Somebody please explain this Alvarez talking point to me

[Bix]

Even being someone who greatly enjoyed WWE during the period and understands that Bryan's a huge Michaels mark...really?

 

This is his latest utterance of it.

 

What was intriguing about WWE's year is that it had an extreme peak and an extreme valley, and in the end leveled off in a way most people did not expect. It opened up with one of the best periods in the history of any wrestling organization in terms of in-ring action.

Shawn Michaels, who had passed 40 and had a body racked with injuries, including a back that needed constant icing and two bum knees, had been coasting along in his tag team role and playing it safe. When Hunter went down, he decided now was the time to step it up.

 

What followed were the best five months in the ring of his career, and arguably the best five months of any weekly television show in wrestling history as it regards in-ring action.

Is there any reasonable explanation other than it being proof that he hasn't watched a whole lot of wrestling? He seems flabbergasted when other time periods are pimped to him, including this statement when I pointed out the insane quality level of the early '90s:

 

"I guarantee that if you took the number of high-level matches in any company worldwide over the past five years (**** or above) and compared it to 1990-1995, today would blow that period away. And if the answer is that All Japan alone had more ****-plus matches than 2002-2007 I still win, because the argument is QUALITY WORLDWIDE."

 

He also seemed flabbergasted by the idea of WCW's 6 hours of TV being largely awesome at points.

[S.L.L.]

He's arguing by assertion. Unless he actually has something to back up his claims with, I'd just as soon assume he's gone crazy.

[Loss]

There is nothing about being a wrestling fan who posts on message boards that is more frustrating than arguing with Bryan Alvarez. Nothing. And that covers a lot of ground.

[Eduardo]

arguably the best five months of any weekly television show in wrestling history as it regards in-ring action.

Has he ever told this to Dave on the air? I would assume even Meltzer would think he's crazy, since Dave's always talking about certain periods of AJPW and AJW being among the best he's ever seen. I haven't been a F4W subscriber for a few months, but has anyone brought up to Bryan how great EMLL was in 1990?

Edited December 31, 2007 by Raging Noodles

[jdw]

arguably the best five months of any weekly television show in wrestling history as it regards in-ring action.

What five month period is he talking about?

 

Since he's talking about "Weekly Television Show", he's limiting it to one show. Since he's talking about Shawn, it clearly means Raw.

 

Since he's talking about weekly TV, it means leaving the Raw PPV matches off the table.

 

So what are the matches in question?

 

What are Meltzer's ratings of those matches?

 

How about one just lists everything on Raw that got ***+ in that period, by air date and rating.

 

John

[jdw]

It is worth keeping in mind that it's about 100% likely he's intentionally trolling with his comments.

 

 

John

[Bix]

I believe he means Jan-May. Dave's ***+ ratings for the period (unless I'm missing anything) only on actual Monday Night Raw TV shows would be:

 

1/22/07 Shawn Michaels vs. Edge (Street Fight) ****

2/19/07 Edge vs. Rob Van Dam ***1/2

4/23/2007 John Cena vs. Shawn Michaels ****1/4

4/30/2007 Edge vs. Randy Orton ****1/4

[goodhelmet]

I don't think so. I think he probably legitimately believes that it is the greatest wrestling he has ever seen. The same way people insist that HBK-Angle from Wrestlemania was a ****+ classic.

[Loss]

John, as an FYI, he has also argued numerous times on his board that the overall quality of wrestling is higher now than it was at any point in the 90s.

[jdw]

John, as an FYI, he has also argued numerous times on his board that the overall quality of wrestling is higher now than it was at any point in the 90s.

I know that. But he's also talking about "high end matches" and ****+ matches elsewhere.

 

 

John

[Bix]

Me to Bryan a few months ago Re: the 2007 vs early 90s claim:

 

With Japan not delivering, the "traditional" Mexican promotion cutting its talent off at the knees with short matches, only 2 American promotions with national TV, much less any TV of note (one of them being irredeemably bad and the other sliding after a good first six months), one American independent of any consequence, and the more minor independents on anyone's radar all sharing the same talent, things are better than the early '90s with Japan on fire, WCW putting out 6 hours weekly of great TV, the WWF hitting its stride more than it had in years, plenty of major indies with great TV shows and solid clearances, and 2 to 3 major Mexican promotions with great weekly TV? Really?

His reply:

 

Yes. I am not talking about how much QUANTITY there is around the world. You're really telling me that the six hours of TV that WCW put out every week in the early 90s was ALL GREAT? Bullshit. Who cares if the indies use the same guys? I just watched BOLA with the same guys I could see on any indy show, and I don't give a fuck because it ended up being the best indy show I've ever been to live. I guarantee that if you took the number of high-level matches in any company worldwide over the past five years (**** or above) and compared it to 1990-1995, today would blow that period away. And if the answer is that All Japan alone had more ****-plus matches than 2002-2007 I still win, because the argument is QUALITY WORLDWIDE.

Then I said:

 

I meant lots and lots of high quality worldwide, in lots of different styles.

 

As far as WCW, aside from the brief period after Flair was fired and before Herd was fired, there was consistently lots and lots of great wrestling on their TV.

And he didn't reply to it.

 

There's another thread from right before this where he argued w/ Paul Miller about it that I need to find.

[jdw]

Who has the list of 4*+ matches in each WWE brand (split apart since they're treated as seperate brands) from 2003-2007. Bryan seems to have a problem counting "five years", since 1990-95 and 2002-2007 actually are six years.

 

In addition, who has the 4*+ matches from TNA for the same period?

 

John

[Bix]

Ah, here it is:

 

Paul:

The early nineties were worse financially, but the wrestling better.

Bryan:

Please clarify in English. Are you saying the wrestling in the early 90s is better than the wrestling today?

Paul:

Most definitely. The quality of wrestling world wide was much deeper but the American companies weren't turning as big of a profit.

Bryan:

You can't POSSIBLY watch any modern wrestling.

hoto:

All Japan and Japan in general was on a much higher level than your "modern" wrestling.

Bryan:

You bolded WORLD WIDE and then said that? There was more to the wrestling world in the 90s than Japan.

Paul:

I watch NOAH, Dragon Gate, EMLL, New Japan, Osaka Pro, and a bunch of wacky Japanese indies along with the WWE with some scattered Chikara here and there.

Paul replying to Bryan's last post:

Early nineties AAA too...

Bryan replying to Paul's "current wrestling" post:

And the quality of wrestling worldwide was better in the early 90s. 1990-1995.

hoto:

You're trolling right? All Japan 90-95 was on a different planet than anything today. And as noted, AAA was awesome too. Ric Flair and Bret Hart and Vader were still having great matches. Benoit, Eddy, Liger, Ultimo...there is very little today that compares.

Paul:

Early nineties, you had Liger, Benoit, Vader, Mutoh, Chono, Hashimoto, and Choshu in New Japan. You had Misawa, Kobashi, Hansen, and Gordy & Williams in All Japan. All Japan Women's had Aja Kong, Toyota, Hokuto, and Inoue. Early nineties AAA has Los Gringos Locos, Konna, Rey Misterio Jr, Psicosis, Juventud Guerrero, and Perro Sr. WCW had Flair, Sting, Steamboat, Vader, Rude, Cactus Jack, and The Steiners. SMW had Jim Cornette booking and the Heavenly Bodies & Rock N Roll Express tearing it up. USWA had the first Mr. McMahon angle and a laundry list of great angles.

 

It was good stuff.

Me:

Keep in mind that it seems like Bryan wasn't watching anything besides WWF and WCW then.

 

It's asinine to say that worldwide, the quality is better now than it was in the early '90s. In the early '90s, you had WCW putting out great stuff consistently (except for the later part of the Herd era), the WWF starting to put on better, more balanced PPVs while also booking some killer feuds like Flair-Savage and Savage-Roberts, all of the good stuff in Japan with the major promotions on fire and the indies starting to really emerge, SMW in general, the last hurrah of the USWA as a viable entity, the AAA-EMLL war where the dying UWA still put out some good stuff, etc.

Bryan:

Obviously there was some great stuff in the early 90s. But people are romanticizing many things, and also underplaying a lot of fucking awesome wrestling in tons of different companies all over the world today.

Paul:

What great current wrestling have you watched lately?

[jdw]

But set that aside.

 

I'm really more interested in this "five month" thing since it really isn't too clear where he's pulling that from.

 

Does he star rate TV matches on his own? Any F-4 sub able to pull the number of 3+ and 4+ matches he handed out for Raw for whatever period he was talking about?

 

 

John

[Bix]

Who has the list of 4*+ matches in each WWE brand (split apart since they're treated as seperate brands) from 2003-2007. Bryan seems to have a problem counting "five years", since 1990-95 and 2002-2007 actually are six years.

 

In addition, who has the 4*+ matches from TNA for the same period?

 

John

http://www.geocities.com/mfoy18/wwfstarlist.html

http://www.geocities.com/mfoy18/tnastarlist.html

[smkelly]

Guess he's never seen the well known classics of the '90s.

 

Like I said in the WWF thread, the '90s has the overwhelming quality, whereas now only has the quanity. At least, it's like that in the WWF.

[jdw]

I believe he means Jan-May. Dave's ***+ ratings for the period (unless I'm missing anything) only on actual Monday Night Raw TV shows would be:

 

1/22/07 Shawn Michaels vs. Edge (Street Fight) ****

2/19/07 Edge vs. Rob Van Dam ***1/2

4/23/2007 John Cena vs. Shawn Michaels ****1/4

4/30/2007 Edge vs. Randy Orton ****1/4

Wow. I'm sure we're missing something.

 

Here's one *month* of All Japan TV in the 90s when it comes to ***+ matches:

 

04/04/93 Kawada vs. Misawa (Carny) ****1/2

04/11/93 Hansen vs. Misawa (Carny) ***3/4

04/18/93 Williams vs. Gordy (Carny) ***3/4

04/18/93 Kawada vs. Taue (Carny) ****1/2

04/18/93 Misawa vs. Kobashi (Carny) ****3/4

04/25/93 Kawada vs. Kobashi (Carny) *****

04/25/93 Hansen vs. Taue (Carny) ***3/4

04/25/93 Gordy vs. Misawa (Carny) ****1/4

 

That's not exactly far and away the best calendar month of AJPW TV of the 90s. They had at least three other month with 5 ****+ matches in them. The 8 ***+ matches isn't special at all - they had eight months with 9+, peaking with 11 in March 1992.

 

If one wants to stick to calendar months, rather than gerrymandering a starting and ending point within months to get the best result, in the five month periods from Jun-Oct 1990 to Nov 1992 - Mar 1993 (the end of one hour TV), All Japan had more than 10 ****+ matches in every period except for Jul-Nov 1990. That's 42 periods. They peaked with 17 in two five-month periods in 1993, and hit 15-16 in eight other period from mid-1992 to mid-1993.

 

10 is a *low* baseline. In additon to Jul-Nov 1990, All Japan got as low as 10 four other times. Of those 5 with 9-10, four of them were the consecutive the periods ending Nov 1990 (the one with 9) through Feb 1991. This was as the Jumbo & Co. vs. Misawa & Co. feud was shaking out and the Kawada-Taue feud was just firing up. The other was Sep 1992 - Jan 1993 which was dragged down by (i) injuries hurting the tag league, (ii) Gordy's OD, and (iii) the Hansen-DiBiase team not really being up to snuff in their push leading into the tag league (entirely due to time passing Ted by). Just didn't have the gaijin sides contributing their share of ****+ matches.

 

When you're looking at ***+, the promotion had 30+ for every five month period in that run with the exception of Oct 90 - Feb 91. They were over 40 in two five month periods, and at 39 two other times.

 

They were doing this with a program that ran about 55 minutes a week.

 

They never had a month without a ****+ match, and only five months from Jun 1990 to Mar 1994 where they had *just* one. Their average was 2.57 ****+ matches a month. At their best, they'd roll out 5 in several months.

 

Again, just a 55 minute weekly TV show.

 

I'd add that while Meltzer eventually lost his mind in handing out snowflakes, and a good chunk of it started in 1993, he tended to cut a lot of slack to US matches relative to Puroresu matches in this era. I like the MX vs. Southern Boys matches that he gave ****3/4 a good deal. But other than being a fan of the MX and Jimbo myself, I don't really think it was better than a lot of NJPW or AJPW matches from that year or 1991 that were rated down in the ****1/4 range. Your typical "rolling out of bed" AJPW 6-Man main event in the 90s would have gotten 4 1/2 if it happened on a WCW PPV with the Steiners & Pillman vs. Arn & Eaton & Windham... and might just get 3 3/4 on tape from AJPW. Part of that was because "we'd seen this before" and rated a better one higher in the past. But much of it was because the standards were different, and the expectations were higher.

 

So while I might argue with some of Dave's snowflakes from this era, relative to the US there were more than fair.

 

 

John

[BO1]

Sorry for not adding anything truly meaningful to the discussion but Meltz snowflakes and the Alvarez comments are a fucking joke(and sadly, much more of a "weepy" one than a truly hilarious one while at it).

 

John, Bix, why even take the time?

[tomk]

What followed were the best five months in the ring of his career, and arguably the best five months of any weekly television show in wrestling history as it regards in-ring action.

Ok wait instead of taking apart part two: "the best five months of any weekly television show in wrestling history as it regards in-ring action"..What about part one: " the best five months in the ring of his career"... I mean I'm not a Shawn Michaels fan but I know that there was a point where he contributed positively alot more to hs matches than he is now.

 

Michaels in 2007 is about the same age as DDP was in 1998.

 

I have a hard time believing anyone would argue that Michaels has contributed more to his matches (had more to offer to them) than DDP did in DDP v Hogan, Malone/DDP v Hogan/Rodman, DDP/Leno/Eubanks v Hogan/Bischoff, DDP v Raven v Benoit, DDP v Goldberg, etc.

 

Has Michaels brought as much to the table as DDP did in 1998?

 

There have been periods in Michaels career where he had more to offer than DDP did in 1998. 2007 wasn't one of those periods.

 

And I'm not much of a DDP fan.

When a "Shawn Michaels" fan boy offers what he considers to be Michaels best 5 month run and it isn't as good as a Benoit five month run, or a Pirata or a Liger or Kawada run...that should come as no surprise.

But when you're arguing that a Michaels five month run is the best "best five months in the ring of his career" and it's sub-DDP, that's really damning.

[S.L.L.]

Yes. I am not talking about how much QUANTITY there is around the world. You're really telling me that the six hours of TV that WCW put out every week in the early 90s was ALL GREAT? Bullshit. Who cares if the indies use the same guys? I just watched BOLA with the same guys I could see on any indy show, and I don't give a fuck because it ended up being the best indy show I've ever been to live. I guarantee that if you took the number of high-level matches in any company worldwide over the past five years (**** or above) and compared it to 1990-1995, today would blow that period away. And if the answer is that All Japan alone had more ****-plus matches than 2002-2007 I still win, because the argument is QUALITY WORLDWIDE.

So he's not not about quantity, he's just talking about...quantity?

[Loss]

Here is usually where you would get the following Bryan Alvarez post:

 

Ok, here's the deal. YOU think that wrestling from the early 90s was better than the wrestling today. But the VAST MAJORITY does not. You can not force your opinions on someone else.

[jdw]

Here is usually where you would get the following Bryan Alvarez post:

 

Ok, here's the deal. YOU think that wrestling from the early 90s was better than the wrestling today. But the VAST MAJORITY does not. You can not force your opinions on someone else.

Except that Bryan misses the point:

 

The Vast Majority of Wrestling Fans left watching wrestling in the period he's pimping: 2002-2007.

 

It's pretty clear that the vast majority of wrestling fans thought so highly of the current product, world wide, that they... you know... stopped fucking watching.

 

That's not even getting to the fact that the vast majority of fans probably think that Hogan vs. Andre was a great match. What Bryan is doing is projecting/forcing a small subset of Fan (along with Inside The Business) Opinion onto another subset of Fan Opinion. The vast majority of wrestling fans don't give a shit about what either of our subsets have to say.

 

John

[WrestlingPower]

That is a TOTALLY ridiculous statement by Alvarez, all the different parts of it brought up here. I remember reading that, shaking my head, and moving on with life. You have to remember Alvarez started his sheet, in what, 1995 or so, when he was about 20 years old. He certainly wasn't then and still doesn't seem to have much interest in watching wrestling from all over the world at all its different levels. I think his statement was akin to a teenager making comments on the internet based on his limited frame of reference. If he was following this stuff closely when it happened in the early 90s he would know how laughable that statement is. Regarding the Michaels-specific comments, and I don't watch much current wrestling, and I am sure Michaels is wrestling at a great level given his age, physical condition, quality of opponents, etc. but you cannot tell me any of his stuff matches up to the late 90s during the Bret era. I'm sure Michaels himself would be insulted if someone suggested to him that at 40+, broken down, and with mostly mediocre opponents that this year was the best year of his career.

[Bix]

Actually the Michaels part appears to be based on what Michaels' own thoughts on that run were.

[S.L.L.]

Regarding the Michaels-specific comments, and I don't watch much current wrestling, and I am sure Michaels is wrestling at a great level given his age, physical condition, quality of opponents, etc.

That depends. Finlay is older than Michaels, really broken down, and had a worse selection of major opponents than Michaels, and I'd have a really, really hard time arguing that 2007 Michaels was a better worker than 2007 Finlay.