So with the HD package I subscribed to came a free preview of all the HD channels for two months, which meant WGN HD and thus I could watch Smackdown in all it’s HHHD glory if I wanted. But then Vickie Guerrero came on in 1080i and scared the shit out of me so I stopped watching and switched to HDNet for Inside MMA instead. Granted Bas Rutten looks scary as well at that resolution, but he’s supposed to.
On with the letters…
While watching many of the WWE DVDs, it seems Flair is always willing to say nice things about Dusty, but not so much for Hulk Hogan. Do you think this is because Dusty was a genuinely a better draw and worker than Hogan or that Flair was jealous of Hogan’s success with his limited tools? Or was it just that Hogan was with the rival promotion at the time? How would you compare Hogan and Dusty?
Well, Dusty appears to at least be a decent human being with some concept of compassion, unlike Hogan, who said that this guy (warning: yucky stuff there) got what he deserved. Good to know I can now the hate the person as much as I hated the character.
Anyway, despite their professional rivalries, Dusty and Flair were pretty close. If Flair had truly hated Big Dust he wouldn’t have agreed to drop the title to him. Yeah, they stopped seeing eye-to-eye after they ended up on opposite sides of the power struggles in WCW later on, but they both were fine with doing business with each other. I would imagine much of Flair’s problem with Hogan comes from his association with Eric Bischoff in WCW and all the problems that caused for Ric, but that’s just speculation on my part since it’s not like they’re all talking about it.
And comparing Dusty to Hogan? I’d actually call Hogan the better worker and he certainly proved to have the longevity. Dusty had that weird charisma and was never really a top-level heel, while Hogan was on top in both heel and face positions, so I’d have to call it a sweep for Hulk, brother.
Long time reader and triple crown book owner, looking forward to being a grand slam owner. I had a couple of questions for you. I started watching wrestling towards the end of 92 and am well aware that 93 sucked, but I think it could have been so much better. I may be biased because it makes up some of my first wrestling memories, but when it comes to hart/lawler, was this feud a legitimate draw? Did it deserve an actual payoff (or should they have let summerslam be the payoff? I am aware that this was one of those "keep bret busy" feuds and the lawsuit messed up the payoff, but I remember being way more into this than anything that main evented in 93.
The feud drew OK but it was never in a top position on the card or anything so it’s hard to make any blanket statements about it one way or the other. The payoff was supposed to be Survivor Series 93 with the Hart Family getting their ultimate revenge on Lawler, but as you noted the whole rape thing messed that up. I think that it was pretty awesome in 93 with the Vince Russo-ish booking of the Summerslam match, but it was definitely diminishing returns after that, especially when it dragged into 1995 with the Kiss My Foot stuff. Nothing else in the WWF in 93 had the kind of pure crowd heat that they did, though, even if the actual in-ring was a night off for Bret every time.
I’ve been watching the AWA’s ESPN shows, and we’re now in 1988. So here are some questions
#1) Were the Top Guns really that awful? or am I comparing them to the rest of the roster (which mainly sucked). The Top Guns were bland and couldn’t give promos, but they didn’t almost kill people like Rocky Mountain Thunder, or continually cut promos like Soldat Ustinov, or anything like that. So, are the Top Guns being overly compared to the sort of teams they replaced (The Rockers and the Rock’n’Roll Express)?
#2) Who/what made the AWA the most money? Big K, The Celebrity Interviews, Rocky Mountain Thunder, or interviewing amateur wrestlers? I’m guessing RMT made the AWA the most money since he probably paid Verne. Although the AWA would have lost money if they paid RMT in foodstamps.
#3) Which 80s wrestler constantly produced the worst interviews? For the AWA, I think it’s Soldat Ustinov. Ustinov’s godawful accent and the tendancy to keep giving him interview time every week makes him a strong contender. The Top Guns weren’t as awful as Ustinov. Paul Diamond sucked on the mic but had a manager. Madusa also sucked on the mic.
#4) Why didn’t Badd Company make it somewhere else? Were they just considered good since the rest of the AWA sucked? or was it a mullet-related issue?
1) I’ve gotten this question or variations thereof a lot lately, so ESPN must be highlighting a lot of Top Guns or something. I think that people, myself included, are comparing them directly to teams like the Rockers and Rock N Roll Express precisely for the reason you mentioned — they were marketed as a direct replacement for those teams and clearly they couldn’t match up to them. Ricky Rice was a decent worker and everything, but it was just the wrong time in the wrong place for those guys.
2) Everything in that list trembles before the might of Greg Gagne’s pasty white complexion and AWA TV title.
3) I’ll skip the obligatory joke about Madusa sucking on other things to advance in the business and just note that indeed Ustinov was bad, although to their credit there were a lot of really good promo guys because I don’t remember too many of the bad ones.
4) Mullets can only help, my friend. But I mean, they did make it, kind of, as the Orient Express II in the WWF, but I think their overall lack of success had to do with Pat Tanaka not looking like a star, because god knows people have been trying to get Paul Diamond over as long as he’s been wrestling. Keep in mind that Badd Company were a big fish in a small pond by that point, too.
I have been a fan of yours for at least 10 years now – Please keep up the great work.
I was just checking out www.wrestlinggonewrong.com (very cool site) and saw a match from Summerslam 2005 where Shawn Michaels was just openly over-selling for Hogan because of some behind the scenes beef. It is some of the most hilarious selling I have ever seen.
I wanted to see your opinion on it, and checked out the rant archives link, but the link is currently dead at Inside Pulse. Did you do a Summerslam 2005 rant? I would love to see it.
Also, since I am a horrible shill, I run a website called SeatsPro.com. I offer some of the cheapest prices on Sports tickets, Concert tickets, etc. (and an extra 5% off with the code "special") If you could see your way to giving me a plug, that would rule.
Nice stealth plug there, man.
Here’s my original review of the show:
http://wrestling.insidepulse.com/2006/08/19/42131/
Shawn’s selling was just playing the game, nothing more. He was the 80s meanie heel and Hogan was the conquering hero for the night, and it was no big deal. Maybe it’s just because I’m a child of 80s wrestling that it didn’t particularly bother me, I dunno.
Long time reader here, never commented on your board before.
Would now be an accurate time to take the "poochie" nickname away from Kevin Nash and officially award it to John Cena? Not in terms of laziness, but in reference to the Poochie character on The Simpsons. Obviously WWE wants John Cena to be so many things to appeal to as many people as possible, very much like the rappin’ surfer dog with attitude. Thoughts?
Well the Poochie joke with Nash was for one specific line in the Simpsons about Poochie ("Also, when Poochie isn’t on screen, everyone should stop and ask ‘Where’s Poochie?’…"), not because of the character of the dog or anything. And I can’t blame them for trying to spread Cena’s appeal to everyone in the fanbase, because no one creates the kind of fan reactions, positive or negative, that he does, so he SHOULD be pushed as the top guy. In fact, he should be pushed as the top face against Vickie Guerrero judging by the reactions she gets. If anyone could turn him into the hero of the entire crowd, it’s her. I wouldn’t pull out the term "nuclear heat" for many people, but for her I would. It’s an awesome heel gimmick and it’s just a shame that she’s not an actual worker because she’d make millions if she was.
Anyway, we’re off track here again. Back to the mailbag.
Oh, god, not an NWA lineage question to finish…
Hey Scott this is Poopy Sean from the blog of doom. I’m writing a column for the cool kids table on the NWA title being brought into ROH. I started thinking back about the history of the title and I’m good up until the WWF era. I know that Turner bought out Crockett and not the whole NWA. So who exactly did Vince buy the license from, and what happened after the angle failed?
Are we talking about the 1998 failed angle where Vince Russo humiliated Jim Cornette via the New Midnight Express? No one bought anything there, it was just a case of the NWA looking for free publicity and the WWF trying to appeal to the traditional WCW audience. It worked out for no one.
Or are we talking about Black Saturday? Because that was just Vince buying one specific promotion and the TV time that came with it. It was never said to be NWA-affiliated.
OK, one last one.
Have you watched much wrestling from the 50’s -60’s? If so, do you find that it’s too different from the stuff you grew up with to be enjoyable? Are there any guys from that era whose matches still stand out?
Most of it is just too different for me. Even 70s wrestling tends to be tough to sit through because there’s no emotional investment for me with any of it. I tend to like the "high flyer" style guys from that era, though, like Carpentier and Ricky Starr and Sammy Steamboat, because their gymnastic take on it is closer to the modern style.
Next time: Rocky/Angle, the Hall lawsuit, MORE Bret Hart, HHH on Smackdown, and other stuff.
