Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

Recommended Posts

Posted

Two questions not related to each other:

1) inspired by the story of the Yankees and their new bats, could a wrestler pull off the loaded boot gimmick these days. I guess if he taps the boot to load it and starts winning matches with drop kicks, fans will eventually figure out something is up

2) what’s the best match from a company whose tape library is owned by the WWE where none of the participants are WWE HOFers? Since I figure the WWE will only induct matches that they own the rights to air

Posted (edited)

Duggan and DiiBiase?  Dory and Brisco?  Flair and Steamboat? Von Erich’s and Freebirds?  Bock and Hennig? 
 

oops, misread the question.

Edited by odessasteps
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Cobra Commander said:

what’s the best match from a company whose tape library is owned by the WWE where none of the participants are WWE HOFers?

Probably something from ECW or WCW featuring two guys not on good terms with WWE.  Like a Taz vs Bigelow match, or something featuring Benoit

 

EDIT: Just doing a quick look thru Meltzer's Five Star list... Fantastics vs Sheepherders from '86 Crockett Cup appears to be the most recent. Everything else WWE owns since then has at least one HOFer. 

Edited by SovietShooter
  • Like 1
Posted

Maybe its just me being cynical, but it seems like inducting "Moments" is just an excuse to bring in guys that are already in the Fame but don't necessarily have a reason to be at the Ceremony, on stage (and, ultimately, the Ceremony has become just another excuse to sell a ton of seats and merchandise). 

This year, having Austin at the WrestleMania Weekend thing and presumably at the Hall of Fame Ceremony to accept the award along with Bret, is the reason they're doing this. Otherwise, you're paying Austin to come out to do only off-camera work and that's kinda silly. If you're going to have the guy in Vegas, you gotta have him pop the crowd and drink a few beers.*

Next year, I expect something similar - Undertaker vs. Shawn, The Rock vs. Foley, Foley vs. Undertaker - to give a reason for a big name retired guy like Undertaker or The Rock to make an appearance (though they don't really need one for The Rock anyway). I don't think they're too eager to bring Flair or Hulk back on-stage and I don't see them celebrating guys that can't really do anything for ticket sales (Savage, Piper, Andre, Warrior). 

I wouldn't get my hopes up that they'll be doing anything to commemorate a match like Bruno/Zybysko unless there are analytics I'm not aware of that say there is huge interest in late 70s/early 80s that can be monetized.


* I wonder if he's going to charge them extra to drink that Real American swill and not his own brand, which is actually a damn tasty IPA (I haven't had his lager). 

  • Like 1
Posted
5 hours ago, SovietShooter said:

Probably something from ECW or WCW featuring two guys not on good terms with WWE.  Like a Taz vs Bigelow match, or something featuring Benoit

 

EDIT: Just doing a quick look thru Meltzer's Five Star list... Fantastics vs Sheepherders from '86 Crockett Cup appears to be the most recent. Everything else WWE owns since then has at least one HOFer. 

 

1 hour ago, Happ Hazzard said:

They are in.

I wonder if there is one in the Meltzer newsletter era, then.

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Cobra Commander said:

 inspired by the story of the Yankees and their new bats, could a wrestler pull off the loaded boot gimmick these days. I guess if he taps the boot to load it and starts winning matches with drop kicks, fans will eventually figure out something is up

 

the answer to all similar questions is "yes if the company actually made a roster-wide commitment to establishing it, but they probably wouldn't."  Cheating absolutely can draw heat and still does in real sports:  just look how mad people get when someone gets away with a hold or a travel, or the phantom DPI/RTP call. But we get mad because in real sports those rules really do exist and most of the time there are consequences to breaking them.

So you gotta be willing to cut matches short here and there by having the ref actually catch guys and actually DQ them and most importantly of all  get in the habit of treating DQ losses like real losses so the fans will get out of the habit of viewing DQ losses as inherent ripoffs/copouts.  So they'll be mad the guy didn't get DQed instead of meta-relieved he wasn't because they wanted to see him actually lose, anyway.

But yeah, any time you want to elevate an underneath guy the most effective way to lampshade "oh, he's good now" is to give him a secret weapon finishing hold and protect it (the Diamond Cutter got over and took DDP along for the ride with it).  And having that secret weapon be an illegal shortcut is always going to be the most logically easy to accept.  "Huh?  Why is this loser suddenly winning a bunch?  Oh he's CHEATING! Okay, that makes sense."

It would also help if finishers, across the board, are more protected. 

And if they got in the habit of having the loaded [whatever] spot happen "early" and have the match end at unexpected, awkward, "wrong" moments so that the crowd notices the break from the usual flow and formula, and realizes something's up.  Everybody knows that first pin attempt never succee--wait what?  He won already?  What happened?  Then you have the victim oversell.  That was a flash pin, he shouldn't be laid out.  But the ref is helping him to the back all of a sudden? 

So, yeah you might be able to get a loaded gear spot over but the wrestler in question can't on their own and the support they'd need probably isn't coming.  Which is too bad. I'd love to see it and it really could work again.

[After all, AEW tried this a couple years back when Tully Blanchard was managing Shawn Spears.  And Blanchard did all the proper subterfuge to hide the metal slug that loaded Spears' black glove, and it was all well and good.  Except they'd be doing it in between two other matches where chairs and bats and thumbtacks were being used in full view of a ref who didn't do anything about it, so it didn't mean anything, because why was Tully even bothering to hide the thing?  There clearly wouldn't have been any consequences if he'd been caught.]

 

Edited by BobbyWhioux
  • Like 4
Posted
7 minutes ago, BobbyWhioux said:

the answer to all similar questions is "yes if the company actually made a roster-wide commitment to establishing it, but they probably wouldn't."  Cheating absolutely can draw heat and still does in real sports:  just look how mad people get when someone gets away with a hold or a travel, or the phantom DPI/RTP call. But we get mad because in real sports those rules really do exist and most of the time there are consequences to breaking them.

So you gotta be willing to cut matches short here and there by having the ref actually catch guys and actually DQ them and most importantly of all  get in the habit of treating DQ losses like real losses so the fans will get out of the habit of viewing DQ losses as inherent ripoffs/copouts.  So they'll be mad the guy didn't get DQed instead of meta-relieved he wasn't because they wanted to see him actually lose, anyway.

But yeah, any time you want to elevate an underneath guy the most effective way to lampshade "oh, he's good now" is to give him a secret weapon finishing hold and protect it (the Diamond Cutter got over and took DDP along for the ride with it).  And having that secret weapon be an illegal shortcut is always going to be the most logically easy to accept.  "Huh?  Why is this loser suddenly winning a bunch?  Oh he's CHEATING! Okay, that makes sense."

It would also help if finishers, across the board, are more protected. 

And if they got in the habit of having the loaded [whatever] spot happen "early" and have the match end at unexpected, awkward, "wrong" moments so that the crowd notices the break from the usual flow and formula, and realizes something's up.  Everybody knows that first pin attempt never succee--wait what?  He won already?  What happened?  Then you have the victim oversell.  That was a flash pin, he shouldn't be laid out.  But the ref is helping him to the back all of a sudden? 

So, yeah you might be able to get a loaded gear spot over but the wrestler in question but not on your own and the support you'd need probably isn't coming.  Which is too bad. I'd love to see it and it really could work again.

[After all, AEW tried this a couple years back when Tully Blanchard was managing Shawn Spears.  And Blanchard did all the proper subterfuge to hide the metal slug that loaded Spears' black glove, and it was all well and good.  Except they'd be doing it in between two other matches where chairs and bats and thumbtacks were being used in full view of a ref who didn't do anything about it, so it didn't mean anything, because why was Tully even bothering to hide the thing?  There clearly wouldn't have been any consequences if he'd been caught.]

 

The best thing a promotion can do, to bridge off from your point, is adopt a thought that a match can end from any move at any time. If you constantly have to use a finisher to end a match, then that means you have to kick out of finishers to build tension because now nobody believes anything's the end of the match unless it's a finisher. Then people won't believe it's the end on two finishers, so you have to use three. Then you have to do three, then do a fourth off the top rope. It's a neverending sense of escalation and it doesn't work, especially with the chatter that rollups are "cheap endings" or somehow aren't clean finishes.

Teach the fans a match can end with a well-placed, well-executed elbowdrop or clothesline and soon anything that looks nasty enough is a believable false finish.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Posted
18 hours ago, Johnny Sorrow said:

Bruno vs Zybysko has got to be a lock eventually.

I doubt it, I bet they’re going to only induct matches where both participants are still alive. 

Posted
3 hours ago, DMJ said:

Maybe its just me being cynical, but it seems like inducting "Moments" is just an excuse to bring in guys that are already in the Fame but don't necessarily have a reason to be at the Ceremony

Nah, you are 100% correct.  While I like the idea of inducting matches,  it's absolutely an excuse to bring back guys.  In their eyes, they are running out of "headliners" to induct into the WWE Hall of Fame and first and foremost, this is a event they can sell tickets to and sell to networks. They want to bring back HBK and Undertaker and whoever else.  That's why I mentioned that it might not even be "matches" necessarily in the future. They could do something like bringing Mike Tyson in. 

  • Like 2
Posted

Sorry for the double post but someone asked if WWE believes the 70's/early 80's content can be monetized and I think we might have the answer to that.  I love the WWE Vault and now "WCW" channels on YouTube but the fact that they are putting up all of this content from the archives on YouTube for free makes me think that the WWE Network as we once knew it is going bye bye and they'll just get whatever they can out of YT engagement.  At least someone who works there is putting up some cool shit. So far they've put up a couple NWA house shows from the Omni and just the other day they put up the NXT House show from WrestleMania 31 weekend that took place in San Jose. 

Posted

The Kings of Wrestling won a lot of matches because of Chris Hero's "lucky" elbow pad. 

I think something like that would work (as opposed to a Thunderfoot style "loaded boot"), but it would have to have a lot of company-wide but in, like Mr Whioux said, and that is tha part I don't see happening.  You can't have a midcard guy like Mark Davis winning with a loaded gimmick, while Mox is winning with barbwire bats, or swerve is drinking folks blood. 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, SirSmUgly said:

 

I wonder if there is one in the Meltzer newsletter era, then.

I'm not sure. What did Meltzer give the Michinoku Pro 6-man at Barely Legal?

Did he give the Raven & Stevie vs Pitbulls chain match at ECW Gangsta's Paradise the full five stars?

 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Niners Fan in CT said:

Sorry for the double post but someone asked if WWE believes the 70's/early 80's content can be monetized and I think we might have the answer to that.  I love the WWE Vault and now "WCW" channels on YouTube but the fact that they are putting up all of this content from the archives on YouTube for free makes me think that the WWE Network as we once knew it is going bye bye and they'll just get whatever they can out of YT engagement.  At least someone who works there is putting up some cool shit. So far they've put up a couple NWA house shows from the Omni and just the other day they put up the NXT House show from WrestleMania 31 weekend that took place in San Jose. 

This is the sort of thing companies like Filmrise thrive in, getting the rights to content that would otherwise not draw much interest in terms of rights fees and making it available on platforms like YouTube, Pluto, and Tubi in exchange for the ad revenue. There's a lot of things folks would watch for free but wouldn't if it was paywalled, and WCW or old Coliseum Video output is at just the right age to hit that niche. Rather than bundle it in with the main WWE package and have it be buried under tons of active content, give it its own YouTube channel, let them do the hosting, and make your money via the ads in exchange for a cut to YouTube.

Posted

I don't know if i've typed it on here, but every once and awhile, having a show kinda come off the rails and the last little bit being a "well, things ended earlier than we expected" wouldn't be the worst thing.. there's a way to do unpredictability without it being constant

also, it would be cool if the people in TV main events weren't practically in isolation where the first time they're seen is when the final match is starting

  • Like 1
Posted
26 minutes ago, Cobra Commander said:

I don't know if i've typed it on here, but every once and awhile, having a show kinda come off the rails and the last little bit being a "well, things ended earlier than we expected" wouldn't be the worst thing.. there's a way to do unpredictability without it being constant

also, it would be cool if the people in TV main events weren't practically in isolation where the first time they're seen is when the final match is starting

There's something to be said for the standby match.

Posted
2 hours ago, bobholly138 said:

/youtu.be/ccObs8FBwLU

Tom Boogaloo Shaft 

every single line that i could understand could be a standout quote. My favorite is "i'd whoop my momma for $5000" with the runner-up being "i eat razorblade biscuits"

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
On 3/29/2025 at 8:26 PM, Niners Fan in CT said:

I was thinking about what matches are obvious ones.  You have to put Steamboat vs. Savage on the shortlist.   Bret could easily have 3 more in there (vs. Piper, Owen and HBK)  

That said, it's called "Immortal Moments" so I'm not even sure if it's just going to be matches.   It could be something like the Mike Tyson vs. Stone Cold face off to get Austin and Tyson on the same stage again.  Etc. 

I have to think that Bret v Owen will not go in as long as Martha and the kids are associated with AEW.

 

Posted
3 hours ago, bobholly138 said:

Was given a drive full of Rip Tyler's WOW TV footage.

So to fill in weeks with no shows been clipping and uploading promos and matches.

 

Yokozuna. Bob Holly and then saw this promo 

 

https://youtu.be/ccObs8FBwLU

Tom Boogaloo Shaft 

 

Have you watched already what is on Kris P’s YT channel?

I love WOW. Rips Corner, the Fake Fargos, Bert with Nick Gulas… 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...