Jump to content

Matches that changed wrestling


HarmonicGenerator

Recommended Posts

On 2/9/2021 at 1:45 PM, tiger_rick said:

Every Indy match for 25 years has been influenced by the Malenko/Guerrero matches in ECW. Those and the Mystero/Psichosos matches had a massive influence on the WCW Cruiserweight style. That's a really popular style that we've seen ever since with spots from Malenko/Guerrero blatantly copied and the dive heavy matches becoming normal.

Really popular with a diminished niche audience I'd say. Fucking mind numbing to bitter fans like me who preferred the business when the marks were out front in the seats rather than in the ring. And unappealing to a mainstream audience.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/9/2021 at 3:34 PM, Pinc said:

Rock/Hogan at Mania X8 shoulders a lot of the blame for WWE becoming the hauntological diminishing returns nostalgia show it has been for the last twenty odd years. There's a direct line that runs from that match to us getting Goldberg in a World Title match at the 2021 Royal Rumble.

Respectfully disagree. That match was a masterpiece in how two elite talents can manipulate and pop a sell out crowd using ring psychology to its fullest.

Nostalgia has always existed in wrestling and always been mixed into the big cards of all feds.

In my opinion the only reason Taker and Goldberg and Angle and Sting and HHH and HBK and Edge etc have been getting wheeled out in recent years is to try and pop faltering ratings and in the main they have moved the needle in the right direction because true stars are a dying breed. 

Rock v Hogan was the box office money match we wanted to see delivered expertly at a time when business was hot. The nostalgia matches these days are desperate attempts to clamber some ratings or buys in a time when the business isn't hot. 

Edited by IronSheik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A little off topic, but I think still worth mentioning, the concept of the winner of the Royal Rumble going on to face the champion at Wrestlemania. 

For me it's perhaps one of the worst as usually you can see the build-up of where they want to go at Wrestlemania, so it sort makes the Rumble match a bit redundant with the winner pretty much a given way ahead of time (except a few rare occasions). It's a shame as the Rumble could be a great opportunity to put over someone who doesn't necessarily fall into the world title picture. It also would mean that longer storylines could build up without having to overcome the Rumble obstacle too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, The Reverend said:

A little off topic, but I think still worth mentioning, the concept of the winner of the Royal Rumble going on to face the champion at Wrestlemania. ...

Further to that, 1992. Flair winning the Rumble and the gold. Helped massively by some of Heenan's finest work.

That dangling carrot of a main event slot at Mania for the winner, tag teams coming to blows, feuds intertwined in one match. Patterson captured that lightning in a bottle with the concept. Further augmented post-split with the "which belt will they go for?" and seeing red v blue (back when wildcards didnt exist and there was a proper split)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Goldberg vs Brock and later that night the 3 way with Benoit in 2004 was apparently the night Vince decided that making the brand the star and not the individual was the way to go. He was like "this non-charismatic chipmunk can get good reactions and these two are leaving, let's just fuck the old business model off."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Awards Moderator
30 minutes ago, IANdrewDiceClay said:

Goldberg vs Brock and later that night the 3 way with Benoit in 2004 was apparently the night Vince decided that making the brand the star and not the individual was the way to go. He was like "this non-charismatic chipmunk can get good reactions and these two are leaving, let's just fuck the old business model off."

It really did all begin... again!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
17 hours ago, The Reverend said:

A little off topic, but I think still worth mentioning, the concept of the winner of the Royal Rumble going on to face the champion at Wrestlemania. 

For me it's perhaps one of the worst as usually you can see the build-up of where they want to go at Wrestlemania, so it sort makes the Rumble match a bit redundant with the winner pretty much a given way ahead of time (except a few rare occasions). It's a shame as the Rumble could be a great opportunity to put over someone who doesn't necessarily fall into the world title picture. It also would mean that longer storylines could build up without having to overcome the Rumble obstacle too. 

It does eliminate the "anybody could win" element by having the title shot as a prize, unless they're going to take a wild punt on somebody getting thrust into the main event. They generally manage to keep it a secret (bookmakers' odds aside), but then there have also been moments like Heyman saying to Benoit that he's never going to win the big one at Survivor Series 2003 that have pretty much telegraphed the Rumble winners. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/10/2021 at 10:36 PM, IronSheik said:

Respectfully disagree. That match was a masterpiece in how two elite talents can manipulate and pop a sell out crowd using ring psychology to its fullest.

Nostalgia has always existed in wrestling and always been mixed into the big cards of all feds.

In my opinion the only reason Taker and Goldberg and Angle and Sting and HHH and HBK and Edge etc have been getting wheeled out in recent years is to try and pop faltering ratings and in the main they have moved the needle in the right direction because true stars are a dying breed. 

Rock v Hogan was the box office money match we wanted to see delivered expertly at a time when business was hot. The nostalgia matches these days are desperate attempts to clamber some ratings or buys in a time when the business isn't hot. 

I agree that the match was a masterpiece. I suppose my point is that it was so successful that it caused the company (subtly, but palpably) to shift philosophy away from sustaining business by frequently creating new stars to instead using the cultural capital it had built up in the 80s and 90s to sustain it into the future.

They have made some stars since then but at a much slower rate than they did pre-Mania X8, and the new stars they do create are invariably shown to be inferior to the stars of yesteryear. It started with them ignoring the mega-popularity of RVD the year before because there were just too many ‘Big Beasts’ left over from the Attitude era in the top spots, but they still might have gotten their act together had Hogan/Rock not validated their new sense that ‘the old guys are better.’

Its true that nostalgia has always been a part of wrestling, but the shift to being a company driven by nostalgia was a new development in the early Noughties which might not have happened quite as it did without the fans siding with Hogan over Rock.

Edited by Pinc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the push to nostalgia was probably inevitable once WCW had closed. They had to create new stars in the 90s because WCW had all their old ones. 

Plus by the time you get to the mid 00s everyone's kinda doing it. That's the dominant business model in entertainment. The X-Men movies are partly intended to cash in on 90s nostalgia (and earlier), Marvel arrives with a bang with Iron Man (arguably a less nostalgic property for most people) but really gets going with Captain America (which relies heavily on nostalgia, even if it's not entirely for the actual character), the Bond movies panic and do the "back to the books and the 60s movies" gimmick (which is always hilarious when you read critical reviews from the 60s and they're discussing how those movies are essentially parodying what's in the books), even now you've got shows like Sabrina, Stranger Things and Riverdale which all rely heavily on nostalgia. Disney are doing live action remakes. Star Wars managed to get positive acclaim with their very nostalgic seventh movie and then made a better eighth movie that people didn't like because it was too different. 

You could argue, quite well, that the entertainment industry has been relying on nostalgia for a very long time. But I do think its a much wider trend and probably an inevitable one for the 'E even if Rock and Hogan bombed. 

Actually, I think maybe you could argue Brock leaving for the NFL played a bigger part in the part timers coming back today. I think that's where the paranoia starts about creating new stars, which leads to them deciding its the brand that draws, which leads to them not creating new stars, which leads to them bringing back the old stars. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah those are great shouts about the general turn to nostalgia in pop culture around the time of Rock/Hogan which I hadn’t fully considered before.

I’ve been reminded of it recently getting back into Coronation Street after years away. The parallels with WWE are really striking in how all the ‘real’ stars from the late 90s have elevated status over the newer cast members. Its almost post-modern in parts; the viewer is definitely supposed to know that some of them are still in it from ‘when it was good.’ Can’t help but think that it all stems from a nostalgia for ‘pre-internet’ entertainment. Its going to be interesting to see if old serial forms of entertainment like soap operas and WWE can even survive once their golden age stars are all gone. Do they finally start making new stuff or will they hit a terminal decline when the golden age is finally exhausted?

Edited by Pinc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Rock v Triple H at Summerslam 98.

 

I think that match confirmed to the WWF higher-ups that they had two main event level wrestlers on their hands. Two people who could enter the main event picture over the next few months to a year. Taker and Foley had done ok to fill the void left by Bret and HBK. They both, along with Kane, gave Austin obstacles to overcome while the WWF found their next top stars. And within 12 months of their ladder match at SummerSlam, both Rock and Triple H had challenged for the WWF Title. (the ppv before SummerSlam 99, saw them face off against each other to determine the number one contender for the WWF Title)

 

If the match at 98 is a flop who knows where the WWF goes from there. Rocky might not conquer Hollywood and Vince might tell his future son-in-law, family or not mate you're just not good enough to main event. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2021 at 5:27 PM, IANdrewDiceClay said:

Goldberg vs Brock and later that night the 3 way with Benoit in 2004 was apparently the night Vince decided that making the brand the star and not the individual was the way to go. 

Very interesting point which leads on to these next points. I think you're right, Vince wanted the brand to be the star and therefore remove the leverage and cost of top stars. Become like the Ringling Brothers circus or the Harlem Globetrotters where people pay to see the brand. 

17 hours ago, Pinc said:

I agree that the match was a masterpiece. I suppose my point is that it was so successful that it caused the company (subtly, but palpably) to shift philosophy away from sustaining business by frequently creating new stars to instead using the cultural capital it had built up in the 80s and 90s to sustain it into the future.

New stars are cheaper and work more days than the stars of yesterday, and I still think Vince would always prefer to cultivate new stars. But time and time again the new talent just couldn't draw flies with a mouthful of shit and the older generation just seem to effortlessly command attention and have a charisma that can't be taught. When ratings or crowds faulter I think Vince has had no option but to bring back the established stars.

12 hours ago, Vamp said:

You could argue, quite well, that the entertainment industry has been relying on nostalgia for a very long time.

Great point brothoooor. Pop culture is obsessed with nostalgia. I certainly am. Every box office hit these days seems to be a remake or a cinematic release of a comic character from yesteryear.

9 hours ago, Pinc said:

I’ve been reminded of it recently getting back into Coronation Street after years away. The parallels with WWE are really striking in how all the ‘real’ stars from the late 90s have elevated status over the newer cast members. Its almost post-modern in parts; the viewer is definitely supposed to know that some of them are still in it from ‘when it was good.’ Can’t help but think that it all stems from a nostalgia for ‘pre-internet’ entertainment. Its going to be interesting to see if old serial forms of entertainment like soap operas and WWE can even survive once their golden age stars are all gone. 

Amen. Neighbours did the same, and was reliant on it's old school babyfaces like your Harold Bishops, your Carl Kennedy, your Toadfish Rbecchis and your Lou Carpenters to carry the show. They probably still roll out their king heel Paul Robinson to this very fucking day if its still going. 

The head designer of the WWF hasbro line recently said there is no longer a market for figures marketed to kids anymore, they instead market to adult collectors. So maybe it isn't the talent's fault. Maybe we're just an audience obsessed with nostalgia and the good old days? 

Edited by IronSheik
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jackpot said:

The Rock v Triple H at Summerslam 98.

 

I think that match confirmed to the WWF higher-ups that they had two main event level wrestlers on their hands. Two people who could enter the main event picture over the next few months to a year. Taker and Foley had done ok to fill the void left by Bret and HBK. They both, along with Kane, gave Austin obstacles to overcome while the WWF found their next top stars. And within 12 months of their ladder match at SummerSlam, both Rock and Triple H had challenged for the WWF Title. (the ppv before SummerSlam 99, saw them face off against each other to determine the number one contender for the WWF Title)

 

If the match at 98 is a flop who knows where the WWF goes from there. Rocky might not conquer Hollywood and Vince might tell his future son-in-law, family or not mate you're just not good enough to main event. 

Have to disagree. This match didnt change both guys careers, let alone wrestling. Doesnt belong anywhere near most of the other matches here in terms of significance. Rock and Triple H were the leaders of the two biggest stables in the company, and were already both super over upper mid carders, when that was still a significant thing. The fact they were booked as the semi main on the second biggest show of the year in MSG in a ladder match shows you they were already very well thought of. They were both getting main event pushes eventually, it was obvious at this time. This is just a good ladder match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...