Loss

Yeah to all of that, but THE MUPPETS ARE NOT PEOPLE. That is the issue.

The biggest difference is that backstage vignettes involve people. How do you suspend your disbelief enough to think Vickie Guerrero thinks Miss Piggy is a real person and takes the time to argue with her? I just can't. I wish I could, but I just can't. That said, Vickie and Piggy arguing was pretty funny.

Absolutely. If people enjoyed it, that's great. I don't want to try to challenge that or take it away from anyone. Just pointing out my thoughts watching it. And yes, it would have been far worse in a setting where wrestling is presented in a more traditional way.

Ok, I'll just come out and say it without worrying about appearing joyless. I didn't hate the idea, but I really, really hated it in execution. When I saw Jack Swagger threatening to make a ham sandwich out of Miss Piggy, I realized that wrestling has fallen off the deep end and that there's no return. There's no reason to believe anything Swagger (or anyone in WWE, really) says in the future, since they made it abundantly, overtly clear tonight how fake wrestling is. I know kayfabe has been dead for a long time, but this is probably the worst violation of it that I have ever seen. That doesn't make me joyless. It means that I like the Muppets and I like wrestling, but I have no reason to see them together. There are many interests I'm sure all of us have that wouldn't be a good fit in the same environment. This happened to be one of them.

I don't want to say I didn't like it, but it was difficult for me to enjoy. Wrestling is the most fun for me when they pretend it's the most serious. But ... anyone who enjoyed this but doesn't buy Rey or other smaller guys on top because of credibility issues is a major, first class hypocrite.

For those of you who like Memphis, this will be your set. I've managed to fill the gaps of the 1990 season set floating around, *and* score the entire USWA Texas season to wade through, *and* get a good chunk of USWA Challenge. There will be quite a bit of footage that has never gotten much play. Same for lucha except for the most hardcore of hardcore fans. Plus, because wrestling was in a state of flux between the indies and the territories, there are quite a few small territories that had TV that will have a little representation. I'm really excited with how this is coming together. From a wrestling perspective, I don't think it will be the *best* set, but overall, it may end up as the most fun set.

On the subject of that match, did anyone else think it was TOTAL BULLSHIT when they announced that if Money Inc. lose by countout, they also lose their belts? Why? At least mention that stip BEFORE the match. This on the same night Hogan got an impromptu title shot. Hulk Hogan was above the rules. The preferential treatment drove me nuts as a fan. But yeah, Sting is amazingly dumb.

I don't watch TNA, but could someone explain how Hogan went from face coming in to heel back to face, and now he's talking about being Hollywood again, which suggests a heel turn? It doesn't seem to make sense on the surface. I doubt it makes more sense with explanation, but I'd still be interested in hearing one.

I'm referencing WWF as kjh had mentioned not running the Garden or Spectrum monthly as a reason for the WWF peak in '98-01 not possibly being bigger than '77-84. Though for all of wrestling, the WWF made more in those years than any territory probably made in their entire history, so there's an argument to be made financially that it was a far better time business wise, but it's difficult to compare the revenue streams and the change in culture. It is difficult to compare, but I don't think anyone would argue that the WWF from 1977-1984 was stronger than the WWF for 1998-2001. That was not the purpose of this thread (although I acknowledge what you were responding to specifically). 1983 in particular had almost every territory in the country doing something really big. Steamboat/Youngblood vs Slaughter/Kernodle and Starrcade in the Carolinas, the big Lawler/Dundee match in Memphis, Super Sunday in the AWA, the Freebirds vs Von Erichs in WCCW, Tiger Mask in New Japan, and probably other things I'm forgetting. The wrestling business was healthy in quite a few places. Perhaps due to changes in television a monopoly was inevitable, but there were far more chances to work on top with less travel and make more money (aside from national stars like Flair, Dusty, Hogan, etc.) Wrestling was a far more lucrative business to work in if you were a headliner during the late 90s/early 00s than it was in the late 70s/early 80s, but at the same time, there were far less main event spots in the modern era.

Are those numbers just what you're estimating for the WWF, or for all of wrestling? The initial point I took as being about wrestling as a whole, not a single promotion.

Thanks. I had them having a match on 02/24 also, but I'm not sure where I got that from. I looked back at the Classics list and it's not there. Different question for anyone who has seen the USWA title tournament: There are way too many matches on that show that look good on paper, far too many to include. What would you classify as the essential matches? If someone could at least put them into tiers (1st tier being musts, 2nd being strongly recommended, 3rd being put on if you have room), that would also be helpful. Thanks.

Apter should probably go in as well. Complaining about his lack of credibility is criticizing him for something he was never attempting to achieve.

Yes, from G+!

Was it really 'hotter' than say '98-01? It may be comparing apples to oranges, but the insane amount of people watching 2 companies during that boom and the WWF shattering thier own attendance records across the country is something we'll probably never see again. The peaks were higher from 98-01, but there were many more wrestlers working and making a good living in the late 70s and early 80s. 1998-2001 was more a one-company boom than it was that anything wrestling related was going to be hot. I'll take strong business in many places over record-breaking business in one place any day of the week.

Not to keep harping on this, but one thing that works on the yearbooks for me is the context without the overkill of one style hitting you over the head. It's hard for me to hop around because I'm not in the moment of the match, if that makes sense. Watching a yearbook is the closest you'll get to what it was like to be a wrestling fan that year.

The 70s would be interesting if the 8mm footage/JIP stuff was mixed in as well. You'd have a lot of clipped stuff/incomplete matches, but taken together, I think it would be interesting. Mixing in the Mid Atlantic film footage, AWA stuff that's out there, Florida 8mm matches, San Francisco stuff, etc. What I wonder is if a single 30-disc "yearbook" could be created covering the period from Stetcher/Caddock from 1920 (the oldest available match I know of) through the end of the 1960s. Then another single 30-disc yearbook could cover the entire decade of the 1970s. Starting with 1980, it would be full sets for each year. That's my vision of how it could work early on, and I might find that changing as I find out what's out there.

Anyone seen the Liger/Owen matches from 1990? Is there one that's more important than others? Are any disappointing and easily not included? Just curious.

Mid February - mid April, I think. Not sure if he worked house shows before the Vader match at In Your House.

I'll give you the advice that worked for me when I felt the same way -- pick one thing and focus on it. The other stuff will be there when you're done. I used to bounce around and it got to a point where I didn't even want to watch wrestling because I didn't know where to start. My suggestion? Put everything else aside, start with the 1992 yearbook and post quick thoughts as you go. There's enough variety to keep it easy to watch without being bogged down in one style. If you like that, do 1993, and so on. I am admittedly biased about this project, but it was the answer to my fan woes, and I honestly believe it probably would be for other people too.

Also interesting in that Austin is already shaved bald so that narrows the time frame even more. He came into the WWF with hair. Maybe this was after the MSG show in May.

Even the 1990 run in the WWF was funny, and it's not like he was brought in to be anything more than an opening match guy. I wouldn't call anything about it actively bad. Plus, he did have a perfectly good, brief WWF run on top in the early 80s.

Where is tomk? I want a response.

Yes, it was pro shot and released either in full or close to it.