SEPT 2018 WRESTLING DISCUSSION

[Curt McGirt]

Also gotta say I agree about the Hansen/Inoki series, think the only one that stood out was the one where they had their own bands playing intros for them. And I lay the blame firmly on Inoki. 

Some of the ones I remember that were underrated on that list were

85.) The Cobra vs. Don Arakawa (8/1/85) - 3869 points

86.) Tiger Mask, Antonio Inoki & Tatsumi Fujinami vs. Baby Face, Dynamite Kid & Abdullah the Butcher (1/8/82) - 3863 points (this is a blast)

87.) Gran Hamada vs. Babyface (4/3/80) - 3849 points

(funny that all three of those are right next to each other)

102.) Tatsumi Fujinami vs. Steve Keirn (2/3 Falls) (2/1/80) - 3473 points

123.) Yoshiaki Fujiwara & Kengo Kimura vs. El Bello Greco & Sergio El Hermoso (2/3/89) - 3065 points

103.) Keiichi Yamada & Shiro Koshinaka vs. Perro Aguayo & El Canek (10/10/88) - 3472 points (not sure, couldn't find another Perro match but it was one with him)

61.) Yoshiaki Fujiwara vs. Don Nakaya Nielsen (7/29/88) - 4446 points

129.) Buzz Sawyer vs. Victor Zangiev (8/5/89) - 2893 points

[Guest Edwin]

40 minutes ago, Curt McGirt said:

Hate to break it to you but Sayama's cred goes way down watching his stuff, or at least it did for me and many others. IIRC he has a really good Gran Hamada match and the rest of it ain't so hot. Weird thing, right after I watched all that stuff I also watched him in UWF without the mask against Fujiwara and flipped because it was so much better.

The random stuff that really stood out to me was the matches with guys like Don Nakaya Nielsen, the luchadors, and the Russians (you HAVE to see Hashimoto vs. Zangiev). 

I'm aware Sayama can be a stinko, but I was just curious to see what guys like Villano III and Solar, for example, could get out of him.

I've seen Hashimoto/Zangiev before and yeah, it's pretty great.

20 minutes ago, Curt McGirt said:

Also gotta say I agree about the Hansen/Inoki series, think the only one that stood out was the one where they had their own bands playing intros for them. And I lay the blame firmly on Inoki. 

Some of the ones I remember that were underrated on that list were

85.) The Cobra vs. Don Arakawa (8/1/85) - 3869 points

86.) Tiger Mask, Antonio Inoki & Tatsumi Fujinami vs. Baby Face, Dynamite Kid & Abdullah the Butcher (1/8/82) - 3863 points (this is a blast)

87.) Gran Hamada vs. Babyface (4/3/80) - 3849 points

(funny that all three of those are right next to each other)

102.) Tatsumi Fujinami vs. Steve Keirn (2/3 Falls) (2/1/80) - 3473 points

123.) Yoshiaki Fujiwara & Kengo Kimura vs. El Bello Greco & Sergio El Hermoso (2/3/89) - 3065 points

103.) Keiichi Yamada & Shiro Koshinaka vs. Perro Aguayo & El Canek (10/10/88) - 3472 points (not sure, couldn't find another Perro match but it was one with him)

61.) Yoshiaki Fujiwara vs. Don Nakaya Nielsen (7/29/88) - 4446 points

129.) Buzz Sawyer vs. Victor Zangiev (8/5/89) - 2893 points

Seen a bunch of these.

That six man tag is all kinds of fun with some awesome style clashes.

[Ziggy]

Around Hell in a Cell '13 the heavily teased a Michaels vs Bryan match even though Michaels stated every chance he could that he had no desire to do another match. At the time Bryan was feuding with Orton and the Authority, so I want to know if WWE thought they'd convince Shawn to work a match with Bryan at Mania since HHH was eventually going to be facing Punk if he hadn't left before WM30. I don't see who else would make sense for Bryan to face anyone other than Hunter at Mania unless you have him beat clean Orton at Mania but that match had been done to death in past 6-8 month by that point.

[Casey]

Didn't Bryan say that the plan going into WM30 (if Punk had stayed) would have been another Sheamus/Bryan match? I swear I read that somewhere.

[DreamBroken]

23 minutes ago, Ziggy said:

Around Hell in a Cell '13 the heavily teased a Michaels vs Bryan match even though Michaels stated every chance he could that he had no desire to do another match. At the time Bryan was feuding with Orton and the Authority, so I want to know if WWE thought they'd convince Shawn to work a match with Bryan at Mania since HHH was eventually going to be facing Punk if he hadn't left before WM30. I don't see who else would make sense for Bryan to face anyone other than Hunter at Mania unless you have him beat clean Orton at Mania but that match had been done to death in past 6-8 month by that point.

I loved the segment they did where Bryan put Shawn in the YesLock, thought Shawn was great there on the mic. Definitely would've loved a match then if Shawn were ever going to do it. And yeah as mentioned, Bryan/Sheamus has always been referred to among original WM 30 plans.

[Web Conn]

If Shawn is coming back for a match and they want to protect him in a tag match do you turn Kendrick face, turn shawn heel and run Shawn and Miz vs Bryan and Kendrick?

[The Green Meanie]

12 hours ago, RIPPA said:

Again - time heals all wounds. Remember no one though Maria would return to the WWE as long as the Bellas were around but she came back.

She hasn't since they've been back, but that's due to the pregnancy.

[Brian Fowler]

I've always assumed they hoped Shawn would do it for his student, and we're told no, and found themselves with nothing for Bryan, hence Sheamus. Until the Rumble reaction was so bad even Vince had to listen.

[Rehabilitated Rick]

There's one thing for sure, if Shawn is getting the itch for a one-off match you don't turn him heel and team him up with the Miz, lol.

Shawn/Taker is the money match. That's the match you do. 

[Brian Fowler]

6 minutes ago, Rick said:

Shawn/Taker is the money match. That's the match you do. 

That certainly seems to be how they feel, but I don't see why. Do something new, give someone the rub.

I mean, I love Taker/HBK matches, but I can't imagine broken down Undertaker vs retired for 9 years Michaels would ever come close to living up to even Mania XVI much less Hell in a Cell.

But Shawn against an up and comer? Someone that can cover of HBK is off a step or two (or just in his low gear setting that he was for most of the 00's) and can benefit from having a match? That might be worth doing.

[Rehabilitated Rick]

I mean the possibilities are endless with the current roster. Shawn/Bryan or AJ are genuine dream matches. I have no doubt the matches would be excellent given Shawn looks to be in great shape and is working with the talent at the PC everyday. Shit, he's only 53. PCO is the best wrestler on the indies and he's 50. 

But does Shawn/Taker move the needle with the casuals? I think it would, and that's all they care about. 

[Casey]

53 minutes ago, Brian Fowler said:

I've always assumed they hoped Shawn would do it for his student, and we're told no, and found themselves with nothing for Bryan, hence Sheamus. Until the Rumble reaction was so bad even Vince had to listen.

If things wouldn't have changed (Punk) and they were deadset on having Punk/HHH and Orton/Batista, I could see them slightly altering Sheamus' comeback storyline in 2014. Still going after Bryan (and Ziggler) for being "underdogs", but also joining up with the Authority as their Corporate Hitter instead of forming the League of Nations and starting a mini-feud with Bryan, instead of Ziggler, leading into WrestleMania.

Or something like that.

League of Nations never made sense to me anyway, since Rusev (in kayfabe) put Sheamus on the shelf from November 2013 to March 2014 and Del Rio eliminated Sheamus from the Andre battle royale.

[Niners Fan in CT]

57 minutes ago, Brian Fowler said:

Do something new, give someone the rub.

Vince.

[The Natural]

WWE returns to the UK this November. I've seen WWE Live before the roster split was brought back and once when it was reintroduced. I preferred pre -split because it's RAW or Smackdown Live whereas before wrestlers were assigned to a show not tied to a specific brand. It's great if you get the roster you want as I did in November 2016 (RAW) but not in November 2018 (Smackdown Live) and November 2018 (RAW).

I might be skipping the RAW roster even though I haven't watched two favourites in Alexa Bliss and Braun Strowman live before.  Smackdown Live features more of my favourites: Daniel Bryan, AJ Styles, Samoa Joe, Becky Lynch, Asuka and the Bar. I haven't seen Joe and Asuka at a live WWE event.

Which roster would you rather see live at an event? I'm going to predict Smackdown Live is the winner.

[SorceressKnight]

1 hour ago, Brian Fowler said:

I've always assumed they hoped Shawn would do it for his student, and we're told no, and found themselves with nothing for Bryan, hence Sheamus. Until the Rumble reaction was so bad even Vince had to listen.

Even with the "everyone has said it was Bryan/Sheamus", I have never bought the claim.

As of January 2014 before we're supposed to believe the storyline had been napalmed, we had:

Team Hell No had started as a big team and a unit.  Kane had been brainwashed by the Wyatt Family and joined The Authority. Daniel Bryan was fighting The Authority and wanted a rise- but had fallen victim to Bray Wyatt himself. Kane, however, had given Bryan a chance to get into the cage, where Bryan turned on Wyatt. Meanwhile, Kane had some problems and was dominant with CM Punk, taking him out at the Rumble (presumably on the build to Wrestlemania and Punk/HHH before that got destroyed.)

Oh, and Daniel Bryan's feud after Wrestlemania was with Kane.

Even if there was the claim, I've always been steadfast: If WWE kept to their story, it would have been Daniel Bryan vs. Kane at Wrestlemania 30. It was a match that would be big at the beginning of 2013 for Team Hell No exploding. It'd be a match that would have been in the making since spring 2012 for Kane and Daniel Bryan to FINALLY blow off their feud, so it'd be a big deal match. It was how the storylines in January 2014 before things went south seemed to build to, and, since it would have had "Well, Daniel Bryan didn't beat Triple H or Randy Orton for the title and destroy The Authority, but he did beat AN AUTHORITY MEMBER, so I GUESS they listened to us...", it would be fair enough.

By contrast, the Sheamus/Daniel Bryan thing always seemed like a mixture of "This NEWZ story would angry up the blood of smarks who are unhappy about the Bryan push", but it also reeks of "From everything we've heard in retrospect from guys/girls and their conversations with Vince just before they were about to reach the top of the mountain, Bryan vs. Sheamus is EXACTLY the type of joke Vince McMahon loves to play on people just before he tells them "We're giving you the World Title'". " (We heard from Jericho's second book that for weeks prior to Armageddon 2001, Pat Patterson had told Jericho 'we're giving you the World Title at this event', but Vince had said similar things to him, not officially telling him he was getting the World Title until the night of Armageddon 2001, and Bret Hart had said on the night he won the title, Vince had said a number of things with how they tried everything with him but it didn't work and made Bret believe he was being fired, before telling him "And that's why we're giving you the World Title.' at the end.) 

[BurningBeard]

2 hours ago, Brian Fowler said:

That certainly seems to be how they feel, but I don't see why.

Rubber match (kinda). Ten years later. Legends. Easy to promote. Will still draw. Simples

[Rehabilitated Rick]

7 hours ago, SorceressKnight said:

Even with the "everyone has said it was Bryan/Sheamus", I have never bought the claim.

 

http://www.newsday.com/sports/pro-wrestling/daniel-bryan-wwe-superstar-thought-neck-injury-might-end-his-career-1.9811542

https://fansided.com/2015/01/18/daniel-bryan-confirms-original-wrestlemania-30-opponent-supposed-sheamus/

Bryan himself confirmed it. 

and if you're speculating Vince was the true mastermind behind the Yes movement and Bryan was 'fabing everybody, where was that kind of genius foresight for the past 4 years booking his golden child Roman?

Vince was pressured beyond comprehension into pushing Bryan. That's the true story. And if you want to play conspiracy, I truly believe Vince prematurely forced Bryan into retirement, and only kept him retired until he threatened to leave and wrestle elsewhere. But that's another story. 

[The Natural]

Check this out:

 

[Craig H]

4 hours ago, Rick said:

http://www.newsday.com/sports/pro-wrestling/daniel-bryan-wwe-superstar-thought-neck-injury-might-end-his-career-1.9811542

https://fansided.com/2015/01/18/daniel-bryan-confirms-original-wrestlemania-30-opponent-supposed-sheamus/

Bryan himself confirmed it. 

and if you're speculating Vince was the true mastermind behind the Yes movement and Bryan was 'fabing everybody, where was that kind of genius foresight for the past 4 years booking his golden child Roman?

Vince was pressured beyond comprehension into pushing Bryan. That's the true story. And if you wan't to play conspiracy, I truly believe Vince prematurely forced Bryan into retirement, and only kept him retired until he threatened to leave and wrestle elsewhere. But that's another story. 

I can't believe this has to be explained again. Every year I think that this subject has been settled, but someone always wants to believe that there's no way they were going to do Sheamus vs Bryan, there's no way they didn't think the YES! movement would have been that big, there's no way Bryan wasn't going to be involved in the WM 30 main event, etc. 

[NikoBaltimore]

8 hours ago, The Green Meanie said:

She hasn't since they've been back, but that's due to the pregnancy.

Not to derail this from the Daniel Bryan talk but she was gearing up for a return and broke a bone her wrist(?) while training.  So that's more time off until that heals.

[Ziggy]

Well from what I understand they really want Shawn for the next India show, which makes sense from a business standpoint. From a fans perspective, It doesn't make sense to try to convince him to work on a show that isnt Mania or atleast one of the other big 4. Right now Vince has the money too throw at Shawn to work the India show or one of these other International supershows that's gonna be streamed on the Network. It's basically a houseshow for the Network and he wont be pressured to have a Mr Wrestlemania type match because it'll likely be a tag that involves Hunter and or 'Taker and I dont think Shawn would want to go all out if its not a one on one setting.

[Beech27]

You mean the Saudi Arabia show, right? (Or is their a rumored India show, and I missed it?)

[RIPPA]

7 minutes ago, Beech27 said:

You mean the Saudi Arabia show, right? (Or is their a rumored India show, and I missed it?)

Nope you are correct - the Taker/Shawn match sure seems like it will be the big selling point of Blood Money #2

[Matt D]

1 hour ago, Craig H said:

I can't believe this has to be explained again. Every year I think that this subject has been settled, but someone always wants to believe that there's no way they were going to do Sheamus vs Bryan, there's no way they didn't think the YES! movement would have been that big, there's no way Bryan wasn't going to be involved in the WM 30 main event, etc. 

They thought it was going to be big....

Big Show that is.

[mattdangerously]

9 hours ago, Brian Fowler said:

But Shawn against an up and comer? Someone that can cover of HBK is off a step or two (or just in his low gear setting that he was for most of the 00's) and can benefit from having a match? That might be worth doing.

HBK vs Mustafa Ali. Book it!

I wanna see Shawn come out of retirement if for no other reason than to see how ridiculous he looks doing his schtick now that he basically has the same hairstyle as Arn Anderson.

6 hours ago, Rick said:

Vince was pressured beyond comprehension into pushing Bryan. That's the true story. And if you want to play conspiracy, I truly believe Vince prematurely forced Bryan into retirement, and only kept him retired until he threatened to leave and wrestle elsewhere. But that's another story. 

Well, yeah, but they forced him to retire because they genuinely thought his health was in jeopardy. Everyone thought that. They only let him come back after he convinced them he was fine, and was determined to wrestle again whether they liked it or not. It's not as sinister as you're implying.