Talk Wrestling Online: Forum

Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 119
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    42
    Posts
    7,763
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by Aslan View Post
    Wrong. Wrestling was "big" in the late 80's and 90's because of kayfabe and all this crap that (thankfully) they've shoved to the side. Like I said, did you see the matches in Wrestlemania I? This is what you're saying was "big" and didn't happen by chance? I'm sorry, Tito Santana vs. The Masked Executioner is not my idea of successful.
    But it was at the time. You can't compare the wrestling of yesterday with the wrestling of today. Totally different people and product and fanbase. That match may not have worked today but it did back then.
    I'm a bit of a b*llshitter myself but occasionally enjoy listening to an expert. Please carry on.

    "Treat everyone the same until you find out they're an idiot."

    A rose by any other name, is just a pr*ck in a bush.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    hertfordshire
    Age
    30
    Posts
    13,333
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by Aslan View Post
    Wrong. Wrestling was "big" in the late 80's and 90's because of kayfabe and all this crap that (thankfully) they've shoved to the side. Like I said, did you see the matches in Wrestlemania I? This is what you're saying was "big" and didn't happen by chance? I'm sorry, Tito Santana vs. The Masked Executioner is not my idea of successful.
    But it was successful!

    Who said anything about what you want? Your 1 person, if you don't like, who cares? Millions did!

    And wrestling was big in the late 90's cause of kayfabe?

    Even though by then kayfabe was already dead?

    Aslan welcome to Wrongville. Get your facts straight sunshine. It was successful, it was big and it didn't happen by chance. You can argue that, but you'd be wrong.
    Turns Water into Funk

    Weekly Column: The Iron Jung!
    http://www.wrestling101.com/101/category/jung

  3. #23
    DC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Damien Demento's house
    Age
    37
    Posts
    31,333
    vCash
    500
    Aslan, you seem to have a hard-on for the opening match of WrestleMania I, like Santana v The Executioner was the pinnacle of the era. If you want to go with 80s matches, why not go with Hogan v Savage, Hogan v Bundy, Hogan v Bossman, Savage v DiBiase, etc, etc?
    www.transformersaredangerous.com

    "The eye of the pyramid never blinks"

    "And as the miserly, intolerant and unruly find their voice, God's wrath shall engulf all of his children in vengeful flame." - Revelations 27:15

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    hertfordshire
    Age
    30
    Posts
    13,333
    vCash
    500
    But wrestling match quality is irrelevant anyway. I mean one of the highest segments in wrestling history is a Mick Foley and Rock promo segment, it's not as if great wrestling=humongous ratings.

    Fact is what they produced be it in matches, superstars, angles, style whatever, was bang on with the popular culture, the mainstream, the casual fan whatever.

    Basically Aslan you should rephrase "Wrestling is in a good state" to "I like today's wrestling" cause if you're arguing what's a success and what isn't, you aren't going to win.
    Turns Water into Funk

    Weekly Column: The Iron Jung!
    http://www.wrestling101.com/101/category/jung

  5. #25
    The Beltster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Devon, England
    Posts
    20,845
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by Aslan View Post
    Wrong. Wrestling was "big" in the late 80's and 90's because of kayfabe and all this crap that (thankfully) they've shoved to the side. Like I said, did you see the matches in Wrestlemania I? This is what you're saying was "big" and didn't happen by chance? I'm sorry, Tito Santana vs. The Masked Executioner is not my idea of successful.
    Oh stop talking such f*cking shit man! Other people can try and play nice and be polite with you, but you are getting on my f*cking nerves with your inane bullshit!

    Nobody said Tito Santana vs The Executioner, the opening card NOTHING MATCH at WM1 was "big" and you seem to be completely confident that continuing to mention this match is somehow proving your point. What a laugh!

    How about you talking about the main event? How about you mention WM3, Hogan vs Andre, you know, the biggest and most important match in company and wrestling HISTORY!

    Yeah, match quality at WM1 wasnt great, but I dont consider guys flying around the ring like acrobats doing the most blatantly choreographed moves EVER and no selling everything because they need to get to the next spot to be good either.

    You dont have a f*cking clue.

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    42
    Posts
    7,763
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by Jung View Post
    But wrestling match quality is irrelevant anyway. I mean one of the highest segments in wrestling history is a Mick Foley and Rock promo segment, it's not as if great wrestling=humongous ratings.

    Fact is what they produced be it in matches, superstars, angles, style whatever, was bang on with the popular culture, the mainstream, the casual fan whatever.

    Basically Aslan you should rephrase "Wrestling is in a good state" to "I like today's wrestling" cause if you're arguing what's a success and what isn't, you aren't going to win.
    Jung there was nothing wrong with the wrestling of 20 odd years ago. It's just different than it is today.

    I remember going with my Dad to Maple Leaf Gardens in Toronto, they only got about 5,000 people into a stadium that seats 17,000 but it was a great night. You didn't have a shed load of kids wearing little green bowlers and there was not T-shirt shillers no merchandise of any kind was sold. I like both era's of wrestling. Although I must say totally disappointed with the way the WWE has gone. They have no competition to speak off really, if they did, they might actually care a little.
    I'm a bit of a b*llshitter myself but occasionally enjoy listening to an expert. Please carry on.

    "Treat everyone the same until you find out they're an idiot."

    A rose by any other name, is just a pr*ck in a bush.

  7. #27
    Senior Moderator John Hancock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    London / New York
    Age
    26
    Posts
    19,815
    vCash
    46470
    I still prefer the 90's style of working matches over any other time. I'd much rather take something intelligent and subtle like Bret Hart VS Stone Cold at Wrestlemania 13, or something GENUINELY shocking (in a good way, take note TNA) like Mankind VS The Rock at Survivor Series '98, or something truly emotional and making-you-stand-up-from-the-coach-for-no-reason-ing as Mankind VS The Rock on RAW, also in '98, than any of the "best matches" of modern times. I much prefer the emotion and story telling of then to the ~MOVEZ~, spots, and endless 2.9 second kick outs of now.

    Even something as impressive as Undertaker VS Shawn Michaels at last year's Wrestlemania was, effectively, just a big load of near finishes. Potentially the best indie match of all time, Samoa Joe VS CM Punk, was really only THAT impressive because they managed to last an hour without having a heart attack, which is actually pretty impressive considering the cardio of most of today's roided up testosto-freaks. Then you have TNA's self described best match ever, Christopher Daniels VS AJ Styles VS Samoa Joe at whatever PPV was, and, yeah, it was very watchable, but it was a circus show. A big loud of spots making people go, "OOOOOH!" and "AAAAAH!" like they're watching Cirque De Soliel. And those are the best of the best. Most of the time, it's obese people/stupidly jacked body builder doing slow motion UFC, before finishing it with an invariably botched power move, or skinny midgets that my dead Nan could take in a fight flying around like they're on E for 20 minutes, whilst trying to revolve in mid-air as many times as physically possible.

    Obviously it's a very personal thing, and much more personal than the concept of bad writing and booking, which think is a lot more universal, but, if there is a "new style" of working matches, I think it's sh*t.
    TWO Senior Moderator

    Boxing and MMA Forum Leader: Boxing and MMA Forum

  8. #28

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Terra
    Posts
    97
    vCash
    500
    I didn't mentioned the late '90's. If I recall Triple H got shafted when his buddies went to WCW because he "broke kayfabe" and hugged them goodbye. So I wouldn't say it was already dead and I'm nowhere near Wrongville. But thanks for calling me sunshine *thumbs up*

    Wrestling was popular in the late '90's because of the stupid Attitude Era. And yes, that IS a personal opinion and you don't have to agree/disagree with me there but most of the Attitude Era was trash.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jung View Post
    But it was successful!

    Who said anything about what you want? Your 1 person, if you don't like, who cares? Millions did!

    And wrestling was big in the late 90's cause of kayfabe?

    Even though by then kayfabe was already dead?

    Aslan welcome to Wrongville. Get your facts straight sunshine. It was successful, it was big and it didn't happen by chance. You can argue that, but you'd be wrong.

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Terra
    Posts
    97
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by The Beltster View Post
    Nobody said Tito Santana vs The Executioner, the opening card NOTHING MATCH at WM1 was "big" and you seem to be completely confident that continuing to mention this match is somehow proving your point. What a laugh!
    And your superior attitudes proves me RIGHT. You're pissed off at me by page 3 because I mention that match twice (on purpose) because its a funny match to mention. I just didn't feel like posting the rest of the card which was almost all complete crap, too.

    The fact that I can rile you and a few of you up in 3 pages proves that you're all jaded. You need to relax. If you don't agree with me, fine I never said you had to agree with me. But can the attitude which is 100x worse then any attitude I have (or actually, haven't) thrown your way.

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Age
    42
    Posts
    7,763
    vCash
    500
    Quote Originally Posted by Aslan View Post
    And your superior attitudes proves me RIGHT. You're pissed off at me by page 3 because I mention that match twice (on purpose) because its a funny match to mention. I just didn't feel like posting the rest of the card which was almost all complete crap, too.

    The fact that I can rile you and a few of you up in 3 pages proves that you're all jaded. You need to relax. If you don't agree with me, fine I never said you had to agree with me. But can the attitude which is 100x worse then any attitude I have (or actually, haven't) thrown your way.
    Dude you need to calm down a little. No one is riled (Belty is always shouty like that, you'll get used to him) but the rest of us are just stating our opinions. Listen we know we don't have to agree with you but I don't think that anybody here is jaded in any way shape or form. We just know what we like and what we don't. If the product is shit then we're going to say so.
    I'm a bit of a b*llshitter myself but occasionally enjoy listening to an expert. Please carry on.

    "Treat everyone the same until you find out they're an idiot."

    A rose by any other name, is just a pr*ck in a bush.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •