NintendoLogic

How did I know this would turn into a Flair thread?

So as I'm sure a few of you have noticed, I haven't really been around in a while. Part of that is due to my return to gainful employment, which has afforded me less time to dick around on the Internet. But the bigger reason is that I just haven't been that interested in wrestling lately. Then again, I tend to be hot-and-cold with my interests. One day I'm borderline obsessed with something, the next day I hardly care about it at all. But there's always been this voice in the back of my head reminding me "You know, this wrestling shit is pretty fucking cool", and I've started to listen to it. I recently watched some matches on my computer for the first time in months, and I definitely feel my interest returning. So I was just curious. Do any of you ever feel the need to take a break from wrestling? If so, is there anything in particular that sucks you back in?

The only I see this even being a difficult decision is if you're a really big fan of the Attitude Era, NOAH, and/or ROH. Or current New Japan, I guess.

I wouldn't call New Japan a workrate alternative to WWE, but it does provide greater stylistic variety. For better or worse, you'll never see a match like Nakamura/Sakuraba or Ishii/Shibata in WWE. Also, 90s All Japan is the best thing ever. Literally the best thing.

There was a fascinating tidbit in Dave's Warrior obit. Apparently, the AMA used to claim that steroids didn't aid in muscle growth and that any apparent gains were due to water retention. Given that, I can understand how a lot of bodybuilder types would end up being skeptical of claims of the health risks posed by steroids.

I think it's neat that Queen Elizabeth gave Kate the rub before leaving the territory.

When did Sting have a match with Sid that was way better than HBK/Sid at Survivor Series? My personal pick would be Misawa in 1995.

Was that a fair assessment, in everyone's opinion? I don't remember him being anything special. But the "worst"? I don't know about that. ESPN wouldn't hire crap, would they? Considering how bad WWE announcing is, I wonder if Grisham was held back by the "talk about everything except the match" style, being yelled at from the headset, etc. It's...it's Christian.

Bob Holly talks about the Wellness Program in his book. According to him, all the drug testing is done by urinalysis, which doesn't pick up HGH. So if you have a prescription for testosterone and combine it with HGH, you're good to go. The thing is that HGH costs a couple grand a month, so only the top guys can afford to do that. The undercard guys have to settle for cheaper stuff like deca and hope they don't get busted.

I'm pretty sure WM17 did over 1 million domestic.

There are superficial similarities between Bryan and Benoit, but there are some fundamental differences. There wasn't a groundswell of fan support that forced WWE to put Benoit in the main event. He was given the belt because HHH had run through everyone on Raw and they needed someone to keep the belt warm until Orton and Batista were ready.

Regardless of how good WWE has been lately from an in-ring and booking standpoint, it's rather unfortunate that they're continuing the asinine tradition of feuds that start with the babyface winning clean and going from there.

Another one for me would be the 8/23/85 Funk/Hansen match. It finished in the middle of the pack in DVDVR voting, but I thought it was the best of their matches together.

She did express regret over getting involved with wrestling because she thought it hurt her career. I can see how people in the business might be bitter over that.

Nakamura/Sakuraba strikes me as a rather odd choice. From what I've seen, that match has received close to universal praise. As for me, I'm one of the few who rates the Savage/Warrior Summerslam match above their WM7 match. And I'm probably the only person who rates Hogan/Andre at least as highly as Hansen/Andre.

Maybe not, but it'd still be nice to have everything important gathered together in a single piece.

I basically agree with what Loss is saying, but I also feel that it's impossible to work with the current WWE crew night in and night out and not improve significantly.

I guess the point was a bit more nuanced than that. Bruno's style of ace was that he'd just fucking deck heels for breakfast. You wouldn't describe Bruno as "plucky", you'd describe him as ... I, dunno, a dignified beast. A gentleman who just might happen to kick your head in if you cross him. I'm pretty sure that's what Dylan had in mind when he said that "Bryan couldn't play Bruno". The narrative arch of a Bruno match is "don't fuck with Bruno". Hogan's style of ace was all about the superman comebacks. He was booked "strong" in terms of wins and losses, but WITHIN matches Hogan would sell a lot for opponents. As we all know. The Hogan formula has been replicated time and again in WWE main events, it's the most basic wrestling formula (shine - heat - comeback). The narrative arch of a Hogan match is "no matter the odds, Hogan will overcome them and win". Backlund didn't work that formula. Not at all. Backlund matches are a totally different ball game, and that's really what I had in mind when I made this thread. The narrative arch of a Backlund match is "Backlund is the best wrestler around and he's the champ for a reason". So this is as much about how Bryan could be booked to work individual matches as it is about character or week-to-week booking. Those all strike me as differences of degree rather than of kind. Just about any top babyface is going to be presented as someone who wins because he's the better wrestler rather than because he got lucky. At the same time, he has to show enough vulnerability to keep fans emotionally invested in the outcome. Bruno and Backlund may have showed less vulnerability than Hogan, but they didn't routinely steamroll opponents like Goldberg either.

It seems to me that "he was plucky, courageous, never-say-die, etc., but booked STRONG" is a standard description of a company ace. If the question is whether Bryan can be booked like most top babyfaces, I suppose the answer is yes.

What the fuck?

Using rope breaks has been a heel move for most of WWE's history. When was the last time you saw John Cena reach for the ropes rather than simply power out of a submission? I'd say the way Bret did it was more of an anomaly than the beginning of a new tradition.

Cesaro was incredibly over as a heel at the house show I went to a little over a week ago. The only thing he did that got a babyface reaction was the giant swing.

You guys are aware that Bulgaria is a separate country from Russia, right?

Jarrett's competence as a promoter, or lack thereof, is of far less concern to me than his history of treating wrestlers, especially minority wrestlers, like chattel. He's not some harmless eccentric with an outsized ego. He's a blight on wrestling and should be regarded with scorn, not ridicule.

I think they could've gotten a million subscribers or close to it if it had been ready to go right after the announcement. A lot of the excitement seemed to dissipate during the month interval.