Wrestlemania Sucked!!!
Ken McCary
Were it not for the Steve Austin vs. Bret Hart bloodbath, I would be
demanding my money back right this moment. EVERY OTHER MATCH ON THE
CARD SUCKED. The four-corner tag team match was poorly written and
hastily ended, the Chicago street fight was an obvious and poorly
imitated copy of the WCW Tornado Match at Uncensored, and the Undertaker
vs. Sid Vicious match was boring and anti-climatic to the Submission
match. Suffice it to say, when this was over I wanted to push McMahon
down myself.
Ken McCary
Jayson Riley
Ken McCary writes
That is what you get for spending 30 bucks on one of Vinnie's lame
crapfests.
Steve Muldoon
In <01bc3881$a8811620$504692cf@pcw95> "Jayson Riley"
Better to spend it on "Vinnie's lame crapfests" than anything WCW
dishes out.
WILL P 32
at least you werent there
sitting behind the french broadcast team, not being able to see shit
because of the three camera dudes standing in the same spot all nite.
at least you werent there
sitting between two people who weighed in at least at 300+each
be thankful you only are out $30
thanks
Doug Tyska
5027 west 24th Place
Cicero Il 60804
708 899 9827
lucifersam
On 24 Mar 1997 16:14:19 GMT, smul...@ix.netcom.com(Steve Muldoon)
wrote:
Actually the last two ppvs by both feds tell the story. WCW's
traditionally worst ppv uncensored was alot better than the wwf's
traditionally best ppv wrestlemania. I think this wrestlemania marks
the end of an era. Uncensored had a solid undercard and at least a
main event that had some serious heat and pop to it at the end.
Wrestlemania had an IYH undercard at best, one good match and two
stiffs in the main event. People complain about wcw's main events but
they seem to ignore this stiff fest as the main event to wwf's biggest
ppv.
Jayson Riley
lucifersam writes
> Actually the last two ppvs by both feds tell the story. WCW's
> traditionally worst ppv uncensored was alot better than the wwf's
> traditionally best ppv wrestlemania. I think this wrestlemania marks
> the end of an era. Uncensored had a solid undercard and at least a
> main event that had some serious heat and pop to it at the end.
> Wrestlemania had an IYH undercard at best, one good match and two
> stiffs in the main event. People complain about wcw's main events but
> they seem to ignore this stiff fest as the main event to wwf's biggest
> ppv.
Uncensored Rocked and so did Superbrawl and Starrcade. Souled out was pure
Crap I will admit that. I truly think WCW has had some of it's best PPVs
over the last 4 months (excluding Souled Out) and I think they will
continue to provide great PPVS this year, I'm really looking forward to
Spring Stampede I have not seen a WWF PPV since SummerSlam last year and i
really really really doubt I will spend my money on any other WWF PPV
again. From what I heard the main event at Wrestlemania was nothing but
restholds and punches and I have heard nobody complain about that.
Ryan Grant
>Actually the last two ppvs by both feds tell the story. WCW's
>traditionally worst ppv uncensored was alot better than the wwf's
>traditionally best ppv wrestlemania.
In your opinion. In my opinion, nothing, and I do mean nothing, on
the Uncensored card came even close to touching the intensity of
Austin-Hart, and the whole card top to bottom was better.
>I think this wrestlemania marks the end of an era.
Oh? You've been proclaiming the era done for as long as I've watched
you post here on RSPW. Bury the body and move on, Mark.
>Uncensored had a solid undercard and at least a
>main event that had some serious heat and pop to it at the end.
And the pop at the end had nothing to do with the match, and
everything to do with Sting coming out of the ceiling. I'm not so
sure how serious the heat was, either.
>Wrestlemania had an IYH undercard at best, one good match and two
>stiffs in the main event.
Hogan-Piper. Hogan-Piper. Hogan-Piper. Would I rather watch
Sid-'Taker than Hogan-Piper? Yep, because out of those 4, the best
one is the Undertaker, and I'd just as soon see him.
>People complain about wcw's main events but
>they seem to ignore this stiff fest as the main event to wwf's biggest
>ppv.
But it had to happen. You can't always have the best workers in the
main event every PPV, the Undertaker deserved the belt, and there was
no one else for the 'Taker to work against. And, in my mind, the main
event was Bret-Steve. Everything else was anti-climactic.
Ryan Grant
RCG...@earthlink.net
Be a Wrestling Fan.
Jayson Riley
Ryan Grant says
> In your opinion. In my opinion, nothing, and I do mean nothing, on
> the Uncensored card came even close to touching the intensity of
> Austin-Hart, and the whole card top to bottom was better.
I saw Uncensored and the Malenko/Guerreo matched rocked and so did
PE-Harlem Heat,Piscosis/Dragon and hell even Glacier put on a great match.
I don't spend money to see one HOT AWESOME match, i would like to see more
then one good match and on paper the rest of the Wrestlemania card looked
crap and from some of the reviews i have read online was crap. What if
there was no Austin-Hart match? How would Wrestlemania be then?
> And the pop at the end had nothing to do with the match, and
> everything to do with Sting coming out of the ceiling. I'm not so
> sure how serious the heat was, either.
The Guy got a huge POP! I Enjoy seeing Sting beat the crap out of the NWO
and i enjoyed the rest of the card as well!
> Hogan-Piper. Hogan-Piper. Hogan-Piper. Would I rather watch
> Sid-'Taker than Hogan-Piper? Yep, because out of those 4, the best
> one is the Undertaker, and I'd just as soon see him.
I think i rather a see a legend like Piper then a Dead Guy.
madman
Jayson Riley wrote:
Ryan Grant says
Look asshole - if you DIDN'T even see Wrestlemania SHUT the FUCK UP.
I'm not one to say this PPV sucked and this PPV was the best, but I
never ever would condemn a show I didn't even see. If you want to say
Uncensored Ruled fine - at least you saw it. But don't condemn another
PPV that you didn't watch just because some lemmings said it sucked in
RSPW
madman
aka Gilgamesh
smul...@ix.netcom.com(Steve Muldoon) wrote:
>In <01bc3881$a8811620$504692cf@pcw95> "Jayson Riley"
><extr...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>>
>>
>>
>>Ken McCary writes
>>
>
> Better to spend it on "Vinnie's lame crapfests" than anything WCW
>dishes out.
Thank you for your balanced, objective, reasoned intrusion into the
debate Mr Muldoon, I personally thought the PPV to be mediocre at
best, with the exception of the excellent Austin-Hart match, quite
what relevance WCW PPV's have to the lamentable failings of WM XIII
are quite lost on me, unless it is a source of comfort to you that WCW
put out bad PPV's so that in someway mitigates for the WWF doing it.
It isn;t over til the Spice Girls sing
"Slam your body down and wind it all around
Slam your body down and zigga zig Ahhhhhhhhh !"
Wannabe - The Spice Girls.
1997 - The Year Of the Re-Birth of English Cricket.
Jayson Riley
madman so kindly writes
> Look a**hole - if you DIDN'T even see Wrestlemania SHUT the F*CK UP.
> I'm not one to say this PPV sucked and this PPV was the best, but I
> never ever would condemn a show I didn't even see. If you want to say
> Uncensored Ruled fine - at least you saw it. But don't condemn another
> PPV that you didn't watch just because some lemmings said it sucked in
> RSPW
Um.. Next time you write a reply please try not to use profanity that
really bugs me.
Thanks!
Ryan Grant
On 24 Mar 1997 20:21:53 GMT, "Jayson Riley"
<extr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>I saw Uncensored and the Malenko/Guerreo matched rocked and so did
>PE-Harlem Heat,Piscosis/Dragon and hell even Glacier put on a great match.
>I don't spend money to see one HOT AWESOME match, i would like to see more
>then one good match and on paper the rest of the Wrestlemania card looked
>crap and from some of the reviews i have read online was crap. What if
>there was no Austin-Hart match? How would Wrestlemania be then?
If there had been no Hart/Austin match, it still would have been a
decent card. But the match was there, and that made the difference.
>> And the pop at the end had nothing to do with the match, and
>> everything to do with Sting coming out of the ceiling. I'm not so
>> sure how serious the heat was, either.
>
>The Guy got a huge POP! I Enjoy seeing Sting beat the crap out of the NWO
>and i enjoyed the rest of the card as well!
Hooray for Sting beating up on the NWO. I myself like to watch good
wrestling matches, and I've yet to see one from anyone involved with
the NWO. Hart-Austin, on the other hand, was a great wrestling match.
>> Hogan-Piper. Hogan-Piper. Hogan-Piper. Would I rather watch
>> Sid-'Taker than Hogan-Piper? Yep, because out of those 4, the best
>> one is the Undertaker, and I'd just as soon see him.
>
>I think i rather a see a legend like Piper then a Dead Guy.
I think I would rather see a legend like Piper back when he was a
great competitior than watch him now when he's not a great competitor.
Timothy Meisner
On 24 Mar 1997, Jayson Riley wrote:
> > match. Suffice it to say, when this was over I wanted to push McMahon
> > down myself.
>
> That is what you get for spending 30 bucks on one of Vinnie's lame
> crapfests.
Where do these people come from?? I don't like WCW, but you don't see me
sitting here posting about how I watched the PPV and thought it sucked.
You know why? IT'S RUDE.
If you don't like it, or don't like Vince, or don't like WCW, don't post
about it, NOBODY CARES WHAT YOU DON'T LIKE.
If you want to post about wrestling, hey that sounds good.
Spring break away from the computer is going to feel good.
ObWrestling: Bret Hart is one hell of a company man. He did the clean job
to Shawn to put him over, jobbed twice to Sid, and to Vader. He obviously
wanted to come back as a face and win the title from Shawn at WM, but when
Shawn apparently balked on it, Bret agreed to turn his back on his fans,
and on his image as a role model, apparently just for the good of the
federation. Not to mention putting up with Shawn talking at the Slammys
about how he beat Bret (more than once he mentioned) and having Shawn talk
about him throughout the match at Wrestlemania. Too bad Shawn hasn't done
anything but avoid jobbing his titles.
---------------
Timothy Meisner
<mei...@u.washington.edu>
http://weber.u.washington.edu/~meisner
Jayson Riley
Timothy Meisner writes
> Where do these people come from?? I don't like WCW, but you don't see me
> sitting here posting about how I watched the PPV and thought it sucked.
> You know why? IT'S RUDE.
I did not post " Wrestlemania Sucked!!!!!!". I did not see this event on
PPV and i doubt i ever will buy the PPV, I was responding to some of the
posts I have read from people who thought the event was terrible and felt
one Good match was not worth 30 bucks.
> If you don't like it, or don't like Vince, or don't like WCW, don't post
> about it, NOBODY CARES WHAT YOU DON'T LIKE.
Um this is a wrestling newgroup*rec.sport.pro-wrestling* and have you ever
heard of Free Speech?
If I want to say I hate the WWF, I'll will post it. If you hate that or me
or any of my posts I suggest you do this:
Put me in your killfile
Ignore my posts.
Don't read the newsgroup.
That is pretty Simple.
Ryan Siebel
The Blue Avenger (aka Gilgamesh) wrote:
> It isn;t over til the Spice Girls sing
Will you PLEASE take the damn ";" out of your .sig file?! I can't bring
myself to take you the least bit seriously because you've had "isn't"
spelled as "isn;t" for the longest time. And while you're updating your
sig, you might want to take out the Spice Girls altogether. Just a
thought.
> "Slam your body down and wind it all around
> Slam your body down and zigga zig Ahhhhhhhhh !"
>
> Wannabe - The Spice Girls.
>
> 1997 - The Year Of the Re-Birth of English Cricket.
--
Ryan Siebel
rm...@po.cwru.edu
"Pure entertainment is not an egotistical lady singing boring songs
onstage for two hours and people in tuxes clapping whether they like it
or not. It's the real performers on the street who can hold people's
attention and keep them from walking away."--Andy Kaufman
Jayson Riley
My Good Friend Timothy Meisner writes
> You didn't see it. Don't comment on it then.
If I want to comment on something I'm going to comment on it and If you
don't like that, Well buddy that is your problem!
> > If I want to say I hate the WWF, I'll will post it. If you hate that or
me
> > or any of my posts I suggest you do this:
> > Put me in your killfile
>
> Some of us wish we had them.
Yeah just go ahead and get a decent newsreader! I can give you the
location of some good sites where you can download a really good one!
> > Ignore my posts.
> 20 of them today?
Tim My good friend I think you are going a little too far! I mean Come On
buddy :)
> That is pretty Simple.
> You want to know what's simple? Your sixth grade homework.
Oh Tim was there a need to be RUDE!.........Geez
Timothy Meisner
Ahhh... I checked my e-mail and stuff before I left. Whoops :)
On 24 Mar 1997, Jayson Riley wrote:
> Timothy Meisner writes
>
> > Where do these people come from?? I don't like WCW, but you don't see me
> > sitting here posting about how I watched the PPV and thought it sucked.
> > You know why? IT'S RUDE.
>
> I did not post " Wrestlemania Sucked!!!!!!".
No, you didn't. You wrote:
> That is what you get for spending 30 bucks on one of Vinnie's lame
> crapfests.
Gee, my mistake.
> I did not see this event on
> PPV and i doubt i ever will buy the PPV, I was responding to some of the
> posts I have read from people who thought the event was terrible and felt
> one Good match was not worth 30 bucks.
You didn't see it. Don't comment on it then.
> > If you don't like it, or don't like Vince, or don't like WCW, don't post
> > about it, NOBODY CARES WHAT YOU DON'T LIKE.
>
> Um this is a wrestling newgroup*rec.sport.pro-wrestling* and have you ever
> heard of Free Speech?
When did the Usenet become property of the USA?
> If I want to say I hate the WWF, I'll will post it. If you hate that or me
> or any of my posts I suggest you do this:
>
> Put me in your killfile
Some of us wish we had them.
> Ignore my posts.
20 of them today?
> Don't read the newsgroup.
Oh yeah, there's the solution.
> That is pretty Simple.
You want to know what's simple? Your sixth grade homework.
---------------
FireBall
On 24 Mar 1997 17:49:34 GMT, "Jayson Riley"
<extr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote this little gem:
>Uncensored Rocked and so did Superbrawl and Starrcade. Souled out was pure
>Crap I will admit that. I truly think WCW has had some of it's best PPVs
>over the last 4 months (excluding Souled Out) and I think they will
>continue to provide great PPVS this year, I'm really looking forward to
>Spring Stampede I have not seen a WWF PPV since SummerSlam last year and i
>really really really doubt I will spend my money on any other WWF PPV
Glad you enjoy the WCW PPV's. On that note, what the hell is the deal
with WCW??? They are now having a PPV every 20 days. Shit at that
rate that 17PPV's a year (at $30/pop = $510/year) And to top it off,
the last 2 PPV's had at least 1 identical match.....er...what the
fuck???
>again. From what I heard the main event at Wrestlemania was nothing but
>restholds and punches and I have heard nobody complain about that.
Not saying that the main event was great, but wouldn't you look more
credible if you had actually WATCHED it and THEN complained about it
rather than going on hearsay????
----------------------------------------------------------------
RSPW-->Rec.Sport.Pro-Wrestling (Does this clear things up???)
Wrestling is not fake! It is Sports Entertainment.
----------------------------------------------------------------
FireBall
On 24 Mar 1997 21:16:53 GMT, "Jayson Riley"
<extr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote this little gem:
>
>Um.. Next time you write a reply please try not to use profanity that
>really bugs me.
So what asshole??? Ask me if I give a fuck about what irks your
village idiot mind. Next!!!!
Dave Scherer
>Where do these people come from?? I don't like WCW, but you don't see me
>sitting here posting about how I watched the PPV and thought it sucked.
>You know why? IT'S RUDE.
No, it's some of the faithful on rspw. People can't just ignore
subjects and people they don't like. They have to tell everyone why
they are wrong to like them.
>If you don't like it, or don't like Vince, or don't like WCW, don't post
>about it, NOBODY CARES WHAT YOU DON'T LIKE.
>
>If you want to post about wrestling, hey that sounds good.
What a concept.
>Spring break away from the computer is going to feel good.
>
>ObWrestling: Bret Hart is one hell of a company man. He did the clean job
He is one hell of a wrestler as well. Anyone who did not like his
match with Steve Austin, no LOVE his match with Steve Austin, watches
wrestling for a different reason than I do.
>to Shawn to put him over, jobbed twice to Sid, and to Vader. He obviously
>wanted to come back as a face and win the title from Shawn at WM, but when
>Shawn apparently balked on it, Bret agreed to turn his back on his fans,
>and on his image as a role model, apparently just for the good of the
>federation. Not to mention putting up with Shawn talking at the Slammys
Well, that and the fact that he got a weird reaction from the fans
when he came back.
>about how he beat Bret (more than once he mentioned) and having Shawn talk
>about him throughout the match at Wrestlemania. Too bad Shawn hasn't done
>anything but avoid jobbing his titles.
Shawn is really, really losing it.
The Wrestling Lariat Newsletter
*Email me for current rates*
Check out our web page at:
http://www.cybrsports.com/lariat
Perfection
boy aren't you a big man. Probably a 14 year old trying to act like a real tough guy. Weakling.
Ryan Grant
On 24 Mar 1997 23:44:17 GMT, "Jayson Riley"
<extr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>My Good Friend Timothy Meisner writes
>
>> You didn't see it. Don't comment on it then.
>
>If I want to comment on something I'm going to comment on it and If you
>don't like that, Well buddy that is your problem!
"Uncensored sucked! I didn't see it, but I know it sucked, so there!"
If I had posted that, I would be a jackass and a fool (not that I'm
not already). Substitute Uncensored for Wrestlemania, and you can
have Jayson Riley.
Caroline Bunce
In article <33373659...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, Dave Scherer
<lar...@ix.netcom.com> writes
>On Mon, 24 Mar 1997 13:37:26 -0800, Timothy Meisner
><mei...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>>ObWrestling: Bret Hart is one hell of a company man. He did the clean job
>
>He is one hell of a wrestler as well.
True, but his interviews leave me kinda cold. Not that 'straight'
interview aren't a breath of fresh air every now and then.
> Anyone who did not like his
>match with Steve Austin, no LOVE his match with Steve Austin, watches
>wrestling for a different reason than I do.
Hey....you've been watch far to much ECW for your own good. <vbg>
*running fast* Seriously it was an excellent match, but if I'd known
how bloody it was gonna be I wouldn't have watched it with my son around
at the time.
>
>>to Shawn to put him over, jobbed twice to Sid, and to Vader. He obviously
>>wanted to come back as a face and win the title from Shawn at WM, but when
>>Shawn apparently balked on it, Bret agreed to turn his back on his fans,
>>and on his image as a role model, apparently just for the good of the
>>federation. Not to mention putting up with Shawn talking at the Slammys
>
>Well, that and the fact that he got a weird reaction from the fans
>when he came back.
Not that weird from what I saw. He took a while off and wrestling fans
memories are notoriously short. That said the couple of other times his
taken time off the fan reaction to him being back has been mixed, maybe
not as much as it was this time, but still mixed.
>
>>about how he beat Bret (more than once he mentioned) and having Shawn talk
>>about him throughout the match at Wrestlemania. Too bad Shawn hasn't done
>>anything but avoid jobbing his titles.
>
>Shawn is really, really losing it.
Micheals seems to be turning into a 'Hogan' behaviour wise. When will
McMahon learn that you can't build your company/fed around one
guy...look what happened last time! At least Bischoff has the sense to
hang it on a group of wrestlers.
Caroline
Jeremy Billones
In article <Pine.A41.3.95b.97032...@dante26.u.washington.edu>,
Timothy Meisner <mei...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>ObWrestling: Bret Hart is one hell of a company man.
Amen.
>He obviously
>wanted to come back as a face and win the title from Shawn at WM, but when
>Shawn apparently balked on it, Bret agreed to turn his back on his fans,
>and on his image as a role model, apparently just for the good of the
>federation.
I'd like to know if they're actually going to go all the way with this -
have Bret wrestle as a heel in the US, but as a face everywhere else :)
One other thing - perhaps Bret will now consider the European Title to
be better and more pure, and go try and take it from BBD? That would
be the easy way to avoid Bret/UT in the near future.
Jeremy Billones http://www.primenet.com/~billones/
3-0, 3.67, .814 * ISTJ * Go Caps! * USSF Certifiable * Kaientai DX 4 Life
"They're cheering me now, but they booed me before... You didn't see me
getting all bent out of shape about it..." Shawn Michaels
"You are a LIAR!" Unknown Fan
aka Gilgamesh
Ryan Siebel <rm...@po.cwru.edu> wrote:
>The Blue Avenger (aka Gilgamesh) wrote:
>
>> It isn;t over til the Spice Girls sing
>
>Will you PLEASE take the damn ";" out of your .sig file?! I can't bring
>myself to take you the least bit seriously because you've had "isn't"
>spelled as "isn;t" for the longest time. And while you're updating your
>sig, you might want to take out the Spice Girls altogether. Just a
>thought.
So tell me what you want, what you really really want ?
It isn;t over til the Spice Girls sing
"Slam your body down and wind it all around
aka Gilgamesh
rcg...@eathlink.net (Ryan Grant) wrote:
>>Wrestlemania had an IYH undercard at best, one good match and two
>>stiffs in the main event.
>
>Sid-'Taker than Hogan-Piper? Yep, because out of those 4, the best
>one is the Undertaker, and I'd just as soon see him.
All 4 suck, but I would sooner see Sid-Taker than Hogan-Piper but not
a single one of those 4 wrestlers is watchable, IMHO, although all 4
give great interviews.
>>People complain about wcw's main events but
>>they seem to ignore this stiff fest as the main event to wwf's biggest
>>ppv.
>
>But it had to happen. You can't always have the best workers in the
>main event every PPV, the Undertaker deserved the belt, and there was
>no one else for the 'Taker to work against. And, in my mind, the main
>event was Bret-Steve. Everything else was anti-climactic.
>
I could not believe it was not top match on the card, even the chicago
streetfight was placed above it, plain crazy.
>
>Ryan Grant
>RCG...@earthlink.net
>
>Be a Wrestling Fan.
aka Gilgamesh
rcg...@eathlink.net (Ryan Grant) wrote:
>On 24 Mar 1997 20:21:53 GMT, "Jayson Riley"
><extr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>>I saw Uncensored and the Malenko/Guerreo matched rocked and so did
>>PE-Harlem Heat,Piscosis/Dragon and hell even Glacier put on a great match.
>>I don't spend money to see one HOT AWESOME match, i would like to see more
>>then one good match and on paper the rest of the Wrestlemania card looked
>>crap and from some of the reviews i have read online was crap. What if
>>there was no Austin-Hart match? How would Wrestlemania be then?
>
>If there had been no Hart/Austin match, it still would have been a
>decent card. But the match was there, and that made the difference.
Yes the match was truly a classic Ryan, one of the best matches I have
ever seen, but what other matches on the card rose above the
nondescript in your opinion ?
aka Gilgamesh
No...@spammers.beware (FireBall) wrote:
>On 24 Mar 1997 17:49:34 GMT, "Jayson Riley"
><extr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote this little gem:
>
>>Uncensored Rocked and so did Superbrawl and Starrcade. Souled out was pure
>>Crap I will admit that. I truly think WCW has had some of it's best PPVs
>>over the last 4 months (excluding Souled Out) and I think they will
>>continue to provide great PPVS this year, I'm really looking forward to
>>Spring Stampede I have not seen a WWF PPV since SummerSlam last year and i
>>really really really doubt I will spend my money on any other WWF PPV
>
>Glad you enjoy the WCW PPV's. On that note, what the hell is the deal
>with WCW??? They are now having a PPV every 20 days. Shit at that
>rate that 17PPV's a year (at $30/pop = $510/year) And to top it off,
>the last 2 PPV's had at least 1 identical match.....er...what the
>fuck???
>
Actually they are having 1 PPV a months, it is just unfortunate thazt
there were 3 weeks in between the last 2, they are running the risk
of, in the words of Gorilla Monsoon, going to the well once too often.
>>again. From what I heard the main event at Wrestlemania was nothing but
>>restholds and punches and I have heard nobody complain about that.
>
>Not saying that the main event was great, but wouldn't you look more
>credible if you had actually WATCHED it and THEN complained about it
>rather than going on hearsay????
>
When it was live I watched it at 2 AM UK time, and it was horrible, I
watched it again on Monday when I got back from work and although not
as bad as my first impression of it, it was still awful.
Austin-Hart is definately match of the year candidate, but not one of
the other matches was better than average.
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>RSPW-->Rec.Sport.Pro-Wrestling (Does this clear things up???)
>Wrestling is not fake! It is Sports Entertainment.
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>
Dave Scherer
>In article <33373659...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, Dave Scherer
><lar...@ix.netcom.com> writes
>
>>On Mon, 24 Mar 1997 13:37:26 -0800, Timothy Meisner
>><mei...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>
>>>ObWrestling: Bret Hart is one hell of a company man. He did the clean job
>>
>>He is one hell of a wrestler as well.
>
>True, but his interviews leave me kinda cold. Not that 'straight'
>interview aren't a breath of fresh air every now and then.
I'll tell ya, Bret was completely on it on Raw last night. What a
fabulous interview. I felt like he was talking to the, unfortunately,
growing number of people at the ECW Arena who chant "Boring" when good
wrestlers actually wrestle.
>> Anyone who did not like his
>>match with Steve Austin, no LOVE his match with Steve Austin, watches
>>wrestling for a different reason than I do.
>
>Hey....you've been watch far to much ECW for your own good. <vbg>
I've seen too much ECW for anyone's good!
>*running fast* Seriously it was an excellent match, but if I'd known
>how bloody it was gonna be I wouldn't have watched it with my son around
>at the time.
That is a major problem I see in the WWF right now. For so long, they
have been family oriented fare, and then they just up and changed the
product without telling the audience. I realize that they are doing
it for the rootest of all reasons, money, but they owe it to their
long time fans to be a little more considerate of instances like you
watching with your son.
>>>to Shawn to put him over, jobbed twice to Sid, and to Vader. He obviously
>>>wanted to come back as a face and win the title from Shawn at WM, but when
>>>Shawn apparently balked on it, Bret agreed to turn his back on his fans,
>>>and on his image as a role model, apparently just for the good of the
>>>federation. Not to mention putting up with Shawn talking at the Slammys
>>
>>Well, that and the fact that he got a weird reaction from the fans
>>when he came back.
>
>Not that weird from what I saw. He took a while off and wrestling fans
>memories are notoriously short.
What I meant was, all along, he has told the "truth". He WAS screwed
out of the title by a last minute stip. He was screwed all along.
The Fed thought that would get the fans behind him, but they turned on
him instead.
>>>about how he beat Bret (more than once he mentioned) and having Shawn talk
>>>about him throughout the match at Wrestlemania. Too bad Shawn hasn't done
>>>anything but avoid jobbing his titles.
>>
>>Shawn is really, really losing it.
>
>Micheals seems to be turning into a 'Hogan' behaviour wise.
But to be fair, he did do a good interview last night.
>When will
>McMahon learn that you can't build your company/fed around one
>guy...look what happened last time! At least Bischoff has the sense to
>hang it on a group of wrestlers.
I think Vince is doing that to, but he wants Michaels in the mix at
the top, for obvious reasons.
FireBall
On Tue, 25 Mar 1997 21:44:44 GMT, (The Blue Avenger (aka Gilgamesh))
wrote this little gem:
>>Glad you enjoy the WCW PPV's. On that note, what the hell is the deal
>>with WCW??? They are now having a PPV every 20 days. Shit at that
>>rate that 17PPV's a year (at $30/pop = $510/year) And to top it off,
>>the last 2 PPV's had at least 1 identical match.....er...what the
>>fuck???
>>
>
>Actually they are having 1 PPV a months, it is just unfortunate thazt
>there were 3 weeks in between the last 2, they are running the risk
>of, in the words of Gorilla Monsoon, going to the well once too often.
Actually, if you look at the dates, the last 2PPV's had a 20day
difference between them and there is also a 20day time span between
the last WCW PPV and the upcoming Spring Stampede...(or is that what
you meant).
Caroline Bunce
In article <33487f7a...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, Dave Scherer
<lar...@ix.netcom.com> writes
>>>On Mon, 24 Mar 1997 13:37:26 -0800, Timothy Meisner
>>><mei...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>>
>>>>ObWrestling: Bret Hart is one hell of a company man. He did the clean job
>>>
>>>He is one hell of a wrestler as well.
>>
>>True, but his interviews leave me kinda cold. Not that 'straight'
>>interview aren't a breath of fresh air every now and then.
>
>I'll tell ya, Bret was completely on it on Raw last night.
I'm gonna have to wait 'till Friday to find that one out :-)
> What a
>fabulous interview. I felt like he was talking to the, unfortunately,
>growing number of people at the ECW Arena who chant "Boring" when good
>wrestlers actually wrestle.
Umm....sorry Dave, but in that atmosphere what did you really expect,
eventually? Violence can be numbing, so you have to step up the amount
to get the same effect. That's not to say there isn't a point where 99
percent of people will go "ugh gross". But does ECW seriously want to
attract the 1 percent that don't. Mind you I'm not saying that ECW has
got _anywhere_ near that point yet, but it could.
[Austin/Hart match]
>>Hey....you've been watch far to much ECW for your own good. <vbg>
>
>I've seen too much ECW for anyone's good!
No comment <g>
>
>>*running fast* Seriously it was an excellent match, but if I'd known
>>how bloody it was gonna be I wouldn't have watched it with my son around
>>at the time.
>
>That is a major problem I see in the WWF right now. For so long, they
>have been family oriented fare, and then they just up and changed the
>product without telling the audience.
Telling? wrong word I think...to make those kind of changes you need
'educate' your audience into if not appricating, accepting a different
style. That takes time, they seemed to have started off pretty well, I
think they just jumped the gun a bit - possibly
> I realize that they are doing
>it for the rootest of all reasons, money, but they owe it to their
>long time fans to be a little more considerate of instances like you
>watching with your son.
It's not as if it really upset him or anything at 9 he's old enough just
to "yuck" and then ignore it more or less, but it could have upset
younger kids.
[Bret Hart]
>>>Well, that and the fact that he got a weird reaction from the fans
>>>when he came back.
>>
>>Not that weird from what I saw. He took a while off and wrestling fans
>>memories are notoriously short.
>
>What I meant was, all along, he has told the "truth". He WAS screwed
>out of the title by a last minute stip. He was screwed all along.
>The Fed thought that would get the fans behind him, but they turned on
>him instead.
*shrug* no one likes people who winge...Hart sometimes comes accross
that way even if it is unintentional
>>>Shawn is really, really losing it.
>>
>>Micheals seems to be turning into a 'Hogan' behaviour wise.
>
>But to be fair, he did do a good interview last night.
I wasn't suggesting that Micheals isn't a good interview, any less than
I'm suggesting he isn't a capable wrestler. All I'm saying is that it
seems he's welding to much power.
>
>>When will
>>McMahon learn that you can't build your company/fed around one
>>guy...look what happened last time! At least Bischoff has the sense to
>>hang it on a group of wrestlers.
>
>I think Vince is doing that to, but he wants Michaels in the mix at
>the top, for obvious reasons.
>
Did I blink and miss something? :-) If the crowd reactions at WM were
anything to go by. As much as Undi is popular as a 'persona' as a
wrestler crowd reaction tends to be flat at times. Austin got over
well, but it wouldn't surprise me if McMahon kinda wished he hadn't.
McMahon seems never to know what to do with 'tweeners. Hart played the
company man and managed to kill a good proportion of his fan support.
But he's not really the kind of person that most fans 'care' enough to
hate. I think the 'mix' isn't there, 'specially if they've got to
'pull' angles with wrestlers who are on the sick list supposedly for
quite sometime. Maybe I'm getting a little jaded <g>
Caroline
aka Gilgamesh
No...@spammers.beware (FireBall) wrote:
>On Tue, 25 Mar 1997 21:44:44 GMT, (The Blue Avenger (aka Gilgamesh))
>wrote this little gem:
>
>>>Glad you enjoy the WCW PPV's. On that note, what the hell is the deal
>>>with WCW??? They are now having a PPV every 20 days. Shit at that
>>>rate that 17PPV's a year (at $30/pop = $510/year) And to top it off,
>>>the last 2 PPV's had at least 1 identical match.....er...what the
>>>fuck???
>>>
>>
>>Actually they are having 1 PPV a months, it is just unfortunate thazt
>>there were 3 weeks in between the last 2, they are running the risk
>>of, in the words of Gorilla Monsoon, going to the well once too often.
>
>Actually, if you look at the dates, the last 2PPV's had a 20day
>difference between them and there is also a 20day time span between
>the last WCW PPV and the upcoming Spring Stampede...(or is that what
>you meant).
>
>------------------------------------------------------
Yeh that is hwat I meant, I was making the point I think that with the
proliferation of PPV's both feds are running the risk of
oversaturation. I would rather see 3 excellent PPV's a year than 12
average ones.
CURRENT RSPWWCW CRUISERWEIGHT CHAMPION - E-TITLE #50
VOTE LABOUR ON MAY 1st FOR A BETTER BRITAIN
Ryan Grant
On Tue, 25 Mar 1997 21:44:47 GMT, (The Blue Avenger (aka Gilgamesh))
wrote:
>>If there had been no Hart/Austin match, it still would have been a
>>decent card. But the match was there, and that made the difference.
>
>Yes the match was truly a classic Ryan, one of the best matches I have
>ever seen, but what other matches on the card rose above the
>nondescript in your opinion ?
None of the other matches were very special, but they were all (with
the notable exception of the final match) adequate, making for an
enjoyable evening.
Alex Demchuk
On 25 Mar 1997, Perfection wrote:
> No...@spammers.beware (FireBall) writes:
> > On 24 Mar 1997 21:16:53 GMT, "Jayson Riley"
> > <extr...@worldnet.att.net> wrote this little gem:
> >
> > >
> > >Um.. Next time you write a reply please try not to use profanity that
> > >really bugs me.
> >
> > So what asshole??? Ask me if I give a fuck about what irks your
> > village idiot mind. Next!!!!
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> > RSPW-->Rec.Sport.Pro-Wrestling (Does this clear things up???)
> > Wrestling is not fake! It is Sports Entertainment.
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
>
> boy aren't you a big man. Probably a 14 year old trying to act like a real tough guy. Weakling.
Man this has to be the most ironic sentence I've ever seen. YOU calling
someone a 14 year old when your sentence could have been written by a 6
year old.
Dave Scherer
>In article <33487f7a...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, Dave Scherer
><lar...@ix.netcom.com> writes
>
>>>>On Mon, 24 Mar 1997 13:37:26 -0800, Timothy Meisner
>>>><mei...@u.washington.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>ObWrestling: Bret Hart is one hell of a company man. He did the clean job
>>>>
>>>>He is one hell of a wrestler as well.
>>>
>>>True, but his interviews leave me kinda cold. Not that 'straight'
>>>interview aren't a breath of fresh air every now and then.
>>
>>I'll tell ya, Bret was completely on it on Raw last night.
>
>I'm gonna have to wait 'till Friday to find that one out :-)
Better than waiting a week right?
>> What a
>>fabulous interview. I felt like he was talking to the, unfortunately,
>>growing number of people at the ECW Arena who chant "Boring" when good
>>wrestlers actually wrestle.
>
>Umm....sorry Dave, but in that atmosphere what did you really expect,
>eventually? Violence can be numbing, so you have to step up the amount
Exactly what it has become, and I even had talked about it in the
Lariat a lot.
>to get the same effect. That's not to say there isn't a point where 99
>percent of people will go "ugh gross". But does ECW seriously want to
>attract the 1 percent that don't. Mind you I'm not saying that ECW has
>got _anywhere_ near that point yet, but it could.
ECW does a lot of things that I wish they wouldn't. But, they are
drawing larger crowds and selling more merchandise than ever, so what
do I know?
>>>*running fast* Seriously it was an excellent match, but if I'd known
>>>how bloody it was gonna be I wouldn't have watched it with my son around
>>>at the time.
>>
>>That is a major problem I see in the WWF right now. For so long, they
>>have been family oriented fare, and then they just up and changed the
>>product without telling the audience.
>
>Telling? wrong word I think...to make those kind of changes you need
>'educate' your audience into if not appricating, accepting a different
>style. That takes time, they seemed to have started off pretty well, I
>think they just jumped the gun a bit - possibly
I don't agree. They are still taking the "all things to all people"
approach.
>> I realize that they are doing
>>it for the rootest of all reasons, money, but they owe it to their
>>long time fans to be a little more considerate of instances like you
>>watching with your son.
>
>It's not as if it really upset him or anything at 9 he's old enough just
>to "yuck" and then ignore it more or less, but it could have upset
>younger kids.
That was my point.
>[Bret Hart]
>>>>Well, that and the fact that he got a weird reaction from the fans
>>>>when he came back.
>>>
>>>Not that weird from what I saw. He took a while off and wrestling fans
>>>memories are notoriously short.
>>
>>What I meant was, all along, he has told the "truth". He WAS screwed
>>out of the title by a last minute stip. He was screwed all along.
>>The Fed thought that would get the fans behind him, but they turned on
>>him instead.
>
>*shrug* no one likes people who winge...Hart sometimes comes accross
>that way even if it is unintentional
Winge? Is that whine? And man, if he does, why don't they hate Shawn
Michaels?
>>>>Shawn is really, really losing it.
>>>
>>>Micheals seems to be turning into a 'Hogan' behaviour wise.
>>
>>But to be fair, he did do a good interview last night.
>
>I wasn't suggesting that Micheals isn't a good interview, any less than
>I'm suggesting he isn't a capable wrestler. All I'm saying is that it
>seems he's welding to much power.
I think he's usually a bad interview. He laughs when he shouldn't.
He acts like an airhead. He chews gum. His interviews can kill an
angle sometimes.
tbru...@aol.com
You knew what the lineup was going to be? Let me ask you the following:
1. Did anyone force you to order it?
2. Was it guarenteed you would like ALL of it?
The answer to both these questions is NO!!!!!!!!!!!
Your thoughts are like President Clinton's recent surgery.
Neither have a leg to stand on.
That's because the #1 Fan of the AA Eastern League Binghamton Mets said so
aka Gilgamesh
rcg...@earthlink.net (Ryan Grant) wrote:
If you enjoyed it fair enough, I found some of the other matches
enjoyable in parts, but would have been aggrieved if I had to pay for
the PPV.
Dan Iacovelli
In article <19970327155...@ladder01.news.aol.com>, tbru...@aol.com
says...
>
>You knew what the lineup was going to be? Let me ask you the following:
>
>1. Did anyone force you to order it?
>2. Was it guarenteed you would like ALL of it?
>
>The answer to both these questions is NO!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>Your thoughts are like President Clinton's recent surgery.
>
>Neither have a leg to stand on.
>
>Tom
>tbru...@aol.com
>
Lets just say it didn't live up to the old Wrestlemania standards(No tv or
movie stars where at WM13 while the past 9 or 10 WM's had Tv or Movie stars)
Summer Slam '94 at the UC(United Center) was a bit better than this.
dan
Caroline Bunce
In article <333fc76c...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>, Dave Scherer
<lar...@ix.netcom.com> writes
>>>I'll tell ya, Bret was completely on it on Raw last night.
>>
>>I'm gonna have to wait 'till Friday to find that one out :-)
>
>Better than waiting a week right?
Umm...I'll answer that one at about mid-night tonight.
>
>>> What a
>>>fabulous interview. I felt like he was talking to the, unfortunately,
>>>growing number of people at the ECW Arena who chant "Boring" when good
>>>wrestlers actually wrestle.
>>
>>Umm....sorry Dave, but in that atmosphere what did you really expect,
>>eventually? Violence can be numbing, so you have to step up the amount
>
>Exactly what it has become, and I even had talked about it in the
>Lariat a lot.
>
>>to get the same effect. That's not to say there isn't a point where 99
>>percent of people will go "ugh gross". But does ECW seriously want to
>>attract the 1 percent that don't. Mind you I'm not saying that ECW has
>>got _anywhere_ near that point yet, but it could.
>
>ECW does a lot of things that I wish they wouldn't.
You and me both, unfort. to a certain degree it's some of the worst
eliments that are being 'carried' into the larger organisations. Toned
down quite a bit admittedly but still as unpalatable.
>But, they are
>drawing larger crowds and selling more merchandise than ever, so what
>do I know?
>
Probably for much the same reason that circus freaks used to attract
crowds....shock value. That's not to say I'm critizing or dissing ECWs
talent, I'm not, they are some of the hardest workers in wrestling. The
buck as far as ECW goes stops with Paul E Dangerously.
>>>That is a major problem I see in the WWF right now. For so long, they
>>>have been family oriented fare, and then they just up and changed the
>>>product without telling the audience.
>>
>>Telling? wrong word I think...to make those kind of changes you need
>>'educate' your audience into if not appricating, accepting a different
>>style. That takes time, they seemed to have started off pretty well, I
>>think they just jumped the gun a bit - possibly
>
>I don't agree. They are still taking the "all things to all people"
>approach.
*waffles hand* maybe....that is one of the 'joys' of being a national
and international 'entertainment' (sports or other wise) organisation.
You've to try and keep the money coming in by appealing to mass
audiences of lots of different sectors.
>
>>> I realize that they are doing
>>>it for the rootest of all reasons, money, but they owe it to their
>>>long time fans to be a little more considerate of instances like you
>>>watching with your son.
>>
>>It's not as if it really upset him or anything at 9 he's old enough just
>>to "yuck" and then ignore it more or less, but it could have upset
>>younger kids.
>
>That was my point.
Thinking on it though, the WWF does occasionally do matches like that.
The Piper/Hart match was another one.
>
>>[Bret Hart]
>>>>>Well, that and the fact that he got a weird reaction from the fans
>>>>>when he came back.
>>>>
>>>>Not that weird from what I saw. He took a while off and wrestling fans
>>>>memories are notoriously short.
>>>
>>>What I meant was, all along, he has told the "truth". He WAS screwed
>>>out of the title by a last minute stip. He was screwed all along.
>>>The Fed thought that would get the fans behind him, but they turned on
>>>him instead.
>>
>>*shrug* no one likes people who winge...Hart sometimes comes accross
>>that way even if it is unintentional
>
>Winge? Is that whine?
Kind of though there is a subtle difference. Winge is what a young
child does when it can't get what it wants, you know the I want, I want
syndrom. While whine is just continually complaining about something.
>And man, if he does, why don't they hate Shawn
>Michaels?
Because Michaels has an upbeat way of doing it, that doesn't grate and
annoy some much?
>>>>Micheals seems to be turning into a 'Hogan' behaviour wise.
>>>
>>>But to be fair, he did do a good interview last night.
>>
>>I wasn't suggesting that Micheals isn't a good interview, any less than
>>I'm suggesting he isn't a capable wrestler. All I'm saying is that it
>>seems he's welding to much power.
>
>I think he's usually a bad interview. He laughs when he shouldn't.
>He acts like an airhead. He chews gum. His interviews can kill an
>angle sometimes.
At the moment I haven't gotten to the point where his 'stuff' has gotten
old, I still enjoy the whole package. That said I enjoyed it more when
it had a heel edge to it. Mind you in a couple of years time, even
less, he's gonna be too old to manage the current persona sucessfully.
Caroline