Wrestling Myth Busters

[khawk20]

Myth? : The Can-Am Connection was super over and Strike Force was just viewed as lame pretty boys...

I've never gotten that sense in any discussions I've ever had about the Can-Ams and Strike Force. personally,I think over the long haul Strike Force was a far better team than the Can-Ams ever could have been.

[Bix]

I think that was a Zenk talking point.

[jdw]

Yeah, sounds like Zenk. My thought would be to watch the title change when Strike Force beat the HF. Place went batshit for it. They were over.

 

 

John

[Bob Morris]

Yeah, sounds like Zenk. My thought would be to watch the title change when Strike Force beat the HF. Place went batshit for it. They were over.

 

 

John

Actually, I'm thinking that comes from Scott Keith, and seems to stem from his love for the Hart Foundation more than anything else.

 

Let's face it: If Strike Force wasn't over, then Rick Martel's sudden heel turn against Tito Santana wouldn't have worked, and that darn well did.

 

The initial confrontations between Santana and Martel in that feud generated a lot of heat, and as evidenced by the SummerSlam match with Santana/Rockers vs. Martel/Rougeaus, the fans pop the loudest every time it looks like Santana is going to get his hands on Martel or rallies against him. In fact, the one flaw I find with that match is Santana played face in peril, when it should have been either Michaels or Jannetty, leading to a spot where Martel tags in, but Santana gets the hot tag and the place thereby comes unglued.

[1004Holds]

I remember Zenk saying on his website that the Can-Am Connection were going to get the tag titles for the long-run and that originally the Hart Foundation were only short term champions. I figured that was due to the Can-Ams being so popular, but this is coming from someone who saw a few of their matches on Youtube and did not see what was happening when it first happened.

[BruiserBrody]

Maybe it was the fact that Demolition got such a pop for beating Strike Force

[Johnny Sorrow]

I remember Zenk saying on his website that the Can-Am Connection were going to get the tag titles for the long-run and that originally the Hart Foundation were only short term champions.

Think about that for a minute, and remember who said it. I love Tom Zenk.

[sek69]

If anything, it was the complete opposite of the "myth", Strike Force was over and the Can-Ams were largely viewed as pretty boys.

[Loss]

Them getting the tag titles isn't a myth, according to the WON at the time, that's correct.

[Bix]

It does make sense with the Bulldogs feud being blown off during the cage match run after WM and the Harts having nothing to do until the Strike Force title switch.

[Ditch]

MYTH: It is inevitable that one day All Japan and NOAH will merge.

 

 

 

Why it's a myth: because current All Japan has exactly three employees (Fuchi, Kea, Wada) left over from the split, so there's no natural connection to be had. There's more reason for NJ and AJ to merge, or AJ and Z1, than NOAH and AJ.

[1004Holds]

Myth: Triple H is the most hated wrestler on the Internet.

 

Why I think it's a myth: I have seen way more defenders of Triple H on the wrestling forums I've been to than critics. I actually didn't post on the Internet for years because it amazed me how people online would overrate Triple H to no end, going so far as to say that he was the best wrestler in the world in 2000. I had seen several promotions by then, so I could not understand this. They seemed to bash Rock and Jericho way more than Triple H and if you pointed out any flaws in his work some of these online fans would get really emotional. Even today I've seen many editorials defending HHH even for his match at WM25 and talking about how he's a great worker because he didn't leave the business like Rock and Brock Lesnar did. It boggles my mind.

 

Myth: Triple H keeping the belt at WM XIX was good for business.

[sek69]

Myth: Triple H is the most hated wrestler on the Internet.

 

Why I think it's a myth: I have seen way more defenders of Triple H on the wrestling forums I've been to than critics. I actually didn't post on the Internet for years because it amazed me how people online would overrate Triple H to end, going so far as to say that he was the best wrestler in the world in 2000. I had seen several promotions by then, so I could not understand this. They seemed to bash Rock and Jericho way more than Triple H and if you pointed out any flaws in his work some of these online fans would get really emotional. Even today I've seen many editorials defending HHH even for his match at WM25 and talking about how he's a great worker because he didn't leave the business like Rock and Brock Lesnar did. It boggles my mind.

 

I think the HHH bashers were always a small but very vocal segment of the wrestling fanbase in total. Especially when it started to look like they would bash him for things that seemingly only existed in their imaginations.

 

 

Myth: Triple H keeping the belt at WM XIX was good for business.

 

I think it was good business for him to keep the belt, but not the way it was done. If the plans were to have a Goldberg feud then it wouldn't have made sense for Triple H to get beaten, even if they'd do a Ric Flair deal and have him win it right back. Considering the buildup to WM XIX had so many racial undertones, the way Triple H was decisively put over put a bad taste in people's mouths (not to mention adding to the previous myth as well).

[artDDP]

At WrestleMania XIX why did Hunter feel it necessary to wait twenty seconds before pinning Booker T? Was there some sort of issue I'm not aware of? I've never seen Triple-H completely bury someone that decisively.

[Marty]

I still hate the overall booking (the way the story was done, Booker T absolutely had to go over HHH at some point to shut him up and avenge his own past) but I disagree that HHH buried Booker by waiting 20 seconds or whatever before pinning him. Booker had already taken a beating at the hands of both HHH and Flair, to the point where his legs were past the point of usefulness. Before that, though, he managed a somersault legdrop off the top rope onto HHH that knocked him out good. I think if HHH pinned Booker instantly after the Pedigree, it would've hurt the affect of Booker's top rope move, which still looks deadly watching it today.

 

Booker still should've won the gold at some point in that feud, no doubt. He was booked as a far greater sympathetic opponent of HHH's than Nash, Steiner, RVD, Kane or even HBK, and there needed to be a payoff to that. But I don't hate the 20 seconds before pinning him like others do.

[jdw]

It does make sense with the Bulldogs feud being blown off during the cage match run after WM and the Harts having nothing to do until the Strike Force title switch.

Looking at Graham's site:

 

The HF-Bulldogs feud went into late June. They had occassional matches after that deep into the year, but as a primary feud they moved on.

 

The fits in with the Harts starting a feud again with the Bee's: 06/20/87 Superstars non-title win by the Bees (taped 06/02/87).

 

Graham has three HF vs Can-Am matches:

 

06/03/87 Challenge taping: HF vs Can-Am dark match

06/24/87 Challenge taping: HF vs Can-Am dark match

06/25/87 first HF vs Can-Am house show match

 

One gets the feeling they were testing it out while going with the reliable HF vs Bees first.

 

The first HF vs Bees house show match of this cycle was 06/28/87 and ended up taped for PTW.

 

07/09/87 was Zenk last known match with the WWF as he no-showed the Boston Garden on 07/11/87. Don't know if he worked on 7/10 since Graham doesn't have complete results for that day.

 

Bees fueded with the HF into October, but also later in it were transitioned to feuding with Demolition.

 

Rougeau got mixed in there as well, though I'm probably overlooking the angle they had on Superstars or Challenge.

 

The WWF in the era often juggled a couple of storylines going on with the Tag Titles simply because of how they hit market. Don't recall either of those feuds being memorable, but there are tons of matches out there from this stretch.

 

HF vs Strike Force actually ended up being a lesser feud than SF vs Islanders. It's almost like they were saving it, then changed their minds and went with Demolition.

 

 

John

[Jkeats]

Am I just imaging it or do I remember the name Strike Force coming directly from the feud with The Islanders? For some reason I remember them coming up with the name during an interview on Superstars saying they were like a strike force storming the island, or something to that effect.

[Bob Morris]

I still hate the overall booking (the way the story was done, Booker T absolutely had to go over HHH at some point to shut him up and avenge his own past) but I disagree that HHH buried Booker by waiting 20 seconds or whatever before pinning him. Booker had already taken a beating at the hands of both HHH and Flair, to the point where his legs were past the point of usefulness. Before that, though, he managed a somersault legdrop off the top rope onto HHH that knocked him out good. I think if HHH pinned Booker instantly after the Pedigree, it would've hurt the affect of Booker's top rope move, which still looks deadly watching it today.

 

Booker still should've won the gold at some point in that feud, no doubt. He was booked as a far greater sympathetic opponent of HHH's than Nash, Steiner, RVD, Kane or even HBK, and there needed to be a payoff to that. But I don't hate the 20 seconds before pinning him like others do.

I think where many people take issue with the "20 seconds it took to cover him and he still got the pin" issue is that, when others hit finishers or signature moves and it took them many seconds before getting a cover, the opponent got the shoulder up in time.

 

It's not something I rake HHH over the coals for, but had Booker got the shoulder up, then HHH later hit the Pedigree and slowly rolled over Booker and just fell over on top of him, it would have kept the point that HHH was still winded and still protected the Pedigree as the finisher, while not doing any harm to Booker.

[Jingus]

Someone else once pointed out to me how that finisher fit into that night's context with the other main events. It took three F-5s for Lesnar to beat Angle. It took three Rock Bottoms for Rock to beat Austin. It took three legdrops for Hogan to beat Vince. But it only took one Pedigree for Hunter to beat Booker, bah gawd.

[MikeCampbell]

The F-5 wasn't supposed to be the finish of Brock/Angle, the SSP was.

[Jingus]

Yeah, but Angle had already kicked out of a couple others beforehand.

[Marty]

I still hate the overall booking (the way the story was done, Booker T absolutely had to go over HHH at some point to shut him up and avenge his own past) but I disagree that HHH buried Booker by waiting 20 seconds or whatever before pinning him. Booker had already taken a beating at the hands of both HHH and Flair, to the point where his legs were past the point of usefulness. Before that, though, he managed a somersault legdrop off the top rope onto HHH that knocked him out good. I think if HHH pinned Booker instantly after the Pedigree, it would've hurt the affect of Booker's top rope move, which still looks deadly watching it today.

 

Booker still should've won the gold at some point in that feud, no doubt. He was booked as a far greater sympathetic opponent of HHH's than Nash, Steiner, RVD, Kane or even HBK, and there needed to be a payoff to that. But I don't hate the 20 seconds before pinning him like others do.

I think where many people take issue with the "20 seconds it took to cover him and he still got the pin" issue is that, when others hit finishers or signature moves and it took them many seconds before getting a cover, the opponent got the shoulder up in time.

 

It's not something I rake HHH over the coals for, but had Booker got the shoulder up, then HHH later hit the Pedigree and slowly rolled over Booker and just fell over on top of him, it would have kept the point that HHH was still winded and still protected the Pedigree as the finisher, while not doing any harm to Booker.

 

Fair point. You're right, that would've been a better scenario.

 

I still think the overall booking of HHH not getting his comeuppance from Booker really hurt Booker in the long run. Took three years and a few turns for him to get a strong main event run again. He had a brief go the year after with Undertaker, but it was after a heel turn and going with the Booker Shango gimmick.

[Log]

Myth: Bruiser Brody had this incredible mind for the wrestling business.

 

Ok, so I've read stuff here and there indicating that Brody had this great mind for the business, could've been a really good booker, etc. (Don't ask me where I heard, this. I just seem to recall hearing something to this effect.) Anyway, from reading the WON recaps here, it seems like Brody did what was good for HIM, but not neccessarily for business. He refused to job, even when the program called for it (vs. Blackwell). He's known for leaving territories high and dry, etc, etc.

 

I'm not doing a good job of wording this, but maybe what I'm getting at is the question as to whether or not the circumstances of Brody's death have led to him being looked upon a bit more fondly, than if he was still around? I mean, reading these old recaps, it comes off as Brody was as big a mark for himself as anyone ever.

[MikeCampbell]

Myth: Bruiser Brody had this incredible mind for the wrestling business.

 

Ok, so I've read stuff here and there indicating that Brody had this great mind for the business, could've been a really good booker, etc. (Don't ask me where I heard, this. I just seem to recall hearing something to this effect.) Anyway, from reading the WON recaps here, it seems like Brody did what was good for HIM, but not neccessarily for business. He refused to job, even when the program called for it (vs. Blackwell). He's known for leaving territories high and dry, etc, etc.

 

I'm not doing a good job of wording this, but maybe what I'm getting at is the question as to whether or not the circumstances of Brody's death have led to him being looked upon a bit more fondly, than if he was still around? I mean, reading these old recaps, it comes off as Brody was as big a mark for himself as anyone ever.

Paging jdw . . . .

 

In all seriousness, you're pretty much on the money about Brody. I don't know if it's the fact that he was friendly with Meltzer, the circumstances surrounding his death, or a combination, but he's been praised for "understanding the business" because he once said that if a babyface called for a back drop, then he'd kick them in the face because they should know better. If Bubba Ray Dudley, Bob Holly, etc were to say that, the IWC would have a collective fit.

[Guest LShunter]

Myth: Bruiser Brody had this incredible mind for the wrestling business.

 

Ok, so I've read stuff here and there indicating that Brody had this great mind for the business, could've been a really good booker, etc. (Don't ask me where I heard, this. I just seem to recall hearing something to this effect.) Anyway, from reading the WON recaps here, it seems like Brody did what was good for HIM, but not neccessarily for business. He refused to job, even when the program called for it (vs. Blackwell). He's known for leaving territories high and dry, etc, etc.

 

I'm not doing a good job of wording this, but maybe what I'm getting at is the question as to whether or not the circumstances of Brody's death have led to him being looked upon a bit more fondly, than if he was still around? I mean, reading these old recaps, it comes off as Brody was as big a mark for himself as anyone ever.

It's funny, I've never really heard anybody talk about his "incredible mind". Everything I've ever heard about him points to him only looking out for his own interests.