Matt D

Could you name some specific examples from matches? I've seen a fair amount and never really thought he was comparable to Murdoch. Short answer: Not really, but I'll try to if you give me some time. I have one example but it's very minor. At around the 24:30 mark, he's matched with Black Terry and he sprinkles in some stuff that's more style than substance. It's very cool and very fun, just little bits of misdirection, but for the point of the match that they were at, and the stakes, and what came before, it took me out of things just a little bit. I feel like there are more blatant examples, however. Maybe this will give you a sense of what I mean though?

Ok jetlag. I put this as 70-30 chance that you've seen it, but I feel that way with everything. South Africa: Danie Brits VS Dave Morgan - Top Star Promotions 25 May 1988 (in three parts)

He'll have his cake and eat it too.

Because he was a petty madman who got absurd amusement in putting grown men in killer bee costumes? In Vince's mind, what's the point of making all this money if you can't lord over people and lean towards your joys?

Week 18. Astroboy off for a bit. Grimmas is back on. jetlag Matt D Grimmas SirEdger DR Ackerman Victator JoeG HeadCheese shodate IpponDropkick Nintendo Logic oldbirds Tim Evans dawho5 jetlag, I will scour all of wrestling history to try to find something for you soon.

Navarro can be so bombastic/over the top that he can sometime take away from a match. It's more of a Dick Murdoch thing than a Dr. Wagner Jr. thing, but even that's not entirely right. It is in his mastery of being able to take over a match and sort of infect it with what he wants, but what he wasn't isn't the sort of comedy Murdoch would bring. It's endearing but occasionally unfortunate. Sometimes I wonder if it's because he's self-conscious due to his age.

Re: the Rooster thing. Sometimes he'll take a kernel of truth and make it into the whole truth, when it was only a small percentage of it or at the very least, certainly not the most important aspect. As people have said, it's useful as 1.) the company line/way Vince may have rationalized things and 2.) that kernel of truth that we very often didn't have before and adds to a whole picture.

Since 2015, he had the Roman MOTYC, great Undertaker feud with 2 MOTYC, cool Orton match, great Goldberg feud, Joe feud wih 4-way MOTYC, and Styles MOTYC. He must have been a hell of a worker before that if being in several of the best matches and moments for the last few years tarnishes him for you. Suplex City is the worst structure in the history of wrestling on any sort of a major stage.

The next few will be the Fingerpoke of Doom, Bash at the Beach 2000, and I think something else I wasn't hugely interested in. I might skip them.

He's called out numerous times on his own show every episode for being a company man and a shill. He goes too far into extremes to be considered credible, I think. It's up to the viewer to decide when to believe him and when not to. It's another piece of evidence to weigh against the rest though. We're better off for having it more times than not.

The only time I see Eddie overrated is when I see claims that he was an all time great all through the 90s and early 00s, when in reality he had plenty of periods of just being good with flashes of greatness. I'd be vaguely interested in a "Greatest Peak Ever" with that period being an X month period (maybe even 1 year).

I kind of want to see what they'd do in a cage?

I'd put it this way. There are things that I always sort of accepted (like the fact Mabel was at least considered for the role of the third man or that Savage vs Hogan was promised to Slim Jims at Halloween Havoc) that I'm now at least willing to doubt.

Hechicero's only been mentioned once in the thread, and that's as an honorable mention. I think he deserves better than that.

I feel like Cena sort of fell off a cliff when he started to "adapt" to the second wave of former indy guys becoming the norm as his opponents. That said, he still gets points for adapting and it did pretty much win over the crowd. You suddenly can't be making a "not enough movez" argument against the guy who's doing springboard stunners.

Looking at tomorrow morning to randomize. Let me know if you're jumping on/off.

I haven't had a chance to see this yet but I figure some people might be interested (it's a local special on the history of Hawaiian wrestling).

His chest was such a mess after the GRRE the doctors won't let him perform. (For real.) You do know that Bryan worked the dark match vs Nakamura after 205 Live, right? I'm not hunting for a better version, but I'm sure some people might be curious.

Does Casas really have that much of a case in the 1980s? Based on footage? Probably not until 87, no. I suppose "touching four decades" would be more accurate.

Re: Casas: Based on footage, who else can be one of the best in the world in four decades?

If they put him on tv every week, I'll actively seek out that match. That's not true for anyone on the roster (except for maybe Dustin if they gave him time) right now.

If you look at my specific word choice, I'm not sure we disagree heavily on your last paragraph. Even with the rest, I'm trying to say something fairly specific.

My argument for Taue in 2018: In practice, his weakness was a strength. In practice, their strength became a weakness. My biggest criticism of the mid-90s AJPW classics is excess. Taue's physical limitations acted as a necessary drag upon them, grounded them. That sounds like an unintended consequence of a negative attribute but Taue worked wisely to the very edge of his limitations while the other three always had the power to limit themselves for the good of the match (and future matches) and simply chose not to. I'm not necessarily saying that he's better than them, but I will say that they're far better off with him than on their own.

Well, it was a good run.

What's Bryan doing tonight?