DMJ

That particular item is so ridiculously weird and pretty unbelievable to me. Basically, Afa and Sika, with over 40 years of exposure to the business, are total marks who believe that Reigns winning/losing a fake championship is a legit reason to leave the top wrestling promotion in America? According to wikipedia, they won 21 Tag Team Championships as the Wild Samoans. Did they quit these promotions 21 times when it was scripted that they lost?

I've only seen his WCW work, but is there anything Charlie Norris does/did that was good?

Great point. I was talking to a friend about this very topic. There have been some good characters in the division over the years, but since the departures of Trish and Lita, it has been more common for these "main event divas" to only get 12-18 months on top and then taken off TV/retired/etc.. Off the top of my head, Michelle McCool, Mickie James, and Beth Pheonix spring to mind, as well as Melina somewhat (though, she never really got to the top of the division or was as over as the previous three mentioned). I think Kharma, if she had had an actual run with the WWE, would've had the same 12 months, then would've been beat and that would've been it for her. I don't even view this as a bad thing. As much as Nikki Bella has improved, I'm willing to wager the Bellas are coming to the end of their run as the focal point of the divas division. They've feuded with everyone, including each other, and the next batch of talent (Sasha and Charlotte) are ready for their run. Just like Layla has been transitioned into an ambassador/spokesperson role, the Bellas will be in that spot (though with more of a TV presence due to their roles on Total Divas) sooner than later. As one-dimensional as she is (someone else said it, but honestly, every move she does has to do with her butt), I do like Naomi's energy and eagerness and wouldn't mind her and Paige being used as transitional opponents to take us from the Bellas Era (2013-15) to the Charlotte/Banks Era (2016-2018).

Shifting the conversation back to Rusev, I'm kind of interested in the back-and-forth over whether Rusev is underrated/overrated as an in-ring worker. I haven't seen *every* match of his or anything, but I thought his bout with Big Show at Hell In The Cell 2014 was probably the best Big Show match in a number of years. I also thought his Network special matches with Big E. and Swagger were career highlights for those two. Throw in his matches with Cena, which I enjoyed, and, in terms of consistency, Rusev has a really strong body of work already. I don't think he's wrestled any masterpiece yet, but I also haven't seen him wrestle a dud and, for a rookie, that's very promising. Gimmick aside, if the WWE fails to find a way to keep him relevant and fresh, they're missing out on a guy that shouldn't be too hard to keep as a threat in upper mid card for years to come (in the vein of Umaga, for example).

"There were two Ultimate Warriors. The first one died." "I used to watch it when it was good and they had guys like The Godfather."

My thought is that they purposefully tanked hour 3 of this show, not necessarily to hurt Reigns in particular, but just to get through it. Let's be honest, we all love wrestling, but if you weren't at least a little sick of pro-wrestling by 11:15 PM on Monday Night, your appetite has no end. After a well-received WrestleMania and a great first half of RAW, the writers/bookers knew that the crowd (who "behaved" well during the 4-hour Hall of Fame ceremony and Mania and the first half of RAW) was getting restless. This resulted in a 2-segment divas match and a 6-man main event that was eerily reminiscent of the same 6-man tag matches we've seen countless times over the past few months. The last hour of RAW was the pedestrian, store-bought vanilla ice cream (no sprinkles, no fudge) you serve as a dessert after serving several much better, much tastier appetizers and entrees. It was the WWE, having given all it could, asking, "You're still hungry?" and realizing that the punch drunk crowd just needed to be put to sleep. WrestleMania weekend was over and the last hour was just a formality. Cue Big Show and Kane. It was also telling that they stuck Orton and Reigns in that dead spot too. We know they were protecting Reigns from getting booed even more than he did (imagine how much more heat he might've got in a different position), but I also think there was some hesitance with putting Orton in front of that crowd. Was it last year or the year before when he and Sheamus got massively booed in the first match of the show and Orton looked legit pissed?

I wasn't bothered with Reigns taking such a beating personally - but what is more confusing to me is that people are calling this a MOTYC. I just don't see it, unless those same people would call Cena/Lesnar at SummerSlam 2014 a MOTYC too. To me, they were almost the exact same match, only SummerSlam ended with a clean finish. Also, I'd have to rewatch, but did Reigns bust out any new moves? I'm not saying he needed to change his arsenal or anything, but I was really hoping that, in preparation for the biggest match of his life, against a former UFC Champion, part of Reigns' "training" was that he was going to utilize a move or two that his opponent (and the audience) wasn't expecting. For example, Cena busted out a springboard neckbreaker that I don't think I've seen him pull out before in the 100s of Cena matches I've watched over the years. Another example would be Bryan debuting a new finisher at SummerSlam '13. I was pretty drunk at the time, but aside from the superman punch and the spear, did he do anything else?

I'm another one that wants to say "not HBK," but its just too hard. Without Hogan, we wouldn't have WrestleMania, but if you go down that rabbit hole, you might also argue, without Hogan, we wouldn't have the modern WWE, so, is he Mr. WWE too? I'm not against giving him that name, but it is so all-encompassing, it kind of defeats the purpose. To me, the Mr. WrestleMania moniker (as the WWE uses it) is supposed to be the guy that stole the show at WrestleMania year after year, but more than that, its the person who embodies the spirit of the night. Savage is a very close second for me - vs. Steamboat, at WM4, vs. Hogan, vs. Warrior, vs. Flair...all classic moments/matches. Bret and Austin are similar to me in that they are almost tied for 3rd. Austin's trilogy against The Rock (especially WM17 and WM19) are two amazing matches. Bret's matches against Owen (WM10) and Piper (WM8) are two personal faves as well. WM13, well, enough's been said about that. One almost has to put The Rock and Cena in there as well as guys that have had absolutely phenomenal matches at Mania. But where Shawn is different is that Shawn, to me, has a body of work that represents everything that IS WrestleMania. Zip-line entrances. Tag team wrestling, singles matches, and triple threats. Streetfights. Boyhood dreams. "Passing of torch" moments. Retirement matches. Ladders. Celebrity tie-ins. Guest referees good (Tyson) and bad (himself). Shawn Michaels' WrestleMania body of work is representative of the show's extravagance (or bloat, depending on how you look at it), in a way that the "lunch pail" work of Bret Hart doesn't embody. Similarly, while Taker's streak puts him in the running, his morbid gimmick takes him out of the equation for me - WrestleMania is not about death and destruction, its about the brightest lights shining and Vince McMahon's booming voice welcoming the world to his yearly blowout celebration of wrestling. Shawn Michaels is that celebratory character that also benefitted from not leaving and being a part of so, so many Manias.

Alex Wright vs. Brian Pillman - Great American Bash 95' - Easily the best Wright match he had had (on PPV at least) so far and a very good effort from Pillman as well. I've been going through the WCW PPVs and Clashes from this era via the Network and what really surprises me, after more research, is that Pillman was around for most of 94'-95', but hadn't been featured in any major storylines or matches for several months. This match shows just how much he still had in the tank, but for whatever reason, WCW thought it best to give PPV time to Evad Sullivan and Road Warrior Hawk instead. What I really like about Pillman here is that he doesn't ever outright cheat, but there are not-so-subtle heel tactics in his offense that allow him to play the crafty vet that has been around the block too many times not to take advantage of his opponent's inexperience. There are moments of real sloppiness (Wright botches a surfboard, for example), but there are also moments that look astonishing (when Wright comes off the top at one point, Pillman catches him with a dropkick that looks like it should've disconnected Das Wunderkind's head from his body), making it an exciting watch. Also, unlike the other Wright matches I've seen from this time, this one isn't bogged down with never-ending restholds. Instead, the submissions and side headlocks are usually kept brief and often come before or after a good exchange of offense. I wouldn't call this a "hidden gem," but relatively speaking to what else WCW was putting on PPV that year, this one is pretty darn good.

Various outlets reporting that Lesnar has re-signed with the WWE. And, once again, the WWE has booked themselves into a corner that everyone else in the world saw a mile away. Had they actually had Bryan win the Rumble, like the fans wanted, they could have easily had Lesnar defeat him at Mania and I don't think even the mega-Bryan supporters would have been TOO bothered by it. I mean, we're talking about a guy who beat Taker, who manhandled Cena, who made Big Show and Jericho look like nobodies. The fans wanted Bryan to get his shot and, had he received it and lost clean in a heroic effort, I don't think the company would have *lost* much (especially when you consider the longterm plan seems to be to make sure Bryan isn't a main eventer anyway). But, no, they got nervous. They said "Reigns is the man and he's going to be the man NOW." Sunday night, we're going to see 1 of 2 two things - (1) Reigns is going to win the title and Lesnar, who might've just got one of the biggest money deals in company history, is no longer The Unstoppable Beast that they spent a year creating. Essentially, they're back to where they were after his first match back - the loss to Cena - where the WWE just paid a large sum of money for something they plan on instantly devalueing. Or (2) Lesnar retains and the Roman Reigns Era is put on hold indefinitely. This means the idea of Reigns being "The Next Cena" would no longer be guaranteed as all sorts of things could happen before Reigns got his redemption. I could easily see the same company brass who were 100% behind Reigns last week ("Fan response be damned! We need to take the belt off Brock!") change their tune now that the safe money is obviously to keep the belt with Lesnar ("We can't take the belt off Brock - listen to the fans!"). It has happened plenty of times where the WWE "cooled" on a guy believing they could always recharge him and strap "the rocket" back on later (as one could argue they'd do with Reigns) only for them to realize that its not that easy. Sunday's main event just got a ton more interesting - but only because its fun to watch the WWE try to book themselves out of yet another shitty situation they put themselves in. Oh, and to make things even shittier, this news story broke on ESPN. Not the Network. Not WWE.com. Not Monday Night RAW. Even in the Reality Era, the WWE failed to capitalize on the realest, most important storyline going into their biggest show of the year.

You could say the same about the Sting/HHH and Reigns/Lesnar matches too. The only feud that has been developed adequately for Mania, by my estimation, is Cena/Rusev and Miz/Mizdow.

In other news, Ziggler and Bryan had a pretty good 10-minute match to cap off a Gauntlet on SD last night. I didn't see the full gauntlet, but one thing that immediately came to mind after watching Ziggler/Bryan tear it up and then the post-match was that the WWE really should've just set up Mania this way - Ziggler vs. Bryan vs. Barrett (Intercontinental Title Match, ladder or not) Harper vs. Ambrose in some sort of "hardcore-lite" match similar to when Big Show was holding the Hardcore Championship in 01'. What I mean by that is, it doesn't have to be bloody or full of crazy high spots, but a basic brawl with a couple of weapon shots and a clear story of Harper being a monster lunatic and Ambrose being a reckless loose cannon - you give em' 10-12 minutes. Maybe Falls Count Anywhere ala Savage/Crush at WM10? You give me those two matches in the undercard, this card looks significantly better just because it would've given me the sense that more is happening on the show. One complaint I had about last year's show was that it was essentially a "2-match" show split into 3 matches (Bryan vs. Evolution and Lesnar/Taker). This year, it's a 3 match show with two clusterfuck multi-mans thrown in. For a four hour show, I wish there were more threads worth following and caring about.

I kinda liked this. To start, if you include the pre-match promo from Flair and Vader and video package (which I do, even though I can't really defend it), the entertainment value starts pretty high. The stage is set thanks to providing context. Then, the match begins, and you get the Renegade in all his cartoonish, over-the-top awfulness. Basically, from that moment on, there is not a single second when there isn't someone on screen doing something absurd/entertaining/interesting. Highlights (or lowlights, depending on your view) include Renegade's entrance (which gets a huge pop because the fans obviously thought the "Ultimate Surprise" would be Warrior, even though Renegade had been seen before in the background of a Hogan promo and looked nothing like him), Flair bouncing inside and outside of the ring in fear of the Renegade, Hogan getting chokeslammed, Vader running full steam into a ring post to try to add some sort of brutality to a very "soft" match, the Vader Bomb, the ridiculous arrivals of not only Jimmy Hart but also yet another "Masked Man," and then one of the most ridiculous, nonsensical endings imaginable. After the bell, things get even more ridiculous, with Arn Anderson waddling down the aisle, and the Macho Man and Hogan embracing and running the heels out. This match is at the Three Stooges-meets-Marx Brothers level of lunacy. This is not an exhibition of any sort of quality wrestling in the athletic, competitive sense of the word and I can understand people hating the heck of this. I totally get that to some this unwatchable. To me, though, it does have that "So Bad, It's Good" quality with just enough good work out of Vader and Flair to make it pretty hard to turn away from. Meltzer gave this 3.5 stars and so would I.

I would be genuinely shocked if Lana is not at Mania. I'm guessing they'll fly her in. While Mania itself is not lacking "star power," it has been mentioned many times by many people that the real problem with the show is that the "stars" are all part-timers. Even in the Divas division, AJ Lee seems to be on her way out and the Bellas, who I'd say had a great 2014, are losing steam now. Creatively, they have peaked and, in terms of wrestling ability, after much improvement, they're still not good enough to carry the division. Lana is the right female talent in the right role to be spotlighted moving forward and there's no bigger spotlight than WrestleMania.

I actually really hated the burial and would've much preferred Lawler and JBL play it a bit straighter. If you are going to present Wrestlecrap, let the audience find the humor in it - don't beat us over the head with how terrible the actor is. By ragging on the accent so much, it came off to me like "meta snark," which gets annoying when you're trying to enjoy the show and suspend your disbelief and when Cena and Rusev are playing it straight in the ring. Its one thing if this was a low-in-the-card comedy angle, but this is supposed to be a major, important storyline. Its like the commentators are so quick to say "This is cheesy in a good way!" that they're not letting anyone actually enjoy it that way. Say what you will about the hokeyness of pre-nWo WCW or pre-Attitude Era WWE, but at least the major angles, no matter how ridiculous, were played straight and the commentators bought in. This is why you can go back and watch and enjoy the Wrestlecrapiness of the Dungeon of Doom, but a segment like this has no replay value.

I had to go back and look at the previous post about the Middle 10 to see where my beloved WM22 sat. I still think that is a top 10 Mania and would feel totally comfortable putting it above WM28 and WM14, which I was surprised to see on this list. That one might need a rewatch from me becase I don't recall it too fondly. Were the HHH/Owen, Rock/Shamrock, and Kane/Taker matches better than I remember them? I know HBK/Austin is not a match either guy is particularly fond of (they've both gone on record saying they had much better matches on the house show circuit).

I think, on a personal side, McMahon might regret the falling out with Randy Savage. From everything that I've read (and I'm not sure how much if it is true), that split started out respectfully, but over time, almost became more personal and bitter on both sides. Maybe it was one of those cases where the longer they were not in communication, the bigger the divide became, to the point that neither guy was willing to pick up the phone?

I have a feeling that most of Tenta's WCW run is better than remembered. It needs re-watching. I've been slowly working my way through 90s WCW on the Network and I'm up to winter/spring 95. It is not saying much because, well, look at his company, but in regards to the original Faces of Fear (Tenta, Beefcake, Sullivan) stable, Tenta is consistently the only guy who is entertaining/remotely good in any of their matches. Whether its his singles matches or the multi-mans, compared to Beefcake and Sullivan, Tenta is a wrestling god.

Voted "Low Enthusiasm." Won't bother with the HoF ceremony live, though I may watch clips of it on Sunday. Will be watching with friends and while I'm sure that'll be fun, I'm not sure I'm going to enjoy the show itself too much. Oddly, I think the casual fans I'm watching with will like it significantly MORE than I will. They will love Sting probably. They like Roman Reigns while I'm indifferent at best about him. They think Orton is an all-time great and one of the best wrestlers of the decade while I think he's supremely overhyped by the WWE machine. They respect Taker so much, they wouldn't dare criticize the man or his matches. They are far less jaded on the "Cena Wins" tedium. They aren't offended by Daniel Bryan being put into a midcard clusterfuck match. Basically, this card looks awesome to them, while I'm pretty unimpressed. Still, as a mostly WWE fan, I can't miss a Mania - especially one I've already paid for with the Network (I had no problem missing PLENTY of them in the past when they were $60 bucks).

I know it'll never happen, but part of me wishes they'd have Harper win the battle royal and then immediately be Reigns' first challenger for the belt at Extreme Rules. If the plan is for Reigns to demolish a monster in his first title defense/feud, as has been rumored to happen with Big Show, then give me Harper instead. He looks intimidating, he's solid in-ring, and he already has pseudo-ties with the Authority. Storyline-wise, you use him just like I think they'll use Show - as a guy being "used" by the Authority to weaken Reigns so that Rollins can swoop in to take the title. Harper is a bajillion times fresher than Show, even if he hasn't been booked well (or at all?) since December, but has the size to be a believable challenger for any champion as long as you give him a tad bit of juice. edit - Whoops, Harper is the ladder match. Never mind.

Did anyone else get a chance to listen to the pitch-shifted version of the Sting promo that opens the Live Audio Wrestling podcast (Review-A-Raw) today? If not, check it out, it starts the show and then they talk about it up to minute 8. They adjusted the audio and it sounds like it was Dolph Ziggler who cut the promo. I'm not 100% sure if that is actually who did the promo or if they adjusted it to make it sound that way, but iwas wondering if an audio expert would weigh in.

Wasn't the original plan for bringing back ECW in 06' to have them be their own touring roster designed for smaller venues? At that time, they didn't really have the roster depth or "names" to do it, but right now, it seems totally believable that this could be a profitable idea. Back in 06', it seemed like they didn't have the right peices/people in place. Big Show, RVD, and Angle could help pack a small venue, no doubt, but when the rest of the roster was relative nobodies (Mike Knox), guys that the audience had already seen for years (Hardcore Holly), or "personalities" that nobody really cared about (Kelly Kelly), it is easy to see why this would fail. Compare that to today's NXT brand and it is just night-and-day. The NXT roster has established guys that can perform and are over with the die-hards (Owens, Balor, Zayn), FRESH midcard acts that people haven't tired of (and you can't teach that), and, instead of one-dimensional non-wrestlers, an actual women's division with two characters that bring "name value" as much as any other womens' wrestler on the indies (Charlotte and Sasha Banks). Throw in the very wise decision to also have Triple H and Ric Flair on the show and you have a card that is undeniably a "step up" from any TNA house show I've been to or the cards I hear RoH or DragonGate or anyone else is running. Plus, even if you can't get HHH or Flair at every show, if they bring NXT to, say, Canada, you could have Bret Hart make an appearance. In NY or Texas? I'm thinking Bruno, HBK, Austin, Foley, JBL, Taker....it just seems like the "NXT Tour Formula" could definitely work in multiple cities in a way that ECW wouldn't have in 06' or the "major indies" would have difficulties with due to a lack of name talent.

This topic was really hard for me think of, but, as I read some "dirt" about her on reddit recently (not sure of the accuracy), I'm going to say Sunny. In interviews, she comes off as incredibly full of herself and, while there was a time I thought she was great and hot and all that, when you read the gossip about her relationship with Chris Candido, it is hard not to feel bad for him and not to really lose respect for her as anything more than a tramp. Of course, her sexuality doesn't really make me hate her - I mean, it has no effect on my enjoyment of the show - but, yeah, she just seems like somebody that I would have no desire to meet and someone who, if the stories are true, seems like a pretty cold skank.

Really real. I like Ziggler more than many people on this thread, but in the age of One World Championship, being the number 5-6 guy on the roster's pecking order is just not enough to be considered for the title. I mean, right now, as it is, you've got Cena, Reigns, Orton, and Bryan ahead of him. Then, on the heel side, you have Rollins and Rusev (not to mention Lesnar, who is probably on his way out, and Wyatt, who I don't see as a World Champion-type guy). Throw in Sheamus and Ambrose as guys that could, if they get hot, return to the main event scene in 2016 (if not sooner). Plus, we've now seen TWO part-timers win the big one (Lesnar and Rock), so, Triple H doing it isn't as absurd as it should be. As this is wrestling, if things get stale, you just flip one of the top guys from heel-to-face and Ziggler's spot remains where it is. It is completely realistic to me to think the next couple YEARS of champions are going to be an amalgamation of Reigns, Rollins, and Cena, with Orton in the mix too. Maybe Bryan if he gets hot again. Maybe Ambrose if he gets as hot as he was last summer. Ziggler is going to have to leapfrog a bunch of talent in order to rise to that upper, upper level.

I'd be really curious to know how many people paid for his site. In this day and age, I find it really hard to imagine there is a huge demand for any paid wrestling site, let alone one like his, which offered very little in terms of content (from what I saw advertised) and didn't have the track record and reputation for quality that other sites (like the Observer, Torch, etc.) rely on so strongly. I subscribed to one paid site in the past, for about 2-3 months, just to hear the shoot interviews (this was in 07'). I forget which one, but it wasn't expensive. I got to hear lots of cool stories. But now? 7 years later or so? You can get stories on Austin's podcast, JR's podcast, Jericho's podcast, and Cabana's podcast. Austin's, in particular, is one I listen to weekly just because Steve is such an entertaining talker that just hearing him talk about India Pale Ales is good for the drive-in to work. You can get wrestling analysis, almost daily, from the LAW. I don't listen, but have good friends who really like Ring Rust. All of these are 100% free to download. There are also dozens of fan-made podcasts (and I'm probably wildly underestimating by saying "dozens"), many of them niche, but some quite good (I listened to Da Sharpshooters for a long time just because the hosts were funny). Whether you want to hear someone's thoughts on last week's Fast Lane PPV or Clash of the Champions 9, you could probably find an hour of talk devoted to it on iTunes. For free. I hate to make the comparison to pay vs. free porno, but to me (and to, what I assume would be 99% of people), if you are paying for porn in this day and age, you're either a major porn freak that might need to seek counseling or you're not sure how to work the search function on google properly. For wrestling, it's the same. If you are so starved for wrestling content that you're going to pay Vince Russo for his thoughts, I don't understand your existence and recommend counseling.