Matt D

Is this a New Breed thing?

Is that another name for Diamond Dust or something?

I think Mark Henry vs Jerry Blackwell is more interesting.

Meng #9 GOAT!

I like the Boston Bret vs Flair ironman way more.

I think Hansen plays exasperated/slightly vulnerable heel champ quite well in his match vs Bock from the AWA set. That's not a role you usually think of him in, no?

One goal with this project is to poke at things with new criticisms. Maybe they'll hold up as valid. Maybe they won't. Maybe they'll let us see things in a new way. Maybe they're just bullshit. I'm not set on this one but I think it's worth looking at. So, your question is a good question and I don't think there's an easy answer. I'm going to ramble for a bit (it's been a crazy week so I haven't hit a lot of posts I've wanted to hit, some of the more general stuff). I think my last paragraph will be the most important. I almost touched on it in my last reply, and thankfully, this is a talking point I like with a specific Vader match, so I can run with it a bit. It seems very difficult and even dangerous to factor context in when examining a wrestler; by that I primarily mean placement on the card and general context in the promotion over time. There are easy examples. One of my favorites is looking at the Johnny Polo vs Marty Jannetty match from Raw, where Polo really went all out. Just a crazy TV match where he showed as much as he could. This was because Levy was frustrated that he wasn't wrestling regularly and that he was used as a manager and a production guy. It was a very solid performance. It was also the exact wrong performance, to the point where the next week on Raw, Vince was talking about how he wrestled the match as a chickenshit manager, when that really wasn't the case at all. JJ Dillon tells a similar story about how he wanted to really go out and impress the "boys in the back" when he was supposed to show a ton of ass. Now those are macro examples and not necessarily micro ones, and if you just saw those matches outside of the broader context of what was going on, you'd probably think they were pretty good. The second is a Vader thing. Look at Starrcade 94 (sorry). He wrestles Duggan early in the card for the US title. It's mainly a pretty good brawl almost completely devoid of standard "big man spots." That wasn't just a Duggan thing. Look at his really quite good series with Yokozuna the year before. He's not adverse to that. So why do they work that way? They work that way because later on the card, higher billed, was Sting vs Avalanche, which they were saving all the big man spots for, so as not to burn the crowd out on them. So my point? It's really tricky to try to judge a wrestler on how he's managing his work relative to the greater goals of the night or the promotion. That brings in a lot of other information that's hard to get to. That said, how can you dismiss those factors mentioned above as being important once you know them? They're hugely important. I need to think about this more and present this better but: Would you say that doing things that are going to hurt the credibility of your co-workers or the overall product might matter? Doing things that will hurt your own matches moving forward because they're unsustainable and they condition the fans that certain time-tested moves and spots and tricks are no longer valid or that they're not enough? Is there a cost to this over time and does it matter? Can a spot be effective in the moment but ill-thought out in the long term or even in the context of the entire card or on your health over time? does that matter? If so, it's probably only to try to figure out people in the top 25. That's sort of the high level nitpickery we're on, but that's one element. I think ultimately, if I watch a wrestler do something that's above and beyond, watch him really use that tool, and he does so in a way that adds to the match and that makes logical sense within the match and especially that has a greater effect in the immediate than not using that tool would have done, I'll probably give him credit for that. But the tool has to be used well. At the end of the day, the best wrestlers are the ones that use the tools at their disposal the best. If all else is equal (which is very rare), then having more tools matter. Where I differ from a lot of people is that I might more highly rate "using the tools available tools well" than what tools are being used. Sometimes that means I'll credit a wrestler with less tools who use them exceptionally well than a wrestler with a lot of tools who uses them well, but just well. I weigh the how far more than the "how many."

First off, I don't have a horse in this race yet. I haven't seen enough Vader in far too long for me to have a strong opinion on this. That said, I found this interesting and I want to raise a potential (and only a potential) counterpoint: Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Just because there are tools that you can use doesn't mean they're the right tools for the situation. And some of that speaks to viewer expectations and some of it just speaks to certain narrative tools being more useful than others in creating a desired effect. It's possible that while he could "get away" with the bumps and while they might have added something for some viewers with certain tastes or in some situations in general, him doing something that he didn't have to "get away" but that instead would have more properly fit the situation he was in could have had a stronger overall effect? I wish I had some specifics for this and I'll keep it in mind while rewatching Vader, but I will say that if people feel the need to criticize the bumps, then maybe it did have an effect on those viewers suspension of disbelief, at least. Or maybe they were just making their wrestling follow strict rules regardless of the actual match in question. I don't know.

I'm sure if someone whose opinion Parv values wants him to take a look at a particular indy guy, he will. Half the board has looked at the Funks vs Abby/Shiek match because Parv wanted them to. He's looked at stuff I've suggested, etc. His criteria isn't unreasonable. That said, the idea of him watching a lot of Chikara is personally amusing to me.

Totally agree on Ricochet over PAC.

The rudo side in that match might be my favorite ever.

I think most people were more than apathetic at the idea of Brock vs Taker coming into Mania.

I like the Glamour Girls a lot more in their WWF matches.

We're going to be so damn smart at the end of this.

I need way way more time. I'd be ok doing it at the deadline and updating it 3 years later.

Honest question: is this true when we look at whole cards?

I'm the last guy you have to convince of that. I generally want to see things in as much context as possible. I'm also probably more apt to gravitate towards trios matches than singles matches right now.

I definitely wouldn't be doing what I was doing ten years ago. Absolutely. I'll just comb through what you've been doing and watch accordingly.

It's fine. I just need to see more. I know you've been digging through it but point me to what I can't miss. Sometimes guys end up playing a role in a trios match which only lets them show one facet. I think I've gotten a lot of that in what I've seen so far. EDIT: the weird thing about writing for SC is that sometimes I hold off on watching things because I'd rather do it as part of a mini project to write up, but you've got Casas so covered that I wouldn't have any misgivings there. I'd just be able to watch freely whatever you pointed me towards.

I'd love that project. Someone post stuff. I reviewed a couple. Satanico and Averno vs GdI and Nuevos Infernales vs Villanos IV and V and IWRG Niebla I want to check out some of the other posted matches at some point. I loved how he was directing traffic in the latter match.

I like older Casas far more than younger Casas. That said, I haven't seen a ton of younger Casas, not really, but from what I've seen of him in trios, it's not what I was hoping for. I was hoping for the nuance and trickiness and character work of old Casas married to much more athleticism. The athleticism is there but I haven't seen enough signs of the rest yet. I do have a lot more to see though.

Funk's career range is pretty astonishing to me.

I am really looking forward to seeing that Veidor match.

The place is aces. Best on the net. Any fixing would be more apt to mess it up.

Nominating Demolition via being way better than the Road Warriors