|
I believe Meltzer mentioned that after Hogan got his win back from Warrior and just before Yoko died (late 98'-early 99'), Hogan was campaigning for WCW to hire Yokozuna.
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2010 05:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 06:01 |
|
|
Andre never lost to Hulk at Survivor Series. I remember a famous NY show where Hulk beat Andre in a Steel Cage Match, but I can't remember when it was, or if it was even after WM3. If that's the case, I don't think Andre ever lost to Hogan in a singles match after WM3... EDIT: Never mind, the Hogan/Andre cage match was at Wrestlefest 88, which was just after WM4 and in Milwaukee, not NY. Shiki Dan fucked around with this message at 06:18 on Nov 18, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Nov 18, 2010 06:04
|
|
|
You know, given the deluge of 2nd and 3rd Generation Wrestlers that WWE has been pushing why in the hell aren't Joe Hennig and Dos Caras Jr. currently billed with names that actually promote their lineage?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 26, 2010 02:10
|
|
|
Forgot to add: "Half the audience of 8-year old Cena fans sits on hands because they have no idea who the gently caress he is"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2010 10:12
|
|
|
Going by WWE/WWF only, Top 10 Most Offensive Angles in no particular order: --Sgt. Slaughter's Saddam Hussein sympathizer angle --Austin's Satanic Crucifixion by Undertaker and the Ministry of Darkness --Hawk/Droz Drug Dealer Alcoholic Suicide Angle --Katie Vick --Any and all instances of attempted, implied, or actual rape (Viscera attempting to rape Ryan Shamrock, Viscera attempting to rape Rob Conway, DX/Triple H's implied rape of a girl who was supposed to be Stephanie) --Vince McMahon putting himself over God (which even earned him coverage on Keith Olbermann's Worst Person in the World segment) --Any and all instances of attempted murder (Austin/Pillman gun angle, The Rock's attempted murder of Austin by throwing him off a bridge--or was it the other way around???) --Jake's Relapsed Alcoholic angle (as mentioned) --Katie Lea/Paul Birchill's attempted incest angle --Any and all instances of a wrestler's death or family of a recently-deceased wrestler's being used to pop ratings or push someone (Melanie Pillman, Randy Orton: "Eddie's not in heaven, he's in HELL!!!")
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2010 05:34
|
|
|
savinhill posted:I thought the One Man Gang/Akeem angle was more awesome than awesome. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRpy1BwKcwU http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAWJbjrzUYA
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2010 07:44
|
|
|
Enter "Botchamania" into YouTube. Watch 140 videos. Become an expert on wrestling botches for life. And Sabu matches.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2010 04:51
|
|
|
I remember seeing someone post an article from WON about WWE worker salaries/bonuses a while ago, circa 2005, I believe, and very, VERY few of them had first class airfare (JBL, HHH, Cena, Taker...and I think that was it) and hotel included. So yeah, while travel is covered, it doesn't mean everybody is necessarily traveling in LUXURY. I also remember being shocked at how low some of the base salaries were. This, along with how much people try to stay on the road working through injuries, leads me to believe money earned from PPV gates, merch, and House Show gates make up for a lot of it. Meaning, if a guy sits on the shelf with injuries, not only is he paying for his own insurance out of pocket, but he's not earning money from being on the road or TV.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2010 06:10
|
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HljqU9qIAQY Take it for what you will, but Cornette does have more credibility than any speculation we can do.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2010 07:32
|
|
|
MassRayPer posted:But one thing that made EVERYTHING better was when something completely lovely came on, you could change the channel. If what you found was worse, the poo poo you started with seemed better in comparison. If it was better, then that seemed better in comparison. This point can't be emphasized enough. In 97 & 98 during the height of the Monday Night Wars, WWF had GREAT main events with the Hart Foundation, Austin, Rock, Foley, Shawn, and Triple H putting out classic TV every week but also had a very wretched undercard. WCW was the exact opposite--it had an AWESOME undercard with the luchadors, cruiserweights, and comedy characters like Disco Inferno and Normal Smiley but the main events sucked total donkey balls. So for me, I'd spend the first hour or 2 watching Nitro undercard matches while flipping over to RAW when Hogan, Bischoff, or the nWo would come out to do 20 minute promo segments. Then when the final hour would come up I'd skip watching the Hogan-Luger-Giant-Steiner-Bischoff-Savage variety hour and switch over to RAW for good. That way I got the best of both worlds.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2010 04:45
|
|
|
Here's a question inspired by reading the last few posts in the Rumble topic: Why in the gently caress does so much of IWC seem to think Muhammad Hassan was so good? It seems like nobody but me was actually WATCHING the dude's matches, or everyone else for some inexplicable reason has rose-colored glasses for the entire 2004-2005 WWE period.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2011 19:54
|
|
|
Admitting that guys in masks can draw and connect with an audience would be admitting that he was wrong, and Vince McMahon never does that.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2011 07:07
|
|
|
Sugar Blaster posted:the most offensive wrestling impersonation was easily oaklahoma. I'm no fan of Ed Ferrara, but I give credit where credit is due--for a writer, he took some really good bumps in that match.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2011 06:55
|
|
|
A little late, but here's Cornette being awesome while explaining everything about the Brawl for All and why it was so terrible: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_4icDCX3a4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSvsW386aCQ The Butterbean thing was about killing two birds with one stone. The WWF had signed Butterbean to 2 guaranteed PPV appearances. The first one was at the D-Generation X PPV in 12/97 in a worked match against Marc Mero. The 2nd one was of course with Bart Gunn at WM15. It probably wasn't as much trying to deliberately sabotage Bart Gunn (although they had to have known that he didn't have the professional training to stand up to Butterbean), as throwing up their hands and saying "Well, we got Bart Gunn over as a tough guy but there's nothing else we can do with him, and we've still got to give Butterbean another PPV payout, so put the two together and see what happens".
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2011 01:12
|
|
|
Judging Ric Flair based off of only seeing the last 6 years of his work is like judging Steven Spielberg based of only seeing the last 6 years of his work.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2011 18:23
|
|
|
flashy_mcflash posted:Just once I'd like to see a heel getting a hot tag and destroying everyone with lariats and then winning clean. Head Cheese vs. T&A at Wrestlemania 2000. ...Oh wait, that match didn't have any heat. It was also loving terrible.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2011 08:06
|
|
|
Probably a stupid question, but what's up with Bryan Danielson here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSDcQ6WGyGw Shoot or work?
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2011 06:33
|
|
|
Chilly McFreeze posted:They could have Wrestlemania in Michigan Stadium, draw 120,000 fans, and it would be one of the quietest Wrestlemanias because of the acoustics. Also it would probably snow. Which makes the crowd noise at Wembley Stadium for Bret/Bulldog or the Pontiac Silverdome for Hogan/Andre all the more impressive.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2011 07:19
|
|
|
Timby posted:How was 1998 awful? I only fell back into wrestling in July '98 or so, but I remember all the Dude Love / Mankind / Cactus Jack stuff, the rise of The Rock, masked Kane being a loving monster, Undertaker clobbering Austin in the face with a shovel, the Deadly Game Survivor Series being pretty great ... I don't remember much that would classify that year as "loving awful." That's because your mind has forced to forget about most of the poo poo. Such as Russo/Ferrara classics including crowds not trained to have the attention space of more than 4 minutes for wrestling, Choppy Choppy your peepee, Terri Runnels' abortion angle, the Oddities, the Real Man's Man Steven Regal, Beaver Cleavage or the Hawk Suicide Angle. Talented guys like Vader, 2 Cold Scorpio, etc. being used as jobber fodder while guys like a REALLY green Mark Henry, Kurrgan, being given significant pushes.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2011 00:06
|
|
|
Super Ninja Fish posted:Mark Henry was just some random guy in the Nation of Domination not getting a push at all in 98. He pinned The Rock at the PPV before SurSer 98 when Rock was in the middle of a SUPER push. But, yes, I forgot that the Headbangers were still around in 98, and that Beaver Cleavage was 99'. Kurrgan however WAS given a (brief) monster singles push in early 98' after they axed The Truth Commission and before the Oddities were formed. Shiki Dan fucked around with this message at 02:57 on Aug 26, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2011 00:46
|
|
|
Zyla posted:I saw Coach on Sportscenter and it kinda messed with my head. CONTINUITY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KqLpWsl5Viw
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2011 07:27
|
|
|
Handicap matches where a main eventer basically squashes an established tag team (sometimes even the CHAMPIONS) making the entire division look like a joke. Happened a couple years back with Batista versus La Resistance. Then John Cena and Randy Orton squashing the entire Raw Roster. Then Triple H versus London and Kendrick or was it DX versus Murdoch and Cade and bunch of other people that I can't remember because 06-07 was the period right before I stopped actively following RAW and the DX feuds from that time period all ran together and are basically a blur to my memory. Just shows you how little Tag Team wrestling means to WWE now. I remember back at the Summerslam 92' buildup show, the main event was Savage and Warrior vs. The Nasty Boys. The whole angle was built around Ric Flair and Curt Hennig pitting Savage and Warrior against other and basically Warrior walked out on Savage during the match, and Savage (who was WORLD CHAMPION at the time) basically got his rear end handed to him by the Nasties (who were a year removed from their Tag Title loss and barely relevant in the Tag Title scene at the point) and LOST. That was huge for me as a fan because it showed that in the golden era WWF, the tag team division was so solid that even the #1 singles guy wouldn't stand a chance on his own against a midcard team. Ric Flair wouldn't have stood a chance in a handicap match against the Road Warriors. But then you come to the point where Batista would look like a chump if he couldn't squash Rob Conway and Sylvain Grenier in less than 3 minutes.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2011 06:55
|
|
|
Lone Rogue posted:Are you confusing Batista with Chris Benoit or did this happen twice to La Resistance? If it happened with Benoit, then I guess it did happen twice: http://www.profightdb.com/cards/wwe/monday-night-raw-2432.html quote:Batista def. (pin) Rob Conway & Sylvain Grenier 02:07 handicap tag This was part of his Wrestlemania 21 Jesus push, the week before winning the Royal Rumble http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_L_jnkjBak No-selling! Grenier being so terrible as to not even being able to take a Spinebuster properly despite being a 4-time World Tag Team Champion (and reigning) at that point! Thinly-veiled sodomy! Shiki Dan fucked around with this message at 07:40 on Oct 8, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Oct 8, 2011 07:30
|
|
|
Is there anyone who could copy and paste the entire Vince Playboy interview here? The talkwrestling link isn't working for me, and now I'm curious to read the whole thing, even the horrible parts, because I just want to see how hypocritical Vince can really be.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2011 07:50
|
|
|
Matlock posted:The worst Raw is the July 8, 2002 edition. There's no debate. There's really no beating Jackie Gayda + Nash quad tear (which instantly desolved the nWo angle--and the nWo itself--for good, which had been the primary focus of RAW for MONTHS). At least the lovely RAWs in the past years have excuses--celebrity pandering, lack of talent, bad writers. WWE in 2002 had the single most stacked roster in history in terms of in-ring talent and name recognition and then they churn out garbage like that show.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 6, 2011 15:50
|
|
|
From about 97-99, we all know the rule was that WCW had a great mid-card but absolutely terrible main events, while WWF had the inverse: absolutely terrible mid-card but great main events. Then most of the good WCW talent jumped ship in 2000 while the Russo gimmicks and lovely workers got mostly flushed out of the WWF talent pool making 2000 WWF mostly loving awesome from top to bottom while 2000 WCW was an abomination.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2012 07:25
|
|
|
The wrestling business moves in cycles. The current WWE product, though probably at its nadir in terms of creativity and talent, is still in a far, far better position culturally, financially, and even legally than its last severe downturn period from 1993-1996. As long as a newer, younger audience keeps flowing in, classic feuds, gimmicks and angles from >7-10 years ago can always be recycled and made fresh. People seem to forget that Ric Flair and Hulk Hogan themselves were recycled gimmicks of older characters. The Attitude Era was fueled by young Hulkamania fans who were now surly teenagers and demanded a more mature product. It took awhile to catch up, but eventually the business was able to fill that demand by tweaking their stars (Razor Ramon and Diesel --> The "Outsiders"; Hulk Hogan--> Hollywood Hogan; Surfer Sting --> Crow Sting, etc.) The same thing will happen again. Eventually the little snot-nosed brats who grew up cheering Cena, Batista, Orton, and Rey will turn into smarmy teenagers again, and we'll probably get back to seeing Vanilla Ice Cena busting out raps with as many words as possible that rhyme with "penis". Then Wrestling might actually be cool again. However, the REAL problems that WWE has now compared to the 90's which may actually hinder the emergence of Attitude Era mk. II are: a) The loss of the Territory system, meaning new stars have to pulled up before they are able to get proper seasoning b) The death of all (meaningful) competition in North America, where guys like Mick Foley and Steve Austin can no longer take a few years to refine their characters before being launched into the mainstream.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2012 20:31
|
|
|
MassRayPer posted:The wrestling business doesn't move in cycles. The only thing you could tie success to is technology but that doesn't even seem to be true anymore. (And it may have never been true because it wasn't technology that drew crowds in the pre TV days.) The birth of TV started a wrestling boom, then the proliferation of UHF stations led to a second one, and cable a third. A complete restructuring of the way wrestling TV was done led to the Monday Night Wars boom, which in some ways can be linked to technology but it is iffy. I didn't consider technology, which may be true to a limited extent, but it has seemed that a creative boom has necessitated the advancement rather than the other way around. Such as Hogan blowing up and winning the title in 1984. Hogan was already seen as the future of the business. The concept of Rock n' Wrestling marketing, cable TV deals, and Pay-Per-Views then followed to build around the star as a core foundation; rather than Vinnie Mac buying up timeslots before Hogan was even over and hoping that one of his stars would catch on. Same with the Monday Night Wars. Although WCW Nitro was already going head-to-head with RAW it needed a hot fresh property in the NWO before the style and tone of the product could change so that could acknowledge their war on-air. quote:This particular cycle argument doesn't even make sense because at best it relies on one complete cycle, the cycle has never repeated. Before 1980, wrestling was not targeted at children. Hell, children were banned from attending wrestling shows at MSG during the WWWF era. It doesn't necessarily have to be children specifically but a brand new audience. Sort of like in the territory days when a promotion could move around once a particular scene was getting burnt-out on the product. The problem is WWE has basically been putting out 4+ hours a week of the same product for the last 10 years, as well as what like 18 PPVs a year for the past few years? So basically the only demographic they have now as loyal viewers are mostly kids. The solution for the problem of a fresh audience is either to put out a product that will appeal to older demographic (unlikely in the next few years), or be forced to wait until the current core demographic ages and either demands something more mature or loses interest. Shiki Dan fucked around with this message at 07:07 on Jan 27, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2012 07:04
|
|
|
KungFu Grip posted:There is the Batista muscle look, which is mostly for show, and then there is Daisuke Sekimoto who looks a little rounder, but is legit scary strong and in good shape. That reminds me of a radio interview with Batista I remember hearing where the subject of Brock Lesnar was brought up, and Batista humbly put Lesnar over as the strongest human being he has ever seen and admits that Lesnar would destroy him with no trouble in a shoot fight or in weightlifting. Yet if you put both of them in their prime in front of Vince today for the very first time, he'd had have Lesnar job to Batista in like 300 straight matches simply because he looks more ripped. Batista still would be a big star, and Lesnar would be a "monster" JTTS, like a Snitsky or Big Daddy V. Squashing tiny curtain jerkers, but getting demolished by Kane, Big Show or John Cena in sub-3 minute matches. Shiki Dan fucked around with this message at 08:32 on Feb 20, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2012 08:30
|
|
|
MassRayPer posted:I probably would too because Lesnar was a relative flop as a wrestling draw while Batista was a huge success. Not saying that would be the wrong decision. Just that it would have been for the wrong reasons. Batista had way more charisma and had better promos. I guess I'm still thinking of Lesnar more of his Japanese period http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNCATsmKZys Kind of in-between his juiced up OVW period but before he trimmed down and got leaner for MMA. Definitely not saying Lesnar wasn't jacked, just that his genetics just don't allow the kind of definition you get with Batista. It's like the difference between John Morrison and Kurt Angle. Angle is way stronger and would absolutely destroy Morrison if Kurt was on his worst day and Morrison was on his best, but Kurt would never have the definition that Morrison does and that's what Vince pops a boner for these days.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2012 09:22
|
|
|
The last live event I went to was the ECW taping which ended up being Chris Benoit's last match ever (with Elijah Burke!)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2012 00:27
|
|
|
I started watching wrestling when Bossman was probably at his peak in terms of athletic ability and overness (late 1990). At one point I would have said he was the 3rd most over face in the WWF, behind Hogan and Warrior. It's sad that for most fans he'll probably be most remembered either as an NWO C-Teamer or for his Attitude Era run when he was a dull heel doing terrible matches. I also remember a quote from the Observer circa 1997 where Savage refused to work a match against Ray Traylor because Randy didn't even consider him close to his own level. Which depresses me because in late 1990, Macho King Vs. Bossman could've been a main event draw in any arena in the country. Oh yeah, not to mention all those Mega Power/Twin Towers main events that drew in 88/89. Or at Survivor Series 1991 when Savage was supposed to captain Bossman's team in the main event, either.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 20, 2012 04:46
|
|
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw2Ud5piw0A#t=12m15s The worst part is that Hogan's hips are basically so gone that he was most likely in some serious pain from that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2012 01:48
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Based on Austin's history, the moment that WWE insists on doing something that he thinks is a waste of himself/the storyline he's involved in, he will simply go home. I can see it now: --Austin returns after Cena loses to Brock, and Cena begins to doubt himself after losing to both Rock and Lesnar. --Austin challenges Cena in order to "get back his fire", but Cena refuses. --Austin antagonizes Cena continually via interference and promos a la McMahon, and then demands Johnny Ace sign the match. Johnny Ace refuses because he is a heel and therefore a bad person who doesn't want to give the audience what they want to see. --Austin stuns Johnny Ace to biggest crowd reaction in months. WWE Creative interprets that as showing that Johnny Ace/Austin is the real money match. Michael Cole makes comments on the air that Ace was the original "master of the Stunner" who taught Austin the move. WWE Creative books a PPV match: Johnny Ace Vs. Austin "Master of the Stunner" match. Johnny Ace is booked to go over. --Austin says "gently caress this, this is stupid" and goes home in the middle of the angle. Writers insert Randy Orton in the match at the last minute. Orton wins.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2012 18:57
|
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Wpslu_AZEY#t=9m47s Not that I give a drat about Hogan, but that ending was dumb as hell. HHH getting to pop up and no sell the Legdrop and hit the Pedigree out of nowhere so obviously smacks of placating his ego for WM12.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2012 05:53
|
|
|
CombineThresher posted:Yeah, but Hogan actually deserves it. I don't care about Hogan or his dumb finisher looking bad, but all the guys who never just popped right up after the Legdrop. He didn't even sell the Legdrop for more than 10 seconds, but anyone who gets hit by the pedigree: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHsLrlrXVgU#t=10m30s Shiki Dan fucked around with this message at 06:57 on Apr 24, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2012 06:51
|
|
|
Nothing will ever be as consistently good and entertaining in WWE again as they were in 2000. Which is why I'm perplexed that Wrestlemania 2000 was probably one of the worst WMs ever.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2012 17:47
|
|
|
oldpainless posted:Just tossing out opinions on Wm 2000 seemed like such a bad WrestleMania, nobody jump all over me please. I agree, but I believe the reason is because WWF was at its absolute zenith in terms of ratings and buyrates during this period and they were making a SHITTON of money every single week so they put literally every single person on the roster with a pulse (see Hardcore Invitational) in the event so that they could take a slice. I mean, take a look at the No Mercy roster and compare that to the list of people who appeared at WM 2000. Who exactly is missing? I think of like...Essa Rios, Steven Richards, and Shamrock (because he was already gone).
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2012 18:32
|
|
|
ColeM posted:I also love the fact that Hall & Nash's contracts had a clause in it that enabled their pay to be bumped up if anyone entered the company and made more money than them. Holy poo poo, between this, the 300+ wrestlers WCW had on its payroll, and Lanny Poffo making a six-figure salary for years despite never stepping one toe in a WCW ring, I wish I had been born 10 years earlier with a even shred of athletic talent so I could've entered wrestling and got a piece of the WCW gravytrain too. It blows my mind how much money one single wrestling company tossed away in just 10 years.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2012 05:23
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 06:01 |
|
|
maniacripper posted:Haha I find it hilarious if true that Triple H garners any reasonable amount of respect from Bruno since he exhumes 4+ reasons Bruno soured on the WWF/E. What was the story of how back in 2004 or so, they were doing a show in Pittsburgh and they were (again) making a REALLY strong reach to Bruno at coming to the show and patching up with Vince, and Bruno said he would only come if Benoit was facing Angle, and then turned it down because he was facing HHH, who Bruno didn't have the slightest clue about?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2012 06:58
|
|