Phil Schneider Posted April 12, 2009 Report Share Posted April 12, 2009 I got a copy of it a couple of months ago, actually thought it was terrible. One of the worst matches I have ever seen either guy in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Al Posted April 12, 2009 Report Share Posted April 12, 2009 I'd go a notch above terrible. It was dull, but decently worked. Still, I'd rather see this kind of stuff from WWE Legacy than yet another re-airing of Wrestlemania matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted April 12, 2009 Report Share Posted April 12, 2009 Also the endless MSG cards from the 70s-80s, which were interesting to me at first since I didn't have access to the MSG network growing up, but now it's more "Oh Jesus, another collection of 20 minute jobber matches and non-finishes in the main events". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted April 12, 2009 Report Share Posted April 12, 2009 I got a copy of it a couple of months ago, actually thought it was terrible. One of the worst matches I have ever seen either guy in Really? 24/7 release, or slipped out of the vault? John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted April 12, 2009 Report Share Posted April 12, 2009 Slipped out of the vault. I procured it and sent it to a handful of people. Really bad match after the cool headlock reversals of the first few minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
khawk20 Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 slipped out of the vault This one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Log Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 So, with Ricky Steamboat being in the spotlight this week, it got me thinking. What led to him leaving the WWF in 88 or 89 or whenever it was before he showed up as Eddie Gilbert's tag partner? He was IC champ, then in the WMIV tourney, and that's all I remember. So my questions are: 1)What led to him leaving? and 2)What'd he do in the meantime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Evans Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 Didn't Vince get pissed about him wanting to spend time with his family or something like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeCampbell Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 Vince getting pissed at him for wanting time off is what led to him losing the title to HTM. I heard somewhere, I forget where, that he'd told Vince that Bonnie was pregnant long before and wanted to delay the Savage match but Vince was adamant that it be at WM3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomk Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 From Wade Keller thread Campbell mentions that Loss: You've experienced it yourself a bit, when dealing with Alvarez over Angle/Michaels. What did I miss? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted April 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?showtopic=3691 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 Slipped out of the vault. I procured it and sent it to a handful of people. Really bad match after the cool headlock reversals of the first few minutes. Cool. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?showtopic=3691 I had forgotten that thread. My head hurts re-reading it. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted April 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 As does mine. My desire to argue with people has been greatly reduced in the past few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted April 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 Although, Bix posting selections from that thread a while back about it being ridiculous to argue that Barry Windham was better than Kurt Angle could be fun. It was especially funny when Bix pointed out that even Bryan admitted he hasn't seen a lot of old wrestling, and Bryan's response was that he has 24/7 and YouTube. To be fair, that wasn't just Bryan, that was several other people on the board. There also seemed to be genuine surprise that Terry Taylor was a big time sheet darling after his UWF heel turn. Bix and I talked on IM about how he probably wouldn't believe it if we told him Lex Luger was even considerably praised in the WON in 1989. In talking about Starrcade '89, Dave actually said no one in the company aside from Flair and Luger was talented enough to work three very different types of matches with three different opponents in one night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 While I'm at it, there's a sense of progression one feels: Jesus --> Pope --> Martin Luther Jesus rebelled against the teaching/leadership of the faith he grew up in. At a certain point, the Pope and Church became every bit as orthodox and set in protecting their power of leadership as those who Jesus rebelled again. Martin Luther, and various others, rebelled against that leadership/teaching and set their own path. At some point, sooner than one would have thought, the Protestant Churches were mirrors of the Catholic Church, with their leaders every much about protecting their power. When I finally read the thread, I tossed out: One of the interesting things is that Meltzer, Mitchell, Wade and Bryan were all at one time "outsiders" who were critical of pro wrestling in ways that got them hammered by people in the business. Included in that were comments on the concept of "work". I've been with Dave, Bruce and Wade each when people in the business tried to explain why their match was great *and* watch Dave, Bruce and Wade either disagree openly with those people, or later over food recall how the person was delusional. They had a different view on "work" than the majority of people in the business *and* the majority of people watching wrestling. But that didn't stop them from being willing to voice their opinions on what they thought was good, what they thought was bad, and why. They irony now is that despite all their attempts to toss at others the notion that some folks think there's "only one right way to work", it's actually those other folks who are the open minded ones of this era, while they happen to get wound a little tighter in their views. Meltzer, Mitchell, Wade, Scherer and Bryan and the rest of the hardcore fans of that generation(s) in a sense rebelled against the way wrestling was being presented to the public. They "taught" their followers/readers to look at wrestling in a different way, they way they looked at it: entertainment rather than sport, with a behind the scenes culture that often was as interesting as what was going on in the ring and inturn played a major role in shaping what went on in the ring. Perhaps Jesus and the Catholic Church to wrestling's Old Testament. Over time, it got as orthodox as what it rebelled again. And there's been a movement away from them probably is a parallel to the Protestant movement. Which inturn led to some of us getting a little to orthodox and set in out own rebellous beliefs. "Jumbo Was Lazy" was clearly Protestant vs. Catholics, and perhaps "Backlund Was Goofy vs Backlund Was a Decent Worker" was the next extension of that and perhaps the stage where things got a little orthodox. I'm wondering if my enjoyment of Hogan vs Orndorff is my own rebellion against some of my Protestant Beliefs. Because if there's one thing that the Wrestling Catholics and Wrestling Protestant shared, it was a firm belief that Hogan was the Anti-Christ. I waiver in by belief of that now. And yes... I'm joking largely through this. The exception would be to reafirm that it remains strange to see Dave, Bryan and others cite the opinions of people in the business a concrete proof of someone ability as a worker. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 Although, Bix posting selections from that thread a while back about it being ridiculous to argue that Barry Windham was better than Kurt Angle could be fun. It was especially funny when Bix pointed out that even Bryan admitted he hasn't seen a lot of old wrestling, and Bryan's response was that he has 24/7 and YouTube. To be fair, that wasn't just Bryan, that was several other people on the board. There also seemed to be genuine surprise that Terry Taylor was a big time sheet darling after his UWF heel turn. Bix and I talked on IM about how he probably wouldn't believe it if we told him Lex Luger was even considerably praised in the WON in 1989. In talking about Starrcade '89, Dave actually said no one in the company aside from Flair and Luger was talented enough to work three very different types of matches with three different opponents in one night. Did I invoke Taylor there? I thought that was a Lugeresque hypothetical in an IM that was less about the Windham discussion and more about Angle vis a vis short term sheet darlings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted April 13, 2009 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 Taylor may not have been mentioned in the thread, but I believe he was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 I didn't mention Taylor in the Angle/HOF thread. Looking at the HBK-Angle thread at F4W, I had forgotten that I started it by comparing that match (the Angle as world champ non-title match where Michaels took Angle's finisher on the floor and off the top rope before kicking out) to the match where HHH sandbagged Eddy Guerrero as an effort to bury the SD champ. I thought I had a less coherent argument. Also, I forgot about this exchange... Bryan: Here's the deal. After watching plenty of matches for plenty of years from plenty of different guys, not to mention being in the ring myself, I think Kurt Angle and Shawn Michaels are great workers. If you ask any ten wrestling journalists, I suspect they will say the same thing. If you took any 100 active wrestlers in America today and asked them, probably 98-100% would agree. In fact, if you took any 100 wrestlers worldwide today and asked them the question, you'd probably get the same percentage. If you took any 100 legendary wrestlers, 98-100% would agree. Many of them, including guys like Ricky Steamboat, have said so on the record, and others have said so privately which you'll surely hear one of these days. If you took any 5 million long-term fans that have any understanding of this business whatsoever if they think Shawn Michaels and Kurt Angle are great wrestlers who have great maches virtually every time out, they would say yes. So, with that said, you, "loss", have not just stated that in your opinion Kurt Angle and Shawn Michaels aren't any good today, but that it is a FACT. Furthermore, this means you believe you are RIGHT, and Dave Meltzer, myself, the vast majority of this board, pretty much everyone in the WWE locker room and virtually every legendary wrestler I've ever heard of, and damn near every fan with a clue I have ever talked to in the ten years I have been following this business closely, are WRONG. Therefore, the onus is on you. If you want to continue to try to prove the overwhelming majority WRONG, go for it. You won't. Sorry. Me: Here's the deal. After watching plenty of matches for plenty of years from plenty of different guys, not to mention discussing them with wrestlers who have been in the ring with them myself, I think Universo 2000 and Rayo de Jalisco Jr. are great workers. If you ask any ten Lucha journalists, I suspect they will say the same thing. If you took any 100 active wrestlers in Mexico today and asked them, probably 98-100% would agree. In fact, if you took any 100 wrestlers worldwide familiar with Lucha and asked them the question, you'd probably get the same percentage. If you took any 100 legendary wrestlers, 98-100% would agree. Many of them, including guys like Ken Timbs, have said so on the record, and others have said so privately which you'll surely hear one of these days. If you took any 5 million long-term fans that have any understanding of this business whatsoever if they think Universo 2000 and Rayo de Jalisco Jr. are great wrestlers who have great maches virtually every time out, they would say yes. So, with that said, you, "Bryan", have not just stated that in your opinion Universo 2000 and Rayo de Jalisco Jr. aren't any good today, but that it is a FACT. Furthermore, this means you believe you are RIGHT, and Jose Fernandez, myself, the vast majority of the Luchaworld board, pretty much everyone in the CMLL locker room and virtually every legendary luchador I've ever heard of, and damn near every fan with a clue I have ever talked to in the ten years I have been following Lucha Libre closely, are WRONG. Therefore, the onus is on you. If you want to continue to try to prove the overwhelming majority WRONG, go for it. You won't. Sorry. Bryan:Oh, and this was the funniest thing I've read all day.Me: I hope it was for the intended reasons. Though I don't especially like Rayo I used him as an example because he's someone who a lot of people dislike who I remember Ken putting over as a great worker. I do appreciate Rayo being able to get a certain schtick over and being able to milk it successfully for years. Universo I used because the people who follow lucha closely generally think he's an awesome worker. Those who don't follow lucha as closely think he sucks, and Dave has made some embarrassing comments about him in a CMLL review (something along the lines of "Universo went to the top rope for a dive to the floor, but of course he was stopped, it's not like a Dinamita would actually do a dive..." when he and his brother do dives often). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 The Rayo spot was great. And the follow up point on Universo hammered it home. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 Bix and I talked on IM about how he probably wouldn't believe it if we told him Lex Luger was even considerably praised in the WON in 1989. In talking about Starrcade '89, Dave actually said no one in the company aside from Flair and Luger was talented enough to work three very different types of matches with three different opponents in one night. I'm not even sure Dave would believe it himself without rereading what he wrote at the time. That Luger was at one point a good worker seems to be lost in the mists of time, replaced by the accepted talking point that Flair carried Luger so well that he conned management into believing Luger was actually good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 It would be strange if it's lost in the mist as it was a firmly held belief through most of the 90s: Lex was once good, and then went to shit. Dave is the one who keep bringing up Luger calling the matches against Steamer. I can't imagine that Dave's completely gone negative on the "Lex Was Once Good" notion. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomk Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 Thanks. I started reading prowrestlingonly after all this. I want to say that there were at least two Figure Fours where Alvarez expressed his anger at a toa post I wrote about Michaels. And this was suggested as also being a possible shot at me (from December 19, 05): FRANK A GOTCH’S FLYING MARE WREFTLING NEWS-LETTER Fan bans Tom and Jerry PHILADELPHIA — Wrestling fan Tom Kilgore ruled Tuesday that he hated Tom and Jerry so much that the cartoon was henceforth banned from his house. “That’s it,” Kilgore said. “No more Tom and Jerry.” According to Kilgore, Tom and Jerry was just too unrealistic for him to enjoy, and anyone else who thought it was a good cartoon was just “drinking the Kool-Aid like the rest of the idiot parents and children across America.” “The action is absurd, it completely lacks internal logic, and it’s just a bad, bad cartoon,” Kilgore said. “I cannot allow my child to grow up thinking this crap is good. No more.” Tom and Jerry has been ranked among the most beloved cartoons of the 20th century. The first episode aired in 1940, and the cartoons still get airplay today. “Whoever did the rankings here is a moron,” Kilgore said. “Seriously, how can you enjoy this? Have you ever seen a real cat chase a mouse? Tom and Jerry is nothing like that. I mean, the cat will almost get the mouse, and then the mouse will pull out a gun. A gun! Whoever heard of a mouse with a gun? It insults my intelligence. And then, sometimes the cat will have the gun, and what does the mouse do? Sticks its finger into the nozzle of the gun, so when the cat pulls the trigger, the gun blows up in his own face. The mouse, of course, escapes unscathed. I mean, how can people watch this?” Kilgore said the best cartoon in history, without question, was Project G.eeK.eR. “It stuns me to hear people say they’ve never heard of Project G.eeK.eR. I mean, take episode thirteen, Future Shocked. GeeKeR, Becky and Noah travel a hundred years into the future and discover that Mister Moloch has gained control of GeeKeR and used his powers to conquer the galaxy. Our trio find an extremely elderly Noah languishing in a cell, his mind addled by his long imprisonment. ‘Old Noah’ gives them a few murky tips on how to foil Moloch’s plan, and they return to the present to fight a seemingly doomed battle to change the course of future history and save the galaxy. That right there is how you write a cartoon. Logic. Realism. Not this cat chases mouse, mouse always escapes generic bullshit.” Regarding why the popularity of Tom and Jerry was so enduring if it sucked so bad, Kilgore concluded: “Cartoons are about storytelling, not pratfalls and violence. But children and parents are intrigued by the violence, and that violence blinds them to the cartoon’s inherent flaws.” I'm kind of easy guy to parody and have seen people do it well. So this was dissapointing. I like violence and good formula. I was in the toa quote machine praising the most foirmulaic of cartoons (Pepe Le Pew)and have little to no interest in anime. But if a shot or me or not, you'd still think that Hogan and Cena are guys who do Tom and Jerry really well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomk Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 JDW's post on orthodoxy got me to thinking about Meltzer's defenses over last tow years of HHH as a guy who shouldn't be voted most overated in the annual polls. An interesting category. As far as wrestlers who were pushed significantly in 2008, Kozlov and Great Khali were in a league by themselves. In particular, when it comes time for either man to sell, the match immediately becomes hideous. HHH, on the other hand, is a genuine Hall of Famer, a top level worker who is one of the most popular wrestlers in the company and had mostly very good matches this year. Is he pushed harder because he’s a family member? Of course, and that’s why he gets so many votes. But it’s not like he’s a joke at the level he’s pushed in. But he’s a regular in these listings, placing third the past two years and has finished first three times in the past. Kozlov, on the other hand, really is only over at the prelim level (and when he was brought to Raw, you could her crickets chirp when he came out) but is pushed like he’s a top level heel, largely because of the dearth of creating people like that. He’s got the unique facial features and some athletic ability and size, but he’s clearly a work in progress. PREVIOUS WINNERS: 1980 - Mr. Wrestling II (Johnny Walker); 1981 - Pedro Morales; 1982 - Pedro Morales; 1983 - Bob Backlund; 1984 - John Studd; 1985 - Hulk Hogan; 1986 - Hulk Hogan; 1987 - Dusty Rhodes; 1988 - Dusty Rhodes; 1989 - Ultimate Warrior; 1990 - Ultimate Warrior; 1991 - Ultimate Warrior; 1992 - Erik Watts; 1993 - Sid Vicious; 1994 - Hulk Hogan; 1995 - Hulk Hogan; 1996 - Hulk Hogan; 1997 - Hulk Hogan; 1998 - Hulk Hogan; 1999 - Kevin Nash; 2000 - Kevin Nash; 2001 - The Undertaker; 2002 - HHH; 2003 - HHH; 2004 - HHH; 2005 - Jeff Jarrett; 2006 - Batista; 2007 - Great Khali I really enjoyed Wrestling II in 83 and 84. My sense is 1980 Johnny Walker was a high level worker who was one of the most popular wrestlers in the company and had mostly very good matches this year. Still even if Meltzer agreed with that I can't see him making the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted April 13, 2009 Report Share Posted April 13, 2009 I think the irony of Hogan being on the list as a winner 7 times might fly by Dave. That sort of sets the example to vote for Trip. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts