RavishingRickRudo

I was kidding ... Kinda. Yves Edwards is the only black fighter they consistently show on PPV. Pete Spratt beat Robbie Lawler, yet Lawler gets continued PPV shots and Spratt hasn't been back. Baroni keeps getting on shows, despite losses. Shonie Carter loses once and then he's gone. And Smith was under the SEG UFC, not the Zuffa UFC. Besides, he was "fed" to Mark Coleman; he wasn't actually supposed to win.

It is 2004. That is your answer. 5 years have passed. This is akin to saying "Do you think there should be more Backstreet Boys-style bands?" Now, I think there could be a time in the future where the WWE might be able to somewhat go back to that style and be successful with it. Right now there is a trend on TV for more 'quality' television. That was in response to reality tv. So you have shows like CSI and LOST getting really high ratings and critical acclaim. Look at the top 5 shows for Nov 15-21 (CSI, Desperate Housewives, CSI Miami, Without a Trace, ER). Watch, next fall there will be even more hour longs featuring large casts. Then the fall after that the TV market will become saturated with melodramas. There will be overkill and there will be a natural desire for something more "light", where someone can "shut their brain off" and sit back and watch. This is where wrestling will come in and meet that need. However, it won't be the raunchy style that Vince Russo popularized.

Does anyone look at Blassie and Abdullah in the "greatest wrestlers of all time" category? Were they EVER looked in that regard? Blassie relied more on charisma than in-ring ability, ditto with Abby. Charisma can carry over into your 50's, wrestling skills? Not really. And Terry Funk has certainly been tainted by hanging on too long. HHH vs. Flair was not a great match. Flair, today, is entertaining in the wrong way.

A lot of bookers tend to get carried away with being "creative" to the point that the story doesn't make sense or fit in the wrestling universe. For example, a booker could come up with an extremely creative idea for a story about murder, zombies, and wrestlers coming back to life. While that story might be very creative and might even work well as a one hour television show, it really wouldn't work in the context of a wrestling show. That's when trying to be "creative" is bad. I dunno bout that. I mean, the WWE couldn't get away with that because they have already established their universe (they have in some part with the Undertaker and Kane. Something like Kaiju Big Battel, or HUSTLE, is a more directed effort). But I look at wrestling as comic books and similar principals apply. I said in my first post that "focus" is underrated, and this is where focus would come to play. It's about how you position your product, it's about focusing on the key elements you wish to impart from your wrestling show on to your audience. It comes down to how far fans are willing to suspend and believe. "Hardcore" wrestling was one style of wrestling, ECW was able to take a niche market and expand it. ROH is taking another style of wrestling (American Strong Style, "Technical", whatever you want to call it) and is doing something similar. There are elements which make up a wrestling fan, the "sports/competitive" side is one, and the "fantastical" is another. I think there has been much more considered focus on one area than the other, and I personally would like to see a more creative version of professional wrestling. Because wrestlings potential in this regard has remained untapped for the most part. I also disagree that wrestling should evolve "beyond good vs. bad". I said it *can*, and I said that I would like to see more adventurous storytelling, to take advantage of wrestlings full potential. I never said it SHOULD evolve beyond that. Hollywood, which has been able to expand itself much more than wrestling, still sticks to GvsE for the vast majority of its films, and they are very successful with that formula. Theatre, for even longer than film, has been doing that as well. So to expect wrestling to do that would be silly. My point is I would like to see wrestling TRY to expand beyond their formulas, because that's the only way change can occur. What's the appeal of having wrestling turn into something where there are no good guys or bad guys....only "wrestlers" in general? You are putting the focus on the wrong part. "Classic Booking Scenario" was the point, "Good vs. Bad" was the example.

About Shonie: UFC doesn't like black fighters. About Frank: Tried his hand at running his own MMA show, has helped in training fighters, but is mainly doing seminars. He's in Australia right now.

There was a time when I would have said Flair was the best wrestler ever and that was largely based on hype. Not as a kid either, just a few years ago (2000, 2001). My expectations were high, because I expected to see some great matches out of Flair and I couldn't even get through some of his so called greatest matches. They were just boring and repetitive. But that was more because I've seen MUCH better from even his _contemporaries_, let alone guys who have wrestled a generation after. If todays style makes Flairs outdated, imagine what will happen a few decades from now when wrestling has evolved even more. I think the Bruno reference is probably the most accurate.

"And at #30, the special guest royal rumble participant... STEVE URKEL!"

I'd like to see everyone get eliminated after #29, so that the 30th guy automatically wins. It would kill the town and the ppv, but it would be great.

I don't even want to start to defend the current case of "more creative", because I think it sucks, but I'd say hundreds of millions of dollars garnered by the WWE from 1998-2001, and more fans in one arena in one day than the total amount of fans that have watched OVW and ROH combined, sez "more creative" is the better direction. But I don't think that version of "creative" booking is indicative of what true creative booking is.

I think people 25-35 years from now who will look back at Flair's "great matches" will be like "what's the big deal?". *I* feel that way already, for the most part, and I've had the influence of guys like Meltzer saying "Greatest Wrestler Ever!" clouding my perspective. When the Flair Rah-Rah guys are gone, then future folk will actually have to look at his *work* which I don't think will stand up, because it doesn't even stand up today.

I don't think there is anything wrong with trying to reinvent the wheel, especially when it comes with wrestling. I would like to see more adventurous booking and writing. Sticking to the "classic booking scenario", which can essentially be called "playing it safe", won't help wrestling evolve. And wrestling CAN evolve. It can go beyond "Good guy vs. Bad Guy". Remember, most of those classic booking scenarios were "new" once. The problem is the people who are able to do such things today suck at it.

Calling creativity overrated is like saying Space Travel is overrated. Well, in once instance - the current and past situations - it is, because it's limited. We can't get beyond the moon. We can't get beyond "This is Your Life". But in another, looking at the potential of it, how could you say that's so when it isn't even NEAR showing its true value. I think we could get high-level storylines, feuds, and promos that would be on the same quality of -say- a CSI, LOST, or whatever. But we aren't getting THAT level of creative work. We aren't even getting UPN sitcom-level creative work. And as a concept, creativity is very much NOT overrated.

I wouldn't say creativity is overrated, because I don't think we've seen the full potential of a creative booker... or have even come close. I would say focus is underrated. I wouldn't call Russo very creative - he "thought outside the box" - but that doesn't necessarily mean creative. Since wrestling is very much IN the box, it takes very little creative ability to think beyond it. I wonder what Paul Heyman would be like if he teamed with Linda McMahon?

*BUT* _Raw_ had the Main Event last year, and they also had the Summerslam Main Event. And they'll probably have the RR Main Event as well. I like the Taker/Royal Rumble winner/WM streak possibilities.

Remembered by who? Someone who is born 25 years from now, after Flair is dead and most of his hardcore fans have little influence on somone who would be born during that time, I think Flair will be looked at as someone who was charismatic in the ring and that's about it.

I think Taker could be taken into consideration as well. Cause, well, you know... he hasn't won it yet.

...Since when did we "expect" the US to "protect" us?

Would it be Ironic that the Liberal Paul Martin is more conservative than the Conservative GWB? Anywho, I think it would be much more productive for Canada to warmly welcome Bush than protest.

Clinton was in Halifax a little less than a decade ago, and took off from CFB Shearwater, which I lived near by. Oh yeah THAT'S RIGHT. ... we saw his limo drive by. ~!

I think Aisha Tyler was a good addition to the cast (or whatever place she is). Much better than Stacy Dash. I miss Sanders in the lab though. 5 points for the Stacy Dash dig

I've enjoyed the Sara/Gill relationship, mainly cause Jorja Fox is a... Fox... and I mark for Grissom. Actually, I enjoy every dynamic on the show.

http://slam.canoe.ca/SlamWrestlingBios/sensation_jason.html It was the second link on Google after typing in "Jason Sensation". Last time I saw him was at the WM 18 press conference, Curry and I were walking back when we saw (and heard) him doing impressions for a small group of people. We watched, and saw it go from "Hey, could you do _____" to "Hey, here's $2, do this..." 10 minutes later, that small group of about half a dozen people turned into a giant circle of about 15 people.

Grissom has a 3 way with the blonde and Sara?

Ok. WHAT THE FUCK??? DAMN THAT ECKLEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I was expecting Leeann to say "I've been BAMBOOZLED!"