Grimmas

NEW YORK, New York, March 23, 2001 - Fusient Media Ventures today announced its purchase of the World Championship Wrestling (WCW) brand from Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. (TBS Inc.) a division of AOL Time Warner. Fusient CEO Brian Bedol, and his business partner, Steve Greenberg, brought former WCW creative director Eric Bischoff back on board as WCW prisdent. "We're going to reestablish the WCW as the champion of professional wrestling entertainment." said Bedol. "There is huge untapped potential for the franchise and with Eric Bischoff on board we will crank everything up to make the WCW franchise even bigger, better, stronger and more entertaining than anything wrestling fans have ever experienced before." The binding agreement provides Fusient Media Ventures with the global rights to the WCW brand, tape library, and other intellectual property rights. The final performance of WCW Monday Nitro Live on Turner Network Television (TNT) will be on Monday, March 26, 2001. WCW will take a month off before returning on a new TV network with some brand new faces.

I disliked this too. Maybe if i watched this in isolation I might had enjoyed it, but in the middle of that PWG show it sucked. There was so much useless nearfalls and high spots that nothing had meaning. This match did stand out a little from the rest of the show thanks to Ospreay's really cool superkick variations. There was some cool spots and all, but Night 1 of BOLA was a putrid show through my eyes.

Any weird voting will be cancelled out by others.

I think looking for Andre classics will be hard, since most of his prime was not taped. Since the amount of great matches someone has had is not a huge deal to me, the work I see out of Andre makes me really high on him. His performances against Khan and Hansen showed how awesome he was in that setting. Add in the Harley and Kobayashi matches as evidence how he can work a more traditional technical style too. Some people don't like his 80's stuff in the WWF, especially the late 80's stuff but I think he was a really smart worker in those and a ton of fun, even if the matches didn't always pan out. I may be the high vote on Andre and I am ok with that. There isn't too many wrestlers I'd rather watch than him.

This to me is the main reason why I don't feel it's necessary to do it every year. The 2016 poll is going to look vastly different to the 2006 poll in any number of ways. Different people will be voting or not voting, and the same people will have watched more stuff and developed new opinions. It's a stark, visible "snapshot", as we've come to call it, of what we're all thinking "now", as opposed to "ten years ago". And I use those last two quotes deliberately because the 2006 poll wasn't really just a poll on how people felt in March 2006 (or whenever exactly they did the poll in 2006) but it was how people felt about their cumulative wrestling watching up until that point. And this poll isn't just what people happen to feel in March 2016, but it will be how their feelings have cumulatively changed since March 2006 (or for new voters, their cumulative wrestling watching up until that point). It's not just a date in time but a period of time that they represent. The 2006 poll reflects the feelings and biases and fashions of that mid-2000s period, the same way this poll will reflect our current mid-2010s fashions. If we do another poll in 2017 will it be fundamentally different to the 2016 one? I doubt it. Individual voters will watch more stuff and change their ballots a bit, people will drop in and out, but largely it won't change as drastically as between 2006-2016. So what, really, is this "snapshot" of 2017 going to say? Much the same thing as the 2016 one did, only the 2016 one was researched and participated in so much more intensely - and there's another point. I don't see how people are going to put THIS much effort into their ballot every year. And as has been said over and over, the journey for this thing is arguably more important than the destination. Everyone has been scrambling for what will be over 18 months to study for this poll. We can't do this over and over again every year. So yearly polls will only quicken, and thus lessen, the process of researching and watching that goes into making a ballot. And this conversation is coming off the back of people seemingly uncomfortable with people's level of commitment and research as is! This is a weird analogy, but this reminds me of that TV doco where they have a group of people they're studying, and they catch up with them every ten years - when they're 20 years old, 30, 40, 50, etc., and see what they've been doing and how their lives have changed. And it's the same kind of thing, the key is that after a period of ten years you can look back and see how wildly some things have changed in that time, and all the living that went into getting you from A to B, even if it isn't apparently on a daily, or even yearly, basis. If you examine them every year, you lose that perspective. To me it's the same kind of thing here. Doing a poll every year just lessens the impact the ten yearly polls have. You'll lose those big sweeping changes, those shifts in philosophy, those trends, because it's a lot harder to see them when you're looking in the mirror every morning. I think yearly changes would only be noticeable and relevant on a personal level. As you say it would basically be a reflection of what you've been watching in the last year. And hell if you want to sit down and write out your GOAT list every year, nobody is stopping you, and I'm sure people would be interested in seeing it, myself included. But I don't think that calls for a collective vote every year. Absolutely my thoughts. Lays out my argument very well. Also I love how people are using wrestler snapshot in this thread.

Discuss here.

Discuss here.

What would be the upside of a yearly top 100 poll? For me, less definiteness in nature and more of a reflection that the list is ever-changing not a finite marker in time. That's a fair point. I think the ten year thing does the same thing as a yearly one. For me, if we were to vote yearly I doubt my list would change much as I wouldn't put in the time to check out new guys or watch certain people's footage as I have had for this project. Of course, if somebody wants to run that yearly go ahead, but I'm not in charge. I'd rather focus on the rumoured wrestling match hall of fame.

What would be the upside of a yearly top 100 poll?

Parv, it's bullshit. You are not voting lucha, shoot style or joshi most likely. You said as much. You can't reject major styles/areas and then say that people aren't taking it seriously enough for you.

Dylan and I had private facebook messages discussing this topic long before it was revealed to the public. The 2016 deadline I was pretty adamant about. Sight & Sound do their movie list every ten years and I am extremely fascinated by that list and it's slow changes over time. The hope is that somebody runs this poll again in 2026, even if it's done in a completely different fashion.

I really think if anybody can be considering over 100 people, then why not?

Hulu Raw (90 minutes) is somewhat difficult. 3 hour Raw (with no commercials) is unberable. 3 hours live with commercials I just can't imagine.

Completely disagree. He was a great promo and had some really good matches, even outside the Eddie series. The Big Show matches were fun. We had a long Honky Tonk reign along with him continually cheat his way to keeping the title. Also we fought a rubber godzilla in Tokyo.

Not funny, let's move on.

Lol. You are correct I think I combined her name with Thor

My thoughts exactly.

Discuss here.

http://placetobenation.com/this-week-in-wrestling-for-october-17-2015/ Pete, Steven & Johnny kick it to this week in wrestling. In the first fall (2:30) we start off with the NWA Classics match this week involved Dusty Rhodes/Junkyard Dog vs Ted DiBiase/Kamala in a Double Bull Rope/Double Dog Collar match. We follow that up with ROH TV, the first night of the 2015 BOLA and end it off with a discussion on EVOLVE and the WWE's relationship. The second fall (1:09:23) is all about NJPW's King of Pro Wrestling show. The third and final fall (1:29:25) starts off with talk of NXT which somehow veers into a discussion on soap operas. We follow that up with Table for 3 with Sting/Vader/DDP and end the show talking Raw.

Discuss here.

He started off with some great dives. Had some amazing matches too. Later in his career he was really charismatic in the ring. I have limited watches on Garza, would he stand a chance?

He hasn't been talked up as much this year. Making anybody list?

He had great butt offense, but is anybody going to vote for him?

Anyone going to bat for him?

Nominated, but no posts. Anybody making a case?