Loss

I don't think this was much of a match, but it was really well-scripted and Savage really gave an inspired heel performance. Even Liz was doing stuff other than standing there stone-faced. DDP gets a win, but it's sort of a fluke, and considering what stage they are in of the feud, I think this is perfectly acceptable. A very angry and dismantled NWO watches as Nash has a death grip on Nick Patrick for counting the fall while checking on Savage. Patrick takes a hell of a bump for Nash. Savage gets his hands on Kimberly. Bischoff stops him from striking her and ends up getting shoved down for his trouble. They end up in a little fight and the NWO is in total disarray. Great stuff.

Hotline teaser about a new "Clique" in WCW. Hmmm … Yes, this is THAT interview. Booker drops an n-bomb on pay-per-view, directed at Hulk Hogan. Sherri seems a little startled but tries to cover for it.

Terry Funk confronts Raven in a locker room, but the presence of the camera and the premise is too "cold" and makes no sense. If only for that detail, I may have really loved this. I don't think Funk is really good at arguing with people in segments without seeming like he's acting. I really, really, really hated this, although it at least led to a really physical brawl.

Raven does one of his sulking promos, this time in a bathroom. THIS LASTED MORE THAN SIX MINUTES, which is way too long without an interviewer to ask questions and play off of. Plus, we had to hear Raven's "I Hate My Father" talk again.

Hey, there's Dutch Mantell lurking in the background. Dundee talks about his recent programs with the New Diesel and New Razor Ramon. He points out that the big guys who enter the territory always seem to come after him and holy cow do these two tower over the Superstar. Kane talking like a normal human being is weird. Dundee wants them to get in the ring and they are hesitant. Brian Christopher eventually comes out with a shovel or rake or something to provide backup to Dundee and suddenly the WWF fakes aren't interested.

Some incredible stuff in this match, as Kohsaka and Yamamoto go the distance for a half hour. I'll sound like a broken record, but other promotions (and not just those in Japan) should have incorporated this into their house style and worked to get it over by educating fans on the importance of holds. I think it would have toned down some of the highspot excess and made the wrestling style more sustainable over the long haul. Think what Watts tried to do in 1992, but with a more modern slant. I do think 30 minutes is a bit too long for this style, but these guys should be commended for keeping the match fresh and not really being all that repetitive. This bordered on too much of a good thing, but you couldn't ask for a much better 30-minute match. The closing stretch of this was just about as exciting as wrestling gets, with Kohsaka digging deep in his reserve to stay in the fight. RINGS is my favorite 1997 promotion so far.

Thanks for the congrats, everyone.

I'll rewatch anything I rated 4* or better, or anything where other people think I really missed the boat. In addition to that, as other matches are mentioned throughout the yearbook threads, I'll add them to this. I have this in place for every year, and I'll start with 1990 when I finish watching the 1999 Yearbook.

In fairness to anarchist, I will say I think the specific point that led him to that long post was that Christian is one of the best babyfaces in company history. I'm too lazy to look on the first page and see who said that, but responses comparing him to Austin and Hogan based on that aren't off the mark.

Lawler likes young girls. Think about what has to happen when a child molester moves into a neighborhood.

That's the point. New matches in blue. This is a "to-do" list.

I think they were saving it for Wrestlemania 14. I think something happened before then with Bret if I remember right.

This can only be redeemed by Kane leading the WWE Universe in singing "This Little Light of Mine".

I just struggle with the idea that the titles have to change more often due to the amount of television, because during the Monday Night Wars, Hulk Hogan had a 16-month run with the title, other than a quick back-and-forth switch with Luger that in hindsight was probably a bad decision. He wrestled on television maybe a half dozen times a year, and even less than that in singles matches. I think it could be done now, but I think it requires re-thinking how storylines are developed, how wrestlers are pushed and how television is formatted. Fans wanting to see something happen before it actually happens isn't completely lost, but that emotion isn't really the same. If the purpose of the more frequent title changes is to keep things interesting, then I have to ask the question: Has it kept things interesting? To my point, who says the title has to be defended on every pay-per-view? I know they run more than WCW did in 1996-1997, but if they build up two to three feuds people care about, they can headline PPVs in "off" months. Tag matches can also headline PPVs. So much copying of what WCW did wrong, so little copying of what WCW did right.

Does anyone in New Japan have a non-douchey hairstyle?

Also, I don't think the answer to getting a wrestler over is to put the title on him. I think putting the title on a wrestler should be a response to fan demand. There are always exceptions which I'm sure someone will point out, but in most cases, the most successful champions in history are the ones who fans wanted to see in that top position before they got there. Different wrestlers are over for different reasons. The only common bond is that they find a way to connect with people. So really, I think doing that exceptionally well (moreso than all of a wrestler's peers) is what I consider "championship material". Everything else varies from wrestler to wrestler.

I remember when they would change the corner logo every few years. That hasn't happened in a long time and as small of a detail as it is, I do think it's representative of everything being so stagnant.

My partner and I are expecting a child in November and we have decided that I will be a stay-at-home dad, so I'm sure there will be some adjustments. I'm trying to take advantage of the watching time while I have it.

As a personal preference, I'd rather no one ever win a title unless there's a plan to build around them as the top star for an extended period of time, which I would say is six months or more. I guess occasionally depending on circumstance there is value in doing quick title switches, but that should be extremely rare. I'm not a fan of transitional champions in general (of course there are exceptions), and I actively hate the concept of midcard or semi-main world champions enough to not watch when that's the booking direction. As far as the qualities that make a guy championship material, they can vary from wrestler to wrestler, but if a promotion doesn't have the confidence to build around their chosen champion as the unquestioned top star, then I'd rather them make their chosen unquestioned top star the champion. All or nothing.

Scott Keith made this up. It is a complete lie.

That's actually a great idea! They could have also had Luger holding off people from making the save at ringside, which could be a tease of if he's joined the Horsemen or not, but could actually just play out as Luger hoping Sting would get injured so he could step into the spot. They could do touch-and-go hype around Sting actually showing up at the pay-per-view, which would involve Luger in the hype for the match and create some real intrigue.

It was an oversight. Thanks. I will edit it in.

Paging goodhelmet ...

Because ECW wasn't really a promotion where smart workers past their physical prime who still had something to contribute were going to get a chance to shine. He's Ricky Morton, he's one of the greatest wrestlers ever ... he should be able to find a consistent, well-paying gig where he can work standard FIP tags. That he couldn't is a reflection of wrestling changing for the worst, not a reflection of old Morton having nothing to offer.

What is the source?