Opinions That Changed

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

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.

 

This referenced quote is something I read in humanoid92's post in the Old School Questions Thread. In it, he described how wrestling fans have just come to accept certain opinions about wrestling's past as fact, even though we might not necessarily agree with it. I started watching wrestling in the mid-80s and didn't get the internet until 1999. Since then, I've noticed that a lot of opinions I had about the era I grew up with changed with the popular sentiment on internet sites.

 

Please use this thread to give examples of opinions that you had that have slowly eroded over time. For example, I thought Chris Benoit and Eddy Guerrero were extremely bland, undersized wrestlers in WCW. I didn't think they offered much and would usually change to something else when they came on because they never gave compelling interviews and their matches lacked interesting spots. By 2004, I was practically screaming for these underappreciated superstars to get world title regins.

 

 

Other examples?

[Jericholic82 0]

Yeah cheech, back in the day I just cheered for "the good guys", I didn't know what workrate was or backstage politics and the like. I was excited when heels turned face, simply cuz it meant they could win the titles as faces (which made me happy i'm not afraid to say it) I liked Eddy G simply cuz he was the good guy when he came to WCW, Benoit on the other hand I took a liking to simply cuz of his style, even before the net. I was reluctant to like the "bad guys" cuz it seemed wrong.

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

Here are some more just to get conversation going:

 

-The choice of Diesel over Bret as world champion in 1995 was a good one. Bret had limited upside as a babyface champion while Diesel was easier to "sell" as a dominant world champion.

 

-WM IX wasn't that bad and the ending was extemely unique and interesting. It didn't do anything to harm business because it added an element of excitement to all future main events.

[King Kamala 0]

I seriously used to think Sid was the best big man ever to grace a wrestling ring.

 

 

 

While I certainly don't think he's as horrendous as some smarks think he is (He's at the very least capable of being carried to a good match which is more than you can say about a lot of big guys.) But I still hang my head in shame when I think about it.

[RonL21 0]

The one thing that bothers me is when people seem to act like they're backstage w/ the wrestlers and Vince is one of their trusted confidants......I get tired of hearing Ahmed Johnson and Ultimate Warriors were awful in the ring and unsafe...like all that mattered when you were 8 years old.....

[Cheech Tremendous 0]

I seriously used to think Sid was the best big man ever to grace a wrestling ring.

 

 

 

While I certainly don't think he's as horrendous as some smarks think he is (He's at the very least capable of being carried to a good match which is more than you can say about a lot of big guys.) But I still hang my head in shame when I think about it.

Sid was one of the greatest things ever. He most definitely had "it", whatever "it" is. He was one of my favorites during the 90s.

[Papacita 0]

About the only opinion that really changed since becoming a smark was my opinion of Warrior, who in my eyes could do no wrong up until about 98 or so. Of course, his rants had a lot to do with that too, but still...

[strummer 0]

I've mentioned this before but when I discovered the IWC in 1997 the first big realization I had was that there was "good" wrestling and "bad" wrestling. I really never looked at wrestling from a quality perspective, but more from a competitive/sports perspective. I cared about win and losses, the titles, the champions and if my favorites were doing well. The idea that a wrestler or wrestling match could be "bad" was foreign to me and it took a while to adjust.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

-The choice of Diesel over Bret as world champion in 1995 was a good one. Bret had limited upside as a babyface champion while Diesel was easier to "sell" as a dominant world champion.

 

Semi-Agreed. Giving the title to Diesel was a good idea given that Bret just got over a long run in 1994 and we needed something fresh. I don't even mind him crushing Backlund that much because while it completely ruined Backlund it really was a big boost to Diesel's career. The real problem with the Diesel reign is that once it got into the spring and it clearly wasn't working with Sid/Diesel drawing houses in the hundreds, they really needed to move into a different direction. Instead the title reign limped on all the way to October, killing business pretty much all the way. We're getting into fantasy territory here, but I would have booked Sid to go over Diesel at KOTR and then have him drop it to Shawn Michaels at Summerslam. Michaels wasn't any draw in 1996, but I blame a large part of that on the insulting 'boyhood dream' angle and a match at Wrestlemania where any sports fan or anybody who ever saw Rocky knew that Bret Hart should have retained the title on a draw after the time limit expired. In 1995 though, HBK was the hottest thing going and the belt should have gone to him a lot sooner. He would have been the best choice, but even if it was somebody else, Diesel on top clearly wasn't working and the WWF needed to go in a different direction.

 

-WM IX wasn't that bad and the ending was extemely unique and interesting. It didn't do anything to harm business because it added an element of excitement to all future main events.

 

WM IX was pretty bad, but I had no problem with the ending. What killed the title was not Hogan winning it at WM IX, but the aftermath where he disappeared for 3 months.

[Mr. S£im Citrus 0]

The one thing that bothers me is when people seem to act like they're backstage w/ the wrestlers and Vince is one of their trusted confidants......I get tired of hearing Ahmed Johnson and Ultimate Warriors were awful in the ring and unsafe...like all that mattered when you were 8 years old.....

Not everybody started watching wrestling when they were eight years old... I was a freshman in high school when Warrior beat Hogan at Wrestlemania, and twenty-two the first time I'd ever heard of Ahmed Johnson.

 

By then, I'd had plenty of time to make up my mind about what I thought a good wrestler was, and you're damned right I thought Johnson was awful.

[Big McLargeHuge 0]

And without WM9 we don't get that awesome ending at WM10 with an injured Bret regaining his belt from the guy who took it from him the year previous. My only issue, is that Yoko should've just kept the title the whole year. Agreed that Hogan's reign was a total joke.

 

In hindsight, it doesn't seem like such a bad idea to have Yoko walk out of Mania 9 with the title. Same for Shawn at WM11.

[JN News 0]

As a mark, I never liked Ric Flair, being that he was always a heel, and he was always oppossing the likes of Hulk Hogan & Bret Hart. Also, as a mark, I never liked The Four Horsemen. I also was a huge Hulkamaniac as a kid, until Vince Russo opened my eyes, and made me realize that Hogan had been holding down guys like Bret Hart in the WWF & WCW. Then, I hated his guts, and wanted The Hitman to kick his ass.

[King Kamala 0]

Random pay per view I used to really like as a mark; WCW Slamboree '99

 

 

 

Now, I can't even explain why I liked that show. I mean the opener was really good but everything else pretty much sucked.

[humanoid92 0]

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.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Hogan is interesting as I used to hate him at the time, but now that I am older I have a much greater appreciation of what he meant to the business. This is the opposite of how it was/is for most people.

 

If Yoko was to go over at Wrestlemania IX, it likely wouldn't be last. The Megamaniacs going over Money Inc for the tag titles probably would have been the main event in that case.

[humanoid92 0]

Hogan is interesting as I used to hate him at the time, but now that I am older I have a much greater appreciation of what he meant to the business. This is the opposite of how it was/is for most people.

 

If Yoko was to go over at Wrestlemania IX, it likely wouldn't be last. The Megamaniacs going over Money Inc for the tag titles probably would have been the main event in that case.

 

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.

[cabbageboy 0]

Kahran, I agree about Hogan. I have to admit, I was never the hugest Hogan fan as a kid. Mainly I think because I thought he got his ass kicked too much during a match and made the same trite comeback with the Hulk Up every time. Yet with time I started understanding Hogan's mastery of crowd heat, his actually good selling in matches, his psychology, and that for a big man he can move extremely well.

 

WM IX was a show that I thought was mostly head scratching at the time. I watched it and didn't think it was the heinous show most make it out to be, but even then I preferred most of the other WMs to it.

[Guest]

About the only opinion that really changed since becoming a smark was my opinion of Warrior, who in my eyes could do no wrong up until about 98 or so.

Yeah, same here. But some of my opinions that I had before have been further influenced by things that I've read on the web, especially my "Hunter hates doing jobs" opinion. Or that Taker doesn't like to put people over.

[Vern Gagne 0]

I was unaware of the all the backstage politics in the business.

 

I always liked the heels. Dibiase, Perfect, Rude, Flair. Alot of that is because of my dad, and brother.

[razazteca 0]

I seriously used to think Sid was the best big man ever to grace a wrestling ring.

 

 

 

While I certainly don't think he's as horrendous as some smarks think he is (He's at the very least capable of being carried to a good match which is more than you can say about a lot of big guys.) But I still hang my head in shame when I think about it.

Sid was one of the greatest things ever. He most definitely had "it", whatever "it" is. He was one of my favorites during the 90s.

Sid was truly the ruler and master of the big men for a short period of time as part of the 4 Horsemen in WCW and working with HBK in WWF remember now Sid got a bigger reaction from the crowd than the champion Shawn Michaels at some of their PPV matches and Sid was suppose to be the bad guy. Oh that "IT" factor was his unique interview style of changing his tone of voice, his intensity, the crazy personality, and of course the Body Glove elbow pad. Then again I am a HUGE fan of the psycho personalities of Randy Savage and Warrior.

[Ravenbomb 0]

Oddly enough, I wasn't that big of a Hogan fan when I was younger. I was more into the Undertaker (my favorite wrestler from as far back as I could remember up until I started watching every week in 98) and Jake Roberts. Really the only mark-ish thing I can remember was thinking Kane was really gonna set the Brood on fire during an episode of Raw.

[King Kamala 0]

RE: The Diesel title reign. I don't think its failure rested on Diesel's shoulders. It resulted in a lack of quality opponents (Thanks to the WWF's thin roster) and as someone said early, The WWF's insistence to keep it going after it had clearly failed. Honestly, I think a heel champion in '95 would have been a better option, since there seemed to be more potential babyface options (Diesel, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, to a lesser extent; The Undertaker, Lex Luger and Davey Boy Smith). Problem was again the lack of credible main event heels.

[Jericholic82 0]

oddly enough I actually was a big Diesel fan when he turned face, he was a dominant face champ (like Hogan, but with a "cooler" persona untill they tried to make him too much like Hogan) and Shawn as well, for me his boyhood dream angle didnt make me dislike him, I liked him even more cuz I could sympathize with him I guess. I liked Ahmed when he came in cuz he was a bad-ass face something new to me. Plus he was friends with shawn so that helped.

 

To set the record, my opinion on warrior has never changed despite his craziness hes still one of my all time favs (my first fav when I got into wrestling ot be honest). sure its fun to see him be whacked out, but I still remmeber fondly his big run.

[Dobbs 3K 0]

I really didn't like Diesel during his face title reign...he just seemed boring to me, and acted like he was too cool for wrestling (Gee, kind of how Kevin Nash has always come off as). His interviews were really boring, too.

[cabbageboy 0]

I think the first time I first considered the notion of backstage politics was during the initial Michaels solo push. The idea of it just seemed so absurd to me at the time. It was the first time I felt like they took a guy that I frankly couldn't buy at that top level and tried to put him on that level whether I liked it or not. I never felt that way about Bret Hart though, I guess due to him actually being a champion in the tag division instead of a glorified jobber (which is what the Rockers essentially were). Add to it Shawn's highly gay ring attire and it was the first time I pondered why a guy was being pushed. I'd never felt that way before about another wrestler, not even about Diesel really. At least with him I instinctively knew "Hey the guy is 7 ft. and 300 lbs. so he'll get pushed."

[Art Sandusky 0]

In the late 80s/early 90s, my cousin loved Ric Flair and other heels. This made him a reprehensible person in my young eyes. He even had the nerve to think the Big Gold Belt looked better than the WWF title! He's still wrong about that at least. I started tiring of Hogan around Wrestlemania VII, especially when his merchandise started looking awful. Fortunately that's when Bret's singles push began. Hogan was nothing compared to Bret Hart for me. I'm coming around on him again in a similar manner to Kahran in that post above, but Bret's still my guy. I liked the various Vanilla Midgets before having the internet for the same reasons. Everything they all did was so crisp and looked so real.

 

Mr. Perfect getting back into things in 1993 was also a big markout for me for some reason.

[King Kamala 0]

Yeah, I've always liked the vanilla midgets and guys like Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, etc. It's not that I didn't like guys like Hogan, The Warrior, Nash and stuff but to me they seemed kind of like superheroes- almost like they were unreal. But I could relate more to a guy like Bret Hart- who was just an average guy who got by on grit and determination.

 

 

My favorites as a kid though were Marty Jannetty and The 123 Kid. I've always marked for smaller wrestlers- in fact, I may have been the only people who didn't mind when Rey Mysterio Jr won The World title. Granted, his title reign completely sucked but I didn't have a problem with him winning it again. I'm straying off topic that happened 5-6 years after I gave up my mark card.

[RepoMan 0]

I thought Men on a Mission was a great tag team.

 

I thought Diesal was one of the best WWF Champions ever.

 

I viewed Vader as a just some sloppy fat guy and mediocre wrestler.

 

Amhed Johnson was a credible maineventer in my eyes.

 

When the Radikalz (or however they spelled it) came in I thought Benoit, Malenko, and Saturn were a bunch of boring overhyped mid-carders.

 

I was a big Chyna mark when she had her IC run. EG's courtship of her made me like Eddie.

 

When Angle came in I thought we was an annoying jobber and that WWF was pushing him down my throat.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

I think the first time I first considered the notion of backstage politics was during the initial Michaels solo push. The idea of it just seemed so absurd to me at the time. It was the first time I felt like they took a guy that I frankly couldn't buy at that top level and tried to put him on that level whether I liked it or not. I never felt that way about Bret Hart though, I guess due to him actually being a champion in the tag division instead of a glorified jobber (which is what the Rockers essentially were). Add to it Shawn's highly gay ring attire and it was the first time I pondered why a guy was being pushed. I'd never felt that way before about another wrestler, not even about Diesel really. At least with him I instinctively knew "Hey the guy is 7 ft. and 300 lbs. so he'll get pushed."

 

The first guy that simply left me wondering why he was in the position that he was in was Akeem the African Dream's initial push in 1988. Bossman I could get, but I could never figure out how some big fat white guy who was pretending to be black and was completely awful in the ring was being pushed as a legitimate opponent for the Megapowers. Keep in mind that I started watching just before Wrestlemania IV so I missed the initial Honkytonk Man push which probably would have me scratching my head as a 7 year old at the time. I know the first time I saw Wrestlemania III I didn't find it believable at all that HTM could pin Jake Roberts.

[Red Baron 0]

I thought Yokozuna was the best wrestler to come from Japan because he won the WWF Title.