humanoid92

My votes: Pontiac- 2 AC- 3 Toronto- 2 NYC- 6 Houston- 6 Seattle- 1 Chicago- 2 Anaheim- 5 Comments: Pontiac- I've never been a fan of Hogan or Andre and every time I watch Wrestlemania III, I find myself wanting to stop watching before the main event. I know what it did for the business, I just don't ever want to watch it again. Warrior vs. Savage, on the other hand, is an awesome match with legitimately touching aftermath. And I love how the finish came out of nowhere- they really put over the idea that a career could end just like that. Five elbows wasn't enough to do it to Warrior, but Savage was both demoralized when his elbows didn't work and gassed by the end after the press slam and splash, that all it took was the shoulder tackles to end it for him. They don't do intra-match storylines like this anymore. AC- Savage vs. Flair has always been one of my all time favorites. Hogan vs. Savage was a great storyline, but the outcome was painfully obvious. Also, they didn't really do anything special with it- it just devolved into the typical Hogan formula match. With the midcard booking at WM 8, and Hogan still around to save the day in the main event, I think a lot of people thought Flair was going over. The fact that they built the issue after they booked the match never bothered me because the whole thing was just a psych game Flair used to get into Randy's head. He was trying to gain every advantage he could for the match by making up this ridiculous backstory.... I dare say it wouldn't have made as much sense if they'd done the angle first and then booked the match. The match itself is a perfect example of creating a chaotic environment without using weapons or vehicles or police officers or any nonsense gimmicks. As for the pre and post-match promos, and the mid-match commentary, everyone was ON. Savage, Flair, Perfect, Heenan, and Gorilla all at their best. And the fact that they never paid off Liz with the centerfold is a non-issue because they were full shit the whole time and after Savage won the Title, Flair's head games became irrelevant. I've always considered this a ***** match. Toronto- Bret vs. Owen is my favorite match/feud/angle ever. NYC- Piper vs. Bret is another of my all-time favorites. Perfect example of doing more with less. This match is so unique from every other match Bret ever had. They just told a great in-ring story (and again, a brilliant promo before the match to set the whole thing up). I would never knock Savage vs. Steamboat. I think it's everything everybody says it is and I know the impact it had and its standing as "greatest match ever." I wouldn't argue it. But this is about favorites, not best, and Bret/Piper is one of my all-time favorites. Houston- Rock vs. Austin has got to be one of the most overrated WM matches ever, while HBK/Jericho gets a raw deal just because of who went over. There's this myth that Austin/Rock is some great match or something but I don't see it. It's a good, typical main-event style match that was indicative of the time period and that's it. It's way better than their crapfest at WM XV but it's also in no way a classic. I think Austin/Rock as a match is overrated because of the names involved and the show it took place on. If you look at the match itself it's really nothing special. My vote goes to Jericho/HBK, which I believe is just a superior worked match, and a lot more fun to watch. Seattle- I love Christian vs. Jericho and I'm glad (and surprised) it got this far, but there's no way I can vote for it over Bret vs. Shawn. A few weeks back when I made the comment about "mass opinions that are accepted as fact on the internet when they're really bullshit" the sentiment about the Iron Man is at the top of the list. Say what you will about the first half being slow, but it's a great, great wrestling match. The perception against the Iron Man has always irked me. Chicago- I think both these matches are tremendously overrated, but I'll go with WM XX because I think Bret vs. Austin is so overrated it's not funny. It is not "the best match of all-time." Bret alone had almost a dozen famous matches that are better. And that's coming from a huge Bret mark. I've gone into this at length before, so there's no sense in revisiting it. Anaheim- I actually like the WM 2000 E & C match more than the TLC at X-7. But I'll vote for it over Brock vs. Angle because I never really could stand Brock, and X-7 was the last time I was actually excited for a ladder match before the fact. To me, it's the last great spotfest of a ladder match before the whole concept jumped the shark.

When did Bret act like a prick as a face before, say, 1996? Unless you consider sticking up for your parents or refusing to fight your own brother as acting like a prick, I'm not seeing it.

I'm having flashbacks to when I sometimes couldn't order PPVs as a kid, so my friend and I would turn to the scrambled PPV channel just to hear the audio to see if we could tell what was going on, and Vince on commentary would say, "Did you just see that?!?!" as only he could. It was infuriating.

Anyone else unable to connect? I don't know what my problem is... it says "Ready", I press play, it struggles to connect and then doesn't. Is there anything I can do?

Thanks to everyone who voted and has left their comments in the first two rounds. Here's Round 3. The winners will advance to the sweet sixteen. I'll be back later with some Round 2 analysis. Just to reiterate for those just joining us, the point of this poll is to vote for your favorites. Don't feel pressured to vote for what's widely accepted as best. Stuff like money drawn, buyrates, historical significance, popular opinion, star ratings, clean finishes, do NOT matter whatsoever, unless of course that stuff is important to you when judging your favorites. Be biased... if you despise Warrior vs. Hogan (merely an example) then vote against it and knock it out of the tournament. And again, please don't bold your choices or list them. Simply write down the # of the seeds you're voting for as has been done in the first two rounds. For example, if in the Pontiac Region you vote for seeds #1 and 3, just write: Pontiac: 1, 3 And as always, I encourage comments and discussion. Here's Round 3, for the right to advance to the sweet sixteen: Pontiac Region 1 Hulk Hogan vs. Andre the Giant (III) 12 Brainbusters vs. Strike Force 2 Ultimate Warrior vs. Randy Savage 3 Hulk Hogan vs. Sgt. Slaughter Atlantic City Region 1 Hulk Hogan vs. Randy Savage 4 Diesel vs. Shawn Michaels 2 Razor Ramon vs. Shawn Michaels 3 Randy Savage vs. Ric Flair Toronto Region 1 Ultimate Warrior vs. Hulk Hogan 13 Twin Towers vs. Rockers 2 Owen Hart vs. Bret Hart 14 Owen Hart & Yokozuna vs. Smoking Gunns New York City Region 1 Ricky Steamboat vs. Randy Savage 5 Lawrence Taylor vs. Bam Bam Bigelow 6 Bret Hart vs. Roddy Piper 7 British Bulldogs vs. Dream Team Houston Region 1 Steve Austin vs. The Rock 4 Hulk Hogan vs. Vince McMahon 6 Shawn Michaels vs. Chris Jericho 7 Edge & Christian vs. Hardy Boyz vs. Dudley Boys (2000) Seattle Region 1 Shawn Michaels vs. Bret Hart 12 Shane McMahon vs. X-Pac 6 Undertaker vs. Ric Flair 10 Christian vs. Chris Jericho Chicago Region 1 Bret Hart vs. Steve Austin 4 Eddie Guerrero vs. Kurt Angle 2 Chris Benoit vs. HHH vs. Shawn Michaels 6 Kurt Angle vs. Shawn Michaels Anaheim Region 1 The Rock vs. Hulk Hogan 5 Edge & Christian vs. Hardy Boyz vs. Dudley Boyz (X-7) 2 Steve Austin vs. Shawn Michaels 3 Brock Lesnar vs. Kurt Angle

You're right that WM cards aren't always spectacular and the whole "WM level match" gets thrown around way too much. I can see where you'd want to speak out on the negativity, but I think you're overdoing it here. With the roster the way it is, I'm not sure how much better they could have done, but it still isn't the greatest lineup ever. In some ways the card is a stronger than last year's show, and there will obviously be a much cooler venue, but I think in the grand scheme it will be a fairly forgettable show... like last year's. You're automatically giving three matches **** before they've happened. And they're not exactly paper-classics like Flair/Steamboat, Hart/Hennig, and Benoit/Angle either. I mean, Lashley, Cena, Umaga, Orton, and a ladder are prominently involved. Personally, I think Money in the Bank is a terrible concept to begin with and the idea is played out. They should have quit after the first one. By this point, if you've seen one of these ladder spotfests, you've seen them all. I don't need to see eight guys, let alone people like Orton, Booker, Finlay, and Kennedy in a ladder match. I saw Edge and the Hardyz routinely killing each other in ladder matches SEVEN years ago. Enough. I think we all know what to expect in this type of match by now. If you want to call that **** then fine, but it doesn't exactly get me excited. I'm not intrigued by this match in the least. Then there's the Billionaires. I have no problem with the match- it's served its purpose in attracting some mainstream publicity. It should be a fun overbooked mess, but the overbooked mess I'm envisioning isn't close to ****. Also, I can't stand Lashley... the guy brings nothing to the table. This thing should have enough bells and whistles to make it a fun little match, but again, I'm not very intrigued by it. Cena/Shawn has potential, but do you honestly think they'll approach *****? I think that's overshooting it. I like the build-up for this match, even if it was just the old cold-war booking, but I've never been huge on Cena in the ring. Just don't like him that much. I don't see this match topping Shawn's WM work with Jericho or Angle. I'd have liked to have seen him against Edge instead. Not to mention the big focus of this show is Shawn and Undertaker gunning for the titles... you know, just like WM 12 and 13. There's just nothing there that's too compelling. Taker's streak vs. Title is fine, but the fact that it's Batista doesn't have me that excited about the match itself. So where you see a possible ***** match, two other **** matches and another *** match, I see one legit really good match (Cena vs. Shawn), a played out spotfest, an overbooked brawl, a *** match (Benoit/MVP), a **1/2 match at best (Taker vs. Batista) and three matches I really don't give a crap about, two of which will likely be awful (women's, Kane/Khali, and ECW). Doesn't sound like a can't-miss "one of the best in history" card to me. Sounds more like a middle of the road show that's had some good build-up. I still don't understand why they feel the need to do things like the whole WM III tribute theme. It's pathetic how they use their own history as a crutch instead of making their own new history, but that's a whole other topic.

We're in agreement with Kane/Khali but I don't know how you can expect MVP/Benoit to get 25 minutes if it's opening (or otherwise, really). Using your own logic of going back and looking at the typical formats, Rey/Eddie is the only recent WM opener to get more than 10 minutes and even that was only about 12. I'm referring to actual match time. Not sure if you're accounting for entrances, hype packages, extra-ciricular activities, etc.

I think it's smart not to put the Taker match on last because it teases a Batista win more. Makes it seem like Batista has more of a chance, but it doesn't necessarily mean he's going over. Other thoughts/observations: "Main event" and "final match" do not necessarily mean the same thing. I'm not seeing a logical opening match for this card. A lot of people are saying it'll be Kane vs. Khali, but I just can't see that. Benoit/MVP is a much better option than Kane/Khali, but it still feels out of place as an opener to me. I agree with whoever said that doing Money in the Bank again this year is a silly idea. As far as turning Cena heel goes, I'm pretty indifferent either way, but my question for those supporting the turn is this. If you turn him, who's the new golden boy that you're pushing as the top face? Not just on Raw but for the company as a whole. Part of the reason the Austin turn failed miserably is because with The Rock leaving, there was no other #1 face to immediately step up as THE guy. So if Cena turns, who becomes THE guy? If your answer is Lashley.... ugh. And I don't really consider Shawn and Taker as possibilities. Of course, they're consistent main eventers, but they kind of have different veteran-type roles these days.

I can understand some of the backlash on Rock/Hogan, but I hear ya. I hope more people vote in this because one match right now is tied. I originally decided the tie would go to the underdog, but I'd rather it not come to that. Stang, I don't know about a least favorite match poll. There's already a thread that did a pretty good job in getting all those matches out there. I think a Summerslam tourney similar to this one would be pretty cool but who knows.

Haha, ok, fair enough. By the way, just because I'm writing this recap doesn't mean the voting period is over, so if you're reading this and you didn't vote in Round 3 yet, get on it. Some info on Round 2: - The #1 seed with the most backlash is clearly Rock vs. Hogan. At one point, late in the voting period, it was actually losing to Money in the Bank of all matches. It ended up eeking out the victory by two votes (14-12). - Other than that, the closest matchups were Jericho vs. Christian over Rock vs. Austin (XV) (14-12), Bulldogs vs. Dream Team over Bret vs. Yoko (X) (15-12), Hogan vs. Vince over HHH vs. Owen (15-11), and Austin vs. HBK over Benoit vs. Jericho vs. Angle (15-11). - 20 of the 32 favorites won. - 62 out of the 64 matches received at least one vote. The only favorite that didn't have a single vote against it was Bret vs. Owen. There were two favorites that only had one vote go against them, those being Savage vs. Flair and Savage vs. Steamboat. There were three favorites which only received two votes against them: Razor vs. Shawn, Warrior vs. Savage, and Benoit vs. HHH vs. HBK. - Some of the most lopsided victories were from supposed underdogs: HBK vs. Jericho over HHH vs. Jericho (26-0). This, and Bret vs. Owen were the only shutouts. The WM 2000 Ladder match over the WM 2000 main event (24-2). The WM X-7 TLC over HHH vs. Booker (24-2). Bret vs. Piper over Savage vs. DiBiase (23-4). Undertaker vs. Flair over HHH vs. Batista (21-5). Angle vs. HBK over Cena vs. HHH (21-5). My personal thoughts: - Not a ton of surprises here. In my opinion, two of the best matches are #6 seeds: Bret vs. Piper and Shawn vs. Jericho. The former is one of my favorite matches ever, and the other is my favorite WM match in the last 5 or 6 years. I think HBK vs. Jericho gets a raw deal just because Shawn went over. The bottom line is it was an awesome match, and by that point, I honestly don't think it mattered that Jericho lost. And believe me, I'm a Jericho supporter. There were plenty of wins he deserved more than this one. He was already damaged goods by this point but win or lose this angle actually made him seem important again. I think they botched Jericho from the beginning, maybe more than anyone. But the fact is, Shawn needed that win too. If he jobs all the time to supposedly put new people over, it ceases to matter after awhile since the guy's always losing. See Foley, Mick or Flair, Ric. Once you're not strong anymore, it doesn't matter when someone beats you. - Good job to everyone for voting Christian vs. Jericho over Rock vs. Austin (XV)... I can't stand that WM 15 match. - I'd have liked to have seen Benoit vs. Jericho vs. Angle go over Austin vs. Shawn but I can understand why it didn't. That's gotta be my favorite triple threat match, even though the rules with the two titles are admittedly goofy. I just think they did everything really well in that match.. it's one of the few triple threats I can actually re-watch and not get sick of. - A little surprised Bulldogs vs. Dream Team beat out Bret vs. Yoko (X). If you look at the matches on paper, yeah, it's a ***1/2ish match against maybe a ** match but A) I didn't know anyone supported/remembered anything from WM 2, B) one is ultimately a forgettable match and the other is at least a great moment and one of the best endings to one of the best WMs. - I know HHH vs. Jericho was disappointing but I'd like to think it would have gotten more than 0 votes if it was up against a match other than HBK vs. Jericho. - A surprising amount of people (8) voted for Undertaker vs. Kane (XIV). I will never be surprised by the Iron Man backlash because I've seen so much of it, but I still think it's ridiculous... just like the people that are currently voting for Shane vs. X-Pac over it. I mean, really? I've said from the start that you're spposed to be biased so if you really do hate the Iron Man, you have every right to vote against it. I just don't believe the amount of unfair criticism that match gets.

This is right on the money. In theory, yes, it seems like ending Taker's streak is a great way to give someone a rub. But the way WWE goes about making "new stars" these days, they rely on these theoretical rubs too much. Sure, in theory making Randy Orton the legend killer and putting him over everybody on his way up will give him a rub. In theory, making him "the youngest Champion ever" will give him a rub. In theory, going over HHH at WM will give Benoit or Batista a huge rub. In theory, putting Chris Jericho over Rock and Austin in the same night will give him a rub. In theory, anyone that beats Mick Foley will get a rub. In theory, anyone who ever beats Michaels or Flair will get a rub. In theory, booking Lashley into this Billionaires match will give him a rub. But how often does it really work out that way? There's a difference between getting a rub and moving up the card (like Lashley is now) and really being put over onto a higher echelon. For a push to be truly effective, it has to be built up properly, executed properly AND followed up on properly. Not to mention the right combination of cooperation from those involved, the right timing, and general good fortune. You can't just plug Wrestler A into a cookie-cutter feud with Legend B and have Wrestler A win and expect it to work. The only thing that does is give Wrestler A a cookie-cutter push. It sounds like it's a great way to elevate new people, but it's not. The way they book sometimes, it's like they go with what looks good on paper or sounds logical in a vacuum. They rely too much on the names and the situations and forget what made names and situations special in the first place. Everyone that wants X to go over Taker to end the streak automatically assumes that it will give X a major rub, but that's not necessarily the case. Of course it could be the case. It could work great. But only if they pull it off right, which is much easier said than done. Taker's streak is just one example of many, where it looks and sounds like a reasonable way to give someone a rub, but the execution of pulling it off is a more difficult task than it appears.

I'd like to see this thread make a dent in page 2 before we get to the sweet sixteen... My votes: Pontiac Region 1, 2 Atlantic City Region 3, 4 Toronto Region 1, 2 New York City Region 1, 6 Houston Region 4, 6 Seattle Region 1, 10 Chicago Region 2, 4 Anaheim Region 3, 5

A lot of feuds back then didn't really have clear-cut blowoffs, which I actually like. A good blowoff is definitely necessary for some feuds and if it's done right it can be a perfect way to wrap up a story, but I really don't think a major blowoff is necessary in every single instance. Sometimes it's good to leave some unfinished business. As far as the Bret vs. America storyline goes, I kind of agree with cabbageboy. Even though I'm American Bret, Owen and the Bulldog were my favorites and I couldn't stand Austin. So I still rooted for Bret. I always thought it was kind of a lame, forced way into making him a heel, but at the same time the angle did intrigue me. Austin was getting popular (which I could not understand at the time... he was just a hillbilly brawler that sweared a lot... big deal). I didn't hate Austin, but I hated his popularity and couldn't understand why the crowd would turn on Bret, who had really done nothing wrong and was as good in the ring as he'd ever been. So basically, I agreed with every reason he had for turning heel... which is why his turn was so effective. He may have come off as whiny and bitter (which I wouldn't accuse him of but I know some saw him this way) but the thing is, he was right. But when people call it the best ever... I don't know. I don't even consider it Bret's best stuff, so how can I consider it the best ever? The thing is, it was a USA vs. Canada storyline, and yet.. there really wasn't anyone sticking up for the USA. Bret's main opponents during that time were a dead guy, a flamboyant ladies man, and a foul-mouthed redneck that only fought because he was an angry guy, not to support his country. The 10 man tag is a perfect example. Here it was, Canada's first family returns home, there's so much pride on the line, and who goes in to challenge them and represent the hated USA?... a washed-up tag team, a sexually ambiguous freak, an ultimate-fighter turned wrestler, and the aforementioned foul-mouthed redneck. I mean, three of the five had freaking face-paint. I know the Patriot got involved later, but he was such a lame character and an unimportant part of the whole thing.. and really, the only reason he got a spot like that in the first place was because of the nature of the storyline. I know part of the appeal of the storyline was that it didn't degenerate into the typical black and white 80's style Hogan angle of USA vs. Evil Foreigners. But as great as Bret's work was and as awesome as the pro-Canada stuff was, they never had the proper foil(s) other than Austin. And even then, the Bret/Austin feud had already existed for months prior and really didn't have much to do at all with Canada vs. USA.

Completely re-doing this year's card for the hell of it. In my universe ECW doesn't exist and the brands are blurred because, let's face it, they are anyway. This is just what I came up with after five minutes of looking at the current talent roster: Undertaker vs. Batista Cena vs. Jericho Michaels vs. Edge Benoit vs. Kennedy Lashley vs. Umaga Kane vs. Khali RVD vs. Punk Flair vs. Orton MVP vs. Booker Helms vs. Guerrero Hardy Boyz vs. London & Kendrick Haas & Benjamin vs. MNM (Regal & Taylor can sub now that Mercury is history) I'm leaving Lashley and Umaga, even if I still think it's a weird match. I don't want to split them off with other opponents so they get each other. Kane and Khali stays to confine the suck to one match. I guess it's a Taker/Giant Gonzalez tribute match. I'm keeping Batista vs. Taker. Streak vs. Title. It'll be an ugly match but there's at least a legitimate bit of interest there, so whatever. I still think Taker vs. Angle with Kurt as Champ would have been a lot better last year, but that'll never happen now. As much as I like the Cena vs. Michaels build up, I find it hilarious that HBK and UT are the two big World Title challengers heading into WM. Two guys that first won the Title a combined 27 years ago. Can you imagine if the WM 8 hype saw Pedro Morales and Bob Backlund gunning for the Title? I know it's not the same, and I would rather see Shawn and Taker in prominent spots over guys pushed too hard too fast, but you've gotta admit, it is a little weird. Anyway, I want to see Michaels vs. Edge to give Edge an acutal, classic big-time WM wrestling match instead of a brawl with a washed-up Foley who hasn't had a rub to give for years or a clusterfuck ladder match. HBK/Jericho was awesome, HBK/Benoit (w/ HHH) worked, HBK/Angle was good... HBK/Edge would be just about as good. Plus, this also eliminates the Money in the Bank goofiness. Michaels vs. Edge would seem to lead to Cena vs. Orton, but A) I don't want to see that and B) no one would buy Orton in that spot at this point. So that's where I bring in Jericho. You've got to assume Jericho will be back at some point. Throw some money at him. He's a huge fan of WM 3 and Savage/Steamboat so you might as well try to bring him back to be a big part of this show. He'd probably go for it. And when he does return, they might as well not fuck it up and use him the way he should be used. Which means don't fuck around with him and make him a midcarder. A returning, face Jericho against a face Cena who the fans could turn on at any moment would be pretty interesting, and given the way Jericho left, Cena is his natural return opponent. There aren't exactly a ton of top guys. Bring back Jericho. I wanted two legit tag matches with all the singles matches on the card, but that's hard to do considering there are barely four legit tag teams. If they could be built up properly, they would work fine. I haven't really followed Smackdown in awhile, so I have no idea if Kennedy vs. Benoit is played out by now. Same with Benoit vs. Finlay, which I also considered. I admit I haven't seen much of MVP, but I've gotta believe there's a better opponent for Benoit than some new guy in a bodysuit. I'd rather do Benoit vs. Finlay and Flair vs. Kennedy, but that leaves Orton completely high and dry and you know he's going to have to fit in somewhere. So with no Jericho, he gets to challenge Cena and Kennedy gets Flair and Finlay gets Benoit. The face side of the roster is really lacking right now. It's basically Cena, Lashley and all the stale veterans (Shawn, HHH, Taker, Flair, Kane, Benoit, RVD, Hardyz) and then everyone else is a heel. There really hasn't been a fresh new good guy in awhile. It's a shame, but there's really no respectable candidate for IC Champ right now. Umaga doesn't need the belt, and in my situation the Hardyz are uniting for a tag match. Seriously, on the roster right now, who's a good candidate for the IC Title? I don't see anyone. The whole card is composed of guys that have had their run with it and shouldn't have to contend for it (Orton, Edge, Flair, RVD), guys who had their run and turned into glorified jobbers (Benjamin, Carlito), monsters that have no place going for it (Umaga, Kane, Khali), guys that it's way too early for (Kenny), and JTTS (Masters, Eugene, Viscera, etc.). It's rough. I think someone like a heel Punk would work out well as an eventual IC Champ, but apparently he's got other things going on. Anyway, that's my half-assed card. I actually have nothing against the real card. Just thought I'd shake it up a little.

I think the approach to rebooking depends on how you look at it. It depends on how much you're willing to stray. Are you just sticking with who they were really hell-bent on pushing at the time and tweaking the rest of the card a little, or completely revamping the direction and just using the talent available to book a completely new card? The way I see it, those are two different ways to interpret the idea, but neither is necessarily better or worse. I like what you did with WM 4, especially with the tourney, which I think you re-did perfectly. But how are you gonna pretend a six-man free-for-all, #1 contender's match, or money in the bank ladder match are at all representative of 1988 booking patterns and was even close to a realistic possibility? Six-man matches and #1 contenders matches and ladder matches just did not happen back then. Same thing with your WM 5 card- I like it because it's different with a modern twist and it's fun to think about, but are you really going to tell me it maintained the booking patterns of 1989? It's not realistic at all. So which is it- do the re-bookings have to conform to the styles of the time, or can they be unrealistic with modern twists? I think either way is acceptable, but it seems to me like you're kind of trying to have it both ways here despite speaking out against the unrealistic booking.

Well, interest in Round 1 seems to have faded so it's time for Round 2. Thanks to all who voted in Round 1. There were only 15 votes, so please vote this time. It doesn't take long and I want to get as large of a sample size as possible. For those of you just joining us, this is NOT a typical "best match" poll. I'm encouraging you to choose your favorite match in each matchup. NOT what is widely considered best. If you've always hated "internet favorites" as Austin vs. Bret or Rock vs. Hogan or Rock vs. Austin, by all means, vote against it and knock it out. Vote for what you personally enjoy more. Be biased. If you've always loved Jericho vs. Christian or Bulldogs vs. Dream Team was a sentimental favorite to you as a kid, vote for it. All the bullshit like money drawn, buyrates, historical significance, popular opinion, star ratings, clean finishes, etc. do NOT matter at all. Do NOT feel pressured to vote for the more "popular" match. Just pick the match you like more. We've discussed the "best" matches a million times, but this tournament will hopefully lend some insight to the less-discussed underrated favorites of the masses. Let the backlash on the major matches begin... Oh, and I have a theory on how to do the final four or elite eight later that will hopefully make things interesting. I'll reveal that later. Just like before, to make it easier to tally the votes, please don't bold your choices or list them, simply write down the # of the seeds that you're voting for. For example, if in the Pontiac Region, if you vote for seeds #1, 13, 3, and 7, please just write: Pontiac 1, 13, 3, 7 I encourage your comments and explanations, but please add them at the beginning or end of the post, separate from the votes. I'll add some thoughts on Round 1 in a bit. Round Two: Pontiac Region 1 Hulk Hogan vs. Andre the Giant (III) 9 Bret Hart vs. Bob Backlund 12 Brainbusters vs. Strike Force 13 Randy Savage vs. George Steele 3 Hulk Hogan vs. Sgt. Slaughter 6 Wrestlemania 2 Battle Royale 7 Rick Rude vs. Ultimate Warrior 2 Ultimate Warrior vs. Randy Savage Atlantic City Region 1 Hulk Hogan vs. Randy Savage 8 Undertaker vs. Jake Roberts 4 Diesel vs. Shawn Michaels 12 Big Boss Man vs. Mr. Perfect 3 Randy Savage vs. Ric Flair 11 Rockers vs. Barbarian & Haku 2 Razor Ramon vs. Shawn Michaels 7 Demolition vs. Andre the Giant & Haku Toronto Region 1 Ultimate Warrior vs. Hulk Hogan 8 Randy Savage vs. Crush 12 Demolition vs. Powers of Pain & Mr. Fuji 13 Twin Towers vs. Rockers 6 Mega Maniacs vs. Money Inc. 14 Owen Hart & Yokozuna vs. Smoking Gunns 2 Owen Hart vs. Bret Hart 7 Nasty Boys vs. Hart Foundation New York City Region 1 Ricky Steamboat vs. Randy Savage 8 Hart Foundation & Danny Davis vs. British Bulldogs & Tito Santana 4 Hulk Hogan & Mr. T vs. Roddy Piper & Paul Orndorff 5 Lawrence Taylor vs. Bam Bigelow 3 Randy Savage vs. Ted DiBiase 6 Bret Hart vs. Roddy Piper 2 Bret Hart vs. Yokozuna (X) 7 British Bulldogs vs. Dream Team Houston Region 1 Steve Austin vs. The Rock (X-7) 8 Edge vs. Mick Foley 4 Hulk Hogan vs. Vince McMahon 12 HHH vs. Owen Hart 3 HHH vs. Chris Jericho 6 Shawn Michaels vs. Chris Jericho 2 HHH vs. The Rock vs. Mick Foley vs. Big Show 7 Edge & Christian vs. Hardy Boyz vs. Dudley Boyz (2000) Seattle Region 1 Shawn Michaels vs. Bret Hart 8 Undertaker vs. Kane (XIV) 4 Rey Mysterio vs. Randy Orton vs. Kurt Angle 12 Shane McMahon vs. X-Pac 3 Batista vs. HHH 6 Undertaker vs. Ric Flair 2 Steve Austin vs. The Rock (XV) 10 Christian vs. Chris Jericho Chicago Region 1 Bret Hart vs. Steve Austin 9 Kurt Angle vs. Chris Benoit 4 Eddie Guerrero vs. Kurt Angle 5 Shane McMahon vs. Vince McMahon 3 John Cena vs. HHH 6 Kurt Angle vs. Shawn Michaels 2 Chris Benoit vs. HHH vs. Shawn Michaels 7 Undertaker vs. HHH Anaheim Region 1 The Rock vs. Hulk Hogan 8 Money In The Bank (XXI) 4 HHH vs. Booker T 5 Edge & Christian vs. Hardy Boyz vs. Dudley Boyz (X-7) 3 Brock Lesnar vs. Kurt Angle 6 The Rock & Mick Foley vs. Ric Flair, Batista & Randy Orton 2 Steve Austin vs. Shawn Michaels 7 Chris Benoit vs. Chris Jericho vs. Kurt Angle

A little bit of a counter to Hawk's WM VII. This show is still in the Sports Arena because I think Hogan vs. Warrior II would have been the only thing that even had a chance to fill up 80% of the Coliseum. And I don't want to book a card with Hogan vs. Warrior II because I'm sticking with Warrior vs. Savage. My card: - Rockers vs. Nasty Boys Opener to get the crowd going. The winner depends on who you'd want to push more subsequently. I vote for the Rockers, but the braintrust surely would have gone with the Nastys in this one. - Intercontinental Title: Bret Hart vs. Mr. Perfect Either move things up here with Bret taking the IC Title as he did at Summerslam, or have this initial match with Perfect barely retaining but Hart giving him the match of his life, and then do the re-match with Bret winning at Summerslam. - Undertaker vs. Jimmy Snuka This was a good squash. - Ted DiBiase vs. Virgil Possibly for the Million Dollar Title. Either you go with the happy ending blowoff with what really happened at Summerslam, or you go with what actually happened at WM. - Blindfold Match: Jake Roberts vs. Rick Martel I like this concept. It's not like they proceeded to run ten subsequent blindfold matches. It was just this one. And it fit the storyline and it was plenty unique and it was fun for the crowd. I've got no problem with this match. - Career Match: Ultimate Warrior vs. Randy Savage Like a lot of people, I'm a sucker for this one. - Big Boss Man vs. The Mountie You can still do the hilarious jailhouse match at Summerslam. Boss Man wins this one by DQ when the Mountie shocks the crap out of him with the ol' cattleprod. And there's the big kickoff to the feud. - Tag Team Titles: Legion of Doom vs. Demolition Even if adding Crush was the kiss of death, Demolition was still plenty over in the fall of '90. This feud never got the proper blowoff it deserved. Wouldn't have been difficult to drag this out until WM. - Flag Match: Jim Duggan vs. Sgt. Slaughter Yeah, Flag Matches are really lame. Take or leave the gimmick. But the Slaughter stuff would have been much better on a smaller scale and Duggan was the perfect guy to oppose him. - WWF Title: Hulk Hogan vs. Earthquake As far as the WWF Title program goes, there are a few schools of thought. A) you get a transitional champion to take the belt off Warrior and put it on Hogan. They went with Slaughter. Other candidates could have been Earthquake or Rude, and even Savage, DiBiase, or Perfect, if they wanted to go that route. B) Warrior jobs the belt back to Hogan. This undoes everything WM 6 did, and really, if you're going that route you might as well just book Warrior vs. Hogan II for WM 7 and do it there. C) Warrior retains the Title and his match with Savage becomes both a Title match and Career Match to close the show. That puts two huge stories into one match, which gives you less mileage, but would still make sense because Savage was initially willing to do just about anything to get a Title shot from the Warrior. For the purposes of this match and shaking things up, I'm giving Quake Slaughter's transitional reign. Although, I actually like the idea of this match better with Hogan entering as Champion. Regardless, Hogan had never pinned Quake and their feud had never really been blown off properly. The Hogan vs. Big Man formula was tired by this point, but Quake always made Hogan extra-watchable, at least to me. Champion or not, maybe you have Quake win the '91 Rumble to provide him with even more credibility leading up to this.

It is interesting how that works. I'm actually kind of the same way, and I have a few friends that say the same thing. I was never into the character at all as a kid, but looking back now, it's such a hilarious shtick. And yeah, they would have wisely moved the card around, but I bet you if they did that people would still be bitching today because "The Title match was in the midcard and it was the Hogan show in the final match." Of course, they essentially did the same thing at WM 8 and didn't even have the excuse of putting a heel over in the first match, and no one complains about that. Not that they should. Just saying.

My votes: Pontiac 9, 12, 3, 2 AC 1, 4, 3, 2 Toronto 1, 13, 6, 2 NYC 1, 5, 6, 2 Houston 8, 12, 6, 7 Seattle 1, 12, 6, 10 Chicago 9, 4, 6, 2 Anaheim 1, 5, 3, 7 My thoughts: - Have never cared for Hogan vs. Andre. Even though WM 11 wasn't Bret's strongest showing, I'll take that instead. - A weak matchup leads to the Busters and Strike Force getting way farther than they ever should have. - Don't care for either Hogan vs. Slaughter or the WM 2 Battle Royale, but I don't care much for battle royales. - I'm a fan of Taker vs. Jake, but not over Hulk vs. Savage. - I've never liked the Boss Man vs. Perfect match, even though I like all those involved. Thought it was very disappointing. - I'm a fan of Savage vs. Crush (few are), but not over Hulk vs. Warrior - Towers vs. Rockers gets my vote but it's going way further than it has any right to. - I love Owen, but there's something about the old-school Maniacs vs. Money Inc. match that I've always liked. So I'll go with that. - Bret vs. Piper is one of my favorite matches ever... probably in my personal top 5 if I stopped to think about it. - I love Dream Team vs. Bulldogs, but I vote for Bret vs. Yoko because I consider the post-match moment to be included and that is easily Bret's crowning moment. - I don't particularly think Edge vs. Foley is great, but I think Rock vs. Austin X-7 is way overrated, so I'm voting against it. Like I said, be biased. - Shawn vs. Jericho is easily my favorite WM match of the last 5 years. - I like the 2000 "TLC 0" better more than their subsequent matches. - I love the Bret vs. Shawn Iron Man. - Don't like Batista vs. HHH or Rey vs. Randy vs. Kurt. - I love Christian vs. Jericho and think Rock vs. Austin XV is a huge, huge, huge pile of garbage. Come on, folks, this Christian vs. Jericho match just needs a tiny bit more support to pull this one off. Vote now. - Kurt vs. Benoit is a bit overrated, although still really good. Austin vs. Bret is really, really overrated even though it's still really good. - I think Kurt vs. Michaels is overrated, but it's worlds better than Cena vs. HHH. - Again, the WM XX triple threat is overrated, but i like it a lot more than Taker vs. HHH, which I actually also kinda like. Thanks to all those that have voted so far, and especially those that included comments. Keep on voting... I'll put up the next round over the weekend, so if you haven't voted yet, get your picks in now. There are quite a few really close matchups here. You could be the difference.

Wow, didn't realize my comments would inspire a new thread. There are a lot of good comments so far, but just to clairfy my original point a little, I wasn't necessarily talking about fans getting online and learning about the ins and outs of backstage politics and the "secrets" of the business. I was more concerned with the mass perception of certain past on-air occurences. Although, certainly, fans discovering knowledge about the politics and booking decisions that are related to some of those occurences definitely contribute to those perceptions. Re: the issue of "good" vs. "bad" wrestling and being an "8 year old mark." Not exactly what I was getting at with my comments. This doesn't really apply to me because I may have been a kid but I certainly could distinguish between the two rather easily. I always liked the matches with guys like Savage, Steamboat, Tully & Arn, Perfect, DiBiase, Bret, Shawn, Marty, Waltman, Jarrett, Bulldog, Owen, etc. over matches with Hogan, Andre, Bundy, Warrior, Luger, Nash, etc. Even as an 8 or 9 year old I was well aware of the good workers vs. the bad ones, even if I wasn't familiar with terms like "workrate" and "workers." For the guy who said that he was 22 when Ahmed Johnson debuted and could recognize how bad he was, I'm with you. I was only 12 back then, but I never liked the guy because I could just tell he wasn't that good. Even when I was younger, Hogan vs. Savage, Hogan vs. Warrior, and Hogan vs. Earthquake were about the only Hogan matches I thought were any good. Well, good for Hogan at least. I never really "got" Hogan as a kid. This is one of the reasons I love the '92 era and beyond... it was the first time I ever really cared about the main events. Re: WM IX. I'm glad some people can see my side of the argument with this one. I agree that the aftermath of Hogan's reign was far more damaging than the actual finish at the PPV. And the point about the story coming together full circle and Bret's moment at WM X is dead on. As ill-advised as all the Luger stuff may have been, everything after Summerslam '93 came together beautifully at WM X, with the clause in the SS contract, the Hart Family feud, the Rumble tie, and the multiple WM X storylines. Re: Yoko or Shawn walking out of WM 9 and 11 respectively as Champions. I don't know about this one. Once Bret vs. Yoko was the direction they set out in, I still think the real outcome was for the best. If they had pegged Bret to be their guy post-WM, then we should have seen Bret vs. Perfect, Savage, Flair, or even Hogan to put him over. But once they chose Yoko as the guy, they made the right move. Yes, they could have had Yoko walk out of WM as Champion but that would've felt flat. Especially in the final match. And especially after he had just won the Rumble at the previous PPV. Heels getting the last laugh barely ever ended PPVs in those days and it had never happened at WM. I know they were pushing Yoko huge, but that might have been overkill. As for WM 11, I was convinced Shawn was going over as well, especially with the LT "send the fans home happy match" closing the show. Oh, and the "Shawn shouldn't be the heel against Nash" assertion is pure bullshit. He was the smarmy heel and he was great at it. He used Nash to his advantage and when Shawn's back was hurt after WM (a match he lost when Nash was forced to the back), Nash took "his" IC Title and stole "his" spotlight. Shawn manipulated him into going for the Tag Titles with him to leech off his success, and throughout '94 he let Nash do all the work while he took it easy. Then he cost him two PPVs in a row with the "accidental" superkick. It was a perfectly fine storyline. Shawn as the face would have sucked. The "small guy" theory is bullshit. Shawn had been a heel for over 3 years at that point. How many of his opponents were bigger than him? A lot. Hell, Razor was a lot bigger than him and no one complained about that. So just because Shawn is smaller than Diesel means he can't play heel against him? Please. Re: Nash's Title reign. I never really liked Nash that much and didn't like his reign at the time. Ramsus is dead on- it was fine to begin with, but once it lost steam with the Sid stuff it just dragged on forever. The Mabel Title shot had disaster written all over it well before it actually happened. By the time the stuff with Bulldog started, that reign was just begging to be mercy-killed. When Bret finally won the Title back at Survivor Series, it was more like an "It's about damn time" moment than anything else. I like Shawn's '95 character and momentum more than the half-assed boyhood dream stuff too but I do kinda like that they dragged it out a little. He seemed that much more credible when he did eventually get it. If anything, using Bret as a transition champ kind of made Bret seem like a lame duck, but I don't think it hurt Shawn. That said, I wouldn't have been opposed to Shawn mercy-killing Nash's reign in the summer of '95 (although it could have just as easily been done by Bret much earlier). Here's some more lame fantasy booking, but: put Razor over Jarrett for the IC Title instead of Shawn, and blowoff that feud. And have Sid transition the belt to Shawn, or have Shawn go over Nash in a face-face match, possibly with Nash turning heel afterwards. And although it would have helped and saved the PPV from being a joke, Shawn didn't have to win KOTR in order to accomplish this. There are plenty of these "the internet consensus is such an exaggeration" examples, but I'll get to that later.

The official numbers for Summer Slam, from Meltzer, are 78,927 and 75,000 paid, though it was announced as 80,355. Yeah, I can't see the WWF downplaying their numbers under any circumstances. I mean, it's pro wrestling. Whether it's a wrestler's weight or an attendance figure, they've been known to exaggerate, but I've never seen them go the opposite way.

Eh, I'm not that awesome. Believe me, there are plenty of things I'm negative about. A lot of people that read my WWF 1997 bashing awhile back can confirm that. I don't post often (or at least I didn't until recently) so when I do post, I like to speak out about things I think are remembered unfairly (be it positive or negative) by the masses. It's not as much about me being positive as it is about my theory that the popular opinion on a lot of stuff from the pre-internet era has been heavily influenced by a few select people and taken as widely accepted fact instead of the opinion of a select few. I assume that a lot of the "smark community" got online for the first time in the late 90's, and all of a sudden there was an opportunity to discuss and read about wrestling's past. An outlet that most kids didn't have while they were fans from the mid 80's up until the dawn of the Attitude era. Which is great. But in that formative period, I think a lot of people started to take the popular opinion and just accept it as fact. The opinions of Keith, Meltzer, and all the other prominent writers seemed to stick as fact. I have no problem with those guys at all. I just think a small number of writers heavily influenced the way the internet masses view history, and those masses usually don't even realize it. As far as everything from the internet era goes, it's a different story. Yeah, there's the HHH criticism that pretty much everyone is on board with, but because everything from the late 90's on has taken place when there's an outlet to discuss it as it's happening, the issues are treated differently. Yes, popular opinion still rules, but we're at least all an active part of the process as that opinion is being formed. With the pre-97 stuff, those opinions were kind of just handed to us after the fact. And for whatever reason, no one seems to challenge any of them. There are a few issues that have achieved a certain status where it's blasphemous to disagree with the popular opinion, and if you disagree with it you're automatically a moron and you can't possibly be making any sense even if you make a strong argument. The WM 9 issue from above is an example of one of those issues. Honestly, I'm not saying the WM 9 finish was the greatest thing ever. Far, far from it. But is anything I said in the post I made earlier untrue? I've yet to see someone actually point out what's wrong with my position. But no, that's one of the examples of something that no one is allowed to challenge. The perception that the whole thing was a huge pile of shit is bulletproof. No one will even consider that what they've believed (or been told to believe) all this time may actually be tremendously exaggerated. I feel this way about other things too, whether the issue in question is criticized or praised by the masses. So basically, I think people were so overwhelmed by the online community and so eager to get their "smark card" that they were willing to embrace the generally accepted version of history without thinking too much about it. And now that version of history has become so ingrained in everyone's thinking that to express an opinion that goes the other way on anything pre-1998 is often considered unacceptable. Just my theory. I'm pretty sure in the Youtube thread somewhere there's a link to a USWA match from that time period, pitting Bret and Owen (as heels) vs. Jarrett and Lawler. And then Gonzalez gets involved in the end. It's so bizarre to watch a '93 version of heel Bret in Memphis, not to mention Gonzalez's involvement. If you can find it, it's definitely worth a look.

This one isn't so much a question, but a clarification. I'm sure if we sift through all the pages of this thread, this subject has been brought up somewhere... Much has been made of Jesse Ventura going off on Hulk Hogan on commentary during the main event at Wrestlemania V. A lot of people thought it seemed out of place that Jesse was overly angry and critical of Hulk constantly throughout the match. It went beyond the usual "heel announcer doesn't agree with top face" to the point where a lot of people were convinced Jesse was shooting on him. I never bought into the shooting part, but it did seem weird that he was so pissed at him for no apparent reason. Well, I just saw a clip that clears it all up. On the version of the show that I watched as a kid, they edited out a lot of stuff around intermission. But apparently there's a segment that includes Mean Gene shilling Hogan's upcoming movie, No Holds Barred. Then Sean Mooney (off his game that night) interviews Donald Trump (which I definitely do remember seeing) and then throws it back to Gorilla and Jesse in the booth. Ventura flips out and cuts a heel promo on Hogan right then and there, because Jesse was a wannabe movie star and he felt Hogan was invading his turf in Hollywood by making this movie. Good stuff... Ventura gets so pissed off that Gorilla looks like he's about to crack up legit by the end of it. Anyway, I had never seen this part of the show before, and it definitely puts Jesse's comments during the main event into context. He was simply pissed at Hogan from the earlier No Holds Barred announcement. Maybe this isn't news to some of you, because I think the clip I saw comes from the WM DVD boxset. But it was news to me, so I figure there are others that were in the dark on this one too. For those interested, the events in question occur during the last couple minutes of this clip: http://www.dailymotion.com/Galaxiawrestlin..._wrestlemaniav8 (On a sidenote, that user has WMs 1-5 posted in their entirety in 10-15 minute increments.)

Some thoughts on Round 1, as promised: - Several matches came just one vote away from pulling off the upset... The WM 4 Battle Royale lost to the WM 2 Battle Royale by one vote. The Steiners vs. Headshrinkers lost to Hogan & T vs. Piper & Orndorff by just one vote. Rey Mysterio vs. Matt Hardy came one vote away from taking out Batista vs. HHH. The Hardcore Battle Royale came one vote away from taking out Rey vs. Orton vs. Angle. - In the Toronto, Seattle, and Houston regions, seven of the eight underdogs recieved at least one vote. - On the 1985-1995 side, 55 of the 64 matches recieved at least one vote. - On the 1996-2006 side, 54 of the 64 matches recieved at least one vote. - Three #1 seeds had votes registered against them. (Rock vs. Austin (X-7), Hogan vs. Rock, and Warrior vs. Hogan) - The five strongest upsets were: Boss Man vs. Perfect over Hogan & Andre (IV) Brainbusters vs. Strike Force over Mr T vs. Piper Shane McMahon vs. X-Pac over Undertaker vs. Sid Bret vs. Backlund over Dusty & Sapphire vs. Savage & Sherri (mistakenly listed as Savage & Liz) Chris Jericho vs. Christian over Shawn vs. Vince - All in all, there were 12 upsets out of 64. Personal thoughts on the first round: - A lot of the higher seeds that weren't too impressive lost. Not a lot of surprises. T vs. Piper, Hulk vs. Andre (IV), Hogan vs. Bundy, Taker vs. Sid, Hogan vs. Sid, Cena vs. JBL, etc. all got the boot. - Luger vs. Yoko was no good, but I'm surprised Savage vs. Steele knocked it off so easily because I thought that match was universally frowned upon as well. These are the things I like finding out with this tournament. - Piper vs. Adonis only received 6 out of 15 votes over Rockers vs. Barbarian & Haku. A tough 11 seed, but this was mildly surprising. - No love for the midgets. The Bundy match from WM 3 only got two votes. - Neither Yoko vs. Bret match fared very well. X advanced by a margin of 10-5 over a #15 seed (Luger vs. Perfect), and IX lost to the Rockers vs. Towers. I didn't expect Bret vs. Yoko to get a ton of love but I like them a little more than the consensus seems to. Upsets that didn't happen: - I would have thought Tatanka vs. Michaels would have given Rude vs. Warrior a run for its money, but it only received 3 out of 15 votes. - I was hoping Razor vs. Jarrett would do a little better against Harts vs. Nastys. I like both matches a lot but the Harts won fairly easily, 10-5. - DiBiase vs. Jake, a match I figured a lot of people would like, only got 2 votes against the Harts six man tag from WM 3. - Similarly, Taker vs. Orton only got two votes against Edge vs. Foley. - I was hoping Jericho vs. Regal would do better against Taker vs. Flair. They lost by six votes. - I didn't expect it to lose but I'm glad there's been a little backlash against Austin vs. Rock (XV) so far. Five people voted against it. I hate that match. By quick count, now that it's down to 64 matches, Bret and Shawn are each represented 9 times, Hogan & HHH 8 times, and Savage 7 times. I'll be back with my votes later... I hope someone out there enjoyed that recap.

I agree with everything else you've said in this thread, but I still think people make too much out of this finish because of who was involved. The Hogan win was made to look like a fluke. Yoko got his comeuppance with the salt in the eyes. He was gassed after his match and Hogan was fresh. Sure, you could say it made Bret and Yoko look bad... except they both recovered right away. Yoko got his belt right back, squashed Hogan in their only "real" match, and Bret won KOTR and the fans still accepted him as the number 1 guy despite every attempt to shove Luger or Hogan into that slot instead. Maybe it had to do with politics, but I think it had just as much to do with popping the crowd. Once they had booked Bret vs. Yoko, what are the other possible outcomes? A) Bret beats Yoko. Not gonna happen because Yoko is their new guy and they're not gonna job him to a 230 pounder in a legit match. B) A DQ finish. This would be a million times worse. C) Yoko beats Bret and that's it. Again, that's worse than what happened. Crowd goes home pissed, which didn't happen in those days. You can certainly argue that the match never should have been booked in the first place (and I have), but once it was, other than Bret going over clean, what outcome would all of you liked to have seen instead? I still think this had as much to do with Vince wanting to pop the crowd and send them home happy with a huge surprise ending (to top the previous year with the awesome Warrior return) as it did with "Hogan being greedy." And let's not forget, the crowd legitimately went nuts. It's not like they crapped on it. The pop was huge. And it freed Bret up to win the KOTR, which ended up putting him and the whole damn concept of the PPV over huge. The bottom line is, no matter what anyone says, it actually worked. It wasn't a disaster by any means. For people that complain about the way they murdered Big Show right off the bat (which they did), look no further than what they did with Yoko in his first 12-18 months as the perfect way to get a big guy over without destroying anyone else's career in the process.