scouseman Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Just been watching Royal Rumble 1992 again. During the Bushwhackers vs the Beverly bros match I have always wanted to know who Jameson was? Was he involved in WWF back in the day etc. Some classic lines from Heena during the match e.g Bobby Heenan: "The only bad thing about wrestling the Bushwackers is win lose or draw, everything you have to have everything you have on fumigated." classic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatulent Dad Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 ...I have always wanted to know who Jameson was? Was he involved in WWF back in the day etc. ." Â John DiGiacomo. Nah, me neither. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapnut Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 1) Is Raw 3 hours tonight? 3) If so, does Tough Enough start an hour before Raw? I'm thinking of streaming it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swift89 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 1) Is Raw 3 hours tonight? 3) If so, does Tough Enough start an hour before Raw? I'm thinking of streaming it. Â Raw starts at the normal time and lasts for 2 hours, Tough Enough is on for the hour proceeding it. They may over lap somewhat though as the winner is supposed to be announced live on RAW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slapnut Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 1) Is Raw 3 hours tonight? 3) If so, does Tough Enough start an hour before Raw? I'm thinking of streaming it. Â Raw starts at the normal time and lasts for 2 hours, Tough Enough is on for the hour proceeding it. They may over lap somewhat though as the winner is supposed to be announced live on RAW. Â Cheers. Could've sworn they've always said the winner would be announced on a 3 hour Raw. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swift89 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 1) Is Raw 3 hours tonight? 3) If so, does Tough Enough start an hour before Raw? I'm thinking of streaming it. Â Raw starts at the normal time and lasts for 2 hours, Tough Enough is on for the hour proceeding it. They may over lap somewhat though as the winner is supposed to be announced live on RAW. Â Cheers. Could've sworn they've always said the winner would be announced on a 3 hour Raw. Â Yeah, I think they may be live from the arena during Tough Enough and then keep cutting to the pre-recorded segments. It's not a proper 3 hour RAW otherwise I'm sure we would have got it on Sky. I've checked the USA Network schedule and it says Tough Enough - 1 Hours, RAW - 2 Hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members garynysmon Posted June 6, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 6, 2011 ...I have always wanted to know who Jameson was? Was he involved in WWF back in the day etc. ." Â John DiGiacomo. Nah, me neither. Â Jameson used to be Bobby Heenan's sidekick on the Bobby Heenan Show back in the late 80's. He was brought back for a while in late 1991, but didn't last long. He was supposedly from New Zealand too as far as I can remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted June 6, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 6, 2011 He also interviewed Luna Vachon for the WWF Magazine in 1994, where he pretended to want to bonk her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InvertedSmiley Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Alright, I've just watched a Saturday Night Main Event from April 1991, the one with the match between the Ultimate Warrior and Sgt Slaughter where The Undertaker becomes heavily involved. This is right around the time that I started watching wrestling, and I still vividly remember the epidose of Superstars (I think) where The Undertaker locked the Warrior in a casket and took a sledgehammer to it. So there was clearly an on-screen rivalry between the two at that point - but the only match I can find is from the UK Rampage. Is there any reason why Ultimate Warrior vs The Undertaker didn't make it to Pay-Per-View? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted June 6, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 6, 2011 Alright, I've just watched a Saturday Night Main Event from April 1991, the one with the match between the Ultimate Warrior and Sgt Slaughter where The Undertaker becomes heavily involved. This is right around the time that I started watching wrestling, and I still vividly remember the epidose of Superstars (I think) where The Undertaker locked the Warrior in a casket and took a sledgehammer to it. So there was clearly an on-screen rivalry between the two at that point - but the only match I can find is from the UK Rampage. Is there any reason why Ultimate Warrior vs The Undertaker didn't make it to Pay-Per-View? From what I remember, Savage (who was "retired") was going to be reinstated at the request of the man who put him out of wrestling to feud with Jake and Undertaker. Warrior fucked off in the Summer of 91 as well, and since there was only 4 PPV's a year, it would have been hard to squeeze Taker vs Warrior in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reznor Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Alright, I've just watched a Saturday Night Main Event from April 1991, the one with the match between the Ultimate Warrior and Sgt Slaughter where The Undertaker becomes heavily involved. This is right around the time that I started watching wrestling, and I still vividly remember the epidose of Superstars (I think) where The Undertaker locked the Warrior in a casket and took a sledgehammer to it. So there was clearly an on-screen rivalry between the two at that point - but the only match I can find is from the UK Rampage. Is there any reason why Ultimate Warrior vs The Undertaker didn't make it to Pay-Per-View? Aye it should definitely have been pencilled in for Summerslam. The match made in hell was absolute crap as i've mentioned before, and it was also totally insignificant seeing as Slaughter had lost all his momentum and Warrior wasn't even part of the program until he was suddenly named in the main event. It was just an excuse to draw a line under the whole thing, which would have been fair enough if it wasn't eating into another main event program which was the focus of the summer. They could have ran the handicap match teaming Hogan with Hacksaw or Sid as a surprise debut - it wasn't like announcing him as special referee beforehand made any difference to buyrates. Â Warrior/Taker did have another match recorded in addition to the Rampage tape you mentioned, a bodybag match at MSG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted June 6, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 6, 2011 (edited) They could have ran the handicap match teaming Hogan with Hacksaw or Sid as a surprise debut - it wasn't like announcing him as special referee beforehand made any difference to buyrates. It was done to build tension and tease whether Sid was heel or face. Slaughter and his gang were bit part players in what would lead to Sid turning months down the line. Of course adding Sid to the match created interested. He was the WWF's intriguing new star and adding him to the match (and his stare down with both Hogan and Warrior in the build up) created a lot of interest going into it just to see if he was with or against Hogan. Your really understating Sid's involvement and overstating Slaughters involvement in the PPV. If you were going to give away Warrior vs Undertaker on a PPV which didnt need it (it was a stacked card anyway), how would you work Undertaker and Jake showing up at Savages wedding at the end which was a big memorable and important angle? SummerSlam was to build up the coming months, to see where Hogan and Sid went and to evolve the Undertaker and Jake alliance against Savage (which might have involved Warrior, but they had to write him out of the storylines that night anyway). They didnt just feud for a few weeks and then have a match on PPV like they do now. They were building Warrior, Savage, Undertaker and Roberts up for the long term. Edited June 6, 2011 by Ian_hitmanhart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reznor Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 They could have ran the handicap match teaming Hogan with Hacksaw or Sid as a surprise debut - it wasn't like announcing him as special referee beforehand made any difference to buyrates. It was done to build tension and tease whether Sid was heel or face. Slaughter and his gang were bit part players in what would lead to Sid turning months down the line. Of course adding Sid to the match created interested. He was the WWF's intriguing new star and adding him to the match (and his stare down with both Hogan and Warrior in the build up) created a lot of interest going into it just to see if he was with or against Hogan. Your really understating Sid's involvement and overstating Slaughters involvement in the PPV. If you were going to give away Warrior vs Undertaker on a PPV which didnt need it (it was a stacked card anyway), how would you work Undertaker and Jake showing up at Savages wedding at the end which was a big memorable and important angle? SummerSlam was to build up the coming months, to see where Hogan and Sid went and to evolve the Undertaker and Jake alliance against Savage (which might have involved Warrior, but they had to write him out of the storylines that night anyway). I know why it was done, but it's kinda straying from the point a bit as i had no problem with sid being there, my problem was with Warrior being there.. They could still have played the "whose side is he on" mini-story by actually having him in the match, grudgingly paired with Hogan, or as the ref with Hogan and Duggan - there wasn't any need to take the Warrior out of his programme that had been built for months as though it never existed. To a kid Undertaker tried to kill him and almost succeeded. I don't think i was alone in wanting to see the Warrior finally get his hands on him, even when in hindsight it couldn't really have had any decisive finish in favour of the Warrior. Â It's all very well saying the card did not need Undertaker or Jake, but he had established himself as the top heel in the fed over the summer. It's reasonable to expect that on the 2nd biggest show of the year, that feud would be represented in some way. It could've fitted in easily, for example shaving 5 minutes off the handicap match, the wedding malarkey, and 3 or 4 from the Hammer/IRS which i think went about 8 minutes. Â They wouldn't have needed to change a thing about the reception angle, apart from Heenans comments throughout the night. It wasn't happening during the event, it would have been several hours after any Taker/Warrior match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted June 7, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted June 7, 2011 (edited) But Warrior and Hogan teaming is a big deal and a very easy buyrate, especially for the main event of one of your top shows. And especially at the time. I remember thinking it was a big deal at the time. Logically, I suppose Warrior vs Undertaker would have fitted well. But logic isnt always the best way forward, especially if Warrior and Hogan teaming against the Iraqi's was such a crowd pleasing match. Edited June 7, 2011 by Ian_hitmanhart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted June 7, 2011 Share Posted June 7, 2011 It's just strange looking at it now from the way we have been used to feuds going for the last fifteen years. Nowadays if someone was locking you in coffins all summer, you'd definitely be fighting them at SummerSlam instead of being thrown into a Babyface Superteam vs Three Old Men match. It was different back then, though. I suppose there were loads of feuds that only got pay-offs on house shows. I got into wrestling after Warrior had been added to the tag match so I never saw any of his stuff with Undertaker and Jake at the time, but I remember reading about it in one of the first WWF magazines I got and wishing I'd seen it. Especially the bit where he locked him in a room with a snake. It was only last year that I watched it, I think, and it was worse than anything that happens in wrestling now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts