Pro Wrestling nostalgia discussion!

ShawnRaven

About six months ago, there was an Attitude nostalgia thread here, which sparked the idea for this!

Tired of Triple H?
Sick of the sight of Cena?
Bored of Taker?

Then you're in the right place! Our very own nostalgia thread. Where everything old can be trashed out. What got you into wrestling? First event you watched? Your most memorable feuds.

This one's for you lurkers as well! If you don't watch it anymore but watched it religiously back in it's day, get your spoke in.

Usual rules apply, play nice, yadda yadda... If the thread is successful enough, i might sticky it.
Have fun guys.

Otis Driftwood

Nice thread idea Shawn especially since I rarely,if ever watch televised wrestling anymore.
I dont know if its the fact Ive gotten a little older or that the current WWE product is simply crap(IMO) but I havnt watched a full episode of Smackdown in at least 3 years and a full episode of Raw in probably near 2 years.
Its this posters opinion that there are simply no stars in it anymore.
Now of course there are stars - Taker,HHH,Michaels etc but they have become stale.IMO it started with the brand seperation.Too many mid card wasters - Kahli,Big Slow,JBL(yes,I think JBL is nothing but a mid-carder folks) etc getting title shots/runs.No charisma,no real talent.
Take back in the late 90s,early 00s,WWE had real star power.Rock and Austin et al.Even the then mid carders - Benoit,Geurerro,Y2J,Angle were more than able to step up to the plate when neccessary and pull off entertaining matches but more than that,they got you to invest emotionally on what was unfolding.I actually cared what was happening to them and was pissed off when my favourites got the shaft.The current product does not have that ability,I simply do not care about any of them anymore.
The lack of a decent tag team division is also a major factor in this IMO.Who do we have now???A fcuking "star" from The Real World is highly regarded.WTF???
"Back in the day" the tag team division was rife with entertaining teams - Hardys,Edge+Christian,Dudleys,Acolytes etc.Hell even jobbers like T+A were entertaining,if for no other reason that you hated the sight of them.
WWE is in a transitional period at the moment IMO,of course this always happens but with no major competition for Vince out there I fear we are stuck with the current crop of gomers for some time to come.
Ive been a fan for approx 22 years and probably will always have an interest but at the moment its very much a case of I can take it or leave it and more often than not,its leave it.

krudler

Earliest wrestling memory was seeing a video of Wrestlemania 3 at my cousins house, been a fan ever since, have fond memories of trying to stay up late on Saturday nights to watch Superstars on Sky 1 and watching the early morning shows as well, loved The Rockers, Demolition, Savage, Rick Rude, LOD, DiBiase, Jake Roberts, I was always more into the heels when I was a kid for some reason.

Todays product has gotten stale, I consider myself lucky to have grown up during the 3 ages of wrestling (the WWF/E ones anyway) and was always the right age for the audience it was aimed at, kids at first in the late 80s/early 90s when gimmicks were essential, the a teenager during the Attitude Era when more realsitic characters and storylines took place, not to mention a huge boom in popularity, back around 99-01 it was no longer considered uncool to be a wrestling fan becuase of Austin and The Rock, nowadays its gone full circle and is being aimed at a PG rating again, Cenas massive popularity is obviously a big factor in this but its hard to care about a lot of whats going on these days, guys like Edge, Orton and Morrisson are who interest me who have a harder edge to them than a goofy Cena.

Lack of competition is definitely hurting the product, if only TNA had more aspirations than to be the B company to Vince and stepped up their booking, relied on their homegrown talent rather than making a big deal of bringing in guys 10 years past their prime, Nash, Foley, The Dudleys, Steiner, Sting, all hugely popular in their day but its too reliant on these guys to ever be nothing more than the castoffs show,the in ring product can be outstanding, different to WWE and fresh at times but for every good midcard match theres 3 main events with baffling storylines and angles, not to mention run ins on pretty much every ppv ending, Russo booking at its finest circa WCW 2000

gimmick

The product has moved on, hence the reason for it being referred to as Sports Entertainment, rather than wrestling by the WWE nowadays.

Fact of the matter is, WWE is a commercial company whose main objective is to make money via merchandise, house shows and PPV. Once you have a cartoon esque main eventer like Cena, it will get the kids wanting his gear. WWE is no longer a workrate based company. Some might argue it never was. Kids do not care for 30 minutes clinics betweent he likes of Malenko and Benoit, this does not sell merchandise or PPV (look at the indies, they have regular long mat based classics, but they are in front of a niche audience. They might sell in a year what a WWE house show sells in a night merch wise) they want to see the likes of Cena/Hardy involved at all times.

WWE has just changed its focus mamny times. 80s was more workrate based with Hogan as the main man. Early 90s was more gimmicky again with Hogan as the main man. Late 90s were far more risque with the Attitude era, and now it is PG entertainment based on looking for the money of families.

For the purposes of the topic, as I have said many times, it was the Steamboat V savage feud which got me into wrestling first day, and their WM3 match is the first match I can ever really remember getting into. I know I remember earlier matches involving the Bulldogs and Killer Bees and the Iron Sheik and all, but that one stands out more than any.

But the first tiem I was ever truly outraged at a happening in wrestling was Royal Rumble 1991 when Randy Savage cost the Ultimate Warrior his title against Sgt Slaughter. Not sure what I was more angry about, Slaughter as Champ, or savages dastardly deeds to cause it. I hated both for a long time as a result.

krudler

I always remember nearly being i tears because Earthquake squished Damien found out it was some meat in a bag with a motor to make it move around years later , oh and Jake siccing his cobra on Savages arm, never seen anything like it since in wrestling, devenomised or not would you let a cobra gnaw on your arm? i sure as **** wouldnt

Endaaaagh

Here's something I often wondered about.. would Andre be as popular today as he was "back in the day"? Or would he just be another slow moving big man ala Khali or Big Show. Was his size his main appeal? .I've only seen his later WWF stuff so I can't comment on what his wrestling skills were like back in the 70's or whenever he started out, but from what I've seen I'd say Big Show is a better wrestler (in that he can preform more moves)

Danny The Pain

gimmick wrote: »

The product has moved on, hence the reason for it being referred to as Sports Entertainment, rather than wrestling by the WWE nowadays.

Fact of the matter is, WWE is a commercial company whose main objective is to make money via merchandise, house shows and PPV. Once you have a cartoon esque main eventer like Cena, it will get the kids wanting his gear. WWE is no longer a workrate based company. Some might argue it never was. Kids do not care for 30 minutes clinics betweent he likes of Malenko and Benoit, this does not sell merchandise or PPV (look at the indies, they have regular long mat based classics, but they are in front of a niche audience. They might sell in a year what a WWE house show sells in a night merch wise) they want to see the likes of Cena/Hardy involved at all times.

WWE has just changed its focus mamny times. 80s was more workrate based with Hogan as the main man. Early 90s was more gimmicky again with Hogan as the main man. Late 90s were far more risque with the Attitude era, and now it is PG entertainment based on looking for the money of families.

For the purposes of the topic, as I have said many times, it was the Steamboat V savage feud which got me into wrestling first day, and their WM3 match is the first match I can ever really remember getting into. I know I remember earlier matches involving the Bulldogs and Killer Bees and the Iron Sheik and all, but that one stands out more than any.

But the first tiem I was ever truly outraged at a happening in wrestling was Royal Rumble 1991 when Randy Savage cost the Ultimate Warrior his title against Sgt Slaughter. Not sure what I was more angry about, Slaughter as Champ, or savages dastardly deeds to cause it. I hated both for a long time as a result.

i agree totally that wwe now isnt work rate based and that the product is directed towards kids now with cena in the cartoon character/hero role i was recently watching the life and times of mr perfect dvd and i remember as a kid how much i hated him because of his cocky and arrogant demeanour but now that im a worker myself i can definately appreciate his in-ring talent and overall charisma in the ring i especially enjoyed his matches with bret hart what mat classics they where and entertaining as hell bring back those days.

Prufrock

My earliest memory is the Undertaker coming down to the ring in his old classic attire and beating some jobber.

The product was just more alive back then. The fans cared more and resulted in better live audiences. I mean the pops you used to get for some shows where huge! Austin helping Foley win the WWF title, HHH returning, Bulldog winning the Intercontinental title in England ect. Todays product lacks that kind of magic.

gimmick

But people are forgetting that "back in the good ol days" kayfabe was kept a damn sight more. The business is no longer protected now. WWE performers are now celebrities, there are items about them on TMZ and other such gossip websites. So with that in mind, people are not going to get as animated about something they (for the most part) know is stage managed.

Re the Andre question, I think an awful lot of his appeal was he was the first main stream monster, so no, I do not think he would have the same draw.

brick tamland

I been thinking about this a bit recently and i dont know if i'm looking back fondly through rose tinted glasses. True I remember waiting up all excited for Superstars or Challenge but it was 95% Squash matches angainst enhancment talent and then 2 promos inbetween the matches wasnt it. the only time i got to see good wrestling was when i rented out old Wrestlemania or Survior Series Tapes or the very odd time I got to see a PPV ( cant remember how i managed to see them either as i never had sky, was Summerslam from Wembley on normal sky?? although i remember watching a rumble on Eurosport )

rossie1977

Prufrock wrote: »

My earliest memory is the Undertaker coming down to the ring in his old classic attire and beating some jobber.

The product was just more alive back then. The fans cared more and resulted in better live audiences. I mean the pops you used to get for some shows where huge! Austin helping Foley win the WWF title, HHH returning, Bulldog winning the Intercontinental title in England ect. Todays product lacks that kind of magic.

undertaker classic attire and austin helping foley are about 7 years apart no you are comparing todays product with everything good that happened for over a decade, totally unfair. HHH returning happened in like 2003 while bulldog winning at wembley was 1992

people would laugh out loud if wwe tried to put on the same shows they did back in 1993-94, e.g wwf superstars with kwang, mantaur, the goon, duke drose, phantasio etc beating some jobber

rossie1977

Endaaaagh wrote: »

Here's something I often wondered about.. would Andre be as popular today as he was "back in the day"? Or would he just be another slow moving big man ala Khali or Big Show. Was his size his main appeal? .I've only seen his later WWF stuff so I can't comment on what his wrestling skills were like back in the 70's or whenever he started out, but from what I've seen I'd say Big Show is a better wrestler (in that he can preform more moves)

no his size wasn't his main appeal, when andre first came to canada circa 1971 he struggled big time to get over in his gimmick jean ferre, vince sr saw that andre was very charismatic and used that as part of his gimmick and the rest is history.

for me personally andre was a better "wrestler" than big show, though show circa 1995-98 had better looking moves.

you need to watch andres matches in the 1970s, early 80s (in japan) he wasn't always a "slow moving big man"

chopperbyrne

Overexposure and the death of kayfabe (through official channels and just growing up and realising it can't possibly be real!) have lead to the steady decline in the appeal of pro wrestling.

Back when there were only four or five PPVs a year and if you wanted to see the really big stars you'd have to watch SNME (which I can't remember ever been broadcast over here?) all we had was Superstars or Challenge which mainly featured midcard and tag matches to get the talent over.

This worked perfectly well and millions of people around the world were big fans.

Then the era of RAW and Nitro broke down kayfabe somewhat and had the big stars featured every week on television. Fortunately both the midcard and tag scene stayed strong during this time (at least in WWF, not so much in WCW) and the product was better as a whole.

After Vince bought out WCW there was no competition and the product as a whole has gotten stale. The 18-35 demographic which was their biggest market during the Monday Night Wars and Attitude Era have largely tuned out and moved on to watching MMA.

I still am and probably always will be a pro wrestling fan, but I do hope that some company can rise to a position to truly challenge the WWE again some day.

gimmick

chopperbyrne wrote: »

I still am and probably always will be a pro wrestling fan, but I do hope that some company can rise to a position to truly challenge the WWE again some day.

I think we have all gone completely off topic, but however ill continue it. Why is the be and all and end all WWE. If it were I would have given up years ago. There is plenty out there to enjoy if you broaden your horizons somewhat.

krudler

Any WCW fans? I did catch it occasionally during the Monday wars period and it always seemed a cooler show than raw, great undercard but you could see a mile away the old timers would never give up their spots, and i liked it was different having been raised on WWF programming

What I miss most these days is theres no spontaneity, back in the attitude days it seemed more like a lot happened on Raw and it was being made up as it went wheras these days they announce matches 2 weeks in advance, when was the last time there was a huge title match in a cage or something announced at the opening segment of the show? (bear in mind I dont watch it much anymore so could be totatlly wrong on this) the promos are scripted, the backstage stuff is shot like a movie, all too planned

grames_bond

krudler wrote: »

Any WCW fans? I did catch it occasionally during the Monday wars period and it always seemed a cooler show than raw, great undercard but you could see a mile away the old timers would never give up their spots, and i liked it was different having been raised on WWF programming

i think back then WCW were behnd WWF in terms of ideas but they improved on all of them, for example the first ever WWF inferno match (taker n kane) wa woeful, WCW if my memory serves me correctly was sting against someone whos name i dont remember and they used af frickin flame thrower!

thebeanz

Sweet Thread

Firstly i don't hate cena, Why not? Well he is a modern hogan. Hogan is why i started watching wrestling. Its unfair to give out about cena if you started watching wwe for guys like hogan, whats Wrong with WWE trying to get kids into wrestling again? The wwe has gone full circle the people who started watching hogans time are having kids of their own, i've had 19 years watching wrestling, i'd like to be able to watch it with my kids.

Anyhow. When i think of old wwe i always remember the colours and gimmicks starting off. They were a kids dream, Hogan the hero in red and yellow, Ultimate Warrior and his face paint, Savage and his cool ring gear, Koko B wear had a parrot, we had a bulldog, the rockers all fun stuff. Then there were the baddies, the undertaker, Million Dollar man, Ric Flair, Mr Perfect. Wrestling was a kids dream.

But what i love most is they kept giving us new stars over the years, bret and owen, hbk and Diesal, Rock and Austin.

I love looking back at old matches now not just for the fun gimmicks but for the wrestling. Some of the old matches are amazing to watch, the storytelling and wrestling itself were class. Credit to the superstars who were able to get my interest as a kid and get my admiration as an adult for the wrestling abilities they had from the start.

I guess wwe really has come full circle now i appreciate wrestling for the moves and storytelling rather than gimmicks and hero like stars.

chopperbyrne

grames_bond wrote: »

i think back then WCW were behnd WWF in terms of ideas but they improved on all of them, for example the first ever WWF inferno match (taker n kane) wa woeful, WCW if my memory serves me correctly was sting against someone whos name i dont remember and they used af frickin flame thrower!

Sting and Vampiro it was.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0mkjpn9s8mo

At least the Taker and Kane one actually had Kanes boot being set on fire and not a stunt man swapped in when the lights went out!

ShawnRaven

grames_bond wrote: »

i think back then WCW were behnd WWF in terms of ideas but they improved on all of them, for example the first ever WWF inferno match (taker n kane) wa woeful, WCW if my memory serves me correctly was sting against someone whos name i dont remember and they used af frickin flame thrower!

Trust me, As bad as Kane v Taker's inferno match was, Sting/Vampiro wasn't an improvement. In fact that entire program was an utter abortion, and Vampiro has been pretty much laughed at since.

grames_bond

ShawnRaven wrote: »

Trust me, As bad as Kane v Taker's inferno match was, Sting/Vampiro wasn't an improvement. In fact that entire program was an utter abortion, and Vampiro has been pretty much laughed at since.

oh i know but WCW always raised the bar or at least attempted to ya kno?!

rossie1977

grames_bond wrote: »

oh i know but WCW always raised the bar or at least attempted to ya kno?!

raised the bar in what way??

wwf had a royal rumble so wcw decided to have a battle royale but with 3 rings with 3 split screens, needless to say it was awful

wwf had hell in a cell so wcw decide to have a 3 cells one on top of each other, needless to say it was awful too

ShawnRaven

The only thing that was really done better than WWE was Wargames, and even then, that was more NWA than WCW because the ones under the WCW banner were less than spectacular. And even the Elimination Chamber kinda sucks by comparison. Especially if you watch the first Wargames match from Great American Bash 87 tour. That sh*t was so ahead of it's time.

WWE *tried* with Survivor Series to compete, but it didn't quite live up to the higher standard set up by the NWA. Not that Vince cared because the only reason he even put that PPV on was to send a "f*ck you" message to Jim Crockett and force cable companies to chose for Wrestlemania the following year. Crockett then tried to send the same message back by sticking on the first Clash Of The Champions on the same date (which is actually tomorrow, March 27th... happy b-day axxechikka btw) and it subsequently ran them out of business.

After remembering that birthday conversation a few months back, a quick wikipedia search also indiicated that Charlie Haas was born that day, Russ Haas was also born that day two years later, and So Cal Val was also born that day. Pretty interesting day for wrestling birthdays. Sorry for dragging it slightly off topic, but i found it amusing at least.

ShawnRaven

I got into WWE around 87. I'd seen some World Of Sport prior to it but it really didn't interest me to the extent it's North American counterpart did, probably because I was only 11 at the time. But we didn't have Sky all that long (Cablelink started providing it at the end of 86) but everyone at school was talking about one thing from January to March, and that was Wrestlemania III, and the two big feuds that were talked about either either Hogan/Andre (for Andre's heel turn) or Savage/Steamboat (for Savage's attack on Steamboat, crushing his larnyx). It was a pretty good time to be introduced to it.

Savage's big tournament win the following year was also a pretty big deal for any kid watching it at the time (both Hardys mention this as well on their shoot interview as well as the Twist Of Fate DVD), unfortunately that Mania has not aged well and a 4 hour Mania wasn't as well received as they had hoped. But I still love it, probably because it was one of the first Wrestling videos i had bought in 1991 (with Mania III being the first).

michael.etc...

ShawnRaven wrote: »

Savage's big tournament win the following year was also a pretty big deal for any kid watching it at the time (both Hardys mention this as well on their shoot interview as well as the Twist Of Fate DVD), unfortunately that Mania has not aged well and a 4 hour Mania wasn't as well received as they had hoped. But I still love it, probably because it was one of the first Wrestling videos i had bought in 1991 (with Mania III being the first).

I'm not sure when i actually saw the event for the first time, but i'm almost certain when i first started getting into wrestling, Savage was the champ, then thanks to not having sky... the next time i saw him, he was the Macho King... baffling when you were like, 5.

Rick Rude vs Jake Roberts at the tourney... jesus.... horrible... horrible match....

ShawnRaven

michael.etc... wrote: »

I'm not sure when i actually saw the event for the first time, but i'm almost certain when i first started getting into wrestling, Savage was the champ, then thanks to not having sky... the next time i saw him, he was the Macho King... baffling when you were like, 5.

Wow, you're talking months in the difference there. Savage wouldn't become King until he beat Duggan in September 89 i think, and he lost the title in April 89!

Jake/Rude was terrible cos Rude couldn't work for sh*t back then, and Jake wasn't the one to carry him. No way should have that gone on to a time limit draw. Double DQ within 5 minutes and give extra time for Savage/Valentine in the second round.

michael.etc...

Yep.. it got worse when you started following WWE magazine too.. almost impossible to keep up.

In fairness, once you start dabbling with the booking, you could probably do with re-arranging the whole tournament. I would have kept Jake and Rude apart altogether, and done Rude/Steamboat. Easy to say that now though...

Sunset V

Awesome. Awesome to the max. fair play Shawn for a pretty sweet thread. Don't really log on that much anymore but you've injected a bit of life into it again.

I first was interest in wrestling way back yonder when I was 6 or 7 I guess. It was Sting's surfer gimmick thing that just hooked me. It was great. WCW and then Catchphrase and then Gladiators. Sweet, sweet Saturday afternoons courtesy of those fine people in ITV.

But like all good things it came to an end and because we lived in Kilbackobeyonds in Longford and had strict parents we couldn't get Sky, so the wrestling dream ended.

After a baron spell, I saw wrestling on Channel 4 one Sunday afternoon. First segment I saw was the Mean Street Posse hiding in some toilets, as you do when you're in the Mean Street Posse. Then something about Kane and Tori but saw the Rock being interviewed and I was hooked again. It was Sting again. Awesome. I was on the old tinternet (it's still dial up at home!) looking up everything. Saw the Smackdown game, spent hours (mainly due to the dial up speed) looking at every single wrestler's move set on gamefags.com. Very sad.

But I knew I was truly hooked when I saw my first ever PPV. It was when Channel 4 used to show the crap ones and they broadcast Backlash 2000. Still to this day it's my favourite PPV. I thought the build up was great; storyline was immense, Stone Cold destroying the DX express. I know I was naive but i loved it. That PPV really got interested again and been hooked ever since. Can't really remember who else was on the card apart from T&A were fighting the Dudley's I think but the main event was a thing of beauty. It had everything.

Simpler times!

ShawnRaven

michael.etc... wrote: »

In fairness, once you start dabbling with the booking, you could probably do with re-arranging the whole tournament. I would have kept Jake and Rude apart altogether, and done Rude/Steamboat. Easy to say that now though...

There were three very good reasons why Rude/Steamboat wasn't going to happen.

1) Steamboat was on his way out and NWA bound, putting Rude in with Steamboat sounds like a good match, but...

2) ... It had already been attempted at the 1988 Royal Rumble as the opening match two months earlier and it didn't generate that much in the way of crowd interest. House shows weren't impressed with it either, leading up to...

3) ... bad as the Mania IV match was, they were eventually able to get better, and they provided a pretty decent program that year.

The heavy rumour was that it was actually a lot more going on than just the storyline regarding Jake's wife and Rude. But wrestling and rumours go in hand.

Prufrock

rossie1977 wrote: »

undertaker classic attire and austin helping foley are about 7 years apart no you are comparing todays product with everything good that happened for over a decade, totally unfair.

I was just saying that you can't get that kind of reaction these days. People just don't care enough about what they are seeing. I don't think its unfair to compare todays product to what came before. It's all the WWF/WWE. The atmosphere just isn't the same. I can't remember the last time I saw the crowd go nuts for anyone. (And classic undertaker is my earliest wrestling memory. So scary when you're young :eek:)

ShawnRaven

Sunset V wrote: »

But I knew I was truly hooked when I saw my first ever PPV. It was when Channel 4 used to show the crap ones and they broadcast Backlash 2000. Still to this day it's my favourite PPV. I thought the build up was great; storyline was immense, Stone Cold destroying the DX express. I know I was naive but i loved it. That PPV really got interested again and been hooked ever since. Can't really remember who else was on the card apart from T&A were fighting the Dudley's I think but the main event was a thing of beauty. It had everything!

Well thanks a lot, bang go my plans for the day! That's twice Backlash 2000 has come up on PW this week, and i'm actually itching to watch it now. Was supposed to take a trip to the bank, ain't happening now!

michael.etc...

ShawnRaven wrote: »

There were three very good reasons why Rude/Steamboat wasn't going to happen.
1) Steamboat was on his way out and NWA bound, putting Rude in with Steamboat sounds like a good match, but...
2) ... It had already been attempted at the 1988 Royal Rumble as the opening match two months earlier and it didn't generate that much in the way of crowd interest. House shows weren't impressed with it either, leading up to...
3) ... bad as the Mania IV match was, they were eventually able to get better, and they provided a pretty decent program that year.
The heavy rumour was that it was actually a lot more going on than just the storyline regarding Jake's wife and Rude. But wrestling and rumours go in hand.

Oh yeah, i know all that, and i can understand that. But it boggles my mind how they insisted (if my memory serves correctly...) in booking a bunch of early matches that capitilised on current feuds (such as Jake/rude), but ended up not delivering, because they didn't want to add anything other than a worthless chapter... if that makes sense.
I still would have put Rude over Steamboat, then had him interfere in Jake's match.

ShawnRaven

michael.etc... wrote: »

Oh yeah, i know all that, and i can understand that. But it boggles my mind how they insisted (if my memory serves correctly...) in booking a bunch of early matches that capitilised on current feuds (such as Jake/rude), but ended up not delivering, because they didn't want to add anything other than a worthless chapter... if that makes sense.
I still would have put Rude over Steamboat, then had him interfere in Jake's match.

I think the worst PPV for that sort of thing was Summerslam 89.

After Mania there were several feuds that were never finished.

One match that made no sense was the Rockers/Santana v Rougeaus/Martel

Santana/Martel never had their feud settled on PPV. They had a 5 minute blow off on SNME, and it made zero sense because Martel had serious heel heat from turning on Santana at Mania, and then he took on Slick as his manager.

Speaking of the Rougeaus, around that time they also had unfinished business with the Harts from the previous year, again, never fully settled, blown off in a six man tag at the Royal Rumble earlier that year. Both would have served as pretty good blowoffs for that Summerslam. They could have easily saved Harts/Arn & Tully for an SNME, seeing as thats where most of Arn & Tully's best work was displayed during their time in WWE anyway.

Actually that would have worked out better for Summerslam 89

Santana/Martel
Harts/Rougeaus
Rockers/Arn & Tully, especially considering the two matches they had on two different SNME's.

big syke

i remember havin the 1992 annual and watching it every sunday but my 1st proper clear was rushing home to watch superstars one sunday evening. Superstars usually only had squash matches but for some reason owen and bret were wrestling each other that night...

the 1st video i personally bought myself was survivor series 98 on vhs...wat an event.....

those were the days:rolleyes:

ShawnRaven

big syke wrote: »

the 1st video i personally bought myself was survivor series 98 on vhs...wat an event.....

those were the days:rolleyes:

Never got the big deal behind that PPV, although two things i specifically remember.

Dwayne Gill (before he wanted to know Who's First!) as a substitute in the tournament, and Steven Regal's "Real Man's Man" entrance. Both hilarious.

big syke

He's a man, a real mans man!!!:D

its all about the memories and nostalgia of that event not the quality of the ppv itself!!

flahavaj

michael.etc... wrote: »

Yep.. it got worse when you started following WWE magazine too.. almost impossible to keep up.

In fairness, once you start dabbling with the booking, you could probably do with re-arranging the whole tournament. I would have kept Jake and Rude apart altogether, and done Rude/Steamboat. Easy to say that now though...

Funny you should mention Rude/Steamboat, they had a really good Iron Man Match in June 1992 in WCW thats well worth a look. Saw it there the other day and it really ages well, great heel psychology from Rude. Better than Hart/Michaels Iron man in my book.

ShawnRaven

flahavaj wrote: »

Funny you should mention Rude/Steamboat, they had a really good Iron Man Match in June 1992 in WCW thats well worth a look. Saw it there the other day and it really ages well, great heel psychology from Rude. Better than Hart/Michaels Iron man in my book.

Rude rarely had a bad match in WCW at that point, oddly enough one of the bad matches he did have was at the 1993 Fall Brawl against one of the few people one would expect him to have a bad match with, and that was Flair!

Hart/Michaels Ironman sucked. One hour of restholds and submission moves to have no decision at the end of it? The last 30 minutes of it would have made the match with a decision. But the first 30 were horrid.

krudler

ShawnRaven wrote: »

Rude rarely had a bad match in WCW at that point, oddly enough one of the bad matches he did have was at the 1993 Fall Brawl against one of the few people one would expect him to have a bad match with, and that was Flair!

Hart/Michaels Ironman sucked. One hour of restholds and submission moves to have no decision at the end of it? The last 30 minutes of it would have made the match with a decision. But the first 30 were horrid.

And yet it keeps winding up being in top ten lists of best matches, WWE polls anyway, despite the fact its as dull as ditchwater for most of it, actually the highlight footage on the 2nd disc that came with the Wrestlemania 2000 dvd makes it look like a fantastic match when it isnt, just watch the highlights itll spare you an hour of boredom, the Rock/HHH ironman was great though, although still suffered from restholds every few mins, but its to be expected really cant expect a match like that to go an hour with fast paced moves from start to finish, lets all hope Randy Orton is never in an Iron Man match, itll be an hour long chinlock

flahavaj

Was looking at an old Arn Anderson promo there the other day as well, most underrated promo guy of all time perhaps? He seems permanently overshadowed by the likes of Flair and Dusty in such discussion, by he was immense in his own right.

flahavaj

krudler wrote: »

And yet it keeps winding up being in top ten lists of best matches, WWE polls anyway, despite the fact its as dull as ditchwater for most of it, actually the highlight footage on the 2nd disc that came with the Wrestlemania 2000 dvd makes it look like a fantastic match when it isnt, just watch the highlights itll spare you an hour of boredom, the Rock/HHH ironman was great though, although still suffered from restholds every few mins, but its to be expected really cant expect a match like that to go an hour with fast paced moves from start to finish, lets all hope Randy Orton is never in an Iron Man match, itll be an hour long chinlock

Absolutely. I could name a list of ten or more one hour or Iron Man matches that were far better.

ShawnRaven

flahavaj wrote: »

Was looking at an old Arn Anderson promo there the other day as well, most underrated promo guy of all time perhaps? He seems permanently overshadowed by the likes of Flair and Dusty in such discussion, by he was immense in his own right.

Oh he was, but i don't think that he was underrated though. As far as his role in the Horsemen were concerned, he didn't have to do a lot of promos. He had Flair to do that. Anderson was the non nonsense tough guy. He went into the ring, got to work, wiped his hands and then left. Hence why he was known as the Enforcer.

His WWE work with Tully in the ring was exceptional, but Vince didn't feel either of their promo skills were up to scratch, so they lumped em in with Heenan. Not that there's anything wrong with Heenan doing your mic work, but they didn't need him, just like Flair didn't need him. But the direction Vince was taking the promotion at the time, their promo styles sadly weren't going to fit.

Shame.

ShawnRaven

flahavaj wrote: »

Absolutely. I could name a list of ten or more one hour or Iron Man matches that were far better.

Angle/Lesnar being one, Rock/HHH (save for the wretched ending), Benoit/HHH for the one hours.

Rude/Dustin Rhodes in WCW was pretty decent too.

flahavaj

ShawnRaven wrote: »

Oh he was, but i don't think that he was underrated though. As far as his role in the Horsemen were concerned, he didn't have to do a lot of promos. He had Flair to do that. Anderson was the non nonsense tough guy. He went into the ring, got to work, wiped his hands and then left. Hence why he was known as the Enforcer.

His WWE work with Tully in the ring was exceptional, but Vince didn't feel either of their promo skills were up to scratch, so they lumped em in with Heenan. Not that there's anything wrong with Heenan doing your mic work, but they didn't need him, just like Flair didn't need him. But the direction Vince was taking the promotion at the time, their promo styles sadly weren't going to fit.

Shame.

Damn straight. Easy to see why he was probably the ideal go to guy if you ewere looking for a great TV champ.

Can work a ten minute draw with a broom handle? Check.

Proven pedigree as a champion? Check.

Can round out your TV broadcast with an awesome 30 second promo to leave the viewer begging for more? Check.

I need to watch me some more AA as a singles guy.

flahavaj

ShawnRaven wrote: »

Angle/Lesnar being one, Rock/HHH (save for the wretched ending), Benoit/HHH for the one hours.

Rude/Dustin Rhodes in WCW was pretty decent too.

Punk/Joe x2, Punk/Hero 90 minute from IWA-MS (not that SR will agree!;))

Some great ones from 90's AJPW as well notably one between Kobashi and Kawada and Misawa/Kobashi vs Kawada/Taue broadway was beyond exceptional.

Ive a handheld of a Bret/Owen broadway from a houseshow that I really must find time for one of these days. Surely it must be decent?

ShawnRaven

flahavaj wrote: »

Punk/Joe x2, Punk/Hero 90 minute from IWA-MS (not that SR will agree!;))

Can't rate something I didn't see. :P
That said, 90 minutes for one match is something I wouldn't bother with, period. Unless i really needed a cure for insomnia. Most one hour ironmans put me to sleep as it is.

flahavaj

ShawnRaven wrote: »

Can't rate something I didn't see. :P
That said, 90 minutes for one match is something I wouldn't bother with, period. Unless i really needed a cure for insomnia. Most one hour ironmans put me to sleep as it is.

Its actually quite easy to get through that 90 min match, believe it or not. Danielson and Austin Aries is another one that went over the 60 that waas remarkably good. Think there were 76 people at that one!:p;):D

Machismo Fan

ShawnRaven wrote: »

Most one hour ironmans put me to sleep as it is.

I much prefer 30 minute Iron Man matches. There's a lot less drag in them, just look at the Styles/Daniels 30 minute Iron man matches from TNA in '05, phenomenal (if you pardon the pun).

ShawnRaven

flahavaj wrote: »

Think there were 76 people at that one!:p;):D

Must have been a new world record for them then! :P

gimmick

Just to point out that Aries Danielson, Joe Punk, Hero Punk were not Iron matches, they were matches which just happened to got that long, therefore giving them a different psychology. Think Hero V Punk was a 2/3 falls match? Nver seen it. Its on the to find list though.

thebeanz

When was the last 2/3 falls match in wwe, i can't remember.

I liked the HHH v HBK 2/3 match in 02, i always enjoyed their matches against each other.

michael.etc...

flahavaj wrote: »

Ive a handheld of a Bret/Owen broadway from a houseshow that I really must find time for one of these days. Surely it must be decent?

This would be quite the find, i'd like to see that. I've seen a fan-cam of a Flair/Bret broadway, but the quality was pretty horrid, though it did look like a decent match.

Can't say i agree with the view that Bret/Shawn was anything other than good- i thought it was GREAT- though i did prefer all of the other WWE Iron Man efforts that followed.

LOVED Aries/Dragon from Testing the Limit. One that gets overlooked alot in my book, is Cabana/Dragon from Gut Check which told a tremendous story. yes, like Hero/Punk, they were 2/3 falls matches... and they definitely benefit from the differing psychology as Gimmick mentioned.

I generally don't like those 30minute Iron Man efforts someone mentioned. They usually contain too many falls, and end up making both guys look foolish. Sure, we've seen some good ones.. but they're usually a disappointment within the context of the feud.