Oh shit, oh shit

[Jobber of the Week 0]

I'm hoping we get them as box sets eventually.

 

It's most likely due to the use of "WWF" in the commentary. The ruling probably isn't enforced overseas.

 

Which really sucks, because I want these DVD's bad.

Actually, the ruling is oriented around the UK. They could have just gone ahead and not blurred the old logo in North America and not release anything with the logo in the UK, but the UK fans are drawing more and making more cash than North America with the current business downturn.

[Guest ManKinnd]

erm, excuse me, why the need for insults?  I asked why you guys are getting excited about these releases and instead of answering you just say that its "big boy stuff".  What on earth does that mean?  Please answer without insults next time though.

I meant it as a joke, so lighten up.

 

But now, now I'm not so sure. People here are having their fun with some classic PPVs and you come up out of nowhere speaking out. If you can't add anything to the topic, or have no interest in these like the rest of us, then just go on your way.

Stuff like this bothers me. Why can't another opinion on this matter be heard? His argument is sound, and his opinion understandable. You say he's adding nothing to the discussion, but guess what? It's very rare for a reply to something like this to actually add something. Are people that post and reminisce about interviews and how cool these shows were adding something? No, they're adding nothing more than he did. Let other opinions flourish here; it's the whole point of this board.

[Downhome 0]

And stuff like what I was talking about bothers me, so tough cookies. People were talking about how they liked the shows, and would like to own them. Coming in and basicly going "I don't see why you guys care about this, I don't care about these releases" is nothing more than a bait if you ask me.

 

If he instead came and said why he didn't understand why we were excited, or just something, then it would be cool, but he didn't.

 

Enough of this bullshit though, let's get back on topic.

[UseTheSledgehammerUh 0]

Say what you will RVDMARK420....but no matter how many HBK/Benoit, Eddie/Benoit, Angle/Lesnar, Eddie/Lesnar, HHH/HBK/Benoit, Benoit winning Rumble etc. type great workrate masterpieces we get nowadays...

 

NOTHING will have the HEAT that...

 

Warrior/Hogan, Savage/Hogan, Andre/Hogan, and pretty much just about every decent match had.

 

Rock/Hogan I was the last example of a heat-bomb.

 

The crowd used to mark out for a dropkick from Marty Jannetty...or a Santana Flying Forearm.

 

Nowadays you have to put on a ***** bout (Rumble 03 WWE Title Bout) just to get some clapping.

[Downhome 0]

Exactly, that is what I miss.

 

Alot.

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

Now, did you see a match of this quality in the WWF between 1983 and 1993?  No, of course you didn't.  I wasn't specifically saying that I disliked these particular shows, just that the product in general at that time was incredibly poor.

It's not quite fair to say that there were NO great matches during that time period. Hart/Bulldog at Summerslam 1992...Savage Steamboat at WM5...there's more than a handful.

...The FUCK!? Jesus Man, you try standing up for the classics, and spout off the WRONG Show. Who are you, Jim Ross?

 

 

Back on topic: Since I have or gradually am buying copies of these "Classic PPVs", I wouldn't need the DVDs, because they are probably poor quality.

[Guest RickyB]

Why don't i like the shows? Do you actually like them? I mean it's commonly accepted that the then-WWF product was dire in the early "McMahon Jr." era of cartoonish characters and little-to-no workrate to speak of. It wasn't until about 1993/94 that the Hogans and Warriors were phased out and the Bret Harts and Shawn Michaels' were showcased that any semblence of workrate entered the promotion. As much as we tend to complain about the product these days it is often worth remembering how bad it used to be. Take, for example, the main event of this past week's RAW between Chris Benoit and Shawn Michaels, or the WrestleMania or Backlash main event triple threat matches. These are just a few examples of recent WWE matches that were good-excellent matches. Matches of this quality are now commonplace on PPV, and occasionally RAW/Smackdown! main events. Now, did you see a match of this quality in the WWF between 1983 and 1993? No, of course you didn't. I wasn't specifically saying that I disliked these particular shows, just that the product in general at that time was incredibly poor.

 

Umm, I don't care what anyone says about "let the guy have his opinion", but your a fucking retard. I'd hazard a guess that you've never watched any shows from that era, because there are a hell of a load of matches better than Benoit and Michaels from this Monday's Raw. Savage/Steamboat from WM 3 (just to set you right mate , WM 5 was Hogan/Savage... which was awesome as well) was a HELL of a lot better than Benoit/Michaels, that's not a shot at either Benoit or Michaels because they are two of my favourite Wrestlers, but Savage/Steamboat just WAS one of the best matches of all time. And you go on about Bret and Shawn not being showcased till 1993, well lets just forget about all of those Classic Tag Matches that the Hart Foundation and the Rockers had. Does it matter that they didn't have the World Title considering that they had a shitload of time to showcase themselves in Tag Matches, this is the problem with peoples thoughts these days, what's wrong with having good workers in Tag Teams? Tag Team Wrestling is a lost art these days, now Wrestlers are only put in tag teams to get them ready for a singles push and you never have lifetime Tag Team workers like the Midnight Express and The Rock And Roll Express. Most Tag Teams don't even last for a year, having the Hart Foundation stick together for years and The Rockers around for years was a GOOD THING because they were good Tag Teams who had GREAT matches. Course you won't know this because you likely never watched any of those shows and you just thought "oh he wasn't a World Champion HOGAN MUST HAVE BEEN HOLDING HIM DOWN!!! DAMN THAT HOGAN FOR BEING SO OVER AND MAKING THE COMPANY MONEY". I mean Hogan and Warrior weren't great workers, but they DID have a hell of a lot of good matches. Hogan/Savage from WM 5, Hogan/Warrior from WM 6, Warrior/Savage from WM 7 was an Amazing match (better than Benoit/Michaels), hell, Slaughter/Hogan from WM 7 wasn't a bad match either. Plus if Hart wasn't been showcased until 1993, then why did he win the Intercontinental Title at Summerslam 91 and then again at Wrestlemania 8? I mean with what your saying 91 and 92 must have SUCKED because people with WORKRATE~! hadn't arrived yet. But Bret was getting a singles push and Flair was World Champion in 1991. You should probably watch a few shows from the time period your talking about before you critisise the whole era. They didn't all do high flying shit and stupid moves because they didn't have to. The just worked the crowd, Wrestled and they TOLD A STORY through the matches.

 

Like I said, watch some of the shows from that time period before knocking it completely.

[Guest Man Of 1,004 Modes]

Ahem....OWNED~! (That is the ONLY response that can follow that slaughter)

[JoeDirt 0]

Now, did you see a match of this quality in the WWF between 1983 and 1993?  No, of course you didn't.  I wasn't specifically saying that I disliked these particular shows, just that the product in general at that time was incredibly poor.

It's not quite fair to say that there were NO great matches during that time period. Hart/Bulldog at Summerslam 1992...Savage Steamboat at WM5...there's more than a handful.

...The FUCK!? Jesus Man, you try standing up for the classics, and spout off the WRONG Show. Who are you, Jim Ross?

 

 

Back on topic: Since I have or gradually am buying copies of these "Classic PPVs", I wouldn't need the DVDs, because they are probably poor quality.

Whoops, hit the 5 instead of 3.

 

At least I remember the Hogan/Warrior match from Wrestlemania 2 like it was yesterday.

 

[Guest OldSchoolCarnage]

Ahem....OWNED~! (That is the ONLY response that can follow that slaughter)

I think F.U.B.A.R. might apply here as well.

[King Cucaracha 0]

Oh yes. I'm getting these two, Mania III and IV, and KOTR 93' and 94' when the next catalogue comes through my door. Ownage.

[Scroby 0]

I'm an old school fan, so I'd love to watch these again. It sucks that the U.K. is getting these only and the U.S. can't.

[Guest I Got Banned for Sucking]

It does suck, but I'd just order those DVDs from that region - I love having packages arrive at the door.

 

First, the U.K. get The Wrestling Channel, and now they have their own exclusive WWF DVDs? (Well, maybe the other way around) What is this, Bush Week?

[KTID 0]

Umm, I don't care what anyone says about "let the guy have his opinion", but your a fucking retard.

 

First of all, letting everyone on the board have an opinion *IS* incredibly important. Also, personal insults like "fucking retard" really ruin the credibilty of your arguments.

 

 

I'd hazard a guess that you've never watched any shows from that era, because there are a hell of a load of matches better than Benoit and Michaels from this Monday's Raw. Savage/Steamboat from WM 3 (just to set you right mate , WM 5 was Hogan/Savage... which was awesome as well) was a HELL of a lot better than Benoit/Michaels, that's not a shot at either Benoit or Michaels because they are two of my favourite Wrestlers, but Savage/Steamboat just WAS one of the best matches of all time.

 

Just so you know, i've seen nearly all WWF/WWE PPV's, unfortunately. Your seriously missing my point here. I never said that this weeks Benoit/Michaels match was one of the best matches ever, just that it was an example of how good WWE matches are on a regular basis these days. As for Savage/Steamboat, yes it was a good match, but its only one match. Its greatness is exaggerated because it was the only "workrate" match of the 80's in this company. If it took place today, it wouldn't stand out.

 

 

And you go on about Bret and Shawn not being showcased till 1993, well lets just forget about all of those Classic Tag Matches that the Hart Foundation and the Rockers had.

 

How could I have missed "all of those Classic Tag Matches"? Perhaps they never happened? The closest the WWF had to "classic" tag team matches in the 80's was the Hart Foundation/British Bulldogs series in '87. Apart from that, the tag division stunk as well.

 

 

Does it matter that they didn't have the World Title considering that they had a shitload of time to showcase themselves in Tag Matches, this is the problem with peoples thoughts these days, what's wrong with having good workers in Tag Teams? Tag Team Wrestling is a lost art these days, now Wrestlers are only put in tag teams to get them ready for a singles push and you never have lifetime Tag Team workers like the Midnight Express and The Rock And Roll Express. Most Tag Teams don't even last for a year, having the Hart Foundation stick together for years and The Rockers around for years was a GOOD THING because they were good Tag Teams who had GREAT matches.

 

Eh, i'll ignore this. You seem to have forgotten what it is you are trying to argue.

 

 

*And in case you aren't aware, the Midnight Express and the Rock 'N' Roll Express worked for Jim Crockett for the majority of their careers, they never worked for Vince McMahon. Their legendary tag team fued which spanned the majority of the 1980's was just one of the major reasons why fans of good wrestling like myself preferred the NWA/WCW to the WWF during the 1980's/early '90s.*

 

 

Course you won't know this because you likely never watched any of those shows and you just thought "oh he wasn't a World Champion HOGAN MUST HAVE BEEN HOLDING HIM DOWN!!! DAMN THAT HOGAN FOR BEING SO OVER AND MAKING THE COMPANY MONEY". I mean Hogan and Warrior weren't great workers, but they DID have a hell of a lot of good matches. Hogan/Savage from WM 5, Hogan/Warrior from WM 6, Warrior/Savage from WM 7 was an Amazing match (better than Benoit/Michaels), hell, Slaughter/Hogan from WM 7 wasn't a bad match either. Plus if Hart wasn't been showcased until 1993, then why did he win the Intercontinental Title at Summerslam 91 and then again at Wrestlemania 8?

 

Again, this point is quite hard to comprehend. Please correct me if i'm wrong, but I think your saying that I am only looking at main events during this period. If so, you are correct to a certain extent. The main events are, excuse the pun, the main matches. They are the ones that matter, are built up, have a purpose and will be remembered. I don't remember every single meaningless mid-card match from every PPV. I do remember almost all main events, as they are the matches that the shows are built around, and were almost always unwatchable. They are the matches being showcased, which is my point. I agree that the WWF in the 80's had some guys who were good workers, say Curt Hennig for example. However, he was never showcased. If a PPV is advertised as "HULK HOGAN V EARTHQUAKE" then all i know is that the main showcased match (the supposed highlight of the show) features two poor workers. How do I know that a good worker (Curt Hennig) will be wrestling in the second match of the eleven-match card. The good worker, and his matches, weren't showcased.

 

 

I mean with what your saying 91 and 92 must have SUCKED because people with WORKRATE~! hadn't arrived yet. But Bret was getting a singles push and Flair was World Champion in 1991. You should probably watch a few shows from the time period your talking about before you critisise the whole era.

 

Again, it wasn't that "people with WORKRATE~!" hadn't arrived yet. They had the Bret Harts and Curt Hennigs, they were just never showcased until this time. Like you said, Bret Hart was beggining to receive a singles push which would see him become world champion a year later. This was one of the first examples of good wrestlers being showcased. Bret would never have been pushed like this in 1987, would he?

 

 

*I'm unsure as to what point you were attempting to make with "Flair was World Champion in 1991". Firstly, Flair was never world champion in 1991. He was indeed world champion for a whopping two months in 1992, however. Now as you all know, i'm not a fan of Ric Flair's work, so i'm not going to cry about his misuse during his WWF tenure.*

 

 

They didn't all do high flying shit and stupid moves because they didn't have to. The just worked the crowd, Wrestled and they TOLD A STORY through the matches.

 

Have to say you've lost me again. Are you saying that the people who enjoy good workrate-heavy matches only watch for "high flying shit and stupid moves"? That makes no sense. My favourite style/era of wrestling is the New Japan Junior Heavyweight division of the mid '90s, such as Jushin Lyger. Most people on here favour All Japan Heavyweights of the '90s, such as Mitsuhara Misawa. Do we watch for "high flying shit and stupid moves"? No, we watch for good matches. And what kind of story is told by two big guys, with a combined repitoire of 3 moves, slugging it out. You want a match that "TOLD A STORY through the matches" then '80s WWF is *not* the place to find it.

 

 

Like I said, watch some of the shows from that time period before knocking it completely.

 

Well, now you know I did watch during that time period and am not merely blindly knocking it. The then-WWF product in the 1980's was simply sub-par workrate wise.

[King Cucaracha 0]

Wrestling isn't just about workrate.

 

Excuse the cheapshot, but considering you're called RVDMARK4:20, I would have thought you'd realised that.

 

And what kind of story is told by two big guys, with a combined repitoire of 3 moves, slugging it out.

 

What kind of story is told by two small guys, with a combined repitoire of 28 moves, dropping each other on their head for 30 minutes? The kind of story that says "this move is sick, and would compress your spine...but it'll only get a two count. This ain't sports entertainment damn it~!" And that's from a ROH fan.

 

It depends on what mood your in. Sometimes people are in the mood for a more fun style of wrestling, with less depth and more character.

 

I agree that the WWF in the 80's had some guys who were good workers, say Curt Hennig for example. However, he was never showcased. If a PPV is advertised as "HULK HOGAN V EARTHQUAKE" then all i know is that the main showcased match (the supposed highlight of the show) features two poor workers. How do I know that a good worker (Curt Hennig) will be wrestling in the second match of the eleven-match card. The good worker, and his matches, weren't showcased.

 

Forgive me if I'm wrong, but Quake/Hogan wasn't in the 80's, which your arguement is based on. Considering Perfect was the IC Champion going into the show Quake/Hogan main evented, I don't think being mis-used was an issue personally.

 

Besides that though...good workers not being showcased. That's not a bad factor of the 80's. That's a bad factor of wrestling. The best guy's aren't neccessarily the best guys...they're the guys the booker thinks are the best guys. Again though, you say bad workers were in the main part of the show. I assume you're referring to SS90, which was headlined by Ultimate Warrior(bad worker, over like hell) against Rick Rude (one of the more undderrated wrestlers of the early 90's).

 

But hey, obviously your arguement is based on Hogan not putting Perfect over or something, so nevermind.

 

As for Savage/Steamboat, yes it was a good match, but its only one match. Its greatness is exaggerated because it was the only "workrate" match of the 80's in this company.

 

I'm sorry, but WTF? You mean in ten years, there was only ONE 'workrate match'? I think there's a bunch of people much more qualified to call bullshit on this than I am.

 

Seriously...I don't get what your prblem with the time is, apart from the fact you obviously have some sort of dislike for Hogan and the like. And forgetting about the 80's pre-85. Bob Backlund didn't have workrate? Yeah.

[Secret Agent 0]

RVDMARK...

 

How could I have missed "all of those Classic Tag Matches"? Perhaps they never happened? The closest the WWF had to "classic" tag team matches in the 80's was the Hart Foundation/British Bulldogs series in '87. Apart from that, the tag division stunk as well.

 

While you are certianly entilted to your opinon, let me suggest some matches that I recently watched and *I* after becoming a WWE fan in the Stone Cold era, was simply blown away by.

 

WM5 - The Rockers Vs. the Twin Towers, Demolition Vs. Powers of Pain, Hart Foundation Vs. Greg Valentine & Honky Tonk Man

 

WM7 - Hart Foundation Vs. Nasty Boys, The Rockers Vs. Barbarian & Haku

 

All those listed are FAR better than any tag match you will see on WWE television or PPV today, or even in the past several years IMHO. Hart Foundation/British Bulldogs were good, but your missing a hell of a lot there, bud.

 

Also while you have WM7 check out the career match from Ultimate Warrior/Randy Savage as it is surprisingly good. That Hogan/Savage from WM5 is a match to watch if for nothing more than Ventura/Monsoon's commentary! I have both of these coliseum shows on DVD, so it's not hard to get a hold of.

[Fökai 0]

WM5 - The Rockers Vs. the Twin Towers, Demolition Vs. Powers of Pain, Hart Foundation Vs. Greg Valentine & Honky Tonk Man

 

WM7 - Hart Foundation Vs. Nasty Boys, The Rockers Vs. Barbarian & Haku

 

All those listed are FAR better than any tag match you will see on WWE television or PPV today, or even in the past several years IMHO.

 

Woah woah woah...

 

Let's not get carried away here. None of those matches broke ** or were even built up at all (save for Demoliton/PoP). These matches aren't able to hold a candle to the tag team division of the new generation (1997-present). Since 1997, the WWE/WCW have subscribed to the idea of combining to two talented singles workers coming together for the benefit of workrate, not just to hide the other's weaknesses (i.e. Hart Foundation, Rhythm & Blues).

[Scroby 0]

What do you mean Henning was never show-cased? He was a top mid-card most of his stint in the WWE. He was always one of the top heels during the 80's/early 90's. Hell he even had a feud with Hogan, his match with Bret was even on "The Best of Summerslam" Tape that was put out years ago.

[Guest ManKinnd]

And stuff like what I was talking about bothers me, so tough cookies. People were talking about how they liked the shows, and would like to own them. Coming in and basicly going "I don't see why you guys care about this, I don't care about these releases" is nothing more than a bait if you ask me.

 

If he instead came and said why he didn't understand why we were excited, or just something, then it would be cool, but he didn't.

 

Enough of this bullshit though, let's get back on topic.

I just wanted to point out that the debate going on now is far more interesting than people posting their favorite moments of these shows; don't you agree?

 

As for my two cents on the issue, I absolutely agree that the few good-great matches that occurred in WWF 80's stood out. How couldn't they? It's not odd anymore to have at least one ***+ match a week, but back then, there could be months between them. Steamboat/Savage was not the only great match of the 80's by any means, but it was in a much smaller pond of great matches than what it would be up against today. If it happened tomorrow, I doubt it'd even win Match of the Year.

[Downhome 0]

I would rather watch just about ANY tag match from back in the 80's and early 90's over just about ANY tag match from the past couple of years.

 

There aren't many workers around right now, that apparently, understand the psychology of a tag team match. We don't have any teams really, and the tag matches of today seem more like just one on one matches.

 

I can't really remember the last tag match that really felt just like that, a tag match.

[Fökai 0]

Would you agree with the last poster who stated that Hart Foundation v. Nasties, an absolutely HORRID match, was better than anything TWGTT or the Smackdown Six put out?

[Downhome 0]

Would you agree with the last poster who stated that Hart Foundation v. Nasties, an absolutely HORRID match, was better than anything TWGTT or the Smackdown Six put out?

Of course the matches teh SD Six put out was of better quality in terms of workrate, etc... I wouldn't try to say otherwise for a second. What I am saying however, is that I prefer the style of tag team match that the Hart Foundation, Nasties, Demolition, etc... worked back in the day. If we could have a bunch of teams to come along today and combine both styles, then I'd be in tag team heaven.

[ISportsFan 0]

Hart Foundation v. Nasty Boys wasn't a classic, or even great. But, it wasn't horrid at all. It was much better than it had any right to be considering three of the four in the match were awful workers.

 

Jason

[thuganomics 0]

The Smackdown Six was an amazing period of tag team history, sure, but in defense of the 80s/early 90s it only lasted about 4 months.

 

How long did we have the Rockers, Hart Foundation, and British Bulldogs, and to a lesser extent Demolition and the Powers of Pain in the late 80's/early 90's. The British Bulldogs alone showcased the greatness of the classic sense of a tag team division. And, I have to agree with downhome that the big guys, while not necessarily great workers, also added a lot of coolness to the division, which tends to be in short supply nowadays.

 

Compare the crowd reactions if you don't believe me...

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

Also RVDMARK I think you forgot that they employed one of the greatest tag teams of all time in 1989 in........Arn Anderson/Tully Blanchard, as well as the teams already there.....

[Guest Your Olympic Hero]

PRWTC006: Royal Rumble 1991 & 1992 Double DVD

Available late August

MOTHERFUCKING MARK OUT.

[Guest RickyB]

Just so you know, i've seen nearly all WWF/WWE PPV's

 

I seriously doubt that. I mean if you'd seen them all then you'd notice that during 93-95ish the characters were more cartoonish than in the 80's and early 90's. Yes Hart and Michaels were in the Main Events, but it didn't meant that the Wrestling suddenly became good. They didn't suddenly bring in good Wrestlers, they just continued the pushes that Bret and Michaels had started to recieve in the late 80's when they were in their respective Tag Teams. The overall "workrate" was exactly the same as it had been in the past.

 

unfortunately. Your seriously missing my point here. I never said that this weeks Benoit/Michaels match was one of the best matches ever, just that it was an example of how good WWE matches are on a regular basis these days.

 

And I think your missing my point that the best matches in the 80's WWF were on a par or better than the best matches around now.

 

As for Savage/Steamboat, yes it was a good match, but its only one match. Its greatness is exaggerated because it was the only "workrate" match of the 80's in this company. If it took place today, it wouldn't stand out.

 

Of course it wouldn't... not at all */sarcasm*, you blatantly haven't seen the match because it is probably one of the best WWF/WWE matches ever. Granted it wasn't that long of a match, but it was perfectly structured, awesomely worked and told a great story. Maybe you should sit and watch it properly.

 

How could I have missed "all of those Classic Tag Matches"? Perhaps they never happened? The closest the WWF had to "classic" tag team matches in the 80's was the Hart Foundation/British Bulldogs series in '87. Apart from that, the tag division stunk as well

 

What about Rockers/Brainbusters, Demolition weren't all that bad either, they worked well with the Rockers and the Hart Foundation. They were quite a lot of Classic Tag Matches... and the Hart Foundation/British Bulldogs series was an incredible series of matches.... better than any Tag Matches around these days.

 

*And in case you aren't aware, the Midnight Express and the Rock 'N' Roll Express worked for Jim Crockett for the majority of their careers, they never worked for Vince McMahon.

 

Nooooo! You don't say?? Maybe you missed the fact that I was using them teams and their feud as an argument to why The Hart Foundation and the Rockers should have been kept together as a Team instead of being split up quickly and given singles pushes.

 

Their legendary tag team fued which spanned the majority of the 1980's was just one of the major reasons why fans of good wrestling like myself preferred the NWA/WCW to the WWF during the 1980's/early '90s.*

 

Hey i've always prefered the old NWA to the WWF. But I prefered the 80s/early 90's WWF to Attitude era (after michaels injury) WWF.

 

Again, this point is quite hard to comprehend. Please correct me if i'm wrong, but I think your saying that I am only looking at main events during this period.

 

Umm, no. I'm saying that you can't have even watched the Main Event's because Hogan/Savage was a great match, as was Hogan/Warrior, and also Hogan/Slaughter wasn't a bad match... that's three Wrestlemania's in a row there that had good Main events.

 

If so, you are correct to a certain extent. The main events are, excuse the pun, the main matches. They are the ones that matter, are built up, have a purpose and will be remembered.

 

I think you're missing the point though, Hogan was the most well-known Wrestler in America at the time, of course the shows were built around him... he was the main draw. And even though his match was the main attraction, there WERE a lot of grea matches on the cards he headlined.

 

I don't remember every single meaningless mid-card match from every PPV. I do remember almost all main events, as they are the matches that the shows are built around, and were almost always unwatchable.

 

Actually most of Hogan's matches weren't unwatchable. They were rarely good, but they weren't unwatchable. I don't think you understand Wrestling at all mate, Wrestling's a three-ring circus, there has to be something for everyone. Most fans at that time wanted to see Hulk Hogan in the Main Events, so they got that, some wanted to see big guys - they had Sid Viscious, Aundre The Giant, etc, some wanted to see Tag Teams - Hart Foundation, British Bulldogs, Demolition, Rockers, some wanted to see good Wrestlers - Curt Hennig, Randy Savage, Ricky Steamboat, some wanted to see power Wrestlers just go out and kill people - Warrior, the big guys again, etc, some wanted to see good characters like Mr Perfect and so on and so on.

 

They are the matches being showcased, which is my point. I agree that the WWF in the 80's had some guys who were good workers, say Curt Hennig for example. However, he was never showcased.

 

Umm, did you not see the amount of time put into his character, did you not see how much he was on TV (which does mean he was showcased), did you not see the long matches he was given and the amount of promo's he was given. Being given the Intercontinental Title does mean that you were getting showcased at the time since the Title meant something then. I also think the fact he was givent he role as Flairs manager when he was injured meant he was worth something to the WWF.

 

If a PPV is advertised as "HULK HOGAN V EARTHQUAKE" then all i know is that the main showcased match (the supposed highlight of the show) features two poor workers. How do I know that a good worker (Curt Hennig) will be wrestling in the second match of the eleven-match card. The good worker, and his matches, weren't showcased.

 

Because they ususally announced more than one match in advance?? They'd announce the Intercontinental Title match and the Tag Team Title Match at least.

 

Again, it wasn't that "people with WORKRATE~!" hadn't arrived yet. They had the Bret Harts and Curt Hennigs, they were just never showcased until this time. Like you said, Bret Hart was beggining to receive a singles push which would see him become world champion a year later. This was one of the first examples of good wrestlers being showcased. Bret would never have been pushed like this in 1987, would he?

 

That's a pretty bad example you know, Savage and Steamboat were given that exact push and they were both great workers. Steamboat got the IC Title in a "showcased" match at WM 3 against Savage, Savage won the World Title a year later at WM 4. Course that couldn't happen, because a good workrate Wrestler like Savage couldn't have won the Title in 88.

 

*I'm unsure as to what point you were attempting to make with "Flair was World Champion in 1991". Firstly, Flair was never world champion in 1991. He was indeed world champion for a whopping two months in 1992

 

Sorry, yeah 92's what I meant.

 

however. Now as you all know, i'm not a fan of Ric Flair's work, so i'm not going to cry about his misuse during his WWF tenure.*

 

So wait, you aren't a fan of one of the best Wrestlers of the 80's, that carried the promotion that you were "a huge fan of" during the 80's and early 90's. The man who was the total package, had great matches, had shitloads of charisma and cut some of the best promo's ever and could carry ANYONE to a good match. Oh wait... he didn't do any high flying moves or headdrops, of course you wouldn't like him...

 

Have to say you've lost me again. Are you saying that the people who enjoy good workrate-heavy matches only watch for "high flying shit and stupid moves"? That makes no sense.

 

No but you're a mark for RVD.... that's pretty much his whole style.. I like watching him, but that is his style.

 

My favourite style/era of wrestling is the New Japan Junior Heavyweight division of the mid '90s, such as Jushin Lyger.

 

That's a great style, i'll agree, but I still doubt you like any of his matches since you're an RVD mark and most of his whole style is very slow paced with a lot of mat work and he doesn't do a whole load of High Flying stuff. The NJPW Junior Heavyweight style is a very good style though, I don't personally think it'd ever get over in America like, as was seen in WCW, they never really took to the Japanese Junior style, they prefered the Lucha style.

 

Most people on here favour All Japan Heavyweights of the '90s, such as Mitsuhara Misawa.

 

I personally prefer Hanson/Kawada to Misawa/Kawada and Misawa/Kobashi. I like watching either style as they always tell a story in their matches. They do Head Drops and stuff like that, but they tell a story in their matches. Same with the All-Japan Woman's style, lots of head drops and crazy shit, but great matches which tell a story.

 

Do we watch for "high flying shit and stupid moves"? No, we watch for good matches.

 

There's more than one kind of "good match", I can watch any matches. I prefer more simple matches, that tell a story and get the fans into it.

 

And what kind of story is told by two big guys, with a combined repitoire of 3 moves, slugging it out.

 

Having an abundance of moves doesn't make you a good Wrestler. Knowing how ot use those moves in the story of your match makes you a good Wrestler. RVD for example, great athlete, has some great moves... not a great wrestler. He doesn't know how to use his moves in the context of the match. Flair, not a great athelite, doesn't have a shitload of moves and does hit some of his moves and take moves fairly sloppily, but he knows how to use the moves in the context of the match and he undestands psycology and knows how to tell a story in the match, that's why people on here absalutly love the guy.

 

You want a match that "TOLD A STORY through the matches" then '80s WWF is *not* the place to find it.

 

We should just agree to disagree on that matter... Hogan Vs Big Guy might not be the greatest match combination ever, but it told a story and was usually fun to watch. All of Hogan's matches told a story, that and the fact they had crowd heat are the main things you CAN'T critisise about his matches.

 

Well, now you know I did watch during that time period and am not merely blindly knocking it. The then-WWF product in the 1980's was simply sub-par workrate wise.

 

I'm still not convinced you watched it. And if you did I think you watched it just to knock it.

[Guest Your Olympic Hero]

Late 80's WWF = best tag team period ever..... no argument possible.

 

The Brainbusters

The Rockers

Demolition

The Powers of Pain

The Orient Express

The Rougeaus

The British Bulldogs

The Twin Towers

The Killer Bees

The Bushwhackers

The Bolsheviks

The Dream Team

The Young Stallions

The Conquistadores

The Hart Foundation

 

There's probably plenty that I'm missing too... feels like I'm missing an important one.

[landy1987 0]

the DVDs are just the exact same versions as the Coliseum Videos, but they are all fantastic quality plus the SummerSlam 88 version that was released in the UK for basically the same as the PPV version (including all promos for Survivor Series and the Leonard/Lalonde boxing match plus a TEN MINUTE interview with both of them) Apparently the version in the U.S was heavily edited.

 

Also Silvervision have listed the Mountie/Koko B Ware match to be on the DVD which I am sure must be wrong as that wasn't on the home video version, so if it is on they must have specifically asked for the match from WWE which I doubt

[Lil' Bitch 0]

Does WWE own the CHV footages, those extras on the VHS tapes? I was just wondering since I don't know how the Coliseum / WWF relationship worked out and that CHV is now gone.