RavishingRickRudo

I watched it both when it aired and in reruns on A&E.

Where did I _ever_ say that a belt can't be elevated by its holder? My point was that the WWE's track record with elevating titles is piss poor. They simply don't know how to build a title, therefore the notion that _they_ can take someone like Benoit and give him a secondary title and it gets elevated is absurd. The secondary titles are WORTHLESS. Infact, they often HURT the wrestler more than they help. There are ways to make a title be important, and just giving them to a popular wrestler and expecting the crowd to respond isn't one of them. That's lazy booking, which is why we've seen it happen so often in the past few years.

You have a better source to rebuke it with? I don't see why _anyone_ would lie about something so trivial, and on a consistent basis.

But what is the point of holding it for a long time when you DO NOTHING with it during that time. Especially when you COMPETE FOR OTHER TITLES during that time. Benjamin cared more about winning the world title than he did his own title, it seemed. As he competed both in the ladder match at mania and in the world title tournament on RAW. Infact, both his match at mania and with Michaels have been the two most memorable things he has done all year - and neither had anything to do with the IC title. An 8 month reign of doing nothing is just wasted time. A long title reign needs to be filled with memorable matches and moments so that people can SEE the passage of time and REMEMBER that he's had the title for a while so that the impact of the loss can mean something. The only thing the IC title loss meant was that CCC won another midcard title in his debut. The IC title didn't really benefit CCC, and it didn't really hurt Benjamin... and no one really is looking to win it. When the title means little to the champion, when it means little to the other wrestlers, then it means little to the fans.

Well, Nate Quarry defeated Shonie Carter at the last UFC show. Carter, while not a top 10 fighter, is still good enough to consider the dominant win impressive. Forrest had an easy victory that night as well. I haven't heard much on the other fighters, but then again, it's only been 3 months and fighters usually fight 3 or 4 times a year at best (unless you are Jeremy Horn). The "Unleashed" shows are previous fights (from the Ultimate Fight Night undercard and other events) and I haven't really heard anything bad about those fights. The August 6th live show will probably feature a select few fights as well. Quarry vs. Sell should be good, Leben vs. Cote should as well. Salaverry vs. Marquardt should be tremendous.

"As a matter of fact, Russo stated that if you ever talk to The Rock, The Rock would tell you that Vince Russo gave him the idea of going out and referring to himself in the third person manner that he does now." - A recap of an interview with Russo.

Benjamin and Orton did dick for the IC title. I'd like to see you (RJ) argue that. Holding the title for a long time without having any memorable feuds or anyone _wanting_ it, doesn't do anything for the title - it is just a placeholder for the wrestler.

July 22nd - 9:00pm Bushido Vol 8 - pay per view Ryo Chonan vs. Phil Baroni Takanori Gomi vs. Jean Silva Tatsuya Kawajiri vs. Luis Buscape Masakazu Imanari vs. Joachim Hansen Kazuo Misaki vs. Daniel Acacio Jyutaro Nakao vs. Marcus Aurelio Ikuhisa Minowa vs. Kimo Denis Kang vs. Andrei Semenov Sentoryu vs. James Thompson July 25th - 11:05 pm et Unleashed - Spike TV Stephan Bonnar vs. Forrest Griffin Diego Sanchez vs. Kenny Florian Alex Karalexis vs. Josh Rafferty Mike Swick vs. Alex Schoenauer August 1st - 11:05 pm et Unleashed - Spike TV Ivan Salaverry vs. Tony Fryklund Ivan Salaverry vs. Joe Riggs Chris Leben vs. Jason Thacker Josh Koscheck vs. Chris Sanford Nate Quarry vs. Lodune Sincaid August 6th - 9:00 pm et Ultimate Fight Night - Spike TV Ivan Salaverry vs Nathan Marquardt Stephan Bonnar vs Sam Hoger Kenny Florian vs Alex Karalexis Mike Swick vs Keith Rockel Josh Koscheck vs Pete Spratt Nate Quarry vs Pete Sell Chris Leben vs Patrick Cote Drew Fickett vs Josh Neer August 8th - 11:05 pm et Unleashed - Spike TV Content TBA August 14th - Check local listings time Fox Sports Network Liddell vs. Horn Liddell vs. Babalu Horn Highlights August 15th - 11:05 pm et Unleashed - Spike TV Content TBA August 20th - 10:00 pm et UFC 54: Boiling Point - pay per view Chuck Liddell vs. Jeremy Horn Randy Couture vs. Mike Van Arsdale Diego Sanchez vs. Brian Gassaway Frank Trigg vs. Georges St. Pierre Tim Sylvia vs. Assuerio Silva Matt Lindland vs. Joe Riggs Dave Terrell vs. Trevor Prangley James Irvin vs. Terry Martin August 22nd - 11:05 pm et The Ultimate Fighter 2 - Spike TV Welterweights & Heavyweights compete for two UFC contracts.

Is that the one where Plucky goes on a road trip to an amuzement park with hampton and his family and they end up just riding the monorail? Fuck, I hate that episode. I've seen Twister an absurd amount of times.

When was the last time anyone "elevated" a title?

*HHH had Angle in the pedigree* *HBK superkicks HHH* *Angle A-slams HBK* *near fall* "Yep, you guessed it. MOTYC" - Meltzer, after cleaning up the mess.

Severn was the first successful amateur wrestler in MMA and one could say opened the doors for amateur wrestlers. He is a 2x tournament champ, a superfight/hw champ. Severn goes around the country as the top star for many small shows. Was Frye a better fighter? Yeah, probably. But did he *do* the same amount of stuff Severn did? No. Actually, I don't think an arguement could be made that Frye ever beat a top 10 fighter, even at the time.

Russo's biggest, positive, contribution to wrestling was telling the Rock to talk in the third person.

Dude... DUUUUUDE. How can you miss this??!

Dude, you're missin some gems.

1. "Theatre" 2. "Harbour"

Austin was "mildly over" in 1997 and 1998. You didn't watch the WWE back then, did you?

The boom in professional wrestling in the late 90's came from _WCW_ and the NWO storyline. That is what caught on and allowed the WWE to take it higher with Tyson/Austin/McMahon/Rock. In 2000 they had the opportunity to prolong their boom as they had Chris Jericho reaching high popularity and they buried him. Benoit and Angle were strong supporting characters and they got halted too, right when they needed to be pushed. As HTQ said, it's all about the right stars. Brand Loyalty can take you so far, it's the wrestlers that ultimately make you popular. The WWE did what all promotions do when they're hot, went with what worked and feared change. The top wrestlers wanted to keep their spot and feared they would lose it to the up and comers. So you had the same guys doing the same storylines. When they didn't freshen the product up at the right time the fans got tired of it, and moved on. When most companies get successful, they play it safe and don't keep moving forward. Why change what's been working, right? You might mess it up... In the 80's, the WWE benefited from a healthy wrestling industry and a wealth of talent to steal from. Vince McMahon did not create "Hulkamania", as it was born in the AWA. Again, the wrestling boom in the 80's wasn't _just_ because of the WWE. You had strong regional markets that had a wrestling fanbase to be exploited. Now, guess what? IT'S JUST THE WWE. There isn't a whole lot of wrestling fans to scoop up now. The potential is not there. It's 100x's harder than it was before because the WWE got a ton of exposure and has a stigma attached to it. There aren't many people in the US who don't know what it is so they made the choice to not pay attention. This is not the same environment there was in the late 90's and its certainly not the environment there was in the 80's. While wrestling has experienced ebbs and flows in popularity thoughout the past 100 years, no one promotion has been able to survive through all of it. Therefore, the WWE's popularity is not cyclical. There will always be a desire for guilt-free violence that wrestling provides and there will always be a desire for the sillyness that wrestling provides... but there are other things that can be substituted for wrestling, so it's a matter of the right company attracting the peoples' desires at the right time. The WWE doesn't have their finger on the pulse of what people want, and with the same dumb people running the company, I highly doubt they will be able to see what people want when they want it. Look at it this way: Their response to the decline in popularity is movies. They have no idea how to get out of it. They were just dumb lucky in the late 90's, and now their luck has run out.

Frye is a UFC tournament champion, and an Ultimate Ultimate champion. But, really, who has he beaten? If you look at his record, you see a lot of "names" - Taktarov, Shamrock, Goodridge, Yvel - but those names aren't good fighters. Severn at least has a lengthy record to look at which IMO put him over the top. Frye doesn't even have 20 fights. I don't really see Fryes influence in MMA and he was a top fighter for a few months. I believe he had a strong drawing period, but I personally don't see that as being enough to put him in. Couture has done enough, especially in relation to his contemporaries, to put him in the HOF. There has been plenty of discussion on the value of the WON MMA HOF, since MMA is still -really- in its developing stages. Royce Gracie still fights, for crying out-loud. Rather than discussing the merits of a MMA HOF, I'd rather discuss the merits of its fighters. IMO, that's more productive and makes for better chit chat.

I dunno if Sapp is old enough to be considered on the list. Was he in the WON PW HOF? I figure Meltzer would be pushing for him if he was eligible.

FIGHTERS Tank Abbott - No. Mark Coleman - UFC HW Champion. 2x UFC Tournament Champion. 2000 PRIDE Grand Prix Champion. Created/Popularized "Ground and Pound". Definitely. Randy Couture - Classic fights against Belfort, Rizzo, and Liddell, and he is the only person to win titles in 2 divisions. One of the most popular fighters ever. Featured on Ultimate Fighter, which gained big exposure (relative to the previous 10 years) in the US. I initially thought "no" because he is still fighting, but looking at his resume, he belongs. Also voted most popular fighter by UFC fans. Don Frye - No. Masakatsu Funaki - Pancrase helped mold MMA and he was the top star and helped develop guys like Bas Rutten, Frank Shamrock, and Ken Shamrock. I am not entirely comfortable with him as a pick into the MMA HOF as a fighter, I'd rather him as a historical/influencial figure, as I have no idea how many of his fights were worked or not. I'll say "yes" because of the pancrase influence and his influence on pancrase, but that's it. Rickson Gracie - He helped PRIDE become successful in its formative years but hasn't really done anything other than that in modern MMA. Had he faced Sakuraba and they drew a huge house, it would be harder to say "no", but he didn't, so it's pretty easy. No. Royce Gracie - Of fucking course. 3x UFC champion, 90 minute fight with Sakuraba, the most influencial fighter ever. Bas Rutten - King of Pancrase, UFC champion, tremendous fights against Frank Shamrock and Funaki, great trainer, great commentator, under the Meltzer criteria a "yes" just because "it feels like he's a HOFer" but compared to his contemporaries he doesn't really match up. He was UFC champ when UFC was going into its dark days, he was active in pancrase when they were working bouts, and he was a primarily panrcase fighter. A "maybe". Kazushi Sakuraba - Yes. Next to Royce Gracie, THE HOF pick. Hugely influencial in his fighting style, defeated 4 Gracies, PRIDE is as popular as it is today because of Sak, GREAT fights against White, Newton, Gracie(s), Jackson. Dan Severn - UFC tournament champ. Ultimate Ultimate champ, Superfight/HW champ. Very prolific fighter, nearing 90 fights and still going at 50, UFC HOFer. The first successful "wrestler" in the UFC. He hasn't accomplished as much as his peers, but I think he has done enough. Yes. Frank Shamrock - One of the greatest fighters of all time. Great matches against Lober, Rutten, Horn, Ortiz. IMO, the first "complete" fighter in MMA, as he not only had the physical and well-rounded fighting skills, but he had the mental side of it as well. I think the Alliance was one of the most influencial groups out there as it put the focus on cross-training and Frank himself is a very good trainer. UFC MW champion. On this list, I think he's the only one who gets a "yes" based on how _good_ he was in the ring/cage, rather than the "other" factors. Ken Shamrock - to me, this is a tough one. I don't like Ken, at all. He never won a UFC tournament, yet SEG still essentially gave him the belt. He was part of 2 of the most boring fights in MMA history (vs. Royce, vs. Severn) which IMO does it a lot of damage. However, his fight against Tito was a big draw, and he headlined the biggest show in UFC history a few months ago vs. Rich Franklin. He headed-up the Lions Den, which -at their peak- was a huge fighting team. Most would say he's a slam dunk, but it's a hard pick for me. He was never a top fighter, IMO. Outside of Panrcase, his record isn't good. He hasn't really beaten any "top" fighters except for Dan Severn. I think his influence is primarily in the Lions Den and his own personal "look" as a fighter. Great draw, nothing else otherwise. Borderline "yes". Maurice Smith - his fight against Mark Coleman, IMO, was the first great showing of cross-training in MMA history. UFC HW champ, great trainer, and a member of the Alliance. Where Ken was a draw and nothing else, I think Mo is influence and nothing else. He was a top fighter for about 6 months and then his time passed. I want to say yes, but I'll say "no". MANAGEMENT/HISTORICAL Rorion Gracie - Yes. Helped form the UFC. Of course. Antonio Inoki - him vs. Ali, I guess, gets points. He tried to popularize the more "real" aspects of wrestling, the Bom Ba Yae was a big card for a few years, he pushed "shoot" fighters in wrestling roles which may have helped popularize MMA in Japan. Someone more knowledgable than me should map out his influence. I dunno. Kazuyoshi Ishii - basically created K-1, which had a strong impact on MMA. But if he's in, then why wouldn't all creators of influencial martial arts be in?? Is Kickboxing now MMA? It was said to be a "mix" of stand-up fighting, so do we consider K-1 to be MMA and kickboxers to be MMA fighters? Where is Andy Hug on this list??? Satoru Sayama - helped create the original UWF in Japan and SHOOTO. SHOOTO is the best organization for lighter fighters, who are starting to rise in PRIDE's Bushido. Though SHOOTO is not as popular as PRIDE or UFC, I think he deserves to get in. Yes.

Yeah. You either consider K-1 MMA, or consider EVERY OTHER INFLUENCIAL MARTIAL ART CREATOR, or don't consider it at all. Why not boxing? Why not Judo? TKD? Karate? Certainly, why not Brazilian Jiu Jitsu? Why not Trapfighting, SAFTA, RIP, Pitfighting, and Joe Son Do?

Taken from Otherarena. From Todd Martin over at WCMB (post directly linked below): "And the list for the new separate Wrestling Observer Newsletter MMA Hall of Fame. The criteria are being a great fighter as well as having historical significance. Same percentages needed for inclusion as the other Hall, with only six votes allowed for fighters. FIGHTERS Tank Abbott Mark Coleman Randy Couture Don Frye Masakatsu Funaki Rickson Gracie Royce Gracie Bas Rutten Kazushi Sakuraba Dan Severn Frank Shamrock Ken Shamrock Maurice Smith MANAGEMENT/HISTORICAL Rorion Gracie (creator of UFC) Antonio Inoki (creator of NJPW) Kazuyoshi Ishii (creator of K1) Satoru Sayama (creator of SHOOTO)

Perfect Strangers Golden Girls Baywatch Empty Nest CSI

There's lots of cameos and connections to my other favourite shows. Seth McFarlane was a bit of a surprise, Scott Patterson was the guy with the sideburns that Elaine dated on Seinfeld, there's CSI and The Shield actors (not main characters) in it, and then Bruce FN McCullough as Tobin, Michels nemisis.