Changing Minds, Part II

Scott,
With hindsight being 20/20, if you could change ONE Wrestlemania card in history, which would it be?  I mean a basic realignment, not adding/substracting guys from other promotions and such.  Example, some people like the idea of a revisionist WM8: Hogan-Flair, Savage-Roberts, Undertaker-Sid.
Wrestlemania XIX always comes to mind for me:
Stone Cold -vs.- Hulk Hogan
Kurt Angle -vs.- Brock Lesnar, WWE Title
Shawn Michaels -vs.- The Rock
HHH -vs.- Chris Benoit, WORLD Title

That redone WM8 is a heck of an idea, actually.  I think a new version of WM4 might have worked better, to make it less boring.  Hogan v. Andre II, Dibiase just defending his World title against Randy Savage (with a #1 contender tournament running on Superstars leading up to the show) instead of doing the tournament, Steamboat v. Valentine as a standalone match… I dunno, tournaments are awesome, but that show needed some serious editing.  I’d also change the two shows where Cena did jobs, because an undefeated Cena eventually going up against undefeated Undertaker would mean way more than whatever momentary rub Miz got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway) or Orton got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway). 

Changing Minds, Part II

Scott,
With hindsight being 20/20, if you could change ONE Wrestlemania card in history, which would it be?  I mean a basic realignment, not adding/substracting guys from other promotions and such.  Example, some people like the idea of a revisionist WM8: Hogan-Flair, Savage-Roberts, Undertaker-Sid.
Wrestlemania XIX always comes to mind for me:
Stone Cold -vs.- Hulk Hogan
Kurt Angle -vs.- Brock Lesnar, WWE Title
Shawn Michaels -vs.- The Rock
HHH -vs.- Chris Benoit, WORLD Title

That redone WM8 is a heck of an idea, actually.  I think a new version of WM4 might have worked better, to make it less boring.  Hogan v. Andre II, Dibiase just defending his World title against Randy Savage (with a #1 contender tournament running on Superstars leading up to the show) instead of doing the tournament, Steamboat v. Valentine as a standalone match… I dunno, tournaments are awesome, but that show needed some serious editing.  I’d also change the two shows where Cena did jobs, because an undefeated Cena eventually going up against undefeated Undertaker would mean way more than whatever momentary rub Miz got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway) or Orton got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway). 

Changing Minds, Part II

Scott,
With hindsight being 20/20, if you could change ONE Wrestlemania card in history, which would it be?  I mean a basic realignment, not adding/substracting guys from other promotions and such.  Example, some people like the idea of a revisionist WM8: Hogan-Flair, Savage-Roberts, Undertaker-Sid.
Wrestlemania XIX always comes to mind for me:
Stone Cold -vs.- Hulk Hogan
Kurt Angle -vs.- Brock Lesnar, WWE Title
Shawn Michaels -vs.- The Rock
HHH -vs.- Chris Benoit, WORLD Title

That redone WM8 is a heck of an idea, actually.  I think a new version of WM4 might have worked better, to make it less boring.  Hogan v. Andre II, Dibiase just defending his World title against Randy Savage (with a #1 contender tournament running on Superstars leading up to the show) instead of doing the tournament, Steamboat v. Valentine as a standalone match… I dunno, tournaments are awesome, but that show needed some serious editing.  I’d also change the two shows where Cena did jobs, because an undefeated Cena eventually going up against undefeated Undertaker would mean way more than whatever momentary rub Miz got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway) or Orton got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway). 

Changing Minds, Part II

Scott,
With hindsight being 20/20, if you could change ONE Wrestlemania card in history, which would it be?  I mean a basic realignment, not adding/substracting guys from other promotions and such.  Example, some people like the idea of a revisionist WM8: Hogan-Flair, Savage-Roberts, Undertaker-Sid.
Wrestlemania XIX always comes to mind for me:
Stone Cold -vs.- Hulk Hogan
Kurt Angle -vs.- Brock Lesnar, WWE Title
Shawn Michaels -vs.- The Rock
HHH -vs.- Chris Benoit, WORLD Title

That redone WM8 is a heck of an idea, actually.  I think a new version of WM4 might have worked better, to make it less boring.  Hogan v. Andre II, Dibiase just defending his World title against Randy Savage (with a #1 contender tournament running on Superstars leading up to the show) instead of doing the tournament, Steamboat v. Valentine as a standalone match… I dunno, tournaments are awesome, but that show needed some serious editing.  I’d also change the two shows where Cena did jobs, because an undefeated Cena eventually going up against undefeated Undertaker would mean way more than whatever momentary rub Miz got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway) or Orton got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway). 

Changing Minds, Part II

Scott,
With hindsight being 20/20, if you could change ONE Wrestlemania card in history, which would it be?  I mean a basic realignment, not adding/substracting guys from other promotions and such.  Example, some people like the idea of a revisionist WM8: Hogan-Flair, Savage-Roberts, Undertaker-Sid.
Wrestlemania XIX always comes to mind for me:
Stone Cold -vs.- Hulk Hogan
Kurt Angle -vs.- Brock Lesnar, WWE Title
Shawn Michaels -vs.- The Rock
HHH -vs.- Chris Benoit, WORLD Title

That redone WM8 is a heck of an idea, actually.  I think a new version of WM4 might have worked better, to make it less boring.  Hogan v. Andre II, Dibiase just defending his World title against Randy Savage (with a #1 contender tournament running on Superstars leading up to the show) instead of doing the tournament, Steamboat v. Valentine as a standalone match… I dunno, tournaments are awesome, but that show needed some serious editing.  I’d also change the two shows where Cena did jobs, because an undefeated Cena eventually going up against undefeated Undertaker would mean way more than whatever momentary rub Miz got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway) or Orton got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway). 

Changing Minds, Part II

Scott,
With hindsight being 20/20, if you could change ONE Wrestlemania card in history, which would it be?  I mean a basic realignment, not adding/substracting guys from other promotions and such.  Example, some people like the idea of a revisionist WM8: Hogan-Flair, Savage-Roberts, Undertaker-Sid.
Wrestlemania XIX always comes to mind for me:
Stone Cold -vs.- Hulk Hogan
Kurt Angle -vs.- Brock Lesnar, WWE Title
Shawn Michaels -vs.- The Rock
HHH -vs.- Chris Benoit, WORLD Title

That redone WM8 is a heck of an idea, actually.  I think a new version of WM4 might have worked better, to make it less boring.  Hogan v. Andre II, Dibiase just defending his World title against Randy Savage (with a #1 contender tournament running on Superstars leading up to the show) instead of doing the tournament, Steamboat v. Valentine as a standalone match… I dunno, tournaments are awesome, but that show needed some serious editing.  I’d also change the two shows where Cena did jobs, because an undefeated Cena eventually going up against undefeated Undertaker would mean way more than whatever momentary rub Miz got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway) or Orton got from going over (and then losing the next month anyway). 

Changing Minds

Scott, Have you ever changed your opinion of a match after hearing that one of the wrestlers in it didn’t think it was that good? As examples, Jericho didn’t think his match with Benoit and Angle at Wrestlemania 2000 was very good, and Flair wrote in his autobiography that the match where he dropped the belt to Bret Hart was “terrible.” Did reading those comments make you reconsider those matches, or is it one of those “eye of the beholder” things where you don’t need Radiohead to like “Creep” for you to like “Creep?”

That’s actually the only Radiohead song I do like.  Anyway, wrestlers, like most creative people, are extremely judgmental of their own work, moreso than any other critic could be.  Excepting of course Kevin Nash who thinks everything he shits is gold.  I know that when I’m reading my old rants for the “Scott sez” redoes I’ll be like “This is the most embarrassingly bad horseshit I’ve ever read” despite people telling me how they love to read my old stuff.  So yeah, oddly enough the opinions of the actual wrestlers are often the least important to me when judging a match.  Plus they would often judge the matches on insanely inside and technical aspects that you’re never going to notice as a common fan anyway (“And then here he’s doing a hammerlock when the previous three armdrags clearly foreshadowed a wristlock…”).  If you ever hear Bret Hart, as an example, talk about his own matches that’s kind of what it sounds like at times.  I can also picture Kurt Angle sitting in front of a TV and picking apart his own matches at 3:00AM while hopped up on painkillers, trying to make sure that he doesn’t ruin the next match by grabbing his back with his left hand instead of his right when selling a bodyslam or something. 

Changing Minds

Scott, Have you ever changed your opinion of a match after hearing that one of the wrestlers in it didn’t think it was that good? As examples, Jericho didn’t think his match with Benoit and Angle at Wrestlemania 2000 was very good, and Flair wrote in his autobiography that the match where he dropped the belt to Bret Hart was “terrible.” Did reading those comments make you reconsider those matches, or is it one of those “eye of the beholder” things where you don’t need Radiohead to like “Creep” for you to like “Creep?”

That’s actually the only Radiohead song I do like.  Anyway, wrestlers, like most creative people, are extremely judgmental of their own work, moreso than any other critic could be.  Excepting of course Kevin Nash who thinks everything he shits is gold.  I know that when I’m reading my old rants for the “Scott sez” redoes I’ll be like “This is the most embarrassingly bad horseshit I’ve ever read” despite people telling me how they love to read my old stuff.  So yeah, oddly enough the opinions of the actual wrestlers are often the least important to me when judging a match.  Plus they would often judge the matches on insanely inside and technical aspects that you’re never going to notice as a common fan anyway (“And then here he’s doing a hammerlock when the previous three armdrags clearly foreshadowed a wristlock…”).  If you ever hear Bret Hart, as an example, talk about his own matches that’s kind of what it sounds like at times.  I can also picture Kurt Angle sitting in front of a TV and picking apart his own matches at 3:00AM while hopped up on painkillers, trying to make sure that he doesn’t ruin the next match by grabbing his back with his left hand instead of his right when selling a bodyslam or something. 

Changing Minds

Scott, Have you ever changed your opinion of a match after hearing that one of the wrestlers in it didn’t think it was that good? As examples, Jericho didn’t think his match with Benoit and Angle at Wrestlemania 2000 was very good, and Flair wrote in his autobiography that the match where he dropped the belt to Bret Hart was “terrible.” Did reading those comments make you reconsider those matches, or is it one of those “eye of the beholder” things where you don’t need Radiohead to like “Creep” for you to like “Creep?”

That’s actually the only Radiohead song I do like.  Anyway, wrestlers, like most creative people, are extremely judgmental of their own work, moreso than any other critic could be.  Excepting of course Kevin Nash who thinks everything he shits is gold.  I know that when I’m reading my old rants for the “Scott sez” redoes I’ll be like “This is the most embarrassingly bad horseshit I’ve ever read” despite people telling me how they love to read my old stuff.  So yeah, oddly enough the opinions of the actual wrestlers are often the least important to me when judging a match.  Plus they would often judge the matches on insanely inside and technical aspects that you’re never going to notice as a common fan anyway (“And then here he’s doing a hammerlock when the previous three armdrags clearly foreshadowed a wristlock…”).  If you ever hear Bret Hart, as an example, talk about his own matches that’s kind of what it sounds like at times.  I can also picture Kurt Angle sitting in front of a TV and picking apart his own matches at 3:00AM while hopped up on painkillers, trying to make sure that he doesn’t ruin the next match by grabbing his back with his left hand instead of his right when selling a bodyslam or something. 

Changing Minds

Scott, Have you ever changed your opinion of a match after hearing that one of the wrestlers in it didn’t think it was that good? As examples, Jericho didn’t think his match with Benoit and Angle at Wrestlemania 2000 was very good, and Flair wrote in his autobiography that the match where he dropped the belt to Bret Hart was “terrible.” Did reading those comments make you reconsider those matches, or is it one of those “eye of the beholder” things where you don’t need Radiohead to like “Creep” for you to like “Creep?”

That’s actually the only Radiohead song I do like.  Anyway, wrestlers, like most creative people, are extremely judgmental of their own work, moreso than any other critic could be.  Excepting of course Kevin Nash who thinks everything he shits is gold.  I know that when I’m reading my old rants for the “Scott sez” redoes I’ll be like “This is the most embarrassingly bad horseshit I’ve ever read” despite people telling me how they love to read my old stuff.  So yeah, oddly enough the opinions of the actual wrestlers are often the least important to me when judging a match.  Plus they would often judge the matches on insanely inside and technical aspects that you’re never going to notice as a common fan anyway (“And then here he’s doing a hammerlock when the previous three armdrags clearly foreshadowed a wristlock…”).  If you ever hear Bret Hart, as an example, talk about his own matches that’s kind of what it sounds like at times.  I can also picture Kurt Angle sitting in front of a TV and picking apart his own matches at 3:00AM while hopped up on painkillers, trying to make sure that he doesn’t ruin the next match by grabbing his back with his left hand instead of his right when selling a bodyslam or something. 

Changing Minds

Scott, Have you ever changed your opinion of a match after hearing that one of the wrestlers in it didn’t think it was that good? As examples, Jericho didn’t think his match with Benoit and Angle at Wrestlemania 2000 was very good, and Flair wrote in his autobiography that the match where he dropped the belt to Bret Hart was “terrible.” Did reading those comments make you reconsider those matches, or is it one of those “eye of the beholder” things where you don’t need Radiohead to like “Creep” for you to like “Creep?”

That’s actually the only Radiohead song I do like.  Anyway, wrestlers, like most creative people, are extremely judgmental of their own work, moreso than any other critic could be.  Excepting of course Kevin Nash who thinks everything he shits is gold.  I know that when I’m reading my old rants for the “Scott sez” redoes I’ll be like “This is the most embarrassingly bad horseshit I’ve ever read” despite people telling me how they love to read my old stuff.  So yeah, oddly enough the opinions of the actual wrestlers are often the least important to me when judging a match.  Plus they would often judge the matches on insanely inside and technical aspects that you’re never going to notice as a common fan anyway (“And then here he’s doing a hammerlock when the previous three armdrags clearly foreshadowed a wristlock…”).  If you ever hear Bret Hart, as an example, talk about his own matches that’s kind of what it sounds like at times.  I can also picture Kurt Angle sitting in front of a TV and picking apart his own matches at 3:00AM while hopped up on painkillers, trying to make sure that he doesn’t ruin the next match by grabbing his back with his left hand instead of his right when selling a bodyslam or something. 

Changing Minds

Scott, Have you ever changed your opinion of a match after hearing that one of the wrestlers in it didn’t think it was that good? As examples, Jericho didn’t think his match with Benoit and Angle at Wrestlemania 2000 was very good, and Flair wrote in his autobiography that the match where he dropped the belt to Bret Hart was “terrible.” Did reading those comments make you reconsider those matches, or is it one of those “eye of the beholder” things where you don’t need Radiohead to like “Creep” for you to like “Creep?”

That’s actually the only Radiohead song I do like.  Anyway, wrestlers, like most creative people, are extremely judgmental of their own work, moreso than any other critic could be.  Excepting of course Kevin Nash who thinks everything he shits is gold.  I know that when I’m reading my old rants for the “Scott sez” redoes I’ll be like “This is the most embarrassingly bad horseshit I’ve ever read” despite people telling me how they love to read my old stuff.  So yeah, oddly enough the opinions of the actual wrestlers are often the least important to me when judging a match.  Plus they would often judge the matches on insanely inside and technical aspects that you’re never going to notice as a common fan anyway (“And then here he’s doing a hammerlock when the previous three armdrags clearly foreshadowed a wristlock…”).  If you ever hear Bret Hart, as an example, talk about his own matches that’s kind of what it sounds like at times.  I can also picture Kurt Angle sitting in front of a TV and picking apart his own matches at 3:00AM while hopped up on painkillers, trying to make sure that he doesn’t ruin the next match by grabbing his back with his left hand instead of his right when selling a bodyslam or something.