NWA World Title Tournament

Double C · 31-05-2007 8:36pm #1

Not exactly ground-breaking news, but NWA are holding a tournament to crown a new champion. The brackets so far line up like this:

Chad Parham vs Damien Wayne

Aaron Aguilera vs Adam Pearce

Brent Albright vs Osamu Nishimora

Fred Sampson vs Glamour Boy Shane

Nelson Creed vs Bryan Danielson

Pepper Parks vs Claudio Castagnoli

Roughneck Ryan vs Sicodelico Jr

Mikey Nicholls vs Fregal Devitt

Should be an interesting tourny, even though I haven't heard of some of these guys. Obvious money is on Danielson, and it would be the right move to have him win as he would add quite a bit of credibility to the belt.
Personally, I'd like Albright to get it as he's been very impressive in ROH since before Christmas. He has got a bitch of a first rounder though. Either that, or the Most Money Making Man, Double C! I'd make a great NWA World Champion. :cool:
The tournament starts on Saturday.

Mr.Nice Guy · 31-05-2007 8:44pm

Just give it to Danielson and be done with it. I have to laugh at the NWA's pathetic attempt to stay relevant. It's a nothing entity that is living off of three letters.

I guess legions of smarks will soon be telling us how new NWA Champion Bryan Danielson is going to restore the title to its former glory days and that he is the true world champion of wrestling. Hooray for Bryan!

Sad really.

Fozzy · 31-05-2007 8:58pm

I was reading about it earlier, I thought it was a nice idea to have them have every match in a different NWA-affilated promotion, might help them get more fans to their events. I also didn't notice that Fergal Devitt is in this! Fair play to the lad, I've been checking out a lot of his stuff recently and he's really moving up in the wrestling world. He's in a tournament in Australia to crown the first NWA Australian champ, aswell as being a contender to win the Best of the Super Junior's tournament in Japan soon

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I have to laugh at the NWA's pathetic attempt to stay relevant. It's a nothing entity that is living off of three letters.

I don't see how this is an attempt to "stay relevant". The NWA is relevant, they're an affiliation of a lot of wrestling promotions that aim to help each other out. Certainly not as relevant as they were 20 year ago, but all the promotions involved in it get their fair share of fans who enjoy the shows and who I'm sure will enjoy something like this tournament which has some very good wrestlers in it. Putting on a show for the fans, where's the harm in that?

ShawnRaven · 31-05-2007 9:01pm

Mr.Nice Guy, Regarding NWA wrote:

It's a nothing entity that is living off of three letters.

Bit of a harsh statement really, OK it's not the monster it once was, but with the amount of breakaway groups, between the US, Canada, UK and Ireland to name some, it's still a home for new and up and coming wrestlers to develop.

Or would you not feel that's equally important to keep the industry alive?
If you're just comparing it with WWE and maybe TNA, then fair enough but it's still an unfair comparison.

I'm also sure that Roderick Strong, Daizee Haize, and CJ Summers are just 3 people would also take exception to your statement citing it as pure ignorance too. Given what the NWA have done for their careers

VR!

Lita Forever · 31-05-2007 9:25pm

On a related note, there's a possibility NWA Women's Champion, Amazing Kong may be added to the tournament as well, judging by some of her recent promos. Now THAT I'd love to see.

Mr.Nice Guy · 31-05-2007 9:41pm

Fozzy wrote:

I don't see how this is an attempt to "stay relevant". The NWA is relevant, they're an affiliation of a lot of wrestling promotions that aim to help each other out. Certainly not as relevant as they were 20 year ago, but all the promotions involved in it get their fair share of fans who enjoy the shows and who I'm sure will enjoy something like this tournament which has some very good wrestlers in it. Putting on a show for the fans, where's the harm in that?

The NWA isn't relevant at all. Did TNA really get any sort of rub from having the use of the NWA belt? The NWA is nothing these days. Just three letters. Where's the harm? The harm is the propagation of the myth that the NWA still matters when it doesn't. Give it a few months.

validreasoning! wrote:

Bit of a harsh statement really, OK it's not the monster it once was, but with the amount of breakaway groups, between the US, Canada, UK and Ireland to name some, it's still a home for new and up and coming wrestlers to develop.

Or would you not feel that's equally important to keep the industry alive?
If you're just comparing it with WWE and maybe TNA, then fair enough but it's still an unfair comparison.

Even compared to ROH it's nothing. I think it's important for the industry to evolve and for people to let the NWA be remembered for its truly great run in the eighties when it had champions like Flair, Rhodes and Race instead of its desperate time in the nineties and beyond with champions like Dan Severn.

validreasoning! wrote:

I'm also sure that Roderick Strong, Daizee Haize, and CJ Summers are just 3 people would also take exception to your statement citing it as pure ignorance too. Given what the NWA have done for their careers

VR!

What has the NWA done for their careers? They are not household names and have not yet achieved anything of note in the wrestling business.

They may regard what I say as ignorance but I regard it as common sense.

ShawnRaven · 31-05-2007 9:47pm

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

What has the NWA done for their careers? They are not household names and have not yet achieved anything of note in the wrestling business.

You hit the nail on the head there, yet. It's only been a few years, and it still got them on the map. Which as i say is pretty important in the industry.

Sorry if that isn't common enough sense for you.

The harm is the propagation of the myth that the NWA still matters when it doesn't. Give it a few months.

So by your definition, you either stay in the big leagues, or else shut down? By your definition then ECW, WCW should never have happened and ROH and TNA may as well give it up as WWE is all that matters. Pretty dim view given how high and mighty you are about ECW. Because WCW was exactly like NWA back in 92 with WWE's old castoffs and ECW was a shell of it's former self before it folded given the only people they could champion in it's dying days was Rhino and Tommy Dreamer!

I dunno, they sound like double standards to me.
VR!

Mr.Nice Guy · 31-05-2007 10:15pm

validreasoning! wrote:

You hit the nail on the head there, yet. It's only been a few years, and it still got them on the map. Which as i say is pretty important in the industry.

Sorry if that isn't common enough sense for you.

Well it isn't. Most people are judged on what they are now - not what they may or may not become.

validreasoning! wrote:

So by your definition, you either stay in the big leagues, or else shut down? By your definition then ECW, WCW should never have happened and ROH and TNA may as well give it up as WWE is all that matters. Pretty dim view given how high and mighty you are about ECW. Because WCW was exactly like NWA back in 92 with WWE's old castoffs and ECW was a shell of it's former self before it folded given the only people they could champion in it's dying days was Rhino and Tommy Dreamer!

I dunno, they sound like double standards to me.
VR!

By my definition, if your organisation is at its knees and is a shell of its former self then you put it out of its misery. WCW quite clearly wasn't like the NWA back in 92 as it had well known talent and was making an impact on a national basis. Same with ECW. What is the NWA?

In your view is it worth carrying on an organisation and tarnishing its legacy when it is nothing like what it was in its heyday? Are you seriously suggesting the NWA is due for a revival any time soon? If not, why do you wish to defend its continued existence?

Vince135792003 · 31-05-2007 10:22pm

I really don't think it matters in 2007 what the NWA means or doesn't mean. It will always be associated with a certain period of time but if it leads to good wrestling, its a positive.

Fozzy · 31-05-2007 10:32pm

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

The NWA isn't relevant at all. Did TNA really get any sort of rub from having the use of the NWA belt? The NWA is nothing these days. Just three letters. Where's the harm? The harm is the propagation of the myth that the NWA still matters when it doesn't. Give it a few months.

I don't believe that the name means a whole lot these days, but the fact remains that there are a lot of promotions involved under the NWA name that give wrestlers a place to work and fans a place to go to. In that respect I absolutely disagree that it doesn't matter. And these promotions have the rights to use the NWA title, so why not make some sort of deal out of it and have a tournament?

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

What has the NWA done for their careers? They are not household names and have not yet achieved anything of note in the wrestling business.

Then what about MVP, Shannon Moore, Jamie Noble, AJ Styles, Abyss and Christopher Daniels, who all gained recognition while wrestling for NWA-affiliated promotions

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

In your view is it worth carrying on an organisation and tarnishing its legacy when it isnothing like what it was in its heyday? Are you seriously suggesting the NWA is due for a revival any time soon? If not, why do you wish to defend its continued existence?

I don't see how the NWA are tarnishing their legacy in any way. Their promotions are putting on wrestling shows every week, so as a wrestling fan, how can you have a problem with that? I don't think the NWA are going to achieve what they did in the past again, but they're making it easier for promotions to put on shows all over the world. I think what you're saying is a lot like saying a football club like Leeds or Nottingham Forest should just shut up shop because there's no way they're going to reach the heights they did in the past. I'd be arguing practically the same points for both cases

ShawnRaven · 31-05-2007 10:35pm

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

By my definition, if your organisation is at its knees and is a shell of its former self then you put it out of its misery. WCW quite clearly wasn't like the NWA back in 92 as it had well known talent and was making an impact on a national basis. Same with ECW. What is the NWA?

ECW was hanging by a string for the guts of it's final year due to most of their talent leaving, it's talent that had been established wasn't there anymore and the stragglers were left to push afterwards, to me, thats a promotion that needed to be put out of it's misery, something Vince did a few weeks later by buying it out.

WCW in 92 was terrible, they'd lost Flair to WWE the year beforehand. They'd also built Luger to be the next big thing, unfortunately for him he got injured in a motorcycle accident and his career never recovered. WCW was only a year or two broken away from the NWA and under Bill Watts, it was going rapidly downhill and wouldn't come back until Hogan came and made the impact he did. Sting wasn't saving WCW, Rude, Terry Taylor and Mick Foley certainly weren't. WCW was a corpse for years, even Bischoff pretty much admit it at the time too. It needed to be turned around, or it was going to do.

Finally WWE. Nobody can ever fully understand how close that company came to bankrupcy in 1995! When Vince got sent down the river in 93 when the steroid trials got going, Patterson was given all creative duties and everything went rapidly downhill. Rumble 94 had a double ending finish, Mania originally had Luger to win the big one (thankfully they switched it to Bret at last minute), Undertaker v Undertaker stank up the joint, Pierre became an evil pirate, midget Kings and midget Doinks were running around the shop. It caused a lot of people to lose interest. So much that people started tuning out when Hogan arrived in WCW, especially for the Hogan v Flair program. By September 1995, WWE were producing PPV buyrates of 0.2! And TV ratings not much better! Now if that isn't grounds for pulling the trigger on a company then nothing is. Fact of the matter is, it's not always about what you can accomplish.

In your view is it worth carrying on an organisation and tarnishing its legacy when it is nothing like what it was in its heyday? Are you seriously suggesting the NWA is due for a revival any time soon? If not, why do you wish to defend its continued existence?

It doesn't need a revival! The NWA accomplished a lot in its heyday. And granted it's not the monster that it once was, but thats no reason to pull the plug on it. It's one of the few things left from the golden age. WWWF is gone, AWA is gone, WCW is gone, ECW is gone. If the NWA can still stick around in a smaller capacity and still help produce young and up and coming talent, then why the **** not? NWA isn't exactly a main player anymore, but when did they ever claim to be? In a lot of peoples eyes neither is ROH or TNA, should they throw in the towel as well?

In my view, it's not tarnishing it's legacy, because it's not the same NWA that everyone may have once remembered it for. Much like the ECW of now. NWA is churning out more and more new talent over the years, and you can count Fergal Devitt as one of them, who has had his tours of the UK, US, Canada and the very much publicised stint in Japan. Thats not to say he wouldn't have made it without NWA. The fact of the matter is, the NWA is still around, and it's still good to have for new talent, worldwide.

And if you STILL can't see the sense in that, then i don't know what more to tell you. To me, it makes perfect sense. For NWA it's not about trying to be what they once were, and all about doing what they can NOW.

VR!

Minto · 31-05-2007 11:25pm

I think its gonna go to Danielson. Brent Albright is the only other name I recognise really. I suppose Augilara would be another.

Mr.Nice Guy · 31-05-2007 11:38pm

Fozzy wrote:

I don't believe that the name means a whole lot these days, but the fact remains that there are a lot of promotions involved under the NWA name that give wrestlers a place to work and fans a place to go to. In that respect I absolutely disagree that it doesn't matter. And these promotions have the rights to use the NWA title, so why not make some sort of deal out of it and have a tournament?

Come on Fozzy, you can't judge the NWA without thinking about its past. As Vince touched on, it will always be remembered for its glory days in the eighties. The letters might give wrestlers a place to work and fans a place to go but is that worth tarnishing the overall legacy of the organisation?

Fozzy wrote:

Then what about MVP, Shannon Moore, Jamie Noble, AJ Styles, Abyss and Christopher Daniels, who all gained recognition while wrestling for NWA-affiliated promotions.

Mainstream recognition? No. That came with WWE and TNA (albeit not to the former's extent). These guys would have made it without the NWA.

Fozzy wrote:

I don't see how the NWA are tarnishing their legacy in any way. Their promotions are putting on wrestling shows every week, so as a wrestling fan, how can you have a problem with that? I don't think the NWA are going to achieve what they did in the past again, but they're making it easier for promotions to put on shows all over the world.

Listen to what you're saying. Not tarnishing their legacy? They have gone from Dusty Rhodes and Sting to Aaron Aguilera and Glamour Boy Shane. You don't see that as a step down?

Fozzy wrote:

I think what you're saying is a lot like saying a football club like Leeds or Nottingham Forest should just shut up shop because there's no way they're going to reach the heights they did in the past. I'd be arguing practically the same points for both cases

But that analogy doesn't work for one very obvious reason - the bulk of these fans will stick with the club through thick and thin. The NWA doesn't have such support. As I put it to VR, are you seriously suggesting the NWA is due for a revival any time soon? If not, why do you wish to defend its continued existence?

validreasoning! wrote:

ECW was hanging by a string for the guts of it's final year due to most of their talent leaving, it's talent that had been established wasn't there anymore and the stragglers were left to push afterwards, to me, thats a promotion that needed to be put out of it's misery, something Vince did a few weeks later by buying it out.

But doesn't that back up my point and defeat yours? It needed to be put out of its misery and was. So what makes the NWA different?

validreasoning! wrote:

WCW in 92 was terrible, they'd lost Flair to WWE the year beforehand. They'd also built Luger to be the next big thing, unfortunately for him he got injured in a motorcycle accident and his career never recovered. WCW was only a year or two broken away from the NWA and under Bill Watts, it was going rapidly downhill and wouldn't come back until Hogan came and made the impact he did. Sting wasn't saving WCW, Rude, Terry Taylor and Mick Foley certainly weren't. WCW was a corpse for years, even Bischoff pretty much admit it at the time too. It needed to be turned around, or it was going to do.

I feel you underestimate the popularity of Sting. He was the champion for much of '92 and if you've watched some of the classic WCW stuff from that era which was shown on Sky a few years' back, while it's not brilliant it's not terrible either. You can't honestly compare an organisation with the likes of Luger, Sting and Vader to what the NWA is now with wrestlers like Pepper Parks, Roughneck Ryan (who?). Be serious please.

validreasoning! wrote:

Finally WWE. Nobody can ever fully understand how close that company came to bankrupcy in 1995! When Vince got sent down the river in 93 when the steroid trials got going, Patterson was given all creative duties and everything went rapidly downhill. Rumble 94 had a double ending finish, Mania originally had Luger to win the big one (thankfully they switched it to Bret at last minute), Undertaker v Undertaker stank up the joint, Pierre became an evil pirate, midget Kings and midget Doinks were running around the shop. It caused a lot of people to lose interest. So much that people started tuning out when Hogan arrived in WCW, especially for the Hogan v Flair program. By September 1995, WWE were producing PPV buyrates of 0.2! And TV ratings not much better! Now if that isn't grounds for pulling the trigger on a company then nothing is. Fact of the matter is, it's not always about what you can accomplish.

WWE at its lowest ebb is nothing like what the NWA is now. If you think otherwise you're deluded. The WWE had talented, well-known guys and the trusty Wrestlemania event. You think the NWA of today can be compared to that? Oh how funny! The WWE had the chance to turn it round which it did. Do you think there's any way back for the NWA? Come on.

validreasoning! wrote:

It doesn't need a revival! The NWA accomplished a lot in its heyday. And granted it's not the monster that it once was, but thats no reason to pull the plug on it. It's one of the few things left from the golden age. WWWF is gone, AWA is gone, WCW is gone, ECW is gone. If the NWA can still stick around in a smaller capacity and still help produce young and up and coming talent, then why the **** not? NWA isn't exactly a main player anymore, but when did they ever claim to be? In a lot of peoples eyes neither is ROH or TNA, should they throw in the towel as well?

This is the most extraordinary argument I've heard in ages. ROH and TNA are BUILDING A LEGACY. The NWA is NOTHING BUT a legacy! Now, it is nothing. Zilch. Nada. Living off of old memories. You want it to hang around? Like a foul corpse stinking up the wrestling business? I'm amazed. Especially since you were content to see ECW go but you want the NWA to hang around like a wilted flower.

validreasoning! wrote:

In my view, it's not tarnishing it's legacy, because it's not the same NWA that everyone may have once remembered it for. Much like the ECW of now. NWA is churning out more and more new talent over the years, and you can count Fergal Devitt as one of them, who has had his tours of the UK, US, Canada and the very much publicised stint in Japan. Thats not to say he wouldn't have made it without NWA. The fact of the matter is, the NWA is still around, and it's still good to have for new talent, worldwide.

And if you STILL can't see the sense in that, then i don't know what more to tell you. To me, it makes perfect sense. For NWA it's not about trying to be what they once were, and all about doing what they can NOW.

It may make perfect sense to you but not to anyone who follows the workings of the company. Are you even aware of what they are calling this tournament? Here's the press release in case you aren't:

The National Wrestling Alliance® is pleased to announce the following participants and locations and the first round match ups for “Reclaiming the Glory: The NWA™ World Heavyweight Championship Tournament presented by Big Vision Entertainment.” The tournament will take place at events across North America and begins Saturday June 2, 2007 from three (3) locations

Did you get that? "Reclaiming the glory". Not 'reinventing ourselves' as you like to think. Are you aware of the names they have used for the tournament brackets? You can check them out here. They are as follows: the Jack Brisco bracket, the Terry Funk bracket, the Harley Race bracket and...the Lou Thesz bracket.

And you're coming on here trying to pretend that these guys aren't trying to live off of the past? Stop spouting such utter bollocks.

Vince135792003 · 31-05-2007 11:53pm

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

The letters might give wrestlers a place to work and fans a place to go but is that worth tarnishing the overall legacy of the organisation?

Yep I think its worth it if people enjoy themselves and wrestlers earn money.

I think this debate is about a decade and half too late.

Fozzy · 01-06-2007 12:24am

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Come on Fozzy, you can't judge the NWA without thinking about its past. As Vince touched on, it will always be remembered for its glory days in the eighties. The letters might give wrestlers a place to work and fans a place to go but is that worth tarnishing the overall legacy of the organisation?

I still don't understand this "tarnishing the legacy" business. The NWA help put on wrestling events for fans. Now they're bringing together Bryan Danielson, Adam Pearce, Claudio Castagnoli, Damien Wayne, Osamu Nishimura and Fergal Devitt, which is the first time it's ever happened. I'm not looking at the possibility of a Devitt vs Danielson match and thinkin "well..it's not going to match up to Rhodes vs Race". I'm lookin at it and thinkin "wow, that's somethin I'd really like to see, fair play to the NWA for doing this". As a wrestling fan, I'm thankful that the NWA is around to help set up matches and events like this. I don't care in the slightest if they were much better or bigger in the past, because they're aiding in putting on some great wrestling. Would you rather the alternative and have a load of promoters just going to business for themselves? I think that would lead to worse quality wrestling in some ways

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Mainstream recognition? No. That came with WWE and TNA (albeit not to the former's extent). These guys would have made it without the NWA.

They wouldn't have gotten as good an opportunity as they did if it wasn't for the NWA. Without the NWA a lot of these promotions wouldn't be able to attract the same calibre of wrestlers as they do and not as many fans would be going to the shows. The existence of the NWA helps promoters, wrestlers and fans. Indy wrestling would suffer without the NWA

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Listen to what you're saying. Not tarnishing their legacy? They have gone from Dusty Rhodes and Sting to Aaron Aguilera and Glamour Boy Shane. You don't see that as a step down?

You don't think they had any crap wrestlers back in the day? Not to call some of those lads crap, as I don't think I've seen all of them wrestle. But the likes of Danielson, Castagnoli and Pearce are some of the best wrestlers around today. How can having the best wrestlers around tarnish something?

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

But that analogy doesn't work for one very obvious reason - the bulk of these fans will stick with the club through thick and thin. The NWA doesn't have such support. As I put it to VR, are you seriously suggesting the NWA is due for a revival any time soon? If not, why do you wish to defend its continued existence?

Then how about comparing it to something without as much brand loyalty, like Pogs. I think you're of the age where you'd remember how big these things were 10 or 15 year ago. Everyone I knew had some. These days I don't see them anywhere, but as far as I know they're still made. Do you think they should just close down the product because it's never going to reach the same heights? What harm is it doing if it's bringing entertainment to some people and providing employment for others?

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

The NWA is NOTHING BUT a legacy! Now, it is nothing. Zilch. Nada.

That's not true at all. Like I've said, they've helped bring wrestlers into promotions who wouldn't have attracted those wrestlers if it weren't for the NWA's affiliation. I've seen NWA-promoted events over the last few years and I've been entertained by them. Are you suggesting that I shouldn't have enjoyed the wrestling they put on because they're "nothing" and presumably unable to put on a good show? Personally, I thank the NWA for helping in putting on good wrestling shows, and I don't compare them to shows from 20 or 30 years ago. I know you're not always comparing current WWE to what they put on 8/9 years ago when it was at it's peak, so why do you have to do it with the NWA? Where's the difference?

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

And you're coming on here trying to pretend that these guys aren't trying to live off of the past? Stop spouting such utter bollocks.

I'm not going to defend their choice of bracket naming, but I'll defend their ability to put on wrestling shows to the end. And which one of those two things matters more?

Mr.Nice Guy · 01-06-2007 1:38am

Vince135792003 wrote:

Yep I think its worth it if people enjoy themselves and wrestlers earn money.

I think this debate is about a decade and half too late.

Well I'm reminded of a comment Lance Storm got recently in a Q and A:

What was the backstage environment like at hardcore homecoming?
A: To be honest I found it kind of sad. It felt to me more like guys trying to live in the past than guys celebrating the past.

The ones making money are the men in suits living off of the legends of the past and the wrestlers are deluding themselves thinking the NWA is still important.

Fozzy wrote:

I still don't understand this "tarnishing the legacy" business. The NWA help put on wrestling events for fans. Now they're bringing together Bryan Danielson, Adam Pearce, Claudio Castagnoli, Damien Wayne, Osamu Nishimura and Fergal Devitt, which is the first time it's ever happened. I'm not looking at the possibility of a Devitt vs Danielson match and thinkin "well..it's not going to match up to Rhodes vs Race". I'm lookin at it and thinkin "wow, that's somethin I'd really like to see, fair play to the NWA for doing this". As a wrestling fan, I'm thankful that the NWA is around to help set up matches and events like this. I don't care in the slightest if they were much better or bigger in the past, because they're aiding in putting on some great wrestling. Would you rather the alternative and have a load of promoters just going to business for themselves? I think that would lead to worse quality wrestling in some ways

It's very simple. If you are prepared to draw on the history of the company - as they clearly are judging by their press releases and their website in general - then you accept the inevitable comparisons that will be made. Your Devitt/Danielson match could happen on IWW over here one day quite conceivably. In fact, it could happen on numerous indy shows. I look at this and think, "how sad that the organisation which was at the forefront of the world's best wrestling, has become little more than a stopping ground for wannabes hoping to one day make it big". That is how it tarnishes the NWA legacy. To go from Dusty to Devitt is a huge step down in my eyes.

Fozzy wrote:

They wouldn't have gotten as good an opportunity as they did if it wasn't for the NWA. Without the NWA a lot of these promotions wouldn't be able to attract the same calibre of wrestlers as they do and not as many fans would be going to the shows. The existence of the NWA helps promoters, wrestlers and fans. Indy wrestling would suffer without the NWA

That's a dubious assertion. How many of the top young stars in wrestling today came up through the NWA promotions? AJ Styles and MVP owe a debt to the NWA territories do they? Please.

Fozzy wrote:

You don't think they had any crap wrestlers back in the day? Not to call some of those lads crap, as I don't think I've seen all of them wrestle. But the likes of Danielson, Castagnoli and Pearce are some of the best wrestlers around today. How can having the best wrestlers around tarnish something?

The NWA had stars. True stars. Flair, Steamboat, Rhodes, Race, Funk. You are telling me parrallels can be drawn with the current crop? I think not. And who says those three wrestlers are some of the world's best? At least in the eighties the wrestlers were proven greats.

Fozzy wrote:

Then how about comparing it to something without as much brand loyalty, like Pogs. I think you're of the age where you'd remember how big these things were 10 or 15 year ago. Everyone I knew had some. These days I don't see them anywhere, but as far as I know they're still made. Do you think they should just close down the product because it's never going to reach the same heights? What harm is it doing if it's bringing entertainment to some people and providing employment for others?

I don't think this analogy works either as Pogs are simply a product whereas wrestling creates an emotional imprint on people. Let's look at TV shows as an example instead. If a TV show stays on the air too long and gets stale it's said to 'jump the shark'. The Simpsons for example is a show I loved as a kid as you might have done. Nowadays? I think it's a shell of its former self. I find the new episodes really sh*tty and I feel it should have ended long ago.

Ricky Gervais ended The Office after 3 seasons so it wouldn't get stale and so it would be remembered fondly. Same with the producers of Father Ted. They sought to protect its legacy.

Now then, continuing with a show past its peak might keep jobs, make money and please a minority but the question is - is it worth doing so when you diminish the standing of the show in the eyes of the majority of its original fans? I say no. What say you?

Fozzy wrote:

That's not true at all. Like I've said, they've helped bring wrestlers into promotions who wouldn't have attracted those wrestlers if it weren't for the NWA's affiliation. I've seen NWA-promoted events over the last few years and I've been entertained by them. Are you suggesting that I shouldn't have enjoyed the wrestling they put on because they're "nothing" and presumably unable to put on a good show?

I'm suggesting that in the wrestling business today the NWA are nothing. I dispute your claim that wrestlers wouldn't have made it without NWA affiliation. The cream always rises to the top. You enjoying an NWA show doesn't make them relevant. I went to an NWA Ireland event and enjoyed some matches. That doesn't mean anything though in the grand sceme of things. Reality is reality. They aren't on the radar any more and they won't be.

Fozzy wrote:

Personally, I thank the NWA for helping in putting on good wrestling shows, and I don't compare them to shows from 20 or 30 years ago. I know you're not always comparing current WWE to what they put on 8/9 years ago when it was at it's peak, so why do you have to do it with the NWA? Where's the difference?

The difference is the WWE has not reached the point where its continued existence demeans its product. It hasn't 'jumped the shark' in other words. The NWA jumped it years ago. That's the difference.

Fozzy wrote:

I'm not going to defend their choice of bracket naming, but I'll defend their ability to put on wrestling shows to the end. And which one of those two things matters more?

I don't mind them putting on wrestling shows - I mind them putting them on under the banner of letters which used to mean something. That matters.

I recall Ric Flair speaking in an interview some time back - I think it was when Raven was holding the NWA title but it could have been Rhyno - but his basic point was that the NWA title had become worthless since men who were wearing it had cheapened the belt's importance. I agree with him on that and feel his point can be made in relation to the organisation as a whole.

Let the company which gave us Funk, Flair and Steamboat rest in peace. Don't tarnish it by letting nobodies fight for a prize that legends once battled over.

ShawnRaven · 01-06-2007 9:27am

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I feel you underestimate the popularity of Sting. He was the champion for much of '92 and if you've watched some of the classic WCW stuff from that era which was shown on Sky a few years' back, while it's not brilliant it's not terrible either. You can't honestly compare an organisation with the likes of Luger, Sting and Vader to what the NWA is now with wrestlers like Pepper Parks, Roughneck Ryan (who?). Be serious please.

Vader, i'll give you, Sting was mostly champion because there was nobody else credible. Sid was a no-go area when he came back and was too busy trying to chop Arn Andersons head off with a pair of safety scissors. Ron Simmons bombed as champion, and by the time 93 rolled around with the title dispute and all (Rude as champion?!). WCW needed to be shot and killed. Even with the established names, it was still a crippled promotion. Established names don't make a promotion.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

WWE at its lowest ebb is nothing like what the NWA is now. If you think otherwise you're deluded. The WWE had talented, well-known guys and the trusty Wrestlemania event. You think the NWA of today can be compared to that? Oh how funny! The WWE had the chance to turn it round which it did. Do you think there's any way back for the NWA? Come on.

As i mentioned 1995, lets focus on a big statement of comparison to NWA. In the case of NWA Ireland, i'd easily watch (and be guaranteed a better match) Paddy Morrow v Fergal Devitt than Bam Bam vs LT! And if you call the latter a credible main event to a "trusty Wrestlemania", i think it's clear that it's you thats talking bollocks here.

Is there any way back for the NWA in general, of course not. Does there have to be? **** no. They've been there and done that.

*this is the countless time i have pointed out this fact, and my point of the whole argument. What is understood doesn't need to be discussed. Case is closed.

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

This is the most extraordinary argument I've heard in ages. ROH and TNA are BUILDING A LEGACY. The NWA is NOTHING BUT a legacy! Now, it is nothing. Zilch. Nada. Living off of old memories. You want it to hang around? Like a foul corpse stinking up the wrestling business? I'm amazed. Especially since you were content to see ECW go but you want the NWA to hang around like a wilted flower.

ROH are nowhere near building a legacy, they're still "the little guy" since 2002. As are NWA, the same thing you're bitching about. TNA is almost in the same boat and is only survived by the backers who pump money into it. Without them, TNA would have died years ago.

I was content with seeing ECW go because it was ONE promotion, and most of it's survivors got jobs in the end. With NWA you're talking about various producers putting on shows and breeding new talent, and considering the **** that WWE is pumping out atm, case in point, RAW this week, nearly 15 mins wasted on a Diva water fight? I'd sooner watch anything NWA, get one of their compilation DVDs from Highspots or something.

Wait a second... out of curiosity, have you ever actually seen anything NWA in recent years?

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Did you get that? "Reclaiming the glory". Not 'reinventing ourselves' as you like to think. Are you aware of the names they have used for the tournament brackets? You can check them out here. They are as follows: the Jack Brisco bracket, the Terry Funk bracket, the Harley Race bracket and...the Lou Thesz bracket.

And you're coming on here trying to pretend that these guys aren't trying to live off of the past? Stop spouting such utter bollocks.

And here comes the preacher again. Set up a chapel or something but don't f*cking preach to me because you can't handle an opposite opinion.

Every promotion uses names of legends to get themselves over. TNA did it on it's TV at the start, what the hell do you call having Ricky Steamboat and Harley Race on the broadcast? WWE did it in 98 having The Crusher and Mad Dog Vachon during King Of The Ring i think. That point is moot.

And if you think thats talking bollocks, thats strictly your opinion, i don't see anyone else agreeing with you though, so you live in your fantasy world while the rest of us laugh at you

VR!

Cactus Col · 01-06-2007 9:45am

I half agree with both sides on this.

The NWA world title has been cheapened by the level of people they've had carry it (people like K-Kwik!), and by the disrespect it has been shown by the various promotions since wcw ditched it. The way ECW did it is a crime, and one of the reasons I'm glad the promotion fell apart.

However, I would say the organisation still serves a purpose. The many indy promotions that carry its name certainly get a rub from it. I'd say I'm a step up from the casual wwe fan, but a step down from a lot of people around here.

But, without knowing any more than the names of the promotions in Ireland, I would say that NWA Ireland has a bit more legitimacy than IWW ... or Celtic Pro Wrestling.

I think the organisation itself is too big to just close down. What would happen to all the small promotions, again like NWA IReland. No longer able to use the name, they have to go backwards a few steps.

The NWA certainly isn't at the level it was in the "glory days". It doesn't look like there's any kind of revival going to happen anytime soon. The only way this would be possible would be for one promoter to buy the name, and build one central promotion. Which is unlikely.

Double C · 01-06-2007 10:47am

The tournament is not tarnishing the legacy at all, the last 15 years of champions have tarnished it's legacy. This tournament is just starting from scratch. They had an illustrious past, but that's f*cking 25 years ago, get over it.
I must say the naming of the tournament is unfortunate in the light of this argument. It's not reinventing the past, it's having something relevant in the present. If it's not relevant to you, don't watch it.

They are using a number of top quality wrestlers, a number of dodgy ones too of course, to try and put themselves back on the map in some way, why begrudge them of that? Are they going to compete with WWE again? Of course not. I don't think anyone here thinks that either, no matter who the champion is.

I also think it's very unfair that you call these wrestlers nobody's. A lot of smoke has been blown about Danielson, and justifiably so, the guy can have a quality match with just about anyone. Guys like Castagnoli and Albright have big futures in the business. But wait, weren't they both let go by WWE? They must be s*it so. :rolleyes:
Pearce is a top quality heel too. Guys like Davitt and Nishimora come highly recommended from Japan. I'm not familiar with Davitt at all, but wasn't he Peagasus Kid II in Japan?

Comparing the NWA of now to the 80's is insane imo. Back then it was to the forefront of the business. Now it's a breeding ground for new talent. Just let it be!

Vince135792003 · 01-06-2007 11:00am

Double C wrote:

The tournament is not tarnishing the legacy at all, the last 15 years of champions have tarnished it's legacy.

Comparing the NWA of now to the 80's is insane imo.

Exactly.

Fozzy · 01-06-2007 11:05am

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Well I'm reminded of a comment Lance Storm got recently in a Q and A:

The ones making money are the men in suits living off of the legends of the past and the wrestlers are deluding themselves thinking the NWA is still important.

But..the NWA is important. They get a lot of fans to their shows. Do you expect the wrestlers to refuse to work for the NWA just because of the three letters? I doubt anyone's making a whole lot of money off of it either, but as a whole I do believe that the people involved are making more money than they could without the existence of the NWA

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

It's very simple. If you are prepared to draw on the history of the company - as they clearly are judging by their press releases and their website in general - then you accept the inevitable comparisons that will be made.

You don't seem to be able to get past the comparisons though. I compare it and see that there's some promoters doing their best to put on good wrestling shows and I applaud them. I think for some fans, the NWA name would attract them to go to an event that they mightn't go to otherwise. How is that a bad thing?

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Your Devitt/Danielson match could happen on IWW over here one day quite conceivably. In fact, it could happen on numerous indy shows.

I wouldn't be holding my breath on it though. Devitt is living in Japan and Danielson is one of the top wrestlers in the world outside of WWE, who also works for a rival Japanese promotion to Devitt. I keep up to date with what they're both up to and it's a surprise to me that they might be wrestling each other. The reason they've been brought together is because Danielson has wrestled for NWA-affiliated promotions across America and Canada, and Devitt trained in NWA-UK and set up NWA Ireland. If it weren't for the NWA, these guys would have no connection and there'd be much less of a chance that a promoter would be able to bring them together, along with all the other guys

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I look at this and think, "how sad that the organisation which was at the forefront of the world's best wrestling, has become little more than a stopping ground for wannabes hoping to one day make it big". That is how it tarnishes the NWA legacy. To go from Dusty to Devitt is a huge step down in my eyes.

Does the thought "there could be some really good matches coming out of this" not enter your head at all? You make it sound like these guys have no talent, which leads me to believe that you've never seen any of them before

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

That's a dubious assertion. How many of the top young stars in wrestling today came up through the NWA promotions? AJ Styles and MVP owe a debt to the NWA territories do they? Please.

Well, yeah. MVP was wrestling every week in NWA Florida a few years ago. Like I said before, the NWA name would attract some fans who would see a legitimacy about the show. If MVP were wrestling in empty halls back then, there's a big chance we wouldn't be talking about him now. One of the first promotions AJ worked for was NWA Wildside. He also worked for them while he was working for TNA. Here's an example of one of my points: NWA Wildside had a lot of TNA guys on their shows, like Abyss and David Young. If it weren't for the NWA, Wildside would just be another promotion that wouldn't have been able to attract guys who were working for one of the biggest wrestling companies. NWA Wildside shut down when their owner signed on to work for WWE. I saw a good few NWA Cyberspace shows a few years ago, and they had guys like Matt Striker wrestling guys like Jeff Jarrett, Rhino, Sabu, Abyss, Jerry Lynn and Christopher Daniels. That wouldn't have happened if it weren't for the NWA name. Actually, I just checked out somethin, and in between the time this promotion changed their name from "Cyberspace Wrestling Federation" to "NWA Cyberspace", their attendances went from about 70 to over 300

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

The NWA had stars. True stars. Flair, Steamboat, Rhodes, Race, Funk. You are telling me parrallels can be drawn with the current crop?

In the sense that some of them are some of the top guys outside of WWE, yes. There is talent outside of WWE

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

And who says those three wrestlers are some of the world's best? At least in the eighties the wrestlers were proven greats.

Mainly people who have seen them. Have you ever watched Adam Pearce? If not, then how can you imply that he's not one of the world's best? And I don't believe that you have to be employed by WWE or TNA to be a great wrestler

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Now then, continuing with a show past its peak might keep jobs, make money and please a minority but the question is - is it worth doing so when you diminish the standing of the show in the eyes of the majority of its original fans? I say no. What say you?

I say that a show with Bryan Danielson and Claudio Castagnoli is in no way a bad show. The fact is that the majority of wrestling fans watch WWE and don't care about anything else. I doubt a lot of them even know that the NWA exists these days, so they don't really come into the discussion here. But leaving all those people aside, we've got wrestling fans who watch indy wrestling. People like me. I'm perfectly happy to have the NWA put on some good wrestling, and I know plenty of others are too. I don't think these people you're talking about exist, people who watched the NWA 20 or 30 years ago and now won't go anywhere near it. If they do, then it's them who are missing out. Would you prefer if all the NWA-affiliated promotions just changed their name? Do you think the "Alliance of Independent Wrestling Promotions" would attract as many fans or have any sort of prestige in their titles?

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

I'm suggesting that in the wrestling business today the NWA are nothing. I dispute your claim that wrestlers wouldn't have made it without NWA affiliation. The cream always rises to the top. You enjoying an NWA show doesn't make them relevant. I went to an NWA Ireland event and enjoyed some matches. That doesn't mean anything though in the grand sceme of things. Reality is reality. They aren't on the radar any more and they won't be.

Cream rises to the top as long as there's somewhere for it to rise. The NWA allows young guys to have the opportunity to work with established guys from other NWA promotions. If it weren't for the NWA's promotion in the UK, Devitt and Paul Tracey wouldn't have been able to set up NWA Ireland here. And like Cactus Col has said, the NWA name does give an air of legitimacy to a promotion in the eyes of a lot of wrestling fans. In the grand scheme of things, Fergal Devitt probably wouldn't have been picked up by New Japan if it weren't for their relationship with the NWA. He would actually be off the radar then. What is the radar as you see it anyway? The majority of wrestling fans (WWE fans)? Or fans who want the best wrestling?

I'm being led to believe that you're basically saying "if you're not in WWE, you're nobody". The NWA will always have their legacy from 20/30 years ago, that's not going to go away. But I believe that promotions should do whatever they can to get more fans buying tickets and the NWA name is one of those things. Maybe it won't make you buy a ticket (or maybe it did when you went to NWA Ireland), but it will make others. This tournament would be cool if it were for some other title, but given who has held it in the past, it does make it mean more to most fans, and I can guarantee that the NWA's attendances will go up because of it. That is a good thing as far as wrestling is concerned

gimmick · 01-06-2007 4:58pm

I dont know enough about NWA to make any comments here, but on topic, I like the look of this tourney.

I guess legions of smarks will soon be telling us how new NWA Champion Bryan Danielson is going to restore the title to its former glory days and that he is the true world champion of wrestling. Hooray for Bryan!

Sounds like a lot of resentment for Danielson. He makes any title look good, as he is a fantastic wrestler, in consistantly good matches in numerous promotions. Anyone who has seen him (more than a handful of times) knows that. He is not the best wrestler outside the WWE at the moment, he is the best there is, IMO, at the moment.

Mr.Nice Guy · 01-06-2007 5:03pm

validreasoning! wrote:

Vader, i'll give you, Sting was mostly champion because there was nobody else credible. Sid was a no-go area when he came back and was too busy trying to chop Arn Andersons head off with a pair of safety scissors. Ron Simmons bombed as champion, and by the time 93 rolled around with the title dispute and all (Rude as champion?!). WCW needed to be shot and killed. Even with the established names, it was still a crippled promotion. Established names don't make a promotion.

LOL. Unbelievable. Your argument that WCW was a "crippled promotion" is sort of damaged by the fact that in the space of a few short years it became the top promotion. WCW didn't need to be shot and killed - it had potential. Unlike the current NWA which has nothing.

validreasoning! wrote:

As i mentioned 1995, lets focus on a big statement of comparison to NWA. In the case of NWA Ireland, i'd easily watch (and be guaranteed a better match) Paddy Morrow v Fergal Devitt than Bam Bam vs LT! And if you call the latter a credible main event to a "trusty Wrestlemania", i think it's clear that it's you thats talking bollocks here.

No it's clear that YOU are talking bollocks here. Bam Bam vs LT whilst not the greatest draw in Mania history was nonetheless a draw. Paddy Morrow v Fergal Devitt? Bwahahaha. Thanks for the laugh.

validreasoning! wrote:

Is there any way back for the NWA in general, of course not. Does there have to be? **** no. They've been there and done that.

LOL. Yes there does have to be a way back for them otherwise you are supporting a dead donkey. You are content to justify the sorry modern NWA living off of the past which I find extraordinary.

validreasoning! wrote:

*this is the countless time i have pointed out this fact, and my point of the whole argument. What is understood doesn't need to be discussed. Case is closed.

Wrong - this is simply yet another case of me embarrassing you and making you look stupid. Don't worry I'll get to your inconsistencies in a moment...

validreasoning! wrote:

ROH are nowhere near building a legacy, they're still "the little guy" since 2002. As are NWA, the same thing you're bitching about. TNA is almost in the same boat and is only survived by the backers who pump money into it. Without them, TNA would have died years ago.

More nonsense. ROH clearly are building a legacy. They are branching out into PPV and are building on a solid and reliable fanbase. The NWA meanwhile are hoping to live off of ROH's top guy, Bryan Danielson. That is how woeful their current position is. TNA has plenty of stars and is the second biggest US promotion so they are building a legacy too. The NWA is nothing but a legacy.

validreasoning! wrote:

I was content with seeing ECW go because it was ONE promotion, and most of it's survivors got jobs in the end.

INCONSISTENCY ALERT!

validreasoning! wrote:

With NWA you're talking about various producers putting on shows and breeding new talent, and considering the **** that WWE is pumping out atm, case in point, RAW this week, nearly 15 mins wasted on a Diva water fight? I'd sooner watch anything NWA, get one of their compilation DVDs from Highspots or something.

Really? So because you - one guy with awful taste and even worse knowledge - would prefer to watch indy guys in NWA trying to reach the top, therefore the WWE - watched by millions worldwide of course - is in a worse off position? Oh it must be fun living in your bizarre little world!

validreasoning! wrote:

Wait a second... out of curiosity, have you ever actually seen anything NWA in recent years?

Uh yeah. Didn't I mention that earlier?

validreasoning! wrote:

And here comes the preacher again. Set up a chapel or something but don't f*cking preach to me because you can't handle an opposite opinion.

And here comes the whiner again. Don't get your panties in a twist just because you have been shown up to be talking utter bollocks yet again. Believe me, I take great pleasure in proving you wrong.

validreasoning! wrote:

Every promotion uses names of legends to get themselves over. TNA did it on it's TV at the start, what the hell do you call having Ricky Steamboat and Harley Race on the broadcast? WWE did it in 98 having The Crusher and Mad Dog Vachon during King Of The Ring i think. That point is moot.

The point isn't moot when earlier you wrote:

To me, it makes perfect sense. For NWA it's not about trying to be what they once were, and all about doing what they can NOW.

Of course I proved you wrong and made you look foolish, hence your little outburst - which I'm loving by the way.

One minute you claim the NWA aren't living in the past and that they are "all about doing what they can NOW" whereas the next minute you flip-flop and justify them living off of the past! Do you not realise your views are all over the place?

validreasoning! wrote:

And if you think thats talking bollocks, thats strictly your opinion, i don't see anyone else agreeing with you though, so you live in your fantasy world while the rest of us laugh at you

Yeah you laugh away like a good lad. It can mask your ignorance. :cool:

Double C wrote:

The tournament is not tarnishing the legacy at all, the last 15 years of champions have tarnished it's legacy. This tournament is just starting from scratch. They had an illustrious past, but that's f*cking 25 years ago, get over it.

They have these same f*cking tournaments every few years and as you point out, the last 15 years of champions have tarnished its legacy. So you prove my point. As for me "getting over it", you ought to tell that to the NWA's men in suits who dupe people like you into thinking this tournament is a continuation of a legacy rather than a tainting of it.

Double C wrote:

I must say the naming of the tournament is unfortunate in the light of this argument. It's not reinventing the past, it's having something relevant in the present. If it's not relevant to you, don't watch it.

Don't worry, I won't be watching it. I think the reason you find the naming of the tournament "unfortuante" is because you know it proves my very point - these guys are living off of the past. The Lou Thesz bracket? Give me a break.

Double C wrote:

They are using a number of top quality wrestlers, a number of dodgy ones too of course, to try and put themselves back on the map in some way, why begrudge them of that? Are they going to compete with WWE again? Of course not. I don't think anyone here thinks that either, no matter who the champion is.

I begrudge them deluding others into thinking the NWA still matters. Their pathetic little charade about "stripping" Christian Cage of his title, "reclaiming the glory" etc. It's a load of bollocks. Heyman and Douglas knew it was bollocks when they threw the belt down years ago. It was bollocks then and it's bollocks now. They are flogging a dead horse.

Double C wrote:

I also think it's very unfair that you call these wrestlers nobody's. A lot of smoke has been blown about Danielson, and justifiably so, the guy can have a quality match with just about anyone. Guys like Castagnoli and Albright have big futures in the business. But wait, weren't they both let go by WWE? They must be s*it so.
Pearce is a top quality heel too. Guys like Davitt and Nishimora come highly recommended from Japan. I'm not familiar with Davitt at all, but wasn't he Peagasus Kid II in Japan?

Yeah Danielson is a legend, isn't he? All those headlocks he does. Randy Orton must be worried! The people who rave about these indy heroes are the same people who raved about CM Punk. Remind me, what stellar match has he had in WWE lately? It wasn't his last PPV match with Burke anyway. Maybe Fit Finaly and Arn Andrson are holding him back. After all, it couldn't be that the indy fan boys hyped him up too much could it?!

vDouble C wrote:

Comparing the NWA of now to the 80's is insane imo. Back then it was to the forefront of the business. Now it's a breeding ground for new talent. Just let it be.

You seem unaware that this is my entire point - let the organisation be and stop living off of the past.

gimmick · 01-06-2007 5:14pm

Don't worry, I won't be watching it.

Out of interest, why not? Because you are against the whole NWA thing? or because its just not your cup of tea?

Re the naming of the tournament, so bloody what, pro wrestling has never been one for under hyping something. All the name is doing is hyping up something. Should WWE refer to one of their summer PPVs as the Mediocre American Bash?

Yeah Danielson is a legend, isn't he? All those headlocks he does

That is an ignorant statement, and I can only assume that you know absolutely nothing about Danielson.

WRT this entire thread, I dont see that anyone has proved anyone wrong.

and with that, I am off to Turkey on my holidays.

Mr.Nice Guy · 01-06-2007 5:37pm

Fozzy wrote:

But..the NWA is important. They get a lot of fans to their shows. Do you expect the wrestlers to refuse to work for the NWA just because of the three letters? I doubt anyone's making a whole lot of money off of it either, but as a whole I do believe that the people involved are making more money than they could without the existence of the NWA

I don't agree at all. Using the football analogy you touched on earlier, are Leeds Utd still important? Sure they have their fans but in the grand scheme of things they are not as relevant as they once were and they are nowhere near what they were in their glory days. It's actually worse for the NWA though because while Leeds could make it back - the NWA won't!

Fozzy wrote:

You don't seem to be able to get past the comparisons though. I compare it and see that there's some promoters doing their best to put on good wrestling shows and I applaud them. I think for some fans, the NWA name would attract them to go to an event that they mightn't go to otherwise. How is that a bad thing?

Why do you applaud a mediocre product? I don't like the fact that the standards have dropped so low. That is why I feel it should be put out to pasture. These guys might be 'stars' to you (though I find this hard to believe) but they are nothing like the stars of the eighties.

Fozzy wrote:

I wouldn't be holding my breath on it though. Devitt is living in Japan and Danielson is one of the top wrestlers in the world outside of WWE, who also works for a rival Japanese promotion to Devitt. I keep up to date with what they're both up to and it's a surprise to me that they might be wrestling each other. The reason they've been brought together is because Danielson has wrestled for NWA-affiliated promotions across America and Canada, and Devitt trained in NWA-UK and set up NWA Ireland. If it weren't for the NWA, these guys would have no connection and there'd be much less of a chance that a promoter would be able to bring them together, along with all the other guys

Well this might mean something to you but, no offence intended, I feel you are in the minority. The NWA used to mean something. It wasn't about an indy fan's dreams - it was about dream matches involving the top stars of the world.

Fozzy wrote:

Does the thought "there could be some really good matches coming out of this" not enter your head at all? You make it sound like these guys have no talent, which leads me to believe that you've never seen any of them before

The modern ECW can have some really good matches but that doesn't change the fact that it's a slap in the face to the original incarnation.

Fozzy wrote:

Well, yeah. MVP was wrestling every week in NWA Florida a few years ago. Like I said before, the NWA name would attract some fans who would see a legitimacy about the show. If MVP were wrestling in empty halls back then, there's a big chance we wouldn't be talking about him now. One of the first promotions AJ worked for was NWA Wildside. He also worked for them while he was working for TNA. Here's an example of one of my points: NWA Wildside had a lot of TNA guys on their shows, like Abyss and David Young. If it weren't for the NWA, Wildside would just be another promotion that wouldn't have been able to attract guys who were working for one of the biggest wrestling companies. NWA Wildside shut down when their owner signed on to work for WWE. I saw a good few NWA Cyberspace shows a few years ago, and they had guys like Matt Striker wrestling guys like Jeff Jarrett, Rhino, Sabu, Abyss, Jerry Lynn and Christopher Daniels. That wouldn't have happened if it weren't for the NWA name. Actually, I just checked out somethin, and in between the time this promotion changed their name from "Cyberspace Wrestling Federation" to "NWA Cyberspace", their attendances went from about 70 to over 300

You seem to be justifying utilising a legacy to make bucks. I'm not interested in that aspect. Wrestling is more than just a business to me and many others.

Fozzy wrote:

In the sense that some of them are some of the top guys outside of WWE, yes. There is talent outside of WWE.

What names are you seeing? These brackets have a bunch of nobodies by and large who are unproven. brent Albright? How long did he last in WWE? To compare them to the legends of the past is crazy.

Fozzy wrote:

Mainly people who have seen them. Have you ever watched Adam Pearce? If not, then how can you imply that he's not one of the world's best? And I don't believe that you have to be employed by WWE or TNA to be a great wrestler

Adam Pearce is a nobody too. This whole argument from indy fans is the equivalent of me saying that my mate is one of the best footballers in the world. You'd probably say he can't be because he's never performed on the world stage while I'd reply with, "well have you ever seen him play? If you haven't how can you say he's not one of the world's best?"

You see, I don't hype people up until they are proven greats.

Fozzy wrote:

Would you prefer if all the NWA-affiliated promotions just changed their name? Do you think the "Alliance of Independent Wrestling Promotions" would attract as many fans or have any sort of prestige in their titles?

I'd prefer it if the company would die a death and stop living off of long past memories.

Fozzy wrote:

Cream rises to the top as long as there's somewhere for it to rise. The NWA allows young guys to have the opportunity to work with established guys from other NWA promotions. If it weren't for the NWA's promotion in the UK, Devitt and Paul Tracey wouldn't have been able to set up NWA Ireland here. And like Cactus Col has said, the NWA name does give an air of legitimacy to a promotion in the eyes of a lot of wrestling fans. In the grand scheme of things, Fergal Devitt probably wouldn't have been picked up by New Japan if it weren't for their relationship with the NWA. He would actually be off the radar then.

But the NWA now is little more than an indy organisation with three famous letters. And the NWA Ireland promotion is doing really poor numbers now from what I've heard so that kind of damages your theorry about the letters bringing an air of legitimacy. When I went to an NWA show in Cabra I saw mostly kids under 12 in the audience. If I'd asked them what the NWA were they'd probably reply, "was that Hall and Nash's group?"

Fozzy wrote:

What is the radar as you see it anyway? The majority of wrestling fans (WWE fans)? Or fans who want the best wrestling?

The way I see it the WWE is now the measuring stick and if you're not on their radar you do not matter. Now you may want to disagree with that but since you've brought up the business aspect above I don't see how you can as they are the leaders of the wrestling business.

Fozzy wrote:

I'm being led to believe that you're basically saying "if you're not in WWE, you're nobody".

Basically, yes. That's what I'm saying. Though I concede there are certain exceptions.

Fozzy wrote:

The NWA will always have their legacy from 20/30 years ago, that's not going to go away. But I believe that promotions should do whatever they can to get more fans buying tickets and the NWA name is one of those things. Maybe it won't make you buy a ticket (or maybe it did when you went to NWA Ireland), but it will make others. This tournament would be cool if it were for some other title, but given who has held it in the past, it does make it mean more to most fans, and I can guarantee that the NWA's attendances will go up because of it. That is a good thing as far as wrestling is concerned

First off I can assure you when I went to the NWA Ireland event the thought of the classic NWA did not influence me attending at all nd I'd be amazed if it influences the regulars who attend the current NWA shows.

The fact is the NWA are living off of the past to try and make themselves sound relevant. Obviously you are fine with that and you justify it from a business standpoint which is fFair enough but I don't look at it that way. I felt I summed my views up pretty well when I mentioned TV shows and how many make the decision to end the show before it gets too stale and jumps the shark. The NWA jumped it long ago.

Your argument about attendances going up and this being good for the wrestling business was the same old stuff being said when guys like Dan Severn emerged with the belt. It was baloney then and it's baloney now.

Mr.Nice Guy · 01-06-2007 5:45pm

gimmick wrote:

Out of interest, why not? Because you are against the whole NWA thing? or because its just not your cup of tea?

For two reasons. One being that I'm against the NWA living off of the past and the second being that I don't enjoy wrestling involving two guys trying to see who can flip the highest, stiff the loudest and drop people on their heads the nastiest.

Fozzy wrote:

Re the naming of the tournament, so bloody what, pro wrestling has never been one for under hyping something. All the name is doing is hyping up something. Should WWE refer to one of their summer PPVs as the Mediocre American Bash?

Indeed, and from a business standpoint it can be justified but I'm not looking at this from the position of a businessman but from the position of a fan.

gimmick wrote:

That is an ignorant statement, and I can only assume that you know absolutely nothing about Danielson.

I've seen enough of the over-hyped bore. I'd prefer Orton in all honesty.

gimmick wrote:

WRT this entire thread, I dont see that anyone has proved anyone wrong.

Then I suggest you reread my 6:03pm post.

gimmick wrote:

and with that, I am off to Turkey on my holidays.

Well for some.

Fozzy · 01-06-2007 5:51pm

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

Yeah Danielson is a legend, isn't he? All those headlocks he does. Randy Orton must be worried! The people who rave about these indy heroes are the same people who raved about CM Punk. Remind me, what stellar match has he had in WWE lately? It wasn't his last PPV match with Burke anyway. Maybe Fit Finaly and Arn Andrson are holding him back. After all, it couldn't be that the indy fan boys hyped him up too much could it?!

Speaking for myself, as I think I have before, but I think the point needs reiterating, Punk entertained me more than any other wrestler in the last 5 years. He's not really doing that now. Am I to put that down to him suddenly losing all his talent? Or is it because my opinion of wrestling was completely different 3 years ago? Or is it because he is now on my tv screen rather than on a dvd? Or is it something to do with the way WWE have dealt with him? I know which one is the logical answer

I really don't think you've watched Danielson at all. I know you think of Finlay and Regal in a high regard, and the three of them all wrestle a similar style. Regal's always speaking highly of Danielson too. Regal does more headlocks than Danielson, should Randy not be more concerned with him?

It's a pity if you'll let three letters get between you and good wrestling

Vince135792003 · 01-06-2007 5:52pm

I think you (MNG) could draw well as the NWA champ. I'd buy a dvd with you in Cattle Mutilation for an hour (as long as you sell it).

Double C · 01-06-2007 6:44pm

This is madness. First of all, Bryan Danielson is an incredible wrestler, better than 90% of WWE's roster. I beg you to disagree.
Your headlock comment is laughable, when he does use restholds he uses more creative ones than just headlocks. BTW its not just Orton who uses restholds, all WWE matches these days are full of them. It's not the workers fault either, they just do what they are told.
So in your opinion is, if it's not WWE its nothing. Please tell me what is so great about WWE right now? I know they have stepped up the in ring action a lot this year, but how many great matches have they had? Maybe 5. Don't try it with the Cena s*it because while he is a great champion from a marketing standpoint and great on the mic, he is not and never will be regarded a great wrestler. A decent wrestler sure, but not a great one. Danielson is.

OK I get the point about NWA trying to revive the glory years. We all know it's not going to happen. The fact is there is a tournament going on to crown a new champion. It's going to be a good tournament and will throw up a few decent matches. What's the problem with that? Just disassociate the current NWA from the old one. You might not be able to do so, but how come everyone else can?
Sure it doesn't have the biggest names in the world like it did in the 80's, they are all under lock and key in Titan Towers. Wouldn't it be great if the likes of Michaels and Benoit could be involved against the likes of Danielson?

If your content watching WWE and nothing else then grand, don't go and say that someone who watches other companies has "awful taste" , you must not realise how badly you come across with comments like that.

ShawnRaven · 01-06-2007 10:02pm

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

And here comes the whiner again. Don't get your panties in a twist just because you have been shown up to be talking utter bollocks yet again. Believe me, I take great pleasure in proving you wrong.

Only the problem is it's only in your mind that you are doing so. You're the only one who has the same dim view on the NWA, And your 50 million line posts on an argument you clearly intend on winning (probably the only pleasure you get out of life.

In your warped mind, WWE is the only, promotion that counts, unless anyone else can become as big as them (highly unlikely, and nobody is disputing that either)

Yeah you laugh away like a good lad. It can mask your ignorance. :cool:

I am laughing! I think it's hilarious on how you go on a self-rightous power trip with the your right and everyone else is wrong attitude. I feel quite sorry for you actually, especially with your views on how WWE is the be all and end all of Pro Wrestling. Heaven help you when John Cena loses his belt, your world will end.

Don't jump kid, it's a long way down, and i'll be at the end with the shovel in hand

Fozzy · 01-06-2007 10:27pm

Watch the insults there VR, don't want to be forced to ban anyone

Mr.Nice Guy, I think you have to accept the fact that there has to be indy wrestling promotions for WWE to have some of the best wrestlers around. You don't immediately become a somebody the moment you sign with WWE, and without fans going to indy events, wrestlers wouldn't be able to learn and grow to eventually make it to WWE. I don't have any ulterior motive, I just enjoy wrestling. I watch WWE and enjoy it for the most part, but I also like what I've seen from NWA promotions. WWE have their own style of wrestling that they force on all their wrestlers and I like to see matches without those restrictions sometimes also, because personally I enjoy them. Maybe you don't enjoy stuff from outside WWE, but there any many fans who do, and I believe their opinion counts as much as any other wrestling fan. The fact is that the NWA facilitates better wrestling than that which would happen without any sort of alliance. You make it sound like they have wrestlers who are past it wrestling at every show when the reality is that they have many of the current and future stars on their shows

I'll just finish with this so I can get back to watchin SD:

Mr.Nice Guy wrote:

First off I can assure you when I went to the NWA Ireland event the thought of the classic NWA did not influence me attending at all nd I'd be amazed if it influences the regulars who attend the current NWA shows.

If those three letters didn't influence you when going to an NWA event, then why do they have to influence you when a tournament featuring some very good wrestlers, including Ireland's best in my opinion, is being put on? Cactus Col said himself that the NWA name would influence him and I don't believe that he would be alone there, but if the name doesn't affect you then that's grand, just judge the show on its own merits and not what it says on the marquee

ShawnRaven · 01-06-2007 11:21pm

Fozzy wrote:

Watch the insults there VR, don't want to be forced to ban anyone

I didn't insult him dude, and he too should get a warning for provocation.

VR!

Edit - problem solved, god bless ignore lists so i don't have to read his stuff. No offence to the guy, never met him, don't know him and i respect the guy for standing his ground... but i go here to get away from headaches, not to generate em

Mr.Nice Guy · 03-06-2007 3:46pm

It's OK Fozzy, people resort to insults and ad hominem attacks when they get throughly embarrassed and humiliated in an argument so we can be a bit understanding with oul' VR.

In regards to the NWA debate which was the key issue after all, I feel I have made my feelings clear and we're just going in circles. If one accepts that the standards have fallen dramatically from the heyday of the NWA, as I think we can all agree on, then you can only really justify continuing to support such a downtrodden company from a business standpoint.

I'm not interested in doing so in the same way I'm not interested in a favourite TV show of my continuing on when its standards have fallen, on the grounds that it will make some people money.

As far as Danielson is concerned, he has proven nothing in this business in my eyes. I find him highly overrated and I think the fans who once drooled over CM Punk ar doing the same over Danielson. Punk in the big leagues of WWE has not had any stellar matches so we can confidently claim that he was hyped up too much. Same with Danielson I feel. But this off-topic anyway.

ShawnRaven · 04-06-2007 4:35pm

Double C wrote:

If your content watching WWE and nothing else then grand, don't go and say that someone who watches other companies has "awful taste" , you must not realise how badly you come across with comments like that.

Good to see i'm not the only one who sees this. But let him embarrass himself time out of number and live in his own little dream world. WWE is all the poor guy knows.

VR!

Double C · 04-06-2007 6:05pm

Ah lets just forget it all, bygons and all that.

Back on subject, for those who care, Albright, Pearce and Parham went through this weekend. The final 4 in this tournament are going to be the 4 ROH guys, aren't they?
I just noticed there, Mike Quackenbush is the NWA Junior Champion and Pearce is the Heritage Champion, whatever that is. If Danielson wins this tournament, NWA will have the best junior and the best heavyweight available to them as champions which is pretty impressive. Danielson could pass as a junior too, but you know what I mean!

Fozzy · 04-06-2007 11:38pm

Double C wrote:

The final 4 in this tournament are going to be the 4 ROH guys, aren't they?

Probably, although I would have given Damien Wayne a chance before he was knocked out. Ya never know though, Devitt might upset Danielson! I was just reading, Devitt's opponent is Australian, and Devitt will be in a tournament in Australia soon to crown an NWA champ there, so I was thinkin that they might have Devitt beat Nicholls, then Nicholls will end up beating Devitt in his own country. I'm just really hopin Devitt goes through!

NWA World Title Tournament

Comments