Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only
Sign in to follow this  
Lust Hogan

Something to Wrestle with Bruce Prichard

Recommended Posts

I generally like this show, and I generally like Conrad, but I wish he'd stop asking Bruce for salary figures for the boys. Prichard rarely seems to remember, he is disinclined to share that information when he does remember, and it's really none of anyone's business what they were making anyway. If it's a matter of public record or if it is absolutely pertinent to a story it's one thing, but what Akeem was making in 1990 is not that important to the overall story of Survivor Series for that year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I generally like this show, and I generally like Conrad, but I wish he'd stop asking Bruce for salary figures for the boys. Prichard rarely seems to remember, he is disinclined to share that information when he does remember, and it's really none of anyone's business what they were making anyway. If it's a matter of public record or if it is absolutely pertinent to a story it's one thing, but what Akeem was making in 1990 is not that important to the overall story of Survivor Series for that year.

Unfortunately we're stuck with that because there are so many idiots who get off on the idea of Conrad being the great voice of truth (i.e. internet folklore) while Bruce is just a corporate puppet of Vince McMahon towing the company line (even though he has not worked there in years and the last wrestling company he worked for was TNA) so part of the gimmick of the show now is Conrad challenging Bruce on stuff and the easiest way to do that is to ask about money because he already knows Bruce isn't going to go there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I generally like this show, and I generally like Conrad, but I wish he'd stop asking Bruce for salary figures for the boys. Prichard rarely seems to remember, he is disinclined to share that information when he does remember, and it's really none of anyone's business what they were making anyway. If it's a matter of public record or if it is absolutely pertinent to a story it's one thing, but what Akeem was making in 1990 is not that important to the overall story of Survivor Series for that year.

Unfortunately we're stuck with that because there are so many idiots who get off on the idea of Conrad being the great voice of truth (i.e. internet folklore) while Bruce is just a corporate puppet of Vince McMahon towing the company line (even though he has not worked there in years and the last wrestling company he worked for was TNA) so part of the gimmick of the show now is Conrad challenging Bruce on stuff and the easiest way to do that is to ask about money because he already knows Bruce isn't going to go there.

 

Agreed. It's all rather tedious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I'm getting butt hurt (dictionary..?) - its just that the whole adversarial stance grows tiresome quite quickly when you know the show will, and does, go on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But it's obviously done on purpose. The podcast would not be nearly as good of Conrad just took Bruce at his word every time. He challenges him even if it's not his own opinion to make for a better show. And you've honestly never heard of butt hurt?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decided to give Survivor Series 90 a listen. It's a formative PPV for me. I'm about ~33 minutes in and I think I'm tapping. It's just the lack of nuance on this one. When they mention Hogan vs Earthquake at Summerslam 90, it's not mentioned why they might do a countout. Conrad couldn't figure it out when it was to keep the program going, When they mentioned Savage vs Dusty in two minutes, it wasn't about Dusty being on his way out or even heating up Savage for Warrior. It was to transition Dusty on to Dibiase. When they mention Zhukov replacing Akeem, there's not mention there that there was the recent Nikolai/Zhukov split and Nikolai was fairly hot at the time (weirdly enough). There's interesting stuff (I don't know if I ever remember hearing that Buddy pitched the blowaway in a Denny's.). But it's sort of frustrating to sit through everything else to get to it.

 

Also, the Ultimate Survival thing was awesome. It's pretty easy to defend.

 

Tapping at 42 mins.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did you like it, Matt? I thought it placed limits on booking the undercard (to ensure a decent heel/face divide) and went against Vince's trope of not liking tournaments because you can't promote the final match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest problem with it is something that WWF still manages to get wrong today. Matches don't have stakes. The second biggest problem is that it made things a little too cutesy with the heel side and the face side, but that's just how things were (and still are to some degree). Fans didn't care that it didn't seem real.

 

But you have to go back to 1990. I've mentioned this before, but the world was so different in 1990. Survivor Series didn't really need stakes because it was so different than what we got the rest of the year. The WWF was so regimented. People had six month house show programs. Angles on the weekend shows would set them up. There would be event center promos. Occasionally you'd get some JTTS matches or inconclusive lower card matches on PTW. SNME would set up the bigger angles and give you some (generally still inconclusive) matches with bigger wrestlers a few times a year. Then you'd have the PPVs. In general, though, the same wrestlers interacted with one another for months and months. The appeal of Survivor Series was that you got to see 4-5 of them wrestle 4-5 others. You got to see the promos with them together before hand. You got to see the faces interact with the faces. You got to see the heels interact with the heels. You got to see weird match-ups, be it Bret vs Dibiase or what.

 

Survivor Series 87 felt important because Hogan and Andre were interacting for the first time in months. I don't think there was a lot of real importance in the two years that followed. This allowed the show to have some punctuation in a real feel good sort of way. It wasn't every day that you got to see Hogan and Warrior team up. To see them team up with Tito (and I loved Tito in 1990) made it feel even more special. Then they were up against a heel team that outnumbered them. Dibiase was in there, but you also got to see Hogan and Warrior interact with Power and Glory and Martel and Warlord. It was an extra fresh match up that doubled down on what made the night special to begin with. Moreover, it was something that the entire night felt like it was building to. It gave it punctuation instead of just fizzling out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest problem with it is something that WWF still manages to get wrong today. Matches don't have stakes. The second biggest problem is that it made things a little too cutesy with the heel side and the face side, but that's just how things were (and still are to some degree). Fans didn't care that it didn't seem real.

 

But you have to go back to 1990. I've mentioned this before, but the world was so different in 1990. Survivor Series didn't really need stakes because it was so different than what we got the rest of the year. The WWF was so regimented. People had six month house show programs. Angles on the weekend shows would set them up. There would be event center promos. Occasionally you'd get some JTTS matches or inconclusive lower card matches on PTW. SNME would set up the bigger angles and give you some (generally still inconclusive) matches with bigger wrestlers a few times a year. Then you'd have the PPVs. In general, though, the same wrestlers interacted with one another for months and months. The appeal of Survivor Series was that you got to see 4-5 of them wrestle 4-5 others. You got to see the promos with them together before hand. You got to see the faces interact with the faces. You got to see the heels interact with the heels. You got to see weird match-ups, be it Bret vs Dibiase or what.

 

Survivor Series 87 felt important because Hogan and Andre were interacting for the first time in months. I don't think there was a lot of real importance in the two years that followed. This allowed the show to have some punctuation in a real feel good sort of way. It wasn't every day that you got to see Hogan and Warrior team up. To see them team up with Tito (and I loved Tito in 1990) made it feel even more special. Then they were up against a heel team that outnumbered them. Dibiase was in there, but you also got to see Hogan and Warrior interact with Power and Glory and Martel and Warlord. It was an extra fresh match up that doubled down on what made the night special to begin with. Moreover, it was something that the entire night felt like it was building to. It gave it punctuation instead of just fizzling out.

Can't argue with all that, but here's another - match length. 4 matches (including very long 10 team matches at each event) worked nicely in 87 and 88. Without the tag team match in 89, it moved to 5 matches in 89. No complaints about feeling rushed on any of the first three years.

 

In 1990 you're moving to 6 matches (plus gobbledgooker), resulting in rapid fire eliminations and nothing really given time to breathe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I was thinking about that too.

 

Nice big long Survivors matches, as nature intended.

 

Only other things so far are Lesnar-Goldberg and Dolph v ?????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decided to give Survivor Series 90 a listen. It's a formative PPV for me. I'm about ~33 minutes in and I think I'm tapping. It's just the lack of nuance on this one. When they mention Hogan vs Earthquake at Summerslam 90, it's not mentioned why they might do a countout. Conrad couldn't figure it out when it was to keep the program going, When they mentioned Savage vs Dusty in two minutes, it wasn't about Dusty being on his way out or even heating up Savage for Warrior. It was to transition Dusty on to Dibiase. When they mention Zhukov replacing Akeem, there's not mention there that there was the recent Nikolai/Zhukov split and Nikolai was fairly hot at the time (weirdly enough). There's interesting stuff (I don't know if I ever remember hearing that Buddy pitched the blowaway in a Denny's.). But it's sort of frustrating to sit through everything else to get to it.

 

Also, the Ultimate Survival thing was awesome. It's pretty easy to defend.

 

Tapping at 42 mins.

Returning to this, you might want to hang in there for the stories about the origins of Undertaker. Best part of the show.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure that's why people voted for it in the first place, but it's kind of the thing I was least interested in on paper. It feels like it's the most covered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decided to give Survivor Series 90 a listen. It's a formative PPV for me. I'm about ~33 minutes in and I think I'm tapping. It's just the lack of nuance on this one. When they mention Hogan vs Earthquake at Summerslam 90, it's not mentioned why they might do a countout. Conrad couldn't figure it out when it was to keep the program going, When they mentioned Savage vs Dusty in two minutes, it wasn't about Dusty being on his way out or even heating up Savage for Warrior. It was to transition Dusty on to Dibiase. When they mention Zhukov replacing Akeem, there's not mention there that there was the recent Nikolai/Zhukov split and Nikolai was fairly hot at the time (weirdly enough). There's interesting stuff (I don't know if I ever remember hearing that Buddy pitched the blowaway in a Denny's.). But it's sort of frustrating to sit through everything else to get to it.

 

Also, the Ultimate Survival thing was awesome. It's pretty easy to defend.

 

Tapping at 42 mins.

 

This was the show that's causing me to give up as well, and it's all due to Conrad. I agree with the points Matt brought up above, but the clincher on this show for me was Conrad's insistence that Undertaker debuted at Survivor Series 1990 as "Kane the Undertaker" and all references to him being called Kane (commentary, on-screen graphic) have since been edited by WWE.

 

In 1990, I was 14 years old and a lifelong wrestling fan. I grew up mainly watching the WWF but I also closely followed all other promotions. I didn't have access to cable TV at home and had to rely on watching other promotions when visiting family or friends who had cable. I had a huge collection of Apter mags, dating back to 1986, and every week I would buy the newest issue of PWI, The Wrestler, Inside Wrestling, Wrestling '88-92, Wrestling Classics, or Wrestling Superstars. I wasn't aware of the dirt sheets and even though I knew the Apter mags to be kayfabed (though I didn't know that term yet), I also recognized that they provided the most reliable news of any other wrestling magazine on the shelf.

 

Survivor Series 1990 was the first PPV I was able to order, and only because my older sister lived in Denver, CO at the time and ordered and recorded it for me. With it being my first PPV, I watched that show repeatedly, to the point that I almost memorized the commentary. I was well aware of who Mark Callaway was and immediately recognized him as the former "Mean" Mark Callous. I'm sure it's common knowledge on a board like this, but Undertaker was only referred to as "The Undertaker" at this show - there has been no editing by WWE.

 

He was referred to as "Kane" a few weeks later when he debuted on WWF Superstars of Wrestling, but that was due to those matches being taped prior to Survivor Series. Aside from a possible mention in the WWF Magazine as Kane, the decision was obviously made to drop "Kane" between those matches and his PPV debut.

 

I get that the arguments between Conrad and Bruce are meant to be part of the appeal of the show, but they come across as more annoying and distracting. When I'm listening to podcasts where wrestling history is discussed, I want to be educated first and entertained second. Maybe I'm in the minority in that regard, but hearing the "banter" between Conrad and Bruce more often than not makes me cringe. His insistence on trying to find out how much someone was paid is uncomfortable and not entertaining or informative in the least. The "rumors and innuendo" bit has long gotten old. His interviewing ability is on par with Rob Feinstein - when he asks questions about whose idea it was for a gimmick, name change, outfit, match, etc, it was usually Vince's. Even when it's not, I can't think of any example where an idea was created by someone else that it made for an interesting story.

 

And the argument that Conrad is "a fan just like anyone else" doesn't work either. No, he's not just like anyone else. If you're doing a weekly podcast that discusses wrestling history, to whatever degree, I believe you have a responsibility to come prepared. Brian Last's comments were mentioned earlier when Bruce appeared on Jim Cornette's podcast, and I can't think of a better example of a current interviewer on a wrestling podcast. Brian is obviously a lifelong fan: He's educated on personalities and topics and can engage in an intelligent discussion/conversation, as displayed during any of the numerous interviews on the 6:05 Superpodcast.

 

I don't post on here very often but I frequent these board several times a day and read through the topics. I enjoy and appreciate the intelligent discussion of various topics by such a knowledgeable group. But this episode touched a nerve with me and I wanted to echo Matt's comments, as well as share my own.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not even that I blame Conrad for not knowing some of this. Blame isn't at all the right word. He outright said he didn't have time to do all of his research this week. It's not about blame or me looking down upon him.

 

I just don't have 2 hours + for this stuff. That's all. I'm too deep down the rabbit hole about some of these specific topics. That may be on me, not them. I listened to 42 minutes and basically felt like I could tell them more about what they'd talked about so far than what they could tell me. Obviously, he has specific insider stories, big and small, and bits of nuance I would have never heard before, but it just wasn't an enjoyable experience getting through the noise to get to it. For some shows that'd be fine. For a show like this, I just don't have the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When they mention Hogan vs Earthquake at Summerslam 90, it's not mentioned why they might do a countout. Conrad couldn't figure it out when it was to keep the program going, When they mentioned Savage vs Dusty in two minutes, it wasn't about Dusty being on his way out or even heating up Savage for Warrior. It was to transition Dusty on to Dibiase.

I'm actually somewhat surprised that Bruce didn't tell Conrad the pretty obvious answer as to why Hogan won by countout - to set up rematches on the house shows. That is usually something Bruce would have jumped on, as a way of educating the audience as to what wrestling was like in that era, and he didn't jump at this opportunity, for whatever reason. Maybe because he was sick.

 

As for Savage vs Dusty, I think it was to set up Savage for a run with Warrior and Dusty for his new program with DiBiase, as well as ending the Dusty/Savage program once and for all after an 8 month run through three different PPVs. It was actually pretty smart booking since it managed to accomplish all three effectively in only two minutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conrad not knowing Arrogance was the biggest gaffe on the Survivor Series show.

 

Hosting a podcast is tougher than it seems, especially when questions are "popped' up on you. Parv is my boy but there has been countless times on WTBBP where he has asked me a question where I know the answer but get stone mouthed and cant think of it in the moment or my head is saying one thing that is different from my brain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×