http://wrestling.insidepulse.com/2011/08/22/the-smark-rant-for-wwe-vintage-collection-08-18-11/ Another interesting show. I like getting oddities I haven’t seen a million times.
In the continuing effort to clean out my inbox, here’s a few very quick questions.
Long time fan. I got a quick one: What’s your take on Zack Ryder?
He’s OK, I guess. He wasn’t terribly thrilling when he was tag champ, but his “Bradley Cooper stuck in the 80s” gimmick is at least different.
Edge or Christian?
Edge has had a lot of great and memorable matches, whereas Christian has a lot of good matches and no bad ones, but you don’t tend to remember them. So Edge.
As a former Demolition mark, did you ever want to see an updated version of the team over the years? It’s not as if Bill Eadie and Barry Darsow were amazing in the ring, but the Demolition name, look, and MUSIC were awesome and they were quite over in their heyday. I kind of thought a mid-90s version with Crush and Adam Bomb in an updated Demo garb could have been cool, especially when teams like the Smoking Gunns, Men on a Mission, etc were about the best you were going to get from the division at the time. Also, can you see a modern Demolition being viable today?
Kronik kind of were an updated Demolition, and we saw how well that worked out. They’re gone, let it go.
Interesting but they left a bunch of stuff out, which bigger nerds than I have already picked apart.
Thought this might make for some interesting general discussion on the blog since we all have different opinions about spoilers in general (wrestling, TV, movies):
Interesting, as I too have been trying to avoid Breaking Bad spoilers until I can get past season one. OK, that’s all I got for now.
Because we can’t say “future endeavored” unless it’s the WWE trademarked version. http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-stories/96-wwe/21821-more-on-hardy This also answers the great question of our lifetime: How much of a fuckup do you have to be in order to get fired by TNA?
http://wrestling.insidepulse.com/2011/08/21/the-smark-rant-for-wwe-raw-house-show-saskatoon-saskatchewan-08-20-11/ Sorry guys, the DVR ate Smackdown this week, so you get this instead.
http://wrestling.insidepulse.com/2011/08/20/the-smark-rant-for-awa-championship-wrestling-on-espn-classic-08-17-11/ I’m drawn to this show like a car wreck. It’s like when you’re walking down the street and see people beating up a ginger kid, and you’re like “Man, I should help that poor freak” but then you stop and take a video for Youtube instead because it’s hilarious. But you feel bad about it afterwards. Like that.
Is there any other instance of a ‘Montreal-type’ situation taking place or nearly taking place? In Japan maybe? We hear about the standoffs, refusals to job, and general bickering about match results, but was there ever another instance in a wrestling promotion in which that kind of outcome either came about or nearly occured? Thanks
Uh, to say the least, YES. That’s why everyone came to warn Bret about getting screwed, because this kind of shit happened ALL THE TIME back in the day. I don’t have a list handy because it would take forever, but Montreal was mainly notable for being the first time it happened on live TV in the so-called “modern era”, when wrestling was supposed to be out of the smoky bingo halls and run by a more sophisticated group of aristocrats instead of the skeevy promoters who would do that sort of thing in the past. That used to be why the NWA would favor guys like Lou Thesz, who could take care of themselves if some two-bit promoter decided he wanted to do an unauthorized title change in his territory. I mean, would you want to go in there and try to shoot on Terry Funk?
Uh oh, another “How to retroactively save WM9” post. You know, Superman learned many times not to try to go back and change the past, because it just never works out. But what the heck, let’s check it out.
Thought this might be a good blog discussion, although this may have been covered before. I recently watched WM9, and although I don’t hate the show as much as others, every time I watch it I always think what they could’ve done to make it a better show. With a few tweaks here and there, it could’ve been up there with other great WM’s. So of course, I had to think about it and come up with a plan like others probably do. And for this card to happen, it really would involve only two little things to make it work:
Convincing Ric Flair to stick around for a couple more months, and Marty Jannetty not pulling a Marty Jannetty the night before the Royal Rumble and showing up in the condition he was reportedly in for his match with HBK (I know, that one is a bit of a stretch and probably makes the following even more pointless than it already is) So here’s what I wish they would’ve done. First, the matches left the same: -Steiners vs Headshrinkers – keep it the same, nice little power tag match -Crush vs Doink – I’m one of the few who actually liked the “fake Doink” thing they did there, it would’ve been fine if they hadn’t repeated it for six months afterwards -Hogan & Beefcake vs Money Inc. – If they wanted to bring Hogan back, this match was fine (just chop like 5-10 minutes off.) Plus the Beefcake angle on Raw to set it up was cool. Hell, give Hogan the tag titles for all I care, maybe that would’ve made him satisfied (that’s a huge reach, I know) -Undertaker vs Giant Gonzales – Undertaker was going through his “fighting giants, monsters & freaks” thing no matter what, so no need to change it. Just get rid of the dumb chloroform thing; that chops like 10 minutes off right there. Maybe Mr. Hughes debuts as Whippleman’s manager, causes a big DQ, and Kamala comes down to even the odds and make his peace with the guy that stuffed him in a casket? Yeah that’s dumb, too. Here’s the matches I would change: -IC title: HBK vs Marty Jannetty – set it up as Marty’s last chance, give them as much time as the Tatanka match, let them go all out and HBK just gets by with a pin. Then maybe over the next few weeks Jannetty (realizing he’ll never get another shot and perhaps HBK’s just better than him) does the whole “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em” thing, and joins back up with HBK as a part-time heel Rockers? Can you imagine a heel Rockers vs Steiners match? -Tatanka vs Bam Bam Bigelow – these two feuded after WM anyway, right? Have it start here. Play up Tatanka’s undefeated streak. Throughout the match Bigelow gets more frustrated that he can’t put Tatanka down so he snaps and gets himself DQ’d and beats the ever-loving hell out of him. -Owen Hart/Tito Santana vs Razor Ramon – gotta keep Razor on here, but instead of Backlund I was thinking Owen. They did a little thing during the buildup to the Rumble where Razor took out Owen to get to Bret, so settle it here. I remember reading though that Owen may have been hurt during this time; if so stick Tito in there to keep his WM streak going. Razor wins though no matter who it is. -Mr. Perfect vs Ric Flair – do the career match from Raw here. Save Luger for post WM shows. Heenan’s upset that Perfect retired his meal ticket, so he brings in Luger to deal with it. -Earthquake vs Yokozuna – have the Natural Disasters be the ones to dump Yoko from the Rumble; Yoko wins in a squash. Or if they’re really determined to put Yoko over as a monster, have him face both Earthquake and Typhoon, I don’t care. Promote it as the heaviest match of all time or something. -World title: Bret Hart vs Randy Savage – give Bret a big win over someone that can really put him over as the star of the future. What do you think? If you really want to get wacky, post WM you can have Bret and Savage be “rivals who respect each other” but they’re both leery as Hogan’s around and they know it’s only a matter of time until he sticks his nose in the world title picture. And then Yokozuna can be the monster that all three of them have to deal with? Love to know everyone’s else’s thoughts.
I got a couple of questions that I don’t think his DVD really goes into
1.) I know Pillman created the "Loose Cannon" persona to basically
trick Eric Bischoff into firing him, but what exactly was Bischoff’s
reason/plan for trying to work the wrestlers/employees in WCW with
this? Was he hoping that Pillman would work out this character in ECW,
then bring him back as anti-authority figure/rebel like Stone Cold
Steve Austin, maybe to battle the NWO? Was this supposed to be knock at
the WWE/Vince McMahon, since Pillman used to be Austin’s tag team
partner? Even if that was the plan, I still don’t see the reason to try
to work his employees.
2.) I know ECW was the rebel "anything can happen" organization, but
surely they must have been hoping they would have gotten alot more out
of Pillman besides a few promos/skits. Like maybe an actual wrestling
match? Did they have any plans for him, even short-term ones?
The question of what exactly anyone, Pillman included, was hoping to get out of the Loose Cannon deal is a tough one. I know Pillman was planning to go back to WCW after his “fake” firing, but the accident left him in a really bad bargaining position and he pretty much had to take the guaranteed WWF money instead. By the time he was in ECW he was so deep into the work that lots of people commented on how he was losing track of the whole reason why he was doing it. So no, ECW had no plans for him aside from screwing with the big two, and I don’t even think Bischoff had plans for him if he was to return.
Hey Scott, it’s me again and I’m here to ask for your help. After finding myself still stewing over the Vickie Guerrero fat jokes on RAW, I decided to write an email to as many of the groups involved in the "be a STAR" anti-bullying campaign as I could find. I’m hoping that anybody else who is sickened by WWE’s behavior might want to do the same and that if enough of us express our outrage over the blatant hypocrisy of the campaign, something will be done. If needed, I can supply a list of email addresses affiliated with the various organizations. Maybe it’s pointless, but at least I tried. I’d really appreciate it if you could run this on your blog sometime. Here’s my letter:
I am writing to bring to your attention the recent activities on WWE television in which a performer named Vickie Guerrero is constantly subjected to dehumanizing and degrading "jokes" about her weight. In reality, Mrs. Guerrero (the widow of former WWE performer Eddie Guerrero, who died at the age of 38 while on tour with WWE) has actually lost upwards of 50 pounds and presents a healthy body type, but since she does not fall within WWE’s narrow definition of what a woman should look like, she is the butt of demeaning and crude attempts at "humor" from other WWE performers who are supposed to be role models for the children who watch these programs. A quick search for "Vickie Guerrero fat jokes" on YouTube will provide all the evidence you need, and if possible, you should try to find clips from this past Monday night’s WWE RAW program, in which Mrs. Guerrero was again taunted regarding her weight by announcer Jerry Lawler. Ironically, this segment
aired prior to a video package promoting WWE’s involvement with the "Be A STAR" campaign.
The hypocrisy is astounding. Personally, I am disgusted and appalled that your groups would be associated with WWE on such a venture. I applaud you for your efforts in dealing with such a widespread and important issue, but if you are truly serious about the anti-bullying campaign, I urge you to look into this matter and re-evaluate your relationship with WWE. Millions of children view WWE programming and they are learning that it is acceptable to tease and bully a person due to their weight issues. That is completely wrong and runs counter to your admirable campaign.
If you need any more information regarding this issue, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your time and your prompt attention to this matter.
Apparently GLAAD is already giving WWE heat about this, as they should. I totally agree that it’s hypocritical and disgusting for WWE to be preaching against bullying and then mocking and tormenting people like Vickie and Jim Ross.
About a year ago I sent you a link to my wrestling review blog/websitewww.marcelusive.com; you suggested to add some more personality to it. I have added a ton more reviews and a few random writings now. How do you think it looks now? If it is worthy, how about a cheap pop on the Blog of Doom? Thanks! Marc A. Florio
I think we’ve established by now that I will literally plug anything.
Hey Scott, Im thrilled at the prospect of u reviewing WWE programming again. Question for u regarding Cena. How is he not blamed for slumping PPv buys and Raw ratings slipping. I read on this week’s Observer that the segment featuring Cena’s match actually LOST viewers. Im just curious.
Because he sells assloads of merchandise and draws at house shows just as much as anyone else they could possibly push to the top would. I don’t think anyone could argue that Cena isn’t the biggest draw of the modern (post-Austin) era, so he’s gonna get some slack when it comes to dropping buyrates and ratings. Besides, buyrates are in the toilet because of fundamental problems with their business, not the people who they push on top.
I find reading the archived Observers from the early 90s endlessly fascinating, partially because I’m finding all these crazy details I never realized before, and partly because of all the hindsight involved. For instance, the initial Hogan v. Flair main event of Bash at the Beach 94 was not as set-in-stone as you’d think. Even into June, the main event was presumed to be Hogan & Sting v. Flair & Curt Hennig, but Hennig was still locked into his WWF deal until September so they would have had to do some legal wrangling. Before that, it was going to be Hogan & Sting v. Flair & Rick Rude, but Rude refused to job for Hogan, and THAT led to him getting fired after the neck injury in Japan. Meltzer was very skeptical about the injury back then, although obviously Rude never wrestled again. With those possibilities shot down, we were left with Hogan v. Flair. Huh. Here’s his thoughts in 1994 on how to best use Hogan:
“Many would argue that just as Vince McMahon didn’t get the most out of the late 1991 Hogan-Flair series because Flair wasn’t cast as an outsider who wasn’t part of the WWF, that Hogan’s best role to draw money would be as an outsider who isn’t part of WCW rather than a new fixture talked about incessantly on every weekly television show.”
Give that man a cigar.
http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-stories/96-wwe/21757-report-that-ufc-new-tv-deal-is-complete This could have HUGE ramifications for the business, as Zuffa now have major network backing and presumably better sense with what to do with that exposure than Strikeforce or EliteXC did. Thankfully this won’t affect us here in Canada as UFC has a separate deal to air their stuff on Sportsnet, but I’m looking forward to seeing what they would pull out for a live show on FOX.
http://www.avclub.com/articles/wwe-monday-night-rawpost-summer-slam-edition,60462/ Another great review from the AV Club, as I can feel his pain about trying to explain the CM Punk angle without dragging a chalkboard into the room like Doc Brown. I even get a shout-out in the first comment!
http://wrestling.insidepulse.com/2011/08/15/the-view-from-down-here-%E2%80%93-book-review-%E2%80%98dungeon-of-death-chris-benoit-and-the-hart-family-curse%E2%80%99-by-scott-keith/ I’ve given up hope of ever making royalties off Dungeon of Death, but IP writer Steven Gepp offered up a very nice review of my last book.
http://wrestling.insidepulse.com/2011/08/16/the-smark-raw-rant-august-15-2011/ Trusting Kevin Nash to get you over in a feud is not a very wise move. Hopefully the combination of perspective and Just For Men that has brought Big Kev back to WWE will change his mentality. But I’m not holding my breath.
I was just thinking the other day about goofy/strange (but consistent) spots, and I was curious what your favorites were. As an example of what I’m thinking of, the old "you can’t headbutt a Samoan" was always a favorite of mine, and damn if almost every single opponent didn’t give it a go anyway. I think my favorite of that spot has to be anyone trying to give the Headshrinkers the double noggin’ knocker. More recently, Santino’s Cobra always cracks me up, and to his credit he has gotten it over – the crowd always pops huge and for some reason I’m always surprised if someone kicks out of it. Any favorites of yours that never seem to get old?
The Iron Claw! The Garvin Stomp! Lex Luger no-selling Ric Flair’s chops and then flexing his pecs at him, which FLAIR SELLS! Basically anything that falls so far out of the bounds of reality that your brain explodes if you think about it too long, and yet gets over, I love. I also love snarking on it, but it’s a complex relationship I have with our so-called sport.
Just in case CM Punk wins the title again and, I dunno, Steve Austin returns and gives him a stunner or something and everyone goes crazy and crashes the blog, I’m taking the blog offline tonight from the start the show until shortly after. There will be a recap posted (I’m assuming) by either Tommy Hall or Michael Bradley and once that’s up, we should be good to go again.
Joel Geraghty Hey Scott, remember me? You used to post my TNA Impact recaps and got me in at InsidePulse. Well, now I’m over at 411 doing a series of Clash of the Champions recaps, starting with the first one in March of 1988. Would you be so kind as to give me a plug on your blog?
People don’t like 411 round here much, but I’m always happy to assist.
I was wondering if there have ever been an occasion when winning a championship was actually detrimental for a wrestler or tag-team? In that, the wrestler’s career would have been better off in the long-term if he, or she, did not win a title when he, or she, did.
The only examples I think come close are Tommy Rich and Ronnie Garvin. Neither guy was believable as champion during his respective reign and was unable to keep any momentum after he lost the gold.
One could argue that winning the gold did Jack Swagger no favors. However, his career is still ongoing. So things might turn around for the All-American American.
Are there any others that fit this bill?
Oh, what a great question! Ron Garvin actually should have won the title much earlier. There was a while there on the old NWA shows on 24/7 where I was hoping I could change history by willing it and have him beat Flair at the Bash instead of Dusty Rhodes, because he was pretty awesome at times. By 87, though, he was getting overshadowed by his brother (well, stepson, but let’s keep this simple) and he just had no momentum going when he won the title. Jimmy Garvin was no great shakes as a worker, to say the least, but that Precious storyline was begging for him to give Flair his comeuppance, and it just never happened. Here’s a controversial pick for you: The Road Warriors should not have won the NWA tag titles in 1988. They didn’t need them, and there was no way to change them because the Warriors didn’t do jobs. It actually made them weaker because before then they were “above” the titles, and now they were just another tag team. David Flair winning the US title in 1998. 99? Whatever, it sucked. It also ruined any future career he might have, because the whole thing was a sort of broad satire of promoters pushing their idiot kids to undeserved titles (during Flair’s “crazy WCW president” phase), and now no one would ever be able to take David seriously following that. Once you’re booked as the buffoon, it’s hard to go back. Ask Matt Borne and Nick Dinsmore. I can think of some other good examples, but I’ll let others play.