Who Is Better?

[ohtani's jacket]

Will look poor to the eyes of who? That's the question.

To the people watching WCW in ten years time.

 

Because it's been made in 2009 will not mean it's automatically badly done.

Perhaps not, but it may look dated to people.

 

Especially since there won't be anymore WCW matches to discover in ten years, most everything woiuld have already been seen.

I don't know about that. I started watching matches for the poll in December 2007 and I didn't get anywhere near watching everything I possibly could've. I saw almost all of the stuff I wanted to see, but there's enough to keep you going for years.

 

What I think you'll see with the WCW results is that certain workers are going to do exceptionally well compared to ten years ago (chiefly Dustin Rhodes), and certain workers are going to do poorly (probably the cruiserweight division), and I also think you'll see a a clear distinction between people who favour the '88-94 period and people who still like the '95-99 stuff. You can put that down to Dustin of the Day or trend setting if you like. I think it has more to do with filesharing, but that's a topic for another day. The point I want to make is that in 10 years time, shit could get flipped on its head. 10 years ago, people loved the cruiserweights and if they watched any early 90s stuff it was Clashes and PPVs. 10 years ago, you had to go back through RSPW archives to get any sort of info from that era, and you sure as hell couldn't log onto dailymotion to see if they have that match people were talking about in 1991. What I'm saying is that there may be 180s or 360s in the future.

 

For the record most of the DVDVR Best of the 90's didn't look good to me when it was done. It doesn't look dated to me now. It looks just as wrong in many aspect as it was the year it was done. Maybe in ten years the people who will do a best of WCW list will have terrible taste and their list will look poor compared to what has been done in 2009.

Well, that's true. It's possible. Heck, the SC WCW list could turn out to be poor. But, y'know, the people who voted in RSPW awards or DVDVR polls didn't think their lists or choices were bad at the time. I don't mean to say "look at what the prehistoric wrestling fan thought was good," I'm just saying shit moves forward. Once people start making best ofs for this decade, I'll be useless. I'd struggle to get past five. I just can't do it. But I guarantee that whatever's produced in the next few years, in 2019 people will be saying, "what were they thinking?"

 

Hum... I wouldn't say that. I have stack of wrestling on my hard drive that I would want to watch and don't find the time too. I would watch more UWF/PWFG, because I really haven't seen enough, and I love that style. I wouldn't be against watching a lot more prime Fujiwara, but from what I've seen from him, I admit I don't see the argument of him being better than Takada.

Why not? I'd really like to know why you like Takada and what you honestly think of Fujiwara. MJH is trying to be diplomatic, but there's no need to pussyfoot around. I'm being honest. I can't understand what people think is good about Takada. This is not a new trend for me. I never liked Takada. The more I watch and rewatch stuff, the worse he gets. What am I missing? The old line about Takada is that he could carry a broom, which is a total crock since he needed carrying himself. The last time we talked about this, you mentioned his aura, but I can't get into the aura of a guy who's too bloated to work the mat properly and who's strikes are so weak. Not to mention his selling and general cowardice. The other day I rewatched Suzuki/Sano and it blew away every single Takada match ever. So, for the sake of a long winded argument, give me some pointers.

[El-P]

What I think you'll see with the WCW results is that certain workers are going to do exceptionally well compared to ten years ago (chiefly Dustin Rhodes), and certain workers are going to do poorly (probably the cruiserweight division), and I also think you'll see a a clear distinction between people who favour the '88-94 period and people who still like the '95-99 stuff. You can put that down to Dustin of the Day or trend setting if you like. I think it has more to do with filesharing, but that's a topic for another day. The point I want to make is that in 10 years time, shit could get flipped on its head. 10 years ago, people loved the cruiserweights and if they watched any early 90s stuff it was Clashes and PPVs. 10 years ago, you had to go back through RSPW archives to get any sort of info from that era, and you sure as hell couldn't log onto dailymotion to see if they have that match people were talking about in 1991. What I'm saying is that there may be 180s or 360s in the future.

Well, maybe. I've not followed the WCW poll. Maybe I will batch an eye at it to see the final countdown and see what are the current "trends" that can be drawn. I get what you say about the distinction between fans of 88-94 and 95-99. Filesharing has indeed changed a lot of things.

 

Why not? I'd really like to know why you like Takada and what you honestly think of Fujiwara. MJH is trying to be diplomatic, but there's no need to pussyfoot around.

It's been a long while since I've been watching a Takada match, but what I got from watching him were what felt like great epics, great spectacles kinda like what I get when I watch a Riki Choshu match, although Takada had a lot more to offer than Choshu as far as pure work goes. The thing is, Takada has never been my favourite. Tamura was my all-time favourite. I should get back at watching the entire shoot-style scene, that would be a great project. From the early UWF to the late RINGS. But hell, right now, I'm into old FMW stuff which is, well, different.

 

I'm being honest. I can't understand what people think is good about Takada. This is not a new trend for me.

I know.

 

I never liked Takada. The more I watch and rewatch stuff, the worse he gets. What am I missing? The old line about Takada is that he could carry a broom, which is a total crock since he needed carrying himself. The last time we talked about this, you mentioned his aura, but I can't get into the aura of a guy who's too bloated to work the mat properly and who's strikes are so weak. Not to mention his selling and general cowardice. The other day I rewatched Suzuki/Sano and it blew away every single Takada match ever. So, for the sake of a long winded argument, give me some pointers.

I dunno, like I said it's been so long since I've watched Takada, but I have nothing but recollection of excellent matches. The Vader matches, the Allbright matches are great stuff to me. Takada sure carried Allbright to an epic, as Allbright was very limited in what he could bring. I remember you saying UWF-I sucked, so maybe it's a stylistic affair. Since I compare Takada to Choshu (I know you hate Choshu too), maybe that will comfort you in why you can seem to enjoy him at all though. Was Takada the greatest lat wrestler? No. Was Takada the better striker ? No. But he had that intangible that made him the total package as far as projecting himself as The Man, and he could have epic matches that felt like truly epics. His junior work in NJ were amazing to me too when I think back at those. He had an incredible charisma, second to none in Japan. The details of his matches totally elude me at this point, but what I got from them was really great.

[El-P]

What I think you'll see with the WCW results is that certain workers are going to do exceptionally well compared to ten years ago (chiefly Dustin Rhodes), and certain workers are going to do poorly (probably the cruiserweight division), and I also think you'll see a a clear distinction between people who favour the '88-94 period and people who still like the '95-99 stuff. You can put that down to Dustin of the Day or trend setting if you like. I think it has more to do with filesharing, but that's a topic for another day. The point I want to make is that in 10 years time, shit could get flipped on its head. 10 years ago, people loved the cruiserweights and if they watched any early 90s stuff it was Clashes and PPVs. 10 years ago, you had to go back through RSPW archives to get any sort of info from that era, and you sure as hell couldn't log onto dailymotion to see if they have that match people were talking about in 1991. What I'm saying is that there may be 180s or 360s in the future.

Well, maybe. I've not followed the WCW poll. Maybe I will batch an eye at it to see the final countdown and see what are the current "trends" that can be drawn. I get what you say about the distinction between fans of 88-94 and 95-99. Filesharing has indeed changed a lot of things.

 

Why not? I'd really like to know why you like Takada and what you honestly think of Fujiwara. MJH is trying to be diplomatic, but there's no need to pussyfoot around.

It's been a long while since I've been watching a Takada match, but what I got from watching him were what felt like great epics, great spectacles kinda like what I get when I watch a Riki Choshu match, although Takada had a lot more to offer than Choshu as far as pure work goes. The thing is, Takada has never been my favourite. Tamura was my all-time favourite. I should get back at watching the entire shoot-style scene, that would be a great project. From the early UWF to the late RINGS. But hell, right now, I'm into old FMW stuff which is, well, different.

 

I'm being honest. I can't understand what people think is good about Takada. This is not a new trend for me.

I know.

 

I never liked Takada. The more I watch and rewatch stuff, the worse he gets. What am I missing? The old line about Takada is that he could carry a broom, which is a total crock since he needed carrying himself. The last time we talked about this, you mentioned his aura, but I can't get into the aura of a guy who's too bloated to work the mat properly and who's strikes are so weak. Not to mention his selling and general cowardice. The other day I rewatched Suzuki/Sano and it blew away every single Takada match ever. So, for the sake of a long winded argument, give me some pointers.

I dunno, like I said it's been so long since I've watched Takada, but I have nothing but recollection of excellent matches. The Vader matches, the Allbright matches are great stuff to me. Takada sure carried Allbright to an epic, as Allbright was very limited in what he could bring. I remember you saying UWF-I sucked, so maybe it's a stylistic affair. Since I compare Takada to Choshu (I know you hate Choshu too), maybe that will comfort you in why you can seem to enjoy him at all though. Was Takada the greatest lat wrestler? No. Was Takada the better striker ? No. But he had that intangible that made him the total package as far as projecting himself as The Man, and he could have epic matches that felt like truly epics. His junior work in NJ were amazing to me too when I think back at those. He had an incredible charisma, second to none in Japan. The details of his matches totally elude me at this point, but what I got from them was really great.

[MJH]

I'm not sure about "carrying a broom" I mean at the end of the day it's a ridiculous turn of phrase anyway. Flair could "carry a broom" with his "routine" but that isn't always a good thing. I mean, I love Flair's routine, something like the Terry Taylor match (UWF?) where he's almost on auto-pilot but still working hard, bumping hard, and having a strong match, I could watch his work from the mid-80s all day. But by the same token I can't help but feel disappointed somewhat when he just fits a great worker into one of his routines.

 

To take it back towards Takada, *surely* the Backlund match is a "carry" from Takada? I'm not saying Backlund was bad by any means there, but one of Takada's great strengths for me has always been his maleability (sp?), where he'd go with what the other guy does and pull it back enough to work? I recall a few great "Bob" spots in that match last time I saw it, but certainly Takada as the jockey. I'm struggling to think of any great Takada match where I thought he was the inferior worker, to be honest. Equal, yeah, I think a few guys were relatively equal I mean Yamazaki and Maeda etc... were clearly strong workers in their own right and look pretty great themselves in their various "classic" matches with Takada. Takada "needing" to be carried seems...

 

I mean like I said before if Takada "doesn't show up all the time", that's fine. Maybe he's the "Ultimate Comp Worker". You get those two sets Tabe made and you don't need anything else, and when you do look it's disappointing. I can't recall being disappointed with Takada stuff but it's not out of the question that I might be. Still Takada was pretty great in those "comp" matches AFAIC.

 

---

 

Volk vs. Fuji...

 

OK me saying Volk isn't a great surprise. I watched the first Tamura match last night just before I put that comparison forward and having worked my way through various Lucha, new "classic" Japan footage from the bigger companies, Joshi and Old US stuff since seeing Han last... he's amazing. The match is ten-minutes and barely lets up a great speed, but it feels complete rather than particularly abbreviated. He gives Tamura openings which Kiyoshi takes with aplomb, and puts them over big. He has the crowd in his palm as much as anyone. The big "oooooh" reactions of expectant dread whenever he'd slowly slither his way into a position to pull one of his submissions out... that's controlling the audience. And of course the matwork itself is glorious in technique.

 

I know the easy case-against, calling him a "spot" worker, but it's the Toyota/Kyoko of matwork sprints is it is. You'd always have the basic story there of a guy who owns on the mat and he'd deliberate downgrade his own striking ability (and of course the forever-weak mid-section) to give them hope. IIRC there's a great carry of Bitsadze Tariel in 1995. Just a blatantly elite worker as much as Kobashi is in a different form. And he pretty much came on the scene a strong worker.

[shoe]

Didn't Dustin go on a months-long undefeated streak booked by his father during '91? That's going to lead to criticism no matter how good a guy is.

 

During what time period did Meltzer think Badd deserved Dustin's push? Not '91, I hope.

 

It's mentioned a few times in 92 Observers.

[ohtani's jacket]

C'mon, MJH that Takada/Backlund match was the UWF guys trying to shit on Backlund's rep. I like that match a lot, but it sums Takada up completely. Takada was a guy who was totally reliant on his opponent to make the match interesting. This is why Takada was never a great worker. You can't just watch a Takada match and know that his side of the match is going to be outstanding. Every single thing that Takada could have possibly been good at, Maeda was better at. Takada just comes across as a jock to me.

[Guest The 3H's]

Melina or Mickie James?

[Tim Cooke]

Midnight Express vs. Rock n Roll Express

 

or

 

Midnight Express vs. Fantastics

 

(both NWA MX teams, RnR is Morton/Gibson, Fantastics are Rogers/Fulton)

[Loss]

I would put those three teams in this order:

 

Rock & Roll Express

Midnight Express

Fantastics

 

All three are great teams. I wouldn't argue too much with someone who had them in a different order, because I can see arguments several ways.

 

The only thing I would stick to would be the Rock & Rolls being better than the Fantastics.

 

Fantastics best matches are better (I think), and they were better in Japan, but the Rock & Rolls I think overall had better output.

 

Either way, it's close.

[Tim Cooke]

The 2/86 and 8/86 handhelds from Cornette's new DVD will help even up the MX vs RnR strength of matches. I need to re-watch the MX/Fantastics World Class matches. Right now I would put the MX v RnR as being overall better but the best match is the Clash I MX/Fantastics.

[El-P]

I'd put the MX Express over the other two face teams.

The Fantastics were more versatile and their work in Japan shows that. Tommy Rogers was a better worker than either Ricky or Robert. But what he lacked is the absolute perfect babyface charisma and psychology or Morton, who's just amazing in his role, able like Onita or Chigusa to make his audience cry. That made the Rn'R matches with the MX better than the Fantastics, who had better mechanics (mostly thanks to Rogers). It's really a matter of taste. The Fantastics have the great series with the Sheeperders in their sleeves too in term of versatility. Fulton was more colorful than Gibson and about as good a worker. Quite frankly it's a toss up to me, really depends of what you're looking for. The most perfect US wrestling tag match up remains the MX vs Rn'R to me though.

[jdw]

You might not. My point is that it's about 99.99% likely that Jerome has seen the "trendy" spot tossed at Backlund and/or Destroyer. So he kind of has the right to lob it back at.

 

John

Ah, I see. Still, I'd think if you've been on the other side of it, you should know how stupid it is and know better than to do it yourself.

 

I don't know. At times it's kind of fun to toss the criticism of one thing back in the direction of something else when there's a parallel. I certainly have some fun with it when I see wrestlers doing stuff that's "uncool" or "goofy" or "awkward" when Backlund does it. And I could see having some fun when one of the wrestlers you enjoyed in a "rethinking" or "revisionism" movement is slagged as being trendy to toss it at the next group of wrestlers who go through that process.

 

John

[Tim Cooke]

I used to think Rogers was better than Morton. I don't hold that opinion any longer.

 

Rogers was extremely talented and a heck of a wrestler. He took big bumps, had some nice flying moves, decent ability to work the mat, and good charisma. But Morton has all of that too and does it better.

 

As an FIP, both guys did a great job. Both took big bumps to get their opponents offense over. But their bumping styles were different. Rogers bumping was much more classical - big bumps on his back and some neck bumps when moves required them. Morton would often take a bump on to his knees and go to the mat, where he would take two to three more mini bumps when his opponent punched him in the face, neck, chest, back. Rogers bumps stick out far more than Morton's but so do Ric Flair's when compared to Ricky Steamboat. Flair took big theatrical bumps, Steamboat sold little things a lot more so he didn't have to take as many wild bumps.

 

Move wise, they are equals. Morton had the rana, Rogers had the old style flying headscissors. Both could do a variety of arm drags, often bringing some lucha flavor to them. Seen both adequately work the mat.

 

In Cornette's results book, he talks about a 1988 MX/Fantastics match from Miami that he wishes was taped, as it was the best match they had together from his view. With the new Cornette raw footage of the 1986 feud, I think the RnR will start to be more highly though of (Mid South and Memphis DVDVR projects have helped this).

 

Also, I think Robert Gibson is a better wrestler than Bobby Fulton. Fulton takes him on charisma but Gibson never had a performance like Fulton did in one of the tag matches on the Mid South set, where Fulton fired back a punch every 10 seconds while being the FIP. He got zero heat and the tag didn't get a pop.

 

In re-watching 1988-1990 MX, Stan Lane certainly doesn't hold up nearly as well as Dennis Condrey. It's mostly the kicks. When he lands them well and has someone selling them well, he is good. But often, one of those two things is missing.

[smkelly]

Hogan - better draw, and Dusty is just annoying

Finlay - is one tough bastard and can go hard without getting hurt

Davey Boy - who is Marty Jannetty?

Onita - his death matches are still awesome

[Bix]

Dusty over Hogan. Much more engaging promos, much better wrestler at his peak (in the '70s Texas Outlaws footage Dusty looks pretty close to Murdoch), and was better at carrying a match with charisma alone.

 

Watched disc #1 of the MX rarities set. The 2/86 Philly R&R match is the best match between the two I've ever seen, and as good as any R&R match I've seen. So anyway, as far as MX/R&R or MX/Fants, I'd say R&R. I think the Fantastics feud is looked at better by some because it's seen as everything the R&R matches had other than Ricky Morton level selling, only with better highspots. After seeing more of the R&R series, they clearly had tons of cool spots as good as or better than what the Fantastics did (aside from the top-rope finishers like the Rocket Launcher and the knucklelock tower senton thing). Of note, Morton's hurricanrana was really awesome and out of control looking, plus they did the slingshot -> sunset flip spot much better (smoother, faster) than the Rockers and the Orient Express did in their famous Rumble '91 match and Cornette's notes about Gibson's speed in his prime are right-on. Also, it's hard to describe, but the MX-R&R matches have a certain rhythm to them via their scary chemistry as opponents that I haven't seen between anyone else aside from the Hardys and MNM in their Rumble '07 match.

[Jkeats]

The 2/86 and 8/86 handhelds from Cornette's new DVD will help even up the MX vs RnR strength of matches. I need to re-watch the MX/Fantastics World Class matches. Right now I would put the MX v RnR as being overall better but the best match is the Clash I MX/Fantastics.

Those two matches have been around for a bit now, I think. I had them on a History of Midnight Express v. Rock & Roll Express comp.

 

I remembered LOVING the Fantastics/Midnight Express feud growing up and back then thought that feud was better. Having watched more recently, and seeing their WCCW matches as well, I go with the RnR-Midnights feud. I just think, overall, it has the history and the matches are still great. A lot of the stuff done in the feud with the Fantastics was done first with the Rock & Rolls. I actually got the chance to see a Rock & Roll Express vs. Midnight Express match main eventing a show in Galveston TX when I was visiting family. It was fantastic, even with a small crowd.

[Bix]

The 2/86 and 8/86 handhelds from Cornette's new DVD will help even up the MX vs RnR strength of matches. I need to re-watch the MX/Fantastics World Class matches. Right now I would put the MX v RnR as being overall better but the best match is the Clash I MX/Fantastics.

Those two matches have been around for a bit now, I think. I had them on a History of Midnight Express v. Rock & Roll Express comp.

No, the Philly matches from '86 on the new set were never circulating before (same goes for the version of Cornette-JJ used on the set, though an RF version had been available).

 

Watched the 8/86 match. It was good but I didn't like it nearly as much as the 2/86 match or the America's Team match.

[Jkeats]

The 2/86 and 8/86 handhelds from Cornette's new DVD will help even up the MX vs RnR strength of matches. I need to re-watch the MX/Fantastics World Class matches. Right now I would put the MX v RnR as being overall better but the best match is the Clash I MX/Fantastics.

Those two matches have been around for a bit now, I think. I had them on a History of Midnight Express v. Rock & Roll Express comp.

No, the Philly matches from '86 on the new set were never circulating before (same goes for the version of Cornette-JJ used on the set, though an RF version had been available).

 

Watched the 8/86 match. It was good but I didn't like it nearly as much as the 2/86 match or the America's Team match.

 

Good to know. I didn't pick up the set because I thought it was the same two matches...I'll pick it up now.

[Bob Morris]

Let me throw a couple onto the pile:

 

Rick Martel or Tito Santana?

 

Butch Reed or Ron Simmons?

 

Edge or Christian Cage?

[Guest DietSoda]

I think this is the first year where Christian is clearly better than Edge.

[El-P]

Rick Martel or Tito Santana?

 

After watching a lot of Santana for the SC WWE poll, his stock has risen dramatically with with. Not a flashy worker, but an excellent babyface who could work intense programs and get the most out of everything he did. Worked as well with a deliberate Valentine and a fast and out of control Savage, could get "technical" (by WWF's standart) yet fire up and brawl with credibility. Martel, I really don't know, he hasn't been in any quality programs in his WWF stint, but he certainly delivered when he got the occasion. I don't think he was as good a babyface worker as Santana was. Haven't seen enough of his AWA work, but the big matches with Jumbo or Stan didn't convinced me he was that great. Martel is kinda like DiBiase to me, in that he's solid as hell, but he lacks truly great matches, or even, compared with Santana, consistent very good and compeling work. His match with Bret Hart are good, but don't get to the next level. At this point I'd choose Santana, but there's probably more Martel to watch.

 

Butch Reed or Ron Simmons?

 

Reed, without having to think two seconds about it. Ron Simmons never struck me as a very good wrestler. Could throw a few bombs, but that's about it.

 

Edge or Christian Cage?

 

Christian Cage, since day one. Edge is so indytastic, with a moveset consisting of lame Novaesque variation of basic moves, oversells everything with his goofy facials. Christian always looked more solid to me, and his matches with Jericho or recently with Swagger are a lot better than any of the "big" Edge matches I've seen over the years. Not that Edge is bad, but he's very overrated (like most WWE main eventer).

[S.L.L.]

You might not. My point is that it's about 99.99% likely that Jerome has seen the "trendy" spot tossed at Backlund and/or Destroyer. So he kind of has the right to lob it back at.

 

John

Ah, I see. Still, I'd think if you've been on the other side of it, you should know how stupid it is and know better than to do it yourself.

 

I don't know. At times it's kind of fun to toss the criticism of one thing back in the direction of something else when there's a parallel. I certainly have some fun with it when I see wrestlers doing stuff that's "uncool" or "goofy" or "awkward" when Backlund does it. And I could see having some fun when one of the wrestlers you enjoyed in a "rethinking" or "revisionism" movement is slagged as being trendy to toss it at the next group of wrestlers who go through that process.

 

John

 

Well, it's one thing when an invalid criticism is thrown towards something, but then the people making the criticism turn around and praise something else for which the same criticism was actually valid. I mean, one of my "favorite" things about the big furor in '07 over whether Cena had become a great worker or not was watching people rag on him for being an uncool poseur with weak offense, who made unconvincing superman comebacks, and had a weak looking finisher, and then watching those same people talk about how Shawn Michaels was still one of the best in the world. I don't really see how the Lawler/Fujiwara/Dustin "trends" are any different from the Destroyer/Backlund "trends" outside of who started them. Not even being tossed back at the guys originally making the accusations of Destroyer/Backlund trendiness. Being tossed at guys who think dismissing these things as "trends" is a wrongheaded approach. I think I see where El-P and MJH are coming from now, but I'd like to think they know better than to accuse others of trendiness because an entirely different group of people accused them of trendiness under identical circumstances. It's less tossing people's criticisms back at them and more "if John McAdam jumped off the Empire State Building, then I guess you would have to jump off the Empire State Building".

[jdw]

Being tossed at guys who think dismissing these things as "trends" is a wrongheaded approach. I think I see where El-P and MJH are coming from now, but I'd like to think they know better than to accuse others of trendiness because an entirely different group of people accused them of trendiness under identical circumstances. It's less tossing people's criticisms back at them and more "if John McAdam jumped off the Empire State Building, then I guess you would have to jump off the Empire State Building".

I would disagree.

 

A criticism of Flair is that he does the same spots all the freaking time, "works the same match all the time", etc.

 

It's a pretty valid thing to point out about Flair.

 

But among the people in the early days of the newsletters pointing that out were the Funks, along with a lot of old time wrestlers.

 

So when you're watching a Terry match and seeing Terry do some of the same old shit he does all the freaking time, I tend to think it's perfectly valid (and quite entertaining) to point out that Terry is working the same match.

 

If one wants example, you can watch the Terry vs Hogan matches where Terry works pretty much the same match in each of them. No doubt Terry would blame Hogan for that, but it's as much the Terry spots that are repetative as the Hogan ones.

 

So that's turning Terry's criticism of Flair back onto Terry.

 

I frankly think it's perfectly valid to turn people's "trendy" comments back on them.

 

No different from someone turning criticism I've tossed at Kobashi or Toyota or Flair over the years by pointing out Kawada or The Destroyer or Backlund doing the same thing.

 

John

[S.L.L.]

Again, that's all true, but....

 

1. That's turning valid criticisms back on people.

2. That's still turning criticisms back on the people who were actually making them in the first place.

 

This is turning invalid criticisms on people who were not making them, and who had in fact acknowledged those criticisms as invalid previously. That's not Terry complaining that Flair does the same old shit in every match and then pointing out Terry does that too. That's Terry complaining that Flair does too many shooting star presses in his matches and then turning that complaint on Ricky Steamboat. It makes no sense.

[NitroFan]

Since 2006 - J Hardy vs. Morrison