Loss

Bret Hart, Steve Austin, The Rock, and Rey Misterio?

If you mean No Flair Match Ever, possibly yes.

I'm also not doubting that Watts may have said that, but what is the source for that? I don't recall seeing it in a WON.

The push was too extreme, for sure. Watts seemed to learn from it, and had them drop both sets of titles by the end of September. I agree that he pushed them way too hard. What's disappointing is that he made that mistake right out of the gate. It may not have seemed such a big deal had he built up some good will with his new vision first. It would just be a misfire instead of something that set the tone for his entire regime.

Don't get too excited about '93. January and February are lots of fun, then it nosedives fast, with a few bright spots here and there. Watts was a big believer in heels getting clean pinfalls. He liked strong heels. From reading WONs at the time, he felt like they needed a few shows to re-educate people on the style - both in booking and wrestling - and if resulted in a few disappointing shows in the short term, so be it. Similar to the top rope ban. He felt that wrestlers jumping off the top didn't get any heat, so he thought by taking it away for a few months, those moves would be so over because people would miss them so much that he could bring them back in a few months and make them mean something again. Absence making the heart grow fonder. I'm not saying he's right about all of this stuff, but I like that a wrestling promoter in the U.S. gave some real thought to this stuff, because I can't remember a time since when anyone has.

Halloween Havoc actually drew really well and should have been much better than it was. Doc and Gordy had just had a great match with Windham and Rhodes on TV, so doing so on PPV should have been a given, but Gordy was fired just before the show. Rude and Chono had the great match in New Japan two months prior, and a rematch here should have been excellent. Steamboat and Pillman should have been a good match too, with Sting/Jake a hot main event. I blame the wrestlers more than Watts for how that show turned out.

This is not to defend Watts, but I think it took him six months just to get a grasp of the current wrestling landscape. By the beginning of '93, he has gotten the Doc and Gordy nonsense out of his system, abandoned the Simmons push and gotten rid of has beens like Dick Slater. Now, he is bringing in guys like Regal and Scorpio, pushing Barry Windham to the top, and doing angles with the Rock & Roll Express and Jim Cornette. He had made arrangements for Flair to come in as well. They were moving in a much better direction post-Starrcade '92, and the build to SuperBrawl III, which was really well done, was all his. Also, I can't guarantee that he would have been a success, but had Watts been told that his goal was to be competitive with the WWF instead of being told his goal was to cut costs however necessary, we likely would have had a different end result. Watts was aiming to get Heyman fired the moment he came through the door, as Frey negotiated a ridiculous contract for him, something like $250,000 a year. They hired a private investigator to follow him on the road and found him falsifying expense reports, and there you go.

You have to remember that whether valid or not, WCW wasn't exactly happy with Jesse Ventura's work. The perception was that he coasted on his name, didn't follow angles closely, and that he was just there to collect a paycheck. I would call Heenan worse in every one of those categories, and I'd take WCW Jesse Ventura over him any day of the week. Sometimes decisions are made that just don't make sense, but I think it was booker Ric Flair that pushed for Heenan and Okerlund to be hired. And in retrospect, who wouldn't pick up Bobby Heenan during that time period if he became available?

Whether anyone in WCW thought highly of his work or not, I think WCW kept Heenan around for perception reasons. When you have Hogan and Savage on top, and Heenan and Okerlund as announcers, it adds to the perception that all of the old WWF stars have moved to WCW.

It sounds so simple, but as great as the Queendom tag was, Misawa/Kawada was everything it has been hyped to be for so many years. Seeing the 1992-1993 matches as a lead in just added to it.

I don't know.

The Shawn TV from '96 worth checking out is: * vs 1-2-3 Kid (3/4/96 RAW) * vs Leif Cassidy (3/25/96 RAW) * vs Hunter Hearst Helmsley (5/13/96 RAW) * vs Marty Jannetty (7/1/96 RAW) * vs Owen Hart (8/12/96 RAW) * vs Steve Austin (10/14/96 RAW) Every match has some positives. Some are really good, and some are just okay. The Owen match is my personal favorite, with the Jannetty match after that.

I wouldn't argue that Shawn matches got progressively worse. Sure, he had a peak, like any wrestler, but once he became a headliner, his output was pretty consistent. My problem with him was his lack of offense. Jerry also touched on the self-importance/calculation of some of his later matches, which rings true for me as well. I bought him as a guy who could take punishment and come back for sure. I didn't buy him as a threat -- someone who could injure or hurt someone, who could either tie them in knots on the mat or pound them into the ground. Maybe you could argue similar things about other guys who aren't really asskicker types like a Rey Misterio, but the difference was that Rey could win by outwrestling his opponent (which required him to show great skill) while Shawn would win by outlasting/showing resilience (which is more of a booking thing).

I've meant to do comments for this and other years, but I haven't been able to motivate myself to dive in. That said, I don't want to just post the list and not reflect on it at all. If there are questions, comments, observations, etc., I'm more than willing to discuss them ad-hoc. I just don't have it in me at the moment to do a little mini-review for each match.

OJ, what's being debated is that you called it one of the worst major shows ever, and you seem to be citing that as the reason.

Ah, you're right!

There's more than one match between these teams? I don't believe so.

Cornette was fantastic. He and Ross in the late 80s/early 90s are one of the best color commentary teams. He may be my #1 color guy pick.

This feels like an appropriate place to mention that the WWF once had Brother Love call an MSG show, and he did the ENTIRE SHOW in his Brother Love voice. This remains the worst color commentary of all time.

Anyone who hops on the 1990 express will hear some high quality Lawler color commentary.

Dutch Mantel in SMW was one of the best color guys ever.

Lawler has been really good at times. The problem isn't Lawler's skills, the problem is the persona he is expected to portray. Michael Hayes was a great color guy. I've said before that I think he was better than Ventura, and I stand by that. Why do you think he wasn't good? I thought Piper was really good. He was just expected to scream too much. Honky Tonk Man wasn't terrible by any means. Dusty was not at all a good announcer in the traditional sense, but his personality added ... color ... to the broadcasts, and in that sense, he was enjoyable.

Ric Flair is HORRIBLE behind the booth. His voice isn't really suited well for it. I'm not sure how Randy Savage managed to call three hour shows in his Randy Savage voice and not do permanent damage to his vocal cords. (I guess it's possible he did.) I think one reason color commentary is harder for some wrestlers is that they shouldn't be putting themselves over all that much, and also because I don't think it is the same skill set. Color guys should sound relatively upbeat and speak in soundbytes (to quote Jim Ross) while a wrestling promo is usually angrier with more time to elaborate on a specific topic. I've noticed that sometimes wrestlers take too long to make their point when doing color, and by the time they get to it, it's irrelevant because the match has shifted gears.