Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be.....

01-05-2012 , 05:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLAGG LIVES
In Bret's book he says something similar, still think regardless of match quality it would have had a huge payoff.
Flair says the rematches after his ear got better didn't even draw.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 05:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLAGG LIVES
In Bret's book he says something similar, still think regardless of match quality it would have had a huge payoff.
Pretty sure in Bret's book he claims that Flair DELIBERATELY tried to have an awful match with him any time they wrestled to avoid putting him over in any way, shape or form. That being said, it is really strange to not show the title changing hands on TV and surely it would have started Bret's first title reign off with a lot more momentum. Didn't the same thing happen when Diesel beat Bob Backlund for the belt? I can't imagine turning on Raw this Monday and finding out the WWE championship changed hands at a house show.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 05:51 PM
That Diesel thing was so strange and I always wanted the real story behind it
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 05:57 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordCC
Pretty sure in Bret's book he claims that Flair DELIBERATELY tried to have an awful match with him any time they wrestled to avoid putting him over in any way, shape or form. That being said, it is really strange to not show the title changing hands on TV and surely it would have started Bret's first title reign off with a lot more momentum. Didn't the same thing happen when Diesel beat Bob Backlund for the belt? I can't imagine turning on Raw this Monday and finding out the WWE championship changed hands at a house show.
It's certainly the classic case of two ego's clashing. They're both probably bitter and clearly dislike each other to this day.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 06:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by EMc
That Diesel thing was so strange and I always wanted the real story behind it
I think they just wanted Backlund to transition the belt to Diesel because Diesel really wasn't at a level where the crowd would accept him going over a babyface world champion like Bret yet. They didn't have 27 PPVs per year then (and the product was better for it), so they had to switch it either on a Raw or on a house show. To that point they had never had the world title change hands on free TV and I think an MSG house show was pushed as a more prestigious place even though nobody got to see it live on TV.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 06:15 PM
I always thought it was because they wanted to save Diesel / Bret for Mania and used Backlund to transition.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 06:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLAGG LIVES
It's certainly the classic case of two ego's clashing. They're both probably bitter and clearly dislike each other to this day.
I think it's pretty clear that the truth lies somewhere between their two sides of the story, it's a real shame that they couldn't put their egos aside because they could have had some VERY good matches if they worked together.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EMc
That Diesel thing was so strange and I always wanted the real story behind it
Whilst I'm not suggesting that he should have been anywhere near the main event in the first place, I remember watching Backlund's whole transition from face to heel and the way that he snapped after narrowly losing to Hart and genuinely buying into his character. I certainly think he had enough value that Nash could have gained a lot more by 'saving' the WWF and it's employees (several of whom were kayfabe attacked by Backlund) from his maniacal reign of terror on an episode of Raw.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 06:20 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLAGG LIVES
I always thought it was because they wanted to save Diesel / Bret for Mania and used Backlund to transition.
Diesel/Bret happened at the Rumble and just ended in a schmozz. Mania was Diesel/HBK.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 06:21 PM
moo I was at WM15 (1999 Rock v Austin) and it was not sold out and they gave away a **** load of tickets. So clearly interest had waned enough from the "good old days" that they couldn't draw or fill arenas at that time. I was there and saw it first hand! Which is of course the real reason they moved 7 as well.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 06:34 PM
Let's suppose, probably counter-factually, that Hart's claim about intentional sabotage is true. How bad at making enemies can one man possibly be? Flair had a well deserved reputation for getting the young stars over. Magnum TA was best buddies with Dusty Rhodes, who was engaged in a real life power struggle behind the scenes with Flair. Flair always tried to build up TA and make him look good. Flair did what he could to coach Luger. He made Sting look great.

As was known to Flair, the company intended for each of these guys to take over for Flair as the top guy. Yet somehow, some way, Bret Hart manages to be the exception.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 06:39 PM
Bret very much strikes me as the Phil Hellmuth of the wrestling world. He means well, but takes himself way too seriously and is delusional to the point of disorder.

Last edited by LKJ; 01-05-2012 at 06:39 PM. Reason: I like both Bret Hart and Phil Hellmuth.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 06:52 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpir
moo I was at WM15 (1999 Rock v Austin) and it was not sold out and they gave away a **** load of tickets. So clearly interest had waned enough from the "good old days" that they couldn't draw or fill arenas at that time. I was there and saw it first hand!
This is an interesting fact as well, given that the PPV buyrate for WM15 was the best for a Wrestlemania...since Wrestlemania VII. Which brings us full circle back to my point about the live attendance figure being misleading as a gauge of a PPV in terms of people entertained and dollar figures.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by moorobot
This is an interesting fact as well, given that the PPV buyrate for WM15 was the best for a Wrestlemania...since Wrestlemania VII. Which brings us full circle back to my point about the live attendance figure being misleading as a gauge of a PPV in terms of people entertained and dollar figures.
I thought your point was that Meltzer was lying about why they moved 7 and that it actually was because of threats. (He wasn't) I agree with the figures being misleading but they moved because of lack of live drawing period. And I am not lying you can ask the three other people I went with. The lower section opposite the hard camera side was 90% empty (we moved there so we could actually see since everyone was holding up their ****ty signs on the hard camera side.) And the M&M sponsor people were handing out tickets in bunches outside before the show started.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 07:00 PM
I agree with Bret taking himself way too seriously, but I don't think he's delusional.

Anyway, I've watched the Bret/Flair Saskatoon title change match a million times and it's quite good. I've never really gotten the Bret/Flair feud in either direction.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 07:10 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by tpir
I thought your point was that Meltzer was lying about why they moved 7 and that it actually was because of threats. .
That was all in defense of my original point/guess about dollars and people about the Slaughter angle.

I don't actively think Dave was lying, just that I distrust him/he isn't a reliable source on the Slaughter angle because he has an axe to grind. He might be telling the truth and he might not be.

I don't see a good reason to disbelieve your story about WM15.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 07:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by moorobot
Let's suppose, probably counter-factually, that Hart's claim about intentional sabotage is true. How bad at making enemies can one man possibly be? Flair had a well deserved reputation for getting the young stars over. Magnum TA was best buddies with Dusty Rhodes, who was engaged in a real life power struggle behind the scenes with Flair. Flair always tried to build up TA and make him look good. Flair did what he could to coach Luger. He made Sting look great.

As was known to Flair, the company intended for each of these guys to take over for Flair as the top guy. Yet somehow, some way, Bret Hart manages to be the exception.
Whilst I'm not saying that you are wrong, by that point Flair surely knew that he was likely headed back to WCW and possibly felt no reason to make a star for a company that he would no longer be employed by and thus in that context Hart was an exception.

Can't deny that Bret takes himself way too seriously at times though.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordCC
by that point Flair surely knew that he was likely headed back to WCW
I'm not sure Flair actually knew this at the time. He implied in a different context that he started to consider leaving the WWF at a later date when he was told by Mcmahon his role was going to be reduced, and after this Bill Watts called Mcmahon and asked him if he could talk to Flair about coming to WCW
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 08:21 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by moorobot
Let's suppose, probably counter-factually, that Hart's claim about intentional sabotage is true. How bad at making enemies can one man possibly be? Flair had a well deserved reputation for getting the young stars over. Magnum TA was best buddies with Dusty Rhodes, who was engaged in a real life power struggle behind the scenes with Flair. Flair always tried to build up TA and make him look good. Flair did what he could to coach Luger. He made Sting look great.

As was known to Flair, the company intended for each of these guys to take over for Flair as the top guy. Yet somehow, some way, Bret Hart manages to be the exception.
Flair was never a WWF guy to start though. History dictates McMahon never gave a single NWA/WCW wrestler the proper respect on the immediate entry into WWF/E. Flair angle was botched, Rhodes wore polka dots,Terry Taylor became a rooster, Windham was Widowmaker, OMG became Akeem, Duggan and Sheepherders became goofy kid characters, etc.....
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 08:24 PM
Arn and Tully got pretty good respect in their WWF run.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 08:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LKJ
Arn and Tully got pretty good respect in their WWF run.
Yep. Also Hall and Nash. And Vader. And Flair. Oh and that Mean Mark guy had a pretty good run too I hear. Lol polka dots. Dusty was allowed to stick around waaaayyy after his prime and is still around!
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 08:35 PM
Good points both! I forgot about Big Bubba/Big Bossman too. I would say Vader wasn't utilized that well but Hall and Nash yes. The botching of the Invasion angle blurred my judgement.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 09:18 PM
Cornette claims Vince wanted to call Vader "Mastodon" so he could copyright it and because he reminded him of a "big, tough, MASTODON!", and changed his mind after discussions.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 10:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordCC
Pretty sure in Bret's book he claims that Flair DELIBERATELY tried to have an awful match with him any time they wrestled to avoid putting him over in any way, shape or form. That being said, it is really strange to not show the title changing hands on TV and surely it would have started Bret's first title reign off with a lot more momentum. Didn't the same thing happen when Diesel beat Bob Backlund for the belt? I can't imagine turning on Raw this Monday and finding out the WWE championship changed hands at a house show.
I've said this in other threads, but I'm still furious about this all these years later.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 10:53 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dylan
The fingerpoke of doom gets a lot of hate, and it was a really stupid angle but part of the reason was because of Goldberg. Goldberg was supposed to fued with the NWO after the FPOD but he punch a window in a limo and nearly had to have his hand amputated so he was out for like 6 months.
You know what, I never understood why this got so much hate. From a pure storyline perspective I thought it was very good, and it was a great swerve. It really set the tone for the nWo to become a horrid heel faction that has no respect for WCW or Wrestling for that matter. It just was unfortunate that Goldberg got injured.

But I thought it was a good angle. I really think WCW was doomed post arquette, and even then they were doing a lot of good things. As much as I like to say, WCW was never really making that much money. It was never the product that caused the death of WCW, it was the merger.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote
01-05-2012 , 10:56 PM
We could say the invasion angle was done wrong, but most of the wrestlers were under guaranteed contracts with Time-Warner. And if they waited to debut WCW, it would lose a lot of momentum. They did the best with what they had, plus let's face it McMahon wanted to bury WCW as a whole. I think the vicitim wasn't the WCW crew but the ECW crew and should've left ECW as a tweener/face neutral faction.
If you could re-write 1 angle or story line in the history of pro wrestling it would be..... Quote

      
m