Jump to content

APRIL 2022 WRESTLING DISCUSSION


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Matt D said:

What’s really important is not dropping your selling of limbwork when it’s time to get your stuff in.

How have Cody’s missile dropkick been since his return? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haven’t watched tonight’s match yet, but I believe Cody’s evolved beyond the missile dropkick. Unless we’re counting his kick off the ropes as a dropkick.

Someone will remind me of something I’ve forgotten surely. 

Edited by John from Cincinnati
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A young Ricky Hatton watched that segment, and thought to himself "Hmmm...."

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, NoFistsJustFlips said:

Have anything other than some guy named "nWoWolfPacTV" on Twitter who's data I can't even view for myself? 

Not that this is especially germane to any of this previous conversation, but I just want to say that I have by total accident been down the rabbit-hole of this guy's youtube channel and while I can't make any claims to the veracity of his data or numbers, what I do know, with 100% certainty, is that his life's work is exonerating Kevin Nash from anything rude anyone has ever said about him on the internet. His channel is all deep-dives on how he actually wasn't the worst drawing champion of all time in WWE, how he didn't kill WCW, how he was a great booker, actually and things like that. Which, hey, maybe that's all true! But just to give some perspective into the mind of that particular wrestling nerd (said with all affection).

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, John from Cincinnati said:

Name a more trustworthy source. I'll wait. 

maxresdefault.jpg

“It comes from a site called Bro Bible, by a guy named Sliced Bread.”

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/23/2022 at 8:00 PM, HumanChessgame said:

Does anyone have an opposite of a "and then the bell rang" guy? As in someone who you didn't think had that good of a look, no interesting gimmick or personality, and were more or less indifferent to but always enjoyed their matches?

He who shall not be named.  Never cared about much but the matches...  he had tons and tons of great great matches.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/24/2022 at 12:54 PM, SirSmellingtonofCascadia said:

Bret is my pick for best American/Canadian wrestler, personally. I know that's a hot take (not generally, but maybe to the DVDVR/PWO set) and Bret took house shows off and all that, but he'll always be the G.O.A.T. to me. It's him at #1, Danielson at #2, and then after that I wouldn't know. 

AJ Styles #2 N.A. from 2000 on...    just below Bryan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/25/2022 at 11:33 AM, A_K said:

The Bret/Shawn era of '96-'97 was really the Fed on its last legs .. and it took Austin's ascendancy to save it at the same time Hart shuffled on over to WCW where he was pretty ineffectual as a star. Vince probably thanks his lucky stars for the Screwjob really .. they've had such enormous amounts of narrative mileage out of it over the decades & it precipitated an almost immediate boon in business as over stars took center stage.

Not really...  1996 was Shawn as the "ace".    1997 was Bret vs. SCSA...   and w/o that feud...  WWE would be dead.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Niners Fan in CT said:

He who shall not be named.  Never cared about much but the matches...  he had tons and tons of great great matches.  

I've thought about if this is revisionist on my part, but I think I always felt this way and just never said it because it was unpopular: Benoit is, for me, the technician who has great matches that I feel absolutely nothing for, and I never have. 

To me, the Hitman could actually make you feel for him in the ring as the underdog getting by on technical skills and grit. Same for Danielson. Benoit had none of that. He was better as a heel, the machine-like wrestler with a bunch of moves, but that was also all he had, too. I didn't care about seeing him get beaten up, ever, because he had zero presence to me in that way. 

Benoit is sort of Dean Malenko-status to me: Fine in fast-paced openers that get the crowd up and ready for the rest of the action, but beyond that, I don't enjoy his matches. I appreciate the crispness and pace of the work, but I don't care about it.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I wouldn't say I felt nothing for them, Bret and Benoit are kind of on the same level in that regard for me. Both were great wrestlers, but I rarely cared about them the same way I did others. In Bret's case that is partially because I started watching just before he was forced into retirement. With Benoit though he was always just missing something for me as a personality. I can appreciate both and enjoy a decent amount of their matches, but I have never felt the same love others had for them. Kind of feel the same about Misawa actually. 

Edited by Eivion
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 In some ways, I think liking Benoit was part of the dirt sheet hive mind thing in the 90s, when a good number of people were overly influenced by what Dave and others said was good, they kept winning their awards and so on. ( I was prob guilty then.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Niners Fan in CT said:

Not really...  1996 was Shawn as the "ace".    1997 was Bret vs. SCSA...   and w/o that feud...  WWE would be dead.

Nah .. like I said, 96 was bad (Michaels was never a solid ace, ever) .. and 97 Bret didn’t move the ratings needle .. from the very day he left onwards they recorded 1 solitary rating weaker than when he was there. One might say .. the Screwjob is what saved the Fed .. the Screwjob, not Bret, is what led to the SCSA ascendancy (thematically and otherwise). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, SirSmellingtonofCascadia said:

I've thought about if this is revisionist on my part, but I think I always felt this way and just never said it because it was unpopular: Benoit is, for me, the technician who has great matches that I feel absolutely nothing for, and I never have. 

To me, the Hitman could actually make you feel for him in the ring as the underdog getting by on technical skills and grit. Same for Danielson. Benoit had none of that. He was better as a heel, the machine-like wrestler with a bunch of moves, but that was also all he had, too. I didn't care about seeing him get beaten up, ever, because he had zero presence to me in that way. 

Benoit is sort of Dean Malenko-status to me: Fine in fast-paced openers that get the crowd up and ready for the rest of the action, but beyond that, I don't enjoy his matches. I appreciate the crispness and pace of the work, but I don't care about it.  

Oh wow. You really nailed that one, I'd never thought about that before and I think you're absolutely right. 

I think to some extent, and I think history has shown it with a few other guys too - wanting Benoit to get his shot at the top, wasn't necessarily about him but just not the same old guys who weren't as talented.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, A_K said:

Nah .. like I said, 96 was bad (Michaels was never a solid ace, ever) .. and 97 Bret didn’t move the ratings needle .. from the very day he left onwards they recorded 1 solitary rating weaker than when he was there. One might say .. the Screwjob is what saved the Fed .. the Screwjob, not Bret, is what led to the SCSA ascendancy (thematically and otherwise). 

Austin would never have been in a position to succeed if Bret didn't shine him up.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m sure most people at the time thought Austin had hit his ceiling when he was in WCW. I don’t understand an argument where Bret making Austin in 96-97 and Austin being the second biggest star in WWF history by the following year are unrelated. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, A_K said:

Nah .. like I said, 96 was bad (Michaels was never a solid ace, ever) .. and 97 Bret didn’t move the ratings needle .. from the very day he left onwards they recorded 1 solitary rating weaker than when he was there. One might say .. the Screwjob is what saved the Fed .. the Screwjob, not Bret, is what led to the SCSA ascendancy (thematically and otherwise). 

Austin hit The Stunner on Vince at MSG in September 1997. Your post would contend that 1) Austin wasn't already insanely over by the time he Stunned McMahon and 2) that Austin Stunning Vince had no thematic connection to Austin feuding with Vince post screwjob. Both of which are wrong. I get your premise, but you're a little off.

Without KOTR 1996, SS 1996 against Bret, WM 13 in 1997 against Bret, and that September 1997 Stunner on Vince, Austin would not have been ready / over enough to step into that role. 50% of those milestones involve Bret. He had a gigantic hand in getting Austin to the next level. Once there, Austin & Vince got him to several levels above where Bret ever hit. But regardless saying the screwjob & not Bret is what led to Austin's accent is just wrong. Austin was already  made man way before the screwjob even happened.

Ratings are something we use as a data point in out arguments. But I'd have a hard time using ratings as proof on this case. Because WWE's internal philosophy changed so much post screwjob. I would contend that the crash tv / Jerry Springer trash tv style they adopted post screwjob makes it kind of like comparing apples and oranges to compare 1997 numbers vs 1998 numbers.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Infinit said:

Austin would never have been in a position to succeed if Bret didn't shine him up.

But the ratings just don’t show this? Categorically, they had the real explosion on the McMahon/Austin angle almost half a year later .. which wouldn’t have materialised without the “evil McMahon” narrative generated by the Screwjob. So, irony of ironies, it was the Screwjob more so than the wrestling classics that really led to lift off for SCSA. As ever in PW, commercial success at absolute zeniths (Hogan in 80s; Attitude era etc) storylines>in ring performance.
 

Bret became sacrificial lamb to take Fed to next level: sad for him. 

Edited by A_K
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, A_K said:

But the ratings just don’t show this? Categorically, they had the real explosion on the McMahon/Austin angle almost half a year later .. which wouldn’t have materialised without the “evil McMahon” narrative generated by the Screwjob. So, irony of ironies, it was the Screwjob more so than the wrestling classics that really led to lift off for SCSA. As ever in PW, commercial success at absolute zeniths (Hogan in 80s; Attitude era etc) storylines>in ring performance.
 

Bret became sacrificial lamb to take Fed to next level: sad for him. 

It's hard to pin down your agenda with this one lol.

I will again just point out that no one here is pushing back and saying god damn pal it was all those crispy matches Austin had and not his storylines that got him over. The truth is it takes both to get over like he did. And the Bret story in 1997 is one of the best of all time. The heel in The US and baby everywhere else promos and backstage segments are some of the best in the history of the business. And with that I will point out Austin was still doing Austin shit in 1997 far before the screwjob.

Abducting Bret's ambulance and beating the shit out of him has nothing to do with a good wrestling match. So your stance is that none of these stories or moments matter before the screwjob? Because that's a bonkers take. Stunning McMahon, abducting Bret, breaking Pillman's ankle... there's probably a dozen more non-wrestling match moments he had before the screwjob that did as much to build him as any wrestling match did.

The gas was already on before the screwjob. The screwjob was just the spark that put the fire on the stove. And tons of shit contributed to the gas being on already. Bret's matches with him. Bret's stories with him. His stories with Vince. All of that shit is pre screwjob. So saying none of that shit built him or had anything to do with his success is revisionist at best. And just totally wrong at worst.

Edited by NoFistsJustFlips
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Todays the 5 year anniversary of the Chiefs drafting Patrick Mahomes, which means it’s the 5 year anniversary of me attending an NXT card on draft night. So here’s the results of the card, several of the people on the card are still in the WWE:

Quote

 

Aliyah & Ruby Riot defeat Billie Kay & Peyton Royce

Dylan Miley defeats Cezar Bononi

Killian Dain (w/Alexander Wolfe, Eric Young & Nikki Cross) defeats No Way Jose

#DIY (Johnny Gargano & Tommaso Ciampa) defeat SAnitY (Alexander Wolfe & Eric Young)

Tye Dillinger defeats Patrick Clark

Asuka (c) defeats Sonya Deville

Aleister Black & Hideo Itami defeat Andrade Almas & Bobby Roode

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...