ohtani's jacket Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 With regards to the Fujiwara/Takada thing Dan I don't know... I think you look for booking and storytelling too much in UWF. Takada beat Fujiwara in October the year before, so the February match was just a payback. Takada got another win over Fujiwara in October that year. Really, the only clear booking pattern there was that year was that Takada went down, Funaki went up and Maeda stayed strong against everyone. Fujiwara probably wasn't the No.2 native, but they protected him (or he protected himself.) If you watch the shows through to the finale, they really had no clear direction other than having Maeda beat Funaki. If they'd continued into 1991, I guess Funaki would've challenged him again, but who knows. Fujiwara's matches were better than Jumbo's for mine, and certainly better than the dizzying lows that UWF-i Takada reached. I don't see who in Japan was on Fujiwara's level in 1992. For the record, Backlund didn't carry Takada. I don't know how anybody can watch that fight and think that's the case. As for Casas in Japan, that's a bit of a duck out of water scenario. I can't really think of too many luchadores who've worked Japan well. Unfortunately, the Casas/Liger matches from UWA were never taped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted August 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 The Rock never had a year as good as Cena's 07, but 07 is starting to look like a diamond in the rough for Cena. Rock has almost all the same plusses as Cena and almost all the same negatives as well. I'm really calling this a wash for now. If I had to pick I'd go with The Rock because he had more great matches. Really? I agree that Cena isn't at the level he was consistently in 2007, but I'd also blame a lot of that on booking. It's difficult to have great matches in multi-man settings, or with certain handicaps like overbooked finishes. I liked Cena/Michaels more than Rock/HHH for hour-long matches, and felt Cena filled out the hour better than Rock did with the same style limitations. I don't think Rock ever had matches with lesser opponents like Cena did with Khali or Lashley, but those were both in 2007, which only confirms your point. Did Rock really have more great matches? I only REALLY enjoyed Rock/Austin, Rock/HHH and Rock/Jericho as his best work, but feel Cena has delivered on more good-great matches since 2006 on the whole. Stuff like Cena/Edge, Cena/RVD, Cena/Khali, Cena/Michaels, Cena/Umaga, Cena/HHH, Cena/Orton (SS 07 and NWO 08) , Cena/Big Show (the televised matches this year), Cena/Jericho etc I'd put against any of Rocks best (specifically Cena/Umaga), and would say Cena has had more good matches with a wider variety of opponents ranging from awful to great. Rock/Austin WM17 is better than anything Cena has done, true, but that is to be expected, as I'm not sure anything in this era *could* reach that level for a number of reasons beyond just ring work. I think Cena's bumping and selling is better, I think he sets up comebacks better, and I think he has a better sense of match structure than Rock did. Rock was great with maximizing what he did well, much like Cena, but I never got the sense that Rock could have a great match around what his opponents did well, at least not at the same level Cena has proven to be able to. I remember Rock/Test and Rock/Christian being good Rock carryjobs at the time, but neither were Cena/Khali or Cena/Lashley. I do like certain aspects of Rock better like his fired up babyface comebacks and "it" factor, but I don't think they compare in terms of body of work. I'm not arguing that Cena is a one trick pony, but he has been severely handicapped by booking decisions and he doesn't have enough in him to transcend that. I thought he had a very good 06 and a monster 07. Before that he had flashes of brilliance, that are very similar in some respects to the flashes The Rock was showing in 98. In fact I'd say Rock v. HHH Ladder Match is very comparable to JBL v. Cena I Quit in terms of both quality and as a jump point of sorts where you can look and see both guys really starting to "get it." He's had moments this year where he looked tremendous - the first two tv matches v. The Big Show, the "last Jericho match on Raw" and the Michaels bouts early in the year. But he's looked disappointing at other times and really seems lost in a role that creative simply won't let him go beyond. I also agree that Cena is a better bumper and is definitely a better seller. In fact I'd rate Cena as maybe the best "strongman" seller I've ever seen, in the sense that he doesn't have a small frame like the Mortons, Rey's and even Steamboats of the world so he has to rely on other methods to convey pain that are outside of the box and unique. His facial expressions are really off the charts. In general I'm less impressed with carryjobs than others, but I must say that I don't think it's surprising that the first really good Angle match was v. The Rock, Jericho had his best matches with The Rock, HHH was able to have a compelling hour long match with The Rock, et. Goldberg v. Rock is a shockingly good match. Brock v. Rock is a legit great match. He had a match with Rikishi that really made kishi look like something beyond a fat Samoan with a thong which is something NO ONE else was able to do despite Rikishi's talents. And then there are his matches with Austin and Hogan where he read the crowd and literally changed the nature of the match to meet the needs of the environment. I like Cena a lot, but I don't think he's a guy who could do that and in fact I think the booking is set up in such a way where he would never be given the change anyhow. In fact I think in some respects Cena had a huge booking advantage in the sense that he was getting to work TLC matches with Edge and LMS matches with Umaga, whereas The Rock was getting post-prime Goldberg and Foley to work with. Really though I think this is a very close call and I am really wishy-washy on it so take all of that for what it is worth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingus Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 He had a match with Rikishi that really made kishi look like something beyond a fat Samoan with a thong which is something NO ONE else was able to do despite Rikishi's talents.I agree with most of the rest of your points (except for Cena outbumping Rock, I always liked Rock's ridiculously theatrical speedball bumping), but this one I must point out an exception to. Remember Rikish's feud with Val Venis in 2000? That was one of those bizarre chemistry miracles where both guys suddenly jumped up to a whole new level above their usual standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted August 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Venis and Rikishi had at least one very good match. But I don't think there matches made Rikishi look like something beyond the act he had been given if that makes sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jingus Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 It was so brief that they didn't really have time to do anything; they only had two PPV matches, and one of those was in the King of the Ring tournament and only a couple minutes long. But even nine years later, I remember the run-ins and beatdowns from that feud as being abnormally brutal, with both men giving and receiving beatings that you never saw them pull off with any other opponents. It made me totally forget, for just a brief shining moment, that Rikishi's gimmick was "Silly Dancing Minority With A Big Smelly Ass". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 The idea that Takada is a great shoot style worker, for example, is a completely dated idea. Maybe. That doesn't make it less valuable. The idea that Fujiwara was one of the greatest workers in Japan is very trendy. Doesn't make it more valuable than the other. It has became trendy to praise Fujiwara and Lawler. I echoes the feeling MJH expressed early in the thread, I'm absolutely not convinced by Lawler's case, and although Fujiwara was ridiculously underrated for a long time, I don't see the "greatest japanese worker ever" argument at all, just like I don't see the "Takada wasn't a great worker" argument at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childs Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 It's not like the Fujiwara thing is a fad. Yes, Phil got super-excited about him a few years ago and the Other Japan set led others down the same road. But if it was merely trendy, that would be over by now. Instead, appreciation for Fujiwara has grown as more and more people have seen more and more of his stuff. You now have folks like OJ and Ditch, who aren't particularly tied to Phil's aesthetic, touting Fujiwara as an all-time great worker. Skepticism is healthy but not an end in itself. If you think the Fujiwara praise is over the top, explain why. If you think Takada still deserves his reputation as the top shootstyle guy, explain that. The fact that it was conventional wisdom for years isn't a good reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Of course it's trendy. The Dustin Rhodes stuff was trendy too. Don't get me wrong, it had a lot of positive (like all the DVDVDVR sets), but there's always the will to get the vaunted "forgotten great worker" from under a rock, and it leads to hyperboles. Same things with music and cinema. Burn what you worshipped and get some new Gods. It's human. I don't think objectivity and measure are prevalent in wrestling analysis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 I watched his match with Takada from February 1990 the other night, for instance. Fujiwara looked good. But... not elite. Not better than Takada. The story's a fairly simple one of Takada's dominant, but Fujiwara's wily and able to sneak a shocking win out using cunningness or whatever "there's still something left in this old dog" yadda yadda. But I didn't get that strong a feeling he was selling that story. The finish amounted to essentially a no-sell by Fujiwara from a legbar. When Takada'd really need an authoritive return from dropping a point as a re-affirmation of who "the man" is there, Fujiwara only really gave it to him once maybe twice. He didn't go down off strikes in any real emphatic way and it was really Takada who was putting Fujiwara over the entire match with the old "oh I'm in trouble" turn of body language whereas I didn't get the same from Fujiwara. His grinning felt more akin to Billy Robinson's rep for "screwing" with guys rather than anything else I can't recall feeling all that much during the match that Fujiwara was in trouble anywhere near as much as Takada would seem at times and for an underdog story to work (which I can only assume would be the idea) that just doesn't work. He has a good case as "best trainer ever" but best worker ever I'm not getting at all... I watched this again and it's fairly typical for these two. Fujiwara is far superior on the mat, while Takada shows few, if any, mat skills. Nevertheless, Fujiwara's selling is good and helps carry Takada's matwork. Fujiwara blocked or evaded most of Takada's kicks, and considering how poor Takada's strikes were, I was pleased when he got the rope break. Fujiwara didn't need to go down to "re-affirm" that Takada was the man, the onus was on Takada to change the point of attack, which he did with one of his crappy legbars. Fujiwara dancing around after the strikes in the corner isn't a no-sell. It was obvious Fujiwara was in pain. Again, the onus was on Takada to get the KO. I liked the way Takada took Fujiwara's headbutt. That was easily the best thing he did in the match. Neither guy was really dominant, though. I dunno why you think Takada was authorative. He wasn't able to pierce Fujiwara's defences for most of the bout. And as for the ending, that legbar is not a submission move. That is a crappy, crappy hold and 90% of the reason why Takada is no good on the mat. The other 10% is his selling, which just looks like he's gassed. Anyway, Fujiwara turned him over a bit too easily, but he turned it into an actual submission, applied even more pressure, and sold it properly. Good match, thanks to Fujiwara. I don't mind if people disagree about Fujiwara or anybody else, so long as they bother to watch the matches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted August 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Of course it's trendy. All smark opinions can be viewed as trendy to an extent. I've been on the net for almost fifteen years and I don't remember Jumbo ever being regarded as a consensus "best ever" guy until jdw and others started touting him as such. People randomly paying attention to Dick Beyer after years of him languishing in obscurity is another good example of this. I'm not sold on Fujiwara either (I was a Memphis fan as far back as 97) but I don't see how being willing to take a look at a newly pimped worker makes one a trend follower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 The Dustin Rhodes stuff was trendy too. Ummm...the Dustin Rhodes stuff started in '02, and in '09 he's still recognized as great. Hell, even now the Goldust/Seamus feud got a bunch of positive reviews. If it's no longer trendy, then it's because it became conventional wisdom, not because he was a passing fad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herodes Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Dustin Rhodes has been great going as far back as 1992, except back then he was the victim of smark backlash (cries of being Dusty's kid) and then he was Goldust so a lot of people dismissed him based on the (then) ridiculous gimmick. That is why it was good to re-examine him and bring him to prominence as a forgotten great worker once we were removed from the days when people would moan about who he beat and how he was being pushed, or the 'outrage' of his gay gimmick. Now we can just look at his work and his matches and rightly proclaim how good he was without there being an issue of how 'wrong' it was that he was pushed based on nepotism. Lawler has always been great. Calling something 'trendy' implies that people would rather stick with tired smark opinions from a decade ago rather than going back and evaluating wrestlers and uncovering wrestlers who didn't get that level of praise previously but are genuinely great. Right now we have more footage and accessability to footage - old and new - than we have ever had in the past so obviously formerly unheralalded wrestlers will come to the forefront. Take lucha as an example; in the past people assumed that the only lucha out there was AAA from 93-95 and the masks vs hair match was the concensus greatest lucha match ever. Now more people are discovering the incredible EMLL footage from the 80s and early/mid 90s which was forgotten (or never even looked at) so we are seeing how good the likes of Dandy, Casas, Satanico, Pirata Morgan, Sangra Chicana, Brazos, Emilio Charles etc really were. Even now though most net fans may have seen some of the more prominent matches from that era like Chicana vs MS-1 or Dandy vs Casas, but still they haven't uncovered all the great matches that were taking place on a weekly basis in EMLL during that era. Maybe (hopefully) that will happen in the next few years and fans will be exposed to that stuff and so people will re-examine these new finds and compare them to the current concensus best wrestlers and change their opinions - that's the way things work, not just in wrestling. To me it's not 'trendy' it's one of the best things about being a fan nowadays especially since I'm not interested in current wrestling. Rather than being stuck in the same old mindset it's great to go back and rediscover wrestlers that no one talked about before. I used to think of Fujiwara as that permanently old guy who used to show up in some undercard matches and never gave him a second thought, now I can look forward to looking at him with new eyes. Years ago I used to think Sabu, Manami Toyota and the big All Japan (men and women) matches were the greatest thing ever because that was the concensus, now I don't care for them but I am more comfortable in liking what I do like even if it's not the majority opinion. That's a good thing. 10 years ago wrestling tastes were a lot less democratised than they are now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Working on a Dustin/Goldust comp now so it will be interesting to see how I view him and how people who buy the set view him when it is all said and done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 This is exactly why Rey is a great worker, and why he is much better now than he was back then. Rather then rely on the same old stock spots that got him over, Rey reinvented himself as a wrestler who's matches emphasize selling and defensive wrestling. The spots are still there but rather than the match being purely about Rey being fast, exciting and "fresh" the matches are about Rey's comebacks. I thought the WWIII match was all about Rey getting controlled and making comebacks. Seriously, a lot of his WCW stuff saw Rey selling his ass off for long stretches getting his ass kicked before the flashy comeback. One of the things that annoyed me about some of his matches with Dean is that Dean didn't break up the domination as much as say Dragon did in the WWIII match, so you felt like you were getting 12 minutes of Rey getting his ass kicked and 1:30 to 2:00 of the Big Rey Comeback. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted August 30, 2009 Author Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 This is exactly why Rey is a great worker, and why he is much better now than he was back then. Rather then rely on the same old stock spots that got him over, Rey reinvented himself as a wrestler who's matches emphasize selling and defensive wrestling. The spots are still there but rather than the match being purely about Rey being fast, exciting and "fresh" the matches are about Rey's comebacks. I thought the WWIII match was all about Rey getting controlled and making comebacks. Seriously, a lot of his WCW stuff saw Rey selling his ass off for long stretches getting his ass kicked before the flashy comeback. One of the things that annoyed me about some of his matches with Dean is that Dean didn't break up the domination as much as say Dragon did in the WWIII match, so you felt like you were getting 12 minutes of Rey getting his ass kicked and 1:30 to 2:00 of the Big Rey Comeback. John Your memory of the WWIII match is pretty off IMO. I like the match a great deal, but when I watched it recently it was pretty evident that the match is basically an extended squash with Ultimo murdering Rey. There are very few Rey comebacks or hope spots to speak of. Ultimo is the flashier wrestler in the match as well. But it really is a vicious mauling of sorts. It's an offensive showcase for Dragon more than anything else, albeit an extremely entertaining one due to the punishment Rey is willing to take. The Hog Wild match is considerably more competitive though not as good. This is not to say that WCW Rey was incapable of doing the things that I think have made WWE Rey so good. It's just that WWE Rey is better about doing these things. The Dustin comp should be interesting. I was shocked when Dustin had more matches in my WCW top hundred ballot (20) than anyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Your memory of the WWIII match is pretty off IMO. I like the match a great deal, but when I watched it recently it was pretty evident that the match is basically an extended squash with Ultimo murdering Rey. There are very few Rey comebacks or hope spots to speak of. Ultimo is the flashier wrestler in the match as well. But it really is a vicious mauling of sorts. It's an offensive showcase for Dragon more than anything else, albeit an extremely entertaining one due to the punishment Rey is willing to take. The Hog Wild match is considerably more competitive though not as good. Very few? I'll have to watch it. Give me an over/under on the number of comebacks I should be looking for in the period Dragon controlled. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MJH Posted August 30, 2009 Report Share Posted August 30, 2009 Firstly I'm definitely with Dylan regarding the WW3 match with Ultimo. Once Ultimo's in control, Rey does one inside cradle, and blocks a dive (which Ultimo them immediately counters the whip to the guardrail from)... before Ultimo eventually gives him a pretty weak transition for the comeback, Rey gets some cool spots in, finish. Ultimo's control is fairly all-over-the-place too but it's certainly spectacular, chock-full of great offence that looks great, it just feels pretty random. Really, Rey's WCW run is dwarfed behind the Havoc match with Eddy. But I'm in the boat of a LOT of NJ juniors/WCW cruisers stuff doesn't hold up as great matches. Spectacular, sure, especially the Rey/Juvy/Psicosis stuff, and they're clearly very, very talented workers from Liger and Ohtani through whomever... but Benoit and Eddy's stuff, in general, holds up far better than most others and their "sleepers" match is the best NJ match with Eddy/Rey, obviously, the best WCW one. It's not a case of people not wanting to re-evaluate "consensus" opinions. I don't think Ohtani was a great seller. At times, sure, but he'd no-sell for his comebacks as much as anyone. The Samurai match I'm not a "MOTYC" supporter of; I don't think there was anything to it other than one guy works the arm, the other works the leg, and they actually followed through on it. It's very good *as that*, but really you need a bit more depth and story to have a great match for me. Liger/Ohtani matches... meh. I think Kobashi/Misawa 10/98 was easilly their second best match together and the last All Japan uber-classic rather than the Kawada match in June (which is great too mind), it's not about sticking to age-old "x is great and y isn't" beliefs. I think Lawler's very good I just don't think he's a Top 5 US worker. As far as Takada goes... I can see the argument of "great wrestler who did shoot-style" as opposed to "great shoot-style wrestler" to a degree, however... the Yamazaki matches, Backlund, Maeda... if you made a list of best matches through the first two UWFs and scored it on points for the wrestlers involved, Takada'd score as well as anyone. Maybe he wasn't a great "everyday" shoot-style wrestler and maybe didn't go out of his way to carry Miyato or Nakano to strong matches... but he hit the heights as well if not better than anyone. So-and-so being "lazy" in minor matches means nothing to me. Look how quickly Kobashi's body broke down, or Sakie Hasegawa for maybe a better example because she had to retire. I don't want to see a running back average 150-200 yards through the first 10 or so games and be done by the time the play offs come around, y'know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 It depends what you're after. If you want a guy who can actually work the mat and sell well, Fujiwara's your guy. The fact that he had some awesome strikes, like his headbutts and punch combos, and a bunch of great schtick, certainly doesn't hurt. If you want a guy who tries to pop the crowd like a pro-wrestler, Takada's your man. Takada was spotty, which is probably why his matches with Yamazaki were spotfests and his matches against Maeda were all built around highspots. Fujiwara's matches had smaller arcs, but were far more intelligent. It's like comparing Black Terry and Navarro matches to Mistco and Casas matches. One has highspots, the other is full of nuances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DietSoda Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Gordon Solie or Lance Russell? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Liska Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 The Dustin Rhodes stuff was trendy too. Ummm...the Dustin Rhodes stuff started in '02, and in '09 he's still recognized as great. Hell, even now the Goldust/Seamus feud got a bunch of positive reviews. If it's no longer trendy, then it's because it became conventional wisdom, not because he was a passing fad. Really, Dustin was pretty well liked by sheet readers when a lot of those 90's matches were happening. The 91 series with Austin was often cited as being the only thing worth seeing at WCW house shows. We liked him and Windham. The Dangerous Alliance matches were always well received. The street fight with Bunkhouse Buck blew people away. Goldust and Savio Vega had some popular stuff. The fact that there weren't more nepotism charges thrown around against Dustin in the early 90's is really a testament to how much people respected him in the ring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 In fairness, there was a lot of complaining at the time about nepotism with Dustin, but more in 1991 than 1992 and after. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Evans Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Gordon Solie or Lance Russell? Without a doubt, Lance Russell. Even when you can tell Lance couldn't care less, he still gave his best. Can't say the same about Gordon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoe Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 Meltzer often cited that Badd should have gotten Dustin's push. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 MJH, I watched the Fujiwara/Takada rematch from October. Pretty masterful performance from Fujiwara. I liked it better than the February bout since Fujiwara was aggressive with his strikes and matwork, and they stayed away from Takada's weaknesses on the mat. There was a lot more stand-up in this, which isn't Fujiwara's strength, but he paced the action well. Takada was pulling his kicks, but still I would've liked to see him press harder. The match went to a final down and Takada got a fairly convincing TKO win. Not a great match, but entertaining enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boondocks Kernoodle Posted August 31, 2009 Report Share Posted August 31, 2009 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.