Mikeymike83

Yet to watch the event so don't have anything new to say on the main event or the other matches full stop. So, the reveal of Christian... surely they got the two ex WWE guys debuts the wrong way round? Christian debuting in the way Show did to tease a huge signing for the PPV. For that debut to be Show would surely be the correct way round and garner the desired reaction they've clearly wanted from said scenario. 

First one I had was the bright blue one in 1992. I'd only gotten into wrestling about a year to 18 months before that, we didn't have sky (at the time), nor did we live in one of the itv regions that WCW played on. So my auntie taping All American Wrestling and Superstars helped facilitate my fix. I'd not seen Texas Tornado before the sticker book, and was in awe of his pictures in the book!

After that, I got the pink '93 one with Bret on the cover. I needed one sticker to complete it, which was the top half of a Shawn Michaels image. My bloody younger sister, feeling left out, cajoled my Mam into buying her it too. Think she was bought a handful of the sticker packs but mainly relied on my double doubles! Low and behold, one of the stickers she pulled out of one of those few packs was that bloody HBK one which she happily stuck in her book. Still bitter about that bastard to this day!

After that, I had the '94 Undertaker one too. It came free with the May WWF magazine and a couple packets of stickers. I didn't collect many from that one as wrestlings popularity had dropped off a cliff at that point and felt a bit of a sad case buying sticker packets adorned with an emo with long hair on the front. The only thing I remember about it was the ridiculousness of the Diesel pages being littered with him in his best shell suit. We'd only got sky in Dec '93 so I had no recollection of Diesel playing cosplay as Harry Enfield's Scouser! 

20 minutes ago, jazzygeofferz said:

If memory serves 23 was headlined by Cena Vs Shawn. It had a Taker Batista match on the undercard which was better than I expected it to be. They also tried to celebrate the 20th anniversary of Hogan Vs Andre be recreating the bodyslam with Kane & Khali. 

Yeah I think the original plan was for a Hogan v Big Show match (this was talked about in late '06), until Show decided he wanted time off to nurse his injuries etc. Which then became Hogan v Khali. Not sure what the actual reason was but did Hogan end up needing surgery so opted instead to go ahead with that. Which then made it turn into Kane and Khali.

WrestleMania 23 also represents the last one I can fully recall. 24 was the first I missed completely (had a new girlfriend at the time which must have been something to do with missing it. Didn't turn out too bad as I'm married to her now). 25 and 26 I watched properly, but can't recall any of the undercard matches. All the way through to the present day. I barely remember what happened at last year's, let alone one from 10 years ago.

Someone made a good point earlier that I'd not considered before, I do believe the lack of a number to the event does hinder it somewhat. They really have all just been a blur since 2015.

On 2/4/2021 at 10:34 AM, Supremo said:

Gratitude Era

Not sure whether you coined it or you stole it from elsewhere... either way, I doth my cap to you good sir. 

I'd have an educated guess on WrestleMania XI being the first PPV that started the ongoing live showings plus a replay on the Tuesday. The only thing I recall was with the Rumble in 95 being interrupted with Sky TV adverts harping on about the OJ trial. After that, I don't recall there ever being ad breaks in any other show.

(My recording of Rumble 97 did have ad breaks but not sure if that was because my dad forgot to press record on the Sunday night, so ended up taping the replay).

38 minutes ago, Pier Six Brawler said:

The early 90s WCW magazine was definitely sold here in WH Smith etc. It was published by the same people who did the Apter mags. At some point around late 93 or early 94 they brought it in house and I think it stopped being sold here. Then it came back later in the decade. Towards the end it became an insider mag.

 

Not sure whether this was a popular/well known photo, but I swear I had that. 

My elder sister bought me a PWI once too, was from a second hand book store that had loads of old magazines in too. Like most who don't follow wrestling (at least back then anyway), she saw wrestling and thought it was purely WWF. Was from 91/92 ish (whenever Tito was transitioning to El Matador anyway), the main interview inside was of Santana talking of his Mexican heritage and becoming El Matador. I remember the rankings in the mag, and seeing all these established names I'd been familiar with but listed for WCW (And the like). 

There was also a set of trading cards which had a picture of a specific wrestler/match on the front with a 'humorous' caption on the image. For example, someone in a headlock would have a speech bubble with them 'saying' something like... "bleurgh, could have put some deodorant on". They seemed to be NWA/WCW heavy because I seem to recall Flair and Luger, amongst others, on these cards and recognising them once they appeared in the WWF.

I can Deffo get on board with some Wrestling Challenge eps. 

On another note, complete dunce here when it comes to computer/streaming jargon so may not be wording this right but, does the compilation of specific matches (I.e. the Best Of series) take up more memory/space for their servers? I get the appeal of lumping a specific group of matches together, but as they're already on the network within the PPV/TV shows etc is it counter productive?

Apologies for poor wording!

I love a bit of late 80's/early 90's Ted. I still want the role of him as WWF Champ eventually. I'd maybe go with some business dealings not going very well for him so he ends up (momentarily) learning the error of his previous ways by becoming a more humble character. In true dastardly heel fashion though, just as Dibiase looks like he's turned his values and morals around, those business dealings which ended up taking his wealth end up coming up trumps. Essentially a reset of his WWF introduction where he becomes even more pompous and villainous. Incorporate the ideas above where he surrounds himself with a group (sorry, but IRS makes sense. I do love the idea of Power and Glory there though). He eventually wins the WWF Championship and heads to a WrestleMania either against Hogan, or if they were determined to get Bret over as the next big babyface. Use Dibiase as his first Title win.

I love the early Superstars episodes too. My only issue I have with the uploads is that they seem to be focusing on a time frame ('93 onwards) where we already have Raw to fill in the gaps between the PPV's. Would like some of the TV content to be from the early 90's.

Other than that, all classic content is good content in my book

7 hours ago, The Dart said:

Carlito I'm guessing?

I think other than appearing on an episode of the Edge & Christian show, this will be the first time he's done anything with the company, since leaving.   Maybe he's sat in the audience at Hall of Fames, but I can't even remember him being a talking head on any documentaries or anything.

He was also there (HoF), with the other Colon kids to induct Carlos snr. Whatever year that was. Even joking about being there.

With Greg Valentine also, I would gold marker a triangle pattern on the inner thighs of him and have him as Hunter Hearst Helmsley. I had two yellow singlet Mr. Perfect figures, I'd use one as Jeff Jarrett. I black marker penned the Rocker Shawn Michaels figure to become Rocket Owen Hart.

Other than those Hasbro for Hasbro swaps, I used an old He-man figure. Black marker penned a trouser singlet get up, as well as his yellow hair and he became Diesel.

I've been ambivalent to it for a good 4 or 5 years now. Always little things here and there which kept me tuning in. And added to the fact I probably became a viewer of habit, rather than any particular connection with any one person/storyline etc.

This year's wrestlemania was my final nail moment though. Not particularly a fan of Drew or Braun (I know circumstances on that occasion), and to see them as the flag bearers. Nah, not for me. 

I've mentioned this previously, I'm not a fan of female wrestling. I can appreciate that once in a while a match will stand out from them, but I can't ever help but feel for the most part that they're the most blatantly choreographed spectacles going. The current batch have moved women's wrestling on so far from what it was, but I see that more a factor of how bad it used to be rather than a bar increasingly being set higher each year. On women's wrestling, do they deserve the spotlight/chance? Of course they do, 100% yes. But it just isn't for me.

I can't stand that the company has an influx of these moveset wankers off the Indies. It wasn't what WWE/F ever was. That's not that they shouldn't evolve with the times, but I'm sick of the skinny bellends thinking moves are what make a match. There's seemingly never any thought into whether it makes sense any more (psychology), more of a 'fuck it, let's throw a million kicks and knees in our matches', or let's bust out another superkick. For all the praise the likes of Owens and Cole get at being good bad guys, they don't half like to play up to and pander to what they think the crowds want. For all the blandness that is Baron Corbin,  the fact that he is the companies best, back to basics heel they have is astounding. A truly stinging indication of where the company is. 

They no longer cater for my needs as a wrestling fan. That's nobodies fault. It's purely their way of thinking more money is to be made doing it the current way. And that's fine, but it isn't my tastes.

For all the shit that the mid naughties roster got for being a cookie cutter mould, I can't think of a time that the 'look' is any less appealing. Skinny and under 6"? Muscular and over 6"? Fat and about 6"? Fuck it, dark stubble/beard, long greasy hair and black ring gear. That's what a wrestler looks like! They may have been a bit dross, but good God I can't believe I'm admitting to this... gimme some bloody Luther Reigns and Matt Morgan types. They might not be able to dish out the bantz~, but I tell you what, they at least look like they could rip your bloody head off your shoulders. You know like wrestlers should look like.

Fuck the oh so clever fans for being pretentious pricks. With their oh so clever chants. And their oh so charming selves. Shove your 'clap, clap, too sweet' bollocks up your arses. They are the most entitled, bollock head fans of any sport. And our own football, has shockingly bad fans.

Vince loves his HD, computer graphics production so much that he's finally succumbed and at age 72, give himself a bloody face make over. He's an absolute nutter too, who gets more and more erratic with each passing year.

Feuds and match sequences which last for about 6 months. It's not even good, well paced, thought out long term story telling either. It can't be, because they've decided they need 4000 hours of prime content each week. Even if they had every wrestler that is alive today under contract, they'd still exhaust every possible match and scenario within the year because they have too much tv time to fill.

And after all that nonsense which infuriates me (And there's plenty more reasons too), I'm still a wrestling fan at heart so I still give them nine pounds and ninety nine pence every bloody month because I love the old school stuff. And am a sucker for all the podcast/documentary type shows they produce. The absolute selfish bastards. Don't they know I'm trying so bloody hard to cold turkey myself off them forever now?!

21 hours ago, Louch said:

If you are fed up of Excalibur naming a move too many times in a show, it’s the move being used in too many matches that’s the problem, not him calling it 

I do not disagree with that statement at all. However, I think it's more his over sell of how he says it that is what highlights it more. 30 years of watching wrestling and I don't get tired of a bodyslam or dropkick being called 50 times a show. It truly is in that stupid delivery. 

Yes, the move should be used less. A lot less. But he doesn't need to describe it in that exact way every single time.

I'm not sure if it's more a critique of the general commentating standards (by myself) in pro wrestling today, but I don't mind Excalibur. Sure he isn't perfect, but he's certainly no worse than what's out there already.

My absolute bug bear, nah forget that - rip off my own ears problem with him is, 'tope suicida'. About half a dozen times each show. I'm not having it as a catchphrase (like Heyman screaming, 'gore, gore, gore'), a catchphrase should work or happen once an episode. It is overkill. (And yes, I'm aware it's been used as a criticism of him previously. But still, over a year later and it's still far too much).

On another note... solid episode from them. I would have preferred the sting reveal to be in the main event segment of the show. For clarity, not part of the Omega/Moxley match. But had they hung on a week, to put that Cody/Darby v Hobbs/Starks match at the top. I know he's a 60 year old man, but it's still another hook to put in front of people to anticipate the following weeks episode.

58 minutes ago, DavidB6937 said:

Of course he does. But it's not like Drew had a lengthy run before getting his Mania opportunity either.

And on top of that,  nor did E's tag mate Kofi. He only started to heat up in February? Didn't halt his ascension. Done right and correctly, with the right individual then all things are possible.

1 hour ago, RancidPunx said:

Completely open to correction on this and I’m counting full months .....

 

Heel : June 85 to Oct 87 ( 852 days)

Face :Oct 87 to Feb 89 (489 days)

Heel :Feb 89 to March 91 (758 days)

Face : Dec 91 (when he was reinstated after retirement )to Oct 94 (1,035 days)

Total Heel : 1,610 days 

Total Face : 1,524 days

 

Very very possible I’ve completely made a balls of it all btw....

I stand corrected.... partly!

I didn't realise how early he started with the company. I've had it in my head it was '86. But never mind, that bit I'm wrong on.

Personally, however, I would go from WM7 as his face turn. But, I won't argue with your saying it was his reinstatement as an active wrestler. All interpretive I guess!

Edit: I'm of the opinion he was equally adept at either side of the good guy/bad guy spectrum. I'd edge towards face though, he was my favourite good guy (And probably overall) when I first got into wrestling in '91. So my heart always leans towards the Macho Man as a babyface wrestler.

I'd say he probably shades being a face longer. Maybe as close as a 55/45 percentage split, but surely no more than a 60/40 split (the greater percentage being as face).

Came in as a heel. Turns face. Turns heel on Hogan in early '89. Turns face in earlyish '91. And remains that way til his exit in late '94.

Give or take months here or there, I'd say his face duration is roughly equivalent to 4 years and his heel duration to be roughly 3 years.

4 hours ago, Carbomb said:

I definitely see your point, and I agree that, in theory, a brand split should be possible with creative-enough thinking behind it. After all, it's simply another dimension via which to tell a wrestling story. But it's not just that WWE were shit at it because of Vince, but also because, any time any other companies with a budget and a profile have shown up and copied anything that WWE did, they tend to copy the same shit tendencies that made those concepts shit. The heel GM is a case in point.

Whilst AEW have demonstrated that they're both creative and adaptable, I don't imagine they'd execute a brand split any better than WWE did, partly down to trying to emulate them, and partly because I don't think even WWE really understood why they had the brand split in the first place.

Exactly that point too. I had it mind at the time I wrote my post out but obviously never got round to writing it down. And again, as I said I do not believe it's the correct avenue to go down anyway. But, yes, should they go down that route, to all and sundry it's another WWE rehash.

To slightly disagree again. Both occasions I listed had a reason, ones which I feel they genuinely recognised . 2002 version had the most bloated, top heavy, roster ever assembled. Everyone of name value was there (or came in not too long thereafter). And I forget the for instances but wasn't the 2016 one as some reason to establish original content for the network? I seem to recall something on those lines. I may have remembered incorrectly though. Albeit the shows being on that 4 week delay.

On 11/16/2020 at 2:56 PM, Carbomb said:

Brand splits are shit. WWE are the only promotion to have done them, and they've never really worked. 

I don't disagree with the sentiment that they've never really worked. That being said, when you have the mad scientist at the top who just constantly disregards stuff, more often than not for no other reason than he feels like it. It's hard to tell whether a true brand split would work or not. The few times they seemed to follow through with them (very first time in '02, again at the restart in '16), they did help more talent get exposure. Some failed, but others did flourish where they wouldn't have gotten a chance to otherwise.

My fear with AEW heading down that route is they are a young company. Other than the die hards that probably tune in every week, a new audience wouldn't be bothered with few recognisable faces. To a wider, casual audience you probably have Jericho, Moxley, Cody, Hardy who are faces you might know of. To then have to split that small percentage in two and thin out what star power (to a casual audience again mind, to those who have watched they have done a good job of establishing new names etc) they actually have. It's counter productive. For the record, I am not in favour of a brand split for this company.

Maybe there's a show that I'm not aware of, but they could really do with a recap type show (in the vain of your Saturday morning/afternoon WWE shows) to help bring that brand to more faces. Not just talking about kids either, talking about the dads who might have switched off years ago to never go back and watch along with their children. However, I would assume it's going to be given a prime time slot. And that, unfortunately, does not lend itself to a recap show.

I hope, I really do, that they don't run before they can walk. A few minor missteps along the way these last 18 months (which for the most part have been rectified) have been understandable given how new they are. But adding another prime time show which will over saturate their product ridiculous levels, could be a costly mistake that they may not be able to reverse.

One thing they could use Eric Bischoff for is to ask him not what to do, but what he wishes he didn't do or be forced to do 20 years ago. He's very vocal about the wrong decisions being made/dictated to him, so he should be able to identify those areas whereby history could be repeating itself.

So, first time I've attempted this. Hopefully I haven't balled it up!

(Decent) fan cam footage of a Shawn Michaels v Mankind match from a house show in January 1997. So, so different to their televised scraps.

https://youtu.be/AjGWTzdAjOI

MR. Hughes v Matt Hardy.

It's a shoot, brother.. match:

Michael Hickenbottom v Michael Hegstrand.

Erm....

Mantaur v Haku!?!

(Just seen previous page... so erm... Michael Hayes v Mark Henry in a blindfold match. Ol' P.S. blindfold is white. And shaped into a point. Like the racist he is.)

Easiest place I could think of for this particular work related conundrum.

Just over a year ago my place of work changed our shift patterns. We had a full shift made redundant, going from four to three shifts. The new pattern was for a 5 day week, 3 lots of 8 hour shifts.

A year in, the vast majority of the staff force are miserable. We're all more or less, a longer hour/more days off group of guys than a shorter hours/less days off. A question has recently been posed in a staff meeting of perhaps going back to a 12 hour shift pattern (with three shifts employed). It appears work are quite receptive to the idea, but want us to come up with a pattern. Is there any website out there that specifies specific shift patterns. Google searches just tend to throw out a 4 on 4 off or similar to what we're currently on. 

Any help or guidance would be much appreciated. 

Edit.. should add that a small percentage of the work force (less than 10%) are currently happy enough with the present pattern. Where do we stand as well regards union representation in this scenario as our F.O.C is in this small group and isn't open for any discussion trying to find a happy medium.

5 hours ago, Gay as FOOK said:

The 24 on this year's WrestleMania is out. They've got a five minute cut of Braun's history and story that makes him more than pretty much anything he's ever done on TV. How do they keep doing this? 

Couldn't agree more. Have never seen much of anything in Braun, even when it seemed cool to like him. But WOW, he showed so much to like as a real human being. I get it, it's easy to discuss and show emotion when it's real life happenings that you lived through but damn, surely this could have been manipulated into a character.

But hey, modern WWE. A company who are so out of touch that they make their 1995 output look like cutting edge, storyline masterpieces.

Thanks guys. Checked for similar period for 96 too. Which is a similar story. Assume that's the same answer for that too

Anyone know or have an idea as to why Monday Night RAW is missing from Aug 21st (last episode listed) up to Sept 11th (first episode back) in 1995 on the network? Its only two weeks worth but thought all RAW's were on (with exception to most recent 4 week spans).