Trish Stratus

[thebrainfollower]

Okay fair enough. I saw it too from first to last match and liked it a lot more than most. Nothing wrong there.

[MoS]

I like Trish quite a lot, but I would like to see an argument for why she deserves to be in the Top 100 and Triple h doesn't. I know their contextual circumstances were not at all similar, but I don't think this project is the place to right historical wrongs.

[Jimmy Redman]

I'm not sure I want to make that argument since I'm pretty sure Hunter will end up in my list, but nevertheless I think the basic argument for Trish over Hunter would be one of individual performance and how much each contributed to their best matches, and how much they contributed consistently over time.

 

Hunter can be good, really good, but he can also be dogshit awful, and so many of his natural tendencies are a detriment to his matches. Whether it's ego or just terrible instincts, the things he feels compelled to do in a ring (outside of his most giving performances, which are anomalies) usually take away from his opponent and the match as a whole in service to his own agenda. Bloated attempts at "epics", transparent attempts to put over a babyface that only serve to make them look bad, and so on.

 

Furthermore, when Hunter isn't being really good or really bad, he's just kind of...there. He's been in an awful lot of good and even great matches (as well as average matches) where he was basically The Other Guy and didn't really contribute anything to its greatness, at least compared to his opponent. He is very, very rarely in a great match where he's the driving force behind why it's great.

 

Trish, on the other hand, was a driving force. As brain has been going into in-depth she made a career out of getting something worthwhile out of girls who were at best passable, and at worst utterly useless. And when she was matched up with actual good workers it resulted in good feuds and great matches, things that until recently were the benchmark for what WWE women are capable of, and I think it still holds true on a main roster level. She almost always elevated the quality of whatever she was involved in, and whether as a face or heel, her character work and work inside the ring was instrumental in achieving that quality.

 

Trish was also never as shitty as Hunter is at his worst, infamous Jackie Gayda match and possibly her rookie period aside. Trish never dragged a match down with her asshole tendencies like Hunter has done many a time.

 

On Great Match Theory she loses, but if you look at individual performances and who is actually performing consistently and contributing positively to great matches...there's the argument.

[Matt D]

That summed up Hunter pretty well. So why is he making your list?

[Jimmy Redman]

That summed up Hunter pretty well. So why is he making your list?

 

A couple of reasons. I'm still a sucker for a Great Match and Hunter has had quite a few of them. He's not "on" as often as I'd like, but when he's on he's on.

 

Also I haven't watched enough new wrestling (new to me, not recent) to have 100 guys that I've watched enough of and rate to honestly place above him. Same goes for other heavily flawed guys with lots of great matches that in a perfect world I'd be able to eliminate, Edge and Angle being the obvious ones.

[Jingus]

infamous Jackie Gayda match

That one was always vastly overhyped as an all-time terrible match, anyway. It's basically two horribly-botched spots and not much else, in a mixed tag match which goes a grand total of three minutes. It's nowhere near being on the same level of apocalyptic awfulness as, say, the Sharmell vs Jenna Morasca holocaust.

[Matt D]

 

That summed up Hunter pretty well. So why is he making your list?

 

A couple of reasons. I'm still a sucker for a Great Match and Hunter has had quite a few of them. He's not "on" as often as I'd like, but when he's on he's on.

 

Also I haven't watched enough new wrestling (new to me, not recent) to have 100 guys that I've watched enough of and rate to honestly place above him. Same goes for other heavily flawed guys with lots of great matches that in a perfect world I'd be able to eliminate, Edge and Angle being the obvious ones.

 

 

I am basically excluding Japan so I can't fault you for that. It just means you have something to work towards for the next one. I think there won't be a guy on my 100 that I feel really doesn't belong there, even with my blindspots. We'll see though.

[Jimmy Redman]

Yeah, like in a perfect world I'd love to be able to exclude guys I have a lot of negative feelings towards, like Hunter, but honestly I haven't seen enough wrestling to say confidently that there's 100 guys I can rank above him.

 

I can definitely talk about Hunter's positives and his great matches though, so it's not really a case of not belonging on my list. I just kind of wish he didn't belong on it.

[thebrainfollower]

I kinda love the fact we have gone from one of the 5 people who kept me watching WWE for years to the person whose presence necessitated those people for me in the first place.

 

As for Trish's rookie year, her character was a cowardly wimp, a cocky idiot who thought of herself as great but had no idea how to do anything. It would be like say Bobby Heenan going 50/50 and getting a great match out of Ricky Steamboat in 87. Great match sure but terrible idea.

 

Trish did well her rookie year for what she was supposed to be doing, deer caught in headlights first month aside. She wasn't a wrestler she was a manager who THOUGHT she could wrestle and got her tail kicked every time to find out otherwise.

[thebrainfollower]

Hunter won't be making my list. I don't rate great matches as important as Jimmy and I just cannot stand the guy. Good work with NXT aside, he's just done so much to hurt WWE over the last 18 years and is the reason I nearly gave up watching wrestling.

 

And rewatching the Gayda tag match it's pretty clear whose fault the blown spots are. And you are right there are 2 of them only.

[Phil Schneider]

 

 

 

 

That summed up Hunter pretty well. So why is he making your list?

A couple of reasons. I'm still a sucker for a Great Match and Hunter has had quite a few of them. He's not "on" as often as I'd like, but when he's on he's on.

 

Also I haven't watched enough new wrestling (new to me, not recent) to have 100 guys that I've watched enough of and rate to honestly place above him. Same goes for other heavily flawed guys with lots of great matches that in a perfect world I'd be able to eliminate, Edge and Angle being the obvious ones.

I am basically excluding Japan so I can't fault you for that. It just means you have something to work towards for the next one. I think there won't be a guy on my 100 that I feel really doesn't belong there, even with my blindspots. We'll see though.

As your boss, I am going to make you watch a bunch of Fujiwara

[Matt D]

 

 

 

That summed up Hunter pretty well. So why is he making your list?

A couple of reasons. I'm still a sucker for a Great Match and Hunter has had quite a few of them. He's not "on" as often as I'd like, but when he's on he's on.

 

Also I haven't watched enough new wrestling (new to me, not recent) to have 100 guys that I've watched enough of and rate to honestly place above him. Same goes for other heavily flawed guys with lots of great matches that in a perfect world I'd be able to eliminate, Edge and Angle being the obvious ones.

I am basically excluding Japan so I can't fault you for that. It just means you have something to work towards for the next one. I think there won't be a guy on my 100 that I feel really doesn't belong there, even with my blindspots. We'll see though.

As your boss, I am going to make you watch a bunch of Fujiwara

 

Once we get past April, I will.

 

Actually, the whole lucha bit was to really get a handle on it, and I'm hitting some level of diminishing returns now that I have.

 

I'm thinking that once I hit the two year mark, I get the DVDVR New Japan 80s set and go through that. He's all over that, right?

[funkdoc]

the other japan 80s set is the bigger fujiwara showcase, i thought?

[Matt D]

I'll probably end up doing both of them in the end. It's all blind spots to me. What's the best way to do both to get the best appreciation? Just do them both at the same time chronologically?

[thebrainfollower]

One thing about longevity - How many of you will have Arn and Tully as #1 in your tag teams (Hint - I will). They were a team for roughly 2 and a quarter years right? And before you say "That's tag teams" consider how much longer the Rock and Roll Express and the Rockers teamed up. Or the High Flyers? Or the Freebirds? Or the Road Warriors or the Funks or Demolition or the Hardy Boys or...........well you get my point.

 

Trish has a longish career for a North American women's wrestler. And she was on top for almost all of it of her division. Gail Kim had a longer one but she makes Dean Malenko look like Ric Flair and has had long breaks.

 

I guess longevity is not as important to me as it is to others, and to be honest neither are Great Matches a be all and end all for me (I am also not a Great Man of History Theory guy either). I would rather see someone have Trish's career than finish up as Flair did to be honest. She's currently looking at about 91 for me, so there's a chance she might not get on the list

[thebrainfollower]

One thing I think plays in Trish's favor that no one talks about is versatility.

 

None of the other divas were able to do both T and A matches AND be taken seriously as a wrestler. Lita did I wanna say one B and P match and Victoria did a handful towards the end of her run when she was a jobber.

 

Trish on the other hand had to have a lingerie match with Terri Runnels, then fight Jazz in a submission based match the next week. She had to face Stacy Keibler in a mud match then Victoria in a hardcore brawl after that.

 

That she was able to swtich back and forth and the audience eventually accepted her in both roles is pretty amazing. No other diva was able to do that EVER. They took out those sorts of matches in 2008 (thankfully) and no one's had to try since because it's a pretty absurd thing to pull off.

 

Nobody ever asked Hogan to have a tuxedo match with Mr. Fuji or Ric Flair to have one with Jim Cornette in 89 but Trish was expected to do both and excel in both and work with 2 totally different groups of workers. She was the only person they had to pull something good out of both wrestlers and models and that takes real talent.

[WingedEagle]

Come on. None of them were wrestlers. It seems beyond a stretch to say there is a "good" T&A "match." AVN award winners don't get promoted to the Oscars for a reason.

[thebrainfollower]

I hate to call a spade but you aren't getting it WE. What is the point of a T and A match? To excite the young teenage boys in the audience with women "wrestling" in a way that primarily showcases their bodies. Does Trish pull that off well? Yes. That doesn't mean I LIKE them or think they are good. I think they are a different part of the program, an act in the circus I would rather not have around.

But it does impress me she could pull that off and then switch to fighting wrestlers the next week and be accepted in both roles. They never booked Jazz or Molly Holly or Victoria or Lita (at least in singles matches) like that often if at all. They did for Trish. Likewise they never tried to book the T and A girls (Stacy, Torrie) in serious hard hitting matches. Trish was expected to straddle the fence and excel in both and she did.

 

That's VERSATILITY. The other serious wrestlers almost always weren't booked in those sorts of matches but because Trish looks like Pam 2.0 (anyone get the double reference?) she was expected to do it and pull both off. Sort of like Mark Wahlberg doing the Departed and the 5th Transformers movie. One is art the other is definitely not but being able to do both kinds of movies makes you a more versatile and successful actor. Regardless of whether you or I like the genre involved.

[WingedEagle]

What talent is required to pull off a T&A match other than meeting threshold for presentable T&A?

[thebrainfollower]

Good camera work?

 

No in all seriousness not all that much. It must not be EASY to wrestle in lingerie however and working out enough safe and funny spots to be able to fill time and still feel like the same person who's going toe to toe with Jazz next week takes some talent. Trish also takes a helluva dangerous bump in a mud match with Stacy in 2002 on Raw.

 

It doesn't take much talent to star in a Michael Bay movie either. It still makes you more versatile as a performer if you can do both however. If there's only ONE "diva" in ten years who can pull both off, then that is something special. At least to me.

[WingedEagle]

Don't really know what else to say. But this whole fascination is very unsettling.

[thebrainfollower]

I have no fascination with it. I've said I don't really like it, I just think the ability to switch between sex symbol and wrestler week in and week out takes talent. I think it took talent for someone like Vincent Price to ham it up in some movies and be deadly serious in others.

 

Do you find it unsettling when people make jokes about how good looking Ricky Steamboat or Rick Martel are?

 

And I have to say being basically called a creep, which you did, is offensive on a lot of levels. I want an apology for that.

[MoS]

Versatility means having a varied skillset that lends you to perform admirably in different situations. An actor in a Michael Bay movie, for example, might be judged on the basis of how badass their delivery of "cool" (read: cheesy) dialogues is, and how they acquit themselves in action scenes.

 

Unless you consider looking good and being fit skills or talent in a wrestling context, I have no earthly idea how participation in lingerie matches and shit can be construed as a positive. I confess I find the argument baffling.

[thebrainfollower]

I will try one more time. I don't. I don't like that sort of stuff at all and I only watched it in context when watching all the stuff she did for my microscope thread. I just think being able to do stupid goofy stuff like that one week and then switch to serious wrestling the next week takes talent. I do remember seeing her take an insane dive in one of those matches and that impressed me at the time.

 

That was my point.

Maybe it d who cares.oesn't, maybe I'm wrong. Don't worry I won't post anymore on this GWE thread.

[MoS]

I will try one more time. I don't. I don't like that sort of stuff at all and I only watched it in context when watching all the stuff she did for my microscope thread. I just think being able to do stupid goofy stuff like that one week and then switch to serious wrestling the next week takes talent. I do remember seeing her take an insane dive in one of those matches and that impressed me at the time.

 

That was my point.

Maybe it d who cares.oesn't, maybe I'm wrong. Don't worry I won't post anymore on this GWE thread.

 

Okay, so, if I am not wrong, you are commending her for participating in absolutely silly stuff one week, and yet having the credibility and the presence to do something serious and intense the next? Okay, that makes sense, and I apologise for misunderstanding you. I mean, I do not agree, but I can see where you are coming from. Sort of like, to compare the great with the mediocre, how Arn Anderson could go out and make an absolute fool of himself one day, and yet be completely believable when he would talk about murdering someone the very next day, right?

 

I have no idea if Trish did that week-to-week, but I do understand where you are coming from. Please do not stop participating in the project, for what it is worth. The more diverse the views, the better in my view.