Matt D

They should really use WWE Purgatory for one since they cant use Armageddon.

Hey, that was your first post. Welcome to PWO, brother brother. Somebody should contact you shortly to offer you your complimentary fruit basket. Don't eat the dates. Here's your complimentary Archie the Stomper Gouldie promo. ... Actually, after a quick search, it seems like it's not online anymore. What a travesty! Can someone reup that?

I've seen a ton of Sheik matches, and if he ever took a legit bump I don't remember it. That was one of the things I found hilarious about the fact that he trained Sabu and RVD. Their styles could not possibly be any different from his. Somehow, I don't think The Sheik taught RVD the 5 Star Frog Splash. Although that visual makes me laugh and laugh. I'm pretty sure RVD couldn't sell, if that helps.

I'm biased too. My bias is that I don't watch this and go find something else to do for 15 minutes.

Alexa is 200% committed all the time in her ringwork. That goes a long way with me.

Some big bumps to the floor already tonight.

It says a lot about how you feel about wrestling if you think Miz or Rollins is obviously better.

I feel like it took him his whole career, but Miz has finally reached the level where he could have been the top heel in a mid-level territory in 1983.

If I was 16 again, I'd totally buy a Miz Cobra Kai headband.

To be clear, if they never bring him back and stick to it, I think that's fine. It's the firing him, waiting it out, and then bringing him back like it never happened that's problematic to me. As such, they've been careful with the recent statements, I think.

Hogan coming back. How they might use him. Why it might be a bad PR move for the company = prowrestlingonly I'm not sure about weighing general morality of slights, however. Maybe we ought to table this one for now and just wait and see what happens here?

Along those lines is Owen.. He's probably overrated for his 80s workrate-y stuff and underrated for his 90s character-driven heel stuff. Im more the opposite as I like his 80s stuff more than the 90s stuff. Perfect/Blazer at Mania I really love. Well, yes, that's the conventional wisdom.

Along those lines is Owen.. He's probably overrated for his 80s workrate-y stuff and underrated for his 90s character-driven heel stuff. Im more the opposite as I like his 80s stuff more than the 90s stuff. Perfect/Blazer at Mania I really love. The thing with Owen is he tends to get more love from fans after he passed away, he was a good wrestler but I really don't see him being World Champion had he not died. I think if he had gone with the Harts to WCW then maybe but WWE side deff not. Along those lines is Owen.. He's probably overrated for his 80s workrate-y stuff and underrated for his 90s character-driven heel stuff. Im more the opposite as I like his 80s stuff more than the 90s stuff. Perfect/Blazer at Mania I really love. Well, yes, that's the conventional wisdom.

I'll say this: if Johnny wanted to run a con on me in real life, I'd be in trouble, because I'd only be able to recognize his voice at 1.5x speed. But seriously, this is about the Fuller podcast and people should listen to it.

Ill apologize for all my train of thought real time reviews too then.

There are actually a pair of threads for it here, in both the 80s folder as well as the Portland-dedicated folder: http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/35875-buddy-rose-ed-wiskowski-vs-roddy-piper-rick-martel-23-falls-8280/ http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?/topic/22466-buddy-rose-ed-wiskowski-vs-roddy-piper-rick-martel-pnw-080280-23-falls/ Thanks for that. I tried a search but just ended up with the neverending Buddy Rose thread which didn't survive the switch to a new board upgrade years ago without formatting getting demolished.

SmartMark15: Rose/Wiskowski vs Martel/Piper in three parts. I don't see a thread here, but here's the SC review: http://segundacaida.blogspot.com/2016/10/1980-match-of-year_25.html

They're around an hour and fifteen minutes, I think. Very easy to listen at 1.5x speed too.

Along those lines is Owen.. He's probably overrated for his 80s workrate-y stuff and underrated for his 90s character-driven heel stuff.

Go find the paper trail.

1. I'm a lot more in tune with the news in general these days so the attribution stuff bugs me much more than it used to, but at the same time, why would any of us expect Dave really care when it's worked for him for decades and decades? When he made an entire livelihood despite it? 2. You should listen to the first Bischoff podcast. It felt a little like a best possible scenario given the reasons you listed. 3. The idea that anyone finds Bruce more credible than Dave is pretty outlandish to me because it comes down to intent. Bruce has more first-hand knowledge about these specific topics but Dave is the one who gains from finding the truth, to the best of his ability, and that has less (though not no) vested interest.

Morality aside, what do you even do with him?

I'm going to bring a little bit of politics into things (sorry), but it all feels a lot like the current administration and the amount of leaking going on, people serving their own interests, and how the NYT/Post are handling it. Meltzer's problem, I think, was in the way he presented information. It always felt like a universal truth in the Observer as opposed to "my sources tell me," which would have gotten tedious line after line, but even anonymous sources are treated a certain way in the media. I feel like Bix has written about this re: Meltzer before. I believe that most of the time he wasn't just making things up and he was getting things from his sources, but he rarely attributed the information he received in meaningful, contextual ways and that makes all of it age worse than it probably should. There are times, too, where you can definitely tell that Meltzer was putting together dots in a logical way (in the Bischoff podcast, there was a bit about Hogan's turn re: merch which would have mattered in most other points of history but merch wasn't a big line-item in early 1996 WCW apparently), when he really didn't have sources. It was much more "expert analysis" than news, but even then it was presented as objective and concrete, not just analysis. He was probably right more often than not when he did this, just like we often are when we do it, because if you follow the wrestling industry in any meaningful way, you note causal relationships and patterns, but it was still presented too definitively as "this is why this is happening." There was often no differentiation between the two.

Five episodes in (and one other one that I heard later on after the change in co-host), and while I'm not going to say that this is the best pro wrestling podcast ever, it pretty much is. It's a straight up narrative of the Welch/Fuller family and their history in wrestling, starting from Roy (and the people who trained him) all the way down. It goes slow and takes its time, is full of stories, is primarily Fuller talking with very few questions. He's an amazing storyteller who can just go and go and go. Obviously, we, as wrestling fans, are taught to not trust the Welch family (isn't that sort of funny? But we've heard it multiple times from multiple sources, from Gary Hart on down), but it's just wildly compelling and Fuller is so amazingly charismatic and gracious as the Southern Gentleman. As I said, I leaped ahead. The first episode I listened to was about Fuller leaving his first territory and going to Florida, why he went there, and how, as a booker, you dealt with talents coming and going, so it was a mix of autobiography and wrestling philosophy. The earlier ones have primarily been history laced with first-and-second-hand stories. The earlier ones have co-hosts I don't know that get a bit more involved, though never fully get in the way. The one on Floridia I heard had Last, but he just kept admirably out of the way. I'm surprised that people here haven't talked about it more.

Sure. Sorry that I missed you. Weve got an odd number now but Im happy to double up with you this week.