wrestling / Columns
Ask 411 Wrestling 09.28.11: Real World Titles, No More Stables, Insane Old Men, More!
Hello, and welcome from the home of a guy who’s internet is screwy, it’s Ask 411 Wrestling!
Sadly my internet is on dial up equivalent speeds because this month’s bandwidth got burnt by someone who isn’t me.
*glares at male roommate and his freeloading friends*
…
Well, all right, me downloading Wikipedia last week didn’t help, but still!
Anyway, because it takes a minute or two to download any one page, and thus I cannot consult my usual pages to find the answers for all the questions since I know nothing fact check my sterling memory on all things wrestling, this shall be another in the long running occasional series of All Opinion Week!
I’m sure you’re all still very excited from last week, and this just adds to the excitement.
Just like you should be excited to go listen to the Tom Tom Club which sadly won’t have me on it this week, and 411mania’s podcasts which never have me on it, and the brand new plug, the Wrestling PodClash! hosted by my good friend Max Comic. It’s all about Australian Wrestling and having some laughs on the way, so if you are Australian, or if you want to be really snobbish about how broad your wrestling knowledge is, or you just need more me in your life (since I’ll be on it eventually) go listen to Episode 1 now. It is awesome.
You know what else is awesome?
Cheese fries.
And Banner.
411 on Twitter!
Me On Twitter~!
http://www.twitter.com/411mania
http://www.twitter.com/411wrestling
http://www.twitter.com/411moviestv
http://www.twitter.com/411music
http://www.twitter.com/411games
http://www.twitter.com/411mma
Backtalking
Falco taking my chokeslam: That match was one of the first matches that guy ever had, and he wanted to take it like that since pretty much the day he debuted. That was intentional. But hey, made me look good. Since, you know, I’m the fat guy there.
Remind me of something: Basically at some point (not here, elsewhere) I intend to take a look at what I would have done with Backlund as champ. It’ll make sense later on. I hope. If you care about my fantasy booking. And apparently some of you do, since I still get questions based on it…
Professionalism: 411mania has rules and guidelines about how to review stuff. Take it up with Larry if you think that’s silly. He could do with a laugh.
Your Turn, Smart Guy…
What am I? I’m a wrestling event, held on PPV last century. I saw a woman pin a man, and a team with a woman beat a team with a man, and vice versa. One guy wrestling two matches in a row, winning both. Only one title changed hands, despite there being 4 title matches on a card with more than a dozen matches. Five matches had special stipulations, one match had a memorable comedic gimmick retaining the title said gimmick is best known for, the main event saw one competitor suffer an injury but above all, the most shocking thing to occur at this show was that Sting actually outsmarted someone. What am I?
NP is there, pretty much.
I believe it is Starcade 1999, though I think one of the criteria is off.
Woman pin a man: Madusa pinned Evan Karagias
A team with a woman beat a team with a man: Revolution (including Asya) beat Duggan and the Varsity club.
And vice versa: Creative Control/Hennig beat Harlem Heat/Midnight
One guy wrestling two matches in a row, winning both: I think you meant JJ, but his matches were spread out and he lost to Benoit (beat him the next night), though he did beat Dustin
Only one title changed hands, despite there being 4 title matches on a card with more than a dozen matches: Madusa won the Cruiserweight belt, while the Hardcore, US and World were all retained.
Five matches had special stipulations: Crowbar on a Pole, Bunkhouse, Ladder, Powerbomb and ‘5 minutes with Oklahoma if I win.’ Yeah.
One match had a memorable comedic gimmick: Hardcore match with Norman Smiley
The main event saw one competitor suffer an injury: End of Bret Hart
Sting outsmarted someone: This is what gave it away for me immediately. Liz was in Sting’s corner against Luger, and he gave her a can of mace beforehand, but knowing she would turn on him, he had filled it with silly string. Of course, they still beat him down and he was gone for months, but at least he wasn’t duped for once.
As Mark pointed out, Vampiro fought Steve Williams then Oklahoma.
Who am I? Andre The Giant’s birthplace is none of my business. My name was given to me by the ring announcer of my first match. I was once called a Machine. I once lived in Melbourne, Australia. I once claimed to be somewhat of an artist. I won a title 37 years after debuting in the industry. And I’ve done something that only Sgt. Slaughter had done before me. Who am I?
Questions, Questions, Who’s Got The Questions?/My Damn Opinion
Derek begins this week, and he’s all about the MUN-ay!
Is that how Vince says it?
I think the WWE has made a positive move lately to help them be able to use money as wrestler’s motivation. On 9.12’s Raw, JR was talking about Swagger “losing purse” and Booker T has been talking lately (9.9’s SD) about the motivation for gaining titles being that people want to more money.What are your opinions on money used as motivation in storylines? It’s simple, relatable, and effective. Do companies just forget about this?
I do like it as an idea, but you have to be careful about it. Money is something that can be relatable, it is a very good way to draw sympathy about someone, if they lose money or what have you. And while heels can be all about it, you have to be careful that you don’t make faces out to be money grubbing. Especially when everyone knows that they are really rich. John Cena coming out and complaining that Del Rio cost him the winner’s purse last week against Punk, say, does come across as a little rich, no pun intended, since he sells merch like hotcakes laced with crack, so him complaining about money would be bad.
Like most old school angle ideas, this seemed to fall by the wayside during the Attitude Era, with Russo throwing out most old school ideas, both the good and the bad. And if they are slowly reintroducing it, all the better. But like anything in wrestling, moderation, and right place, right time.
Michael has a few questions.
1)What do you think is the reason For John Morrison’s de-push? I keep hearing it’s punishment for Melina’s comments about the E and that it’s comparable to How the E punished HHH for the MSG incident but that seems weak for three reasons:
a)HHH was directly involved in the MSG incident. Morrison isn’t involved(as far as I know) in Melina’s rants.
b)They had a whole video package highlighting Morrison’s return right before he came back and then the big announcement on Raw by HHH that he was back when he came down looking all gay and beat up on Truth.
c)he was getting tons of love before his injury. Especially for his theatrics at the Rumble. Seems odd they would push him that hard and then derail it. Especially when faces are generally lacking on Raw.
Seems odd they would punish him for Melina’s comments(at least to this degree) and even more odd they would hype him up only to have him get buried every week. Did something else happen b/w hyping his return and his actual return that maybe triggered this? it can’t all be Melina right?
BTW-I think he’s sloppy as hell in the ring(although creative) and looks kind of fruity but he’s not without talent and potential marketability
It’s hard to say for sure, since rumors spread like wildfire, gaining new and exciting details with every passing retelling. But also a lot of this sort of stuff relies on the whims of a few key people in the WWE, and they can, and do, change their minds a lot. So what was true last week isn’t true now.
But the problem with Morrison seems to be, at the heart of it, wrestling etiquette, and the fact that he’s doing Melina, who has (almost) NEVER been without heat. At times, it is claimed, he has been egotistical and/or whiny. His comments/attitude at WM, for instance, with his interaction with Trish, did not win him any friends. And his bringing Melina to a show after she got fired recently got him even more heat. If he dumped Melina, or at least was seen to admit she’s nuts and distance himself from her, that may well mollify most of the issues. But who knows, Vince might change his mind again next week and push Morrison again…
But yeah, it’s not so much the fact that Melina’s insane, it’s just that Melina’s insane and he’s not distancing himself from her. Supposedly.
2) Do you think a wrestler will ever have an extended run as World Champ ever again? By extended I’m talking around 2 years consecutive. If no, why not? Is it fans short attention spans? The want to create as many new stars as possible? Both?
WWE puts out 23 hours of TV a week. Even with most of that being recaps and old stuff and shows not directly involving the champ (and really I only included that number because I was shocked by it), the fact remains that the WWE runs at a much faster pace as it once did, with the house shows somewhat meaningless and PPVs rapidly becoming so as well. Yes, fans are a lot more needy and greedy than they once were, but the fact is that WWE is mainly a TV outlet now. Regardless of if this is good or bad, but when you put out TV every week, long storylines have to be done carefully. And any man holding a title that long is almost impossible to pull off without becoming very boring. There’s only so many feuds you can do nowadays, as you can’t have someone win a title then run the house show circuit for 8 months with them V one or two guys, you get 2 or 3 PPVs out of them at most and then you have to move on or people complain.
Plus there is the issue that it’s a lot more risky to have someone be champ for a long time, since wrestlers work harder, and are more likely to not work injured/seek treatment. You run someone as a main event guy for 2 years straight and at some point he’ll be injured. Might be minor, might not.
But then given the state of PPV buys at this point, they might just keep the belt on Cena indefinitely. But it’s mostly just the way the business has changed, with a smattering of the fans being whiny bitches as well.
3)This ties in to question 2. Act as if it’s the Hulk Hogan of 1983 not 2011. With that said, imagine the Hulkster is relatively brand new on the current scene in the E, kind of like he was in 1983. He’s got a favorable rep among fans, although not a household name, because he was in TNA for awhile(as compared to the old AWA) and Vince saw his potential so he signed him to the E after Vince Russo screwed him over(much like Verne did). Orton gets hurt and they need someone to challenge Henry for the title. Insert Hogan. He comes out at Survivor Series in MSG and defeats Henry in front of a raucous crowd. Vince sees how the fans react to Hogan(much like they did when he beat the Sheik). Do you think if Hogan was as over today as he was in 1984, that Vince would keep the title on him for 5 years as he did back then? Or do you think he’d pull a title change along the way?
Thanks and sorry for such long questions!!
No, again, because the business does not work the same way. Had 1984 been like today, with 4 hours of first rate TV a week every week, Hogan would have traded the belt with Piper, Orndorff and possibly Bundy during that time. Just like today he’d lose the belt at some point sooner rather than later. The business is different.
Now that’s got positives and negatives, depending on your viewpoint, but overall it’s just a fact to deal with. You can’t use 1984 logic on the current scene, and vice versa. Well, you can, but you have to understand that any comparison is flawed from the get go.
And there’s also no way in hell anyone, even Hogan 1984, would come in and win the title right now like that. No way in hell.
Cuthbert is all over the place.
Hello again,
Got a few things to throw your way.
First, does it get on your nerves when everyone calls you “Matt or Matthew” instead of “Mat or Mathew”? I know I have screwed it up in the past, though. I think I would just be tempted to edit my own name being spelled right before publishing the column.
Nah, I understand that Matthew is the most common spelling, and Matt is an acceptable shortening even for my name. But I don’t edit emails at all, because it’s work and I’m lazy. As long as people understand that I’m not the Artist Matthew Sforcina out there, even though he’s Australian as well. Different branch of the family tree.
But yeah, it doesn’t bother me. Closest it came was when Sean Oliver didn’t even try to pronounce my last name on the Dixie Carter Youshoot. Come on man, at least give it a shot! I know Sf freaks out the Anglo-Saxon brain, but geez. I keep missing out on the deadlines for Youshoot, I’m gonna have to submit some questions for the next one just to tell him how to pronounce the damn thing.
Now for something less familiar to me. I asked this in the comments section, too.
Note: I am writing this at like 1 am on Wed. morning, right after Del Rio lost his title at the Night Of Champions. Who knows what will happen before it is posted…
What the hell is WWE thinking taking the title off Del Rio just weeks before a Mexican tour? (Between RAW and Smackdown crews, there are 8 Mexico shows coming up in mid-October) For me, there are only 2 acceptable scenarios: He wins the title RIGHT before the tour starts, so that he is champ or he wins it the first show and has it the rest of the tour. It’s just like the Harts in Canuckville. Anyway, what the hell are they thinking???
This falls under the “topical fast forward” rule.
Anyway, they are thinking that John Cena is John Cena and he needs to win most of the time because he’s John Cena and those losses to Punk hurt him.
Well, there is something to be said for the fact that most everyone was calling Del Rio to win because of the tour, so maybe they wanted to shock people, because that always works out well, right?
Anyway, I think this is academic as Del Rio win pin Punk in the Cell to get the belt back and firmly establish the pecking order, in that Cena > Del Rio, and Del Rio’s a scaredy cat pansy bitch, because Tara forbid you have two strong dominate heel champs at the same time, that would cause the world to implode.
minus divided by .
But yeah, the title change is to show that Cena is better than Del Rio, so when he wins it back we hate him more since we know Cena can beat him. I guess. It’s WWE booking with Cena, it rarely works by normal logic.
This next part has probably been asked before. It feels very familiar…
I am curious about C.M. Punk and his straight-edge lifestyle. Now I understand the whole deal behind it, definitely, but not him in particular. And I know that different people follow it to a different level. How strongly does Punk follow it? For example, I totally get the no recreational drugs, no drinking stuff, but what about pain relievers like aspirin or something stronger, but with a legit prescription for it (and not used in an abusive manner)? I haven know Straight Edgers who have fallen into both camps, myself. Meaning, there isn’t any absolute answer as to what is or isn’t allowed, to some people.
And not to step on anyones toes, but how does this look to others in the industry? Do they support him as long as he isn’t preaching about it? Is there a feeling of disbelief by others who live and die by massive numbers of pain pills (and can’t see how anyone could wrestle without them)? And, do people believe that he is as hardcore in his beliefs as he claims?
Like I said, I really, really think that has been gone over before. I just can’t think right now the specifics.
Time to hit Send.
Well this was brought up on Twitter, and Punk replied (with, I believe, invisible half-Chandlers with them…)
@darkmage138: @CMPunk realistically, how long do you reckon you can last in wrasslin without painkillers?
@CMPunk: No. I’m just not a pussy.
@Erikjhalvorsen: @CMPunk tweeted you will never use pain killers because you aren’t a pussy, that mean the boys that do use them are?
@CMPunk: Yes.
Anyway, the issue of CM Punk’s Straight Edge lifestyle is by most accounts very hardcore. He’s up the hard end, no drugs, not even prescription. When he fractured his skull, supposedly, he did not take any pain medication. I have nothing to disprove that (I mean, the guy might skull Jack Daniels at home, I can’t say for sure. But I’d be very surprised.), by all accounts he’s very strict about no foreign chemicals in his body.
Unless you mean ink for tattoos, that’s OK.
Or sugar and/or caffeine, they are cool, apparently.
(That’s the one I take issue with, believe you me, I know first hand that Caffeine is a drug. I’m addicted to it. So unless he’s drinking Caffeine Free Diet Pepsi, he’s taking something. And if he does drink Caffeine Free Diet Pepsi… Why not just drink water and dirt?)
Now, the feeling in the industry is tempered by the fact that he’s nowhere near as preachy in real life. You listen to the shoot interviews he’s done, he goes out to bars with guys. He just doesn’t drink there. Some people who do take drugs take issue with him regardless, and there are guys like me who might have technical debating point issues with it (from the petty, above, to the slightly bigger issue of drugs in general), but for the most part it’s just a thing, like Daniel Bryan’s veganism, or Mick Foley’s obsession with Christmas, or any other of the thousand quirks, kinks and/or personality traits that is put up with. CM Punk is Straight Edge. And I don’t know anyone who thinks he’s a fraud. Certainly not on a major scale, I’m sure someone out there swears he saw him inject weed at a party once 12 years ago or something…
Now hurry up and heal Maffew! I need you up and mobile so we can eventually meet and you can drink me under the table.
Speaking of Daniel Bryan, and people calling me the wrong name, it’s John!
(Nah, it’s cool dude, don’t worry.)
Hi Matthew
Thanks for the column. A google search brought me to it one week, and introduced me to the world of 411 Wrestling. My productivity has never been the same.
Just wondering what you think of the current use of Daniel Bryan? If he’s going to the Main Event at Wrestlemania, shouldn’t he be getting a bit more of the spotlight at the moment? Shouldn’t he be around commenting on who is the champion, how he’s preparing for the biggest night of his life, etc?
Cheers
Yes and no. Yes in the sense that I think they should, but no in that they are going a certain way with him, and that way dictates the fact that they shouldn’t. And since I disagree with it, sorta, we get a wishy-washy answer.
See, they are clearly building this up to be Daniel Bryan: the Ultimate Underdog Story. With the WWE title, sadly, destined for the Rock/Cena match (if they are really going to do that, you know what they should do? Have some controversial non-finish at TLC over the belt, a draw/double finish or something, vacate the belt, and have the Rumble winner be the New Champ, then have Rock enter at 39, after Cena comes in at 2 and is tossed a few seconds before, and have Rock win the belt and then walk into WM as the champ. If you must have Rock V Cena include the belt.), they can have the World Title be slightly risky. So, be it Henry or Orton (I don’t see it being anyone else, regardless of how good a Bryan/Christian match would be), the idea is that they are going to be dominate, commanding, the focal point, whereas Daniel Bryan has spent his time from winning MITB winning some, losing some, not being dominate, not being on TV, just there. So there’s no way he can win the title on the grandest stage of them all, right? Against a dominate powerhouse like The World’s Strongest Man/The Viper? Come on, Bryan’s gonna lose, surely, he’s gonna be the first MITB Loser, LOSER they shall call him!
And so on. The whole point is to make it seem like he’s got no hope. So when he wins (presumably), it’s a huge moment and everyone loves him and it gets over.
That seems to be the thinking. And with that, comes the need to not push him. You gotta do that sometimes. Or maybe that’s my wishful hoping that they intend to do that and that they aren’t actually botching a proper push.
Steve wants to recap something from last week.
Hi Mat!!!
From this week’s Ask 411………
And as well all know, this was set to be due to Papa Shango’s magic, but Bob got so over as a heel they went with him just being crazy.
Um…what??? Please expand on that next week! That is the most awesome rumor I’ve heard in a while!
Oh, I thought this was common knowledge/rumor. But basically the idea was that Papa Shango was set to return in 1994, with the idea being that he’d reveal himself as the cause of Bob Backlund’s decent into madness. You’ll notice if you watch the early ‘Crazy Bob’ matches, he’d suddenly snap, attack viciously, and then snap back out of it and be shocked, staring at his hands and the like. This was to set up the idea that Papa Shango had cursed him and was making him do those things. But then Bob developed the MR. Bob Backlund character more fully, he began to do the long words, the suits, mention the fact he was ‘still the champion’ and so on, he found a character that worked and was over, so they scrapped the angle and then repackaged Charlie as Kama, the Ultimate Fighting Machine. Which worked so well for everyone.
Chandler’s getting a work out this week.
Ralph sadly expects miracles.
Read the column every week, I was watching hulk hogan on wwe classics and was wondering whose idea it was for hulk to take someone finisher and make his comeback and when was the first time he did it and was he the first to do it
See, like most things in Wrestling, there’s no magic moment. There wasn’t a point where Hogan or Vince or Savage or anyone said ‘Hey, I bet if you Hulk take a finisher then hulk up, that’ll make billions!’ You look at early Hogan matches, there’s no Hulking up, no finger wagging, none of the formula. It came over time, as he slowly perfected the Hogan Finishing Sequence. Taking the finisher then coming back, Hogan was the first man I know of who did it repeatedly and constantly, but almost every face at some point prior had taken a finisher and then made a comeback. I would wager the first time it happened would be in AWA, since that was his first major face run, but finding a specific match would be impossible.
Unless someone down below me has very impressive Kung Youtube.
Dr. J asks about stables.
Hello. Longtime reader, first time writer.
I’m sure this has been asked before and perhaps I’ve forgotten, but with the somewhat recent formation of “The Corre” breaking away from “The Nexus”, questions surrounding stables have been coming to mind.
What happened to them? Yes, we have the Nexus and Corre now, but before them? Part of the reason I think we all marked out so hardcore when the Nexus first showed up (beside it being totally awesome and actually something we haven’t really seen before), is that we knew we had a new supergroup on our hands. It’s been awhile (at least in the WWE) since there was a big stable. (SES/Hart Dynasty do not count.. because they were a tag team with a Diva.) Stables have always been a part of wrestling history, and many of my favorite wrestling memories pertain to the Four Horsemen, nWo, or DX. Not to mention the Hart Foundation, Nation of Domination, Corporation, Ministry of Darkness, Corporate Ministry, The Alliance, The Union (one of the more underrated stables in my opinion), and countless others. I can’t help but notice that a lot of these stables come from the Attitude era. One of the biggest draws to me was the gang-warfare aspect of the Attitude era, notsomuch the dirty language and hijinks. But the epicness of a big brawl. Some of the biggest pops in WCW were due to someone (or a small group) finally standing up to the nWo.
I guess what I’m asking is if there’s a particular time you can pick out that started the downfall of stables in the WWE? Is this Vince’s doing, or the writers simply not going there. I know Vince is not hot on tag teams, but a stable is definitely something different than a tag team. It can get a bunch of guys over, with a dominating main eventer leading the charge.
See it’s odd, you’d expect Hollywood writers to be all over stables. It’s a common trope, the big group of bad guys that the faces have to square off with. And it makes booking easy and logical. But on the other hand, Stable Warfare can be done badly. ROH suffered from this, they stuck too long on it at the end of Gabe’s run (I think, I may have the timing a little off there). A major problem comes in ending a stable. It should have a clear end, a point where the group dies, the counterpoint to it’s beginning. The Alliance ended at Survivor Series 2001. Evolution died when Batista went thumbs down.
Compare that to Nexus and Corre, who both just sorta… died. Corre broke up at some point (yes, it was right before MITB, I know), and Nexus still technically was ongoing while Otunga and McGillicutty were tag champs.
But that’s a minor point. Why aren’t Stables more plentiful?
Stables come in two flavours, the easy and the good. It’s easy to make a stable, you just toss together any random guys, like a boxer, a teacher, a couple of vampires, and some guy who can pounce real good and volia, it’s a stable. But to make a good stable, you need a charismatic leader, and some offsiders with distinct personalities and quirks who are their own man or woman but part of the greater whole.
Look at the Horsemen, for instance. Flair, The Andersons, Dillon, Blanchard. All were part of the one whole, but Flair was not the same guy as Tully. Arn would not be confused for Ole. A stable, if it’s going to be really successful, needs some work, which is hard. And it may not even pay off, even if you make a stable that’s logical and everyone involved is different but aligned together, it still may not have chemistry. And if that happens, then everyone involved takes a hit.
Was there a point when it went downhill? Ironically enough, I think it was Evolution. Not that Evolution sucked, quite the opposite, there was a rash of stables afterwards, none of which did anywhere near as well as Evolution. All modern WWE stables will be compared to Evolution. And the Spirit Squad, or The Cabinet, or La Famila, they don’t really stack up. So it’s not that WWE hasn’t tried, it’s just that the attempts don’t work, and are forgotten.
But by all means, the comments section might disagree. And they’re a pretty big stable, so let’s get their opinion too.
But before that, Gregory wants to talk about World Championships.
Hey Mathew,
I was thinking about the term “World Championship” in wrestling. For instance, it is widely accepted that Ted Dibiase was never “World Champion” and yet he was Mid South North American champion…and since Mid South was not an NWA member, he was the champion of a very large territory and I would argue that makes him as much a “World Champion” as any of the AWA or WWF “World Champions”. After all the AWA and WWF at that time only represented a territory no bigger or smaller than Mid South. In fact, I would argue that the only title in wrestling history that could make a claim as a “World Championship” is the NWA title.
Until 1986 the NWA title was defended around the world for many different promotions/companies that recognized it as the World Championship over their own regional titles. No other championship can make that claim. Post 1986, WWF, JCP-NWA, WCW, AWA, ECW, TNA, ROH, and any number of companies outside the United States all have made claims to having World Championships, but recognizing any of them as world championships means we as wrestling fans have to decide the criteria for what qualifies as a world title.
Is a company proclaiming it’s champ a “World Champion” enough to satisfy that critera? Of course I realize debating what makes a world title in a fake sport is a semantic argument, but I do think it’s relevant when certain websites (I’m looking at you 411) makes list of Greatest Wrestlers in which points are added/deducted based on having won a “World Championship”.
My opinion of Eddie Guerrero’s greatness would not change if he had been a world champ or not…but many others do think that single accomplishment is relevant to his legacy. One would think Eddie’s accomplishment is less than say Tommy Rich NWA title reign since the WWE title was diluted. I mean how on earth can a single company claim to have 2 world titles (I’m looking at you WWE) and expect us to view them as anything more than props?
My question is this: Give me a criteria of what makes a title a world championship and then provide a subsequent list of every world title in wrestling history?
OK, here’s the thing: There is no strict, hard and fast rule about what is and isn’t a World Championship. Some people have strict rules, others just go on what they think counts. There should be rules, if we were to try and quantify this, but then you get into arguments, as you point out, about what is and isn’t a world title. And then you get issues like the NWA World Title. That was, at one point, THE title in the world, and be anyone’s judgement a World Title. Then it became nothing more than a glorified Indy belt. And then TNA came along and brought it back up, and (perhaps) it’s a World Title again. Now it’s on Adam Pearce, a guy I love but who most people wouldn’t recognize if he came up and called them Outsider Scum to their face. Can a title be a World Title for a bit and then not and then one again?
The closest to an official rule is the ‘PWI rule’ (at least, I think it’s them, off the top of my head.) in which a title is a World Title if it’s called a World title and it’s defended in a country over than it’s origin/on another continent (there’s debate over that point). But I don’t like that rule, it’s too forgiving.
So we’re left with rules that aren’t really scientific, or justifiable. And it’s an argument that will continue until the end of time. Wikipedia has a list of candidates, but can we pare that down, and if so, how?
My rule, which is solely my rule and no-one else’s, so feel free to disagree, is that a World Title is a World Title if the company that supports it is big enough, or prestigious enough, or popular enough that they can make the claim with a straight face. Now, thing is, that’s sure as hell unscientific, but if you go down the list, I can argue for it.
In Wikipedia’s list, none of the belts in the ‘active’ category below the divisions count. The companies that support them are just not big enough to justify it. The WWE and World Heavyweight titles are, however, since when you’re the biggest wrestling company in history, you can call whatever you like a World Title. The TNA belt is just viable, in my mind, in that TNA is #2 in the world, it’s on TV in almost as any countries as WWE, so it counts as a World Title.
The NWA World Title gets in via grandfathering. The belt’s linage, despite a few hiccups, is long enough and strong enough to justify that it’s historically a world title. It’s over 60 years old and has been around the waist/shoulder of some of the best wrestlers of all time. It gets in.
But the ROH title… I don’t consider that a world title. Yet. It’s damn close, and if you want to include it I understand (and you might be up in arms in a moment about this but bear with me), but I don’t think ROH is as popular and mainstream enough to justify giving it World Title status yet.
Now, in that page’s defunct page, again, anything below the divisions is not big enough to justify that company claiming it has a World Title. Now, WCW World, absolutely. WCW International… I really don’t want to, since no-one believed them, but… again, like ROH, I won’t argue it too much.
AWA is borderline, but given the status of the company and the business at the time it was most active, I’m willing to give it the nod, but it’s in many ways the benchmark. If you’re not more prestigious or well known or popular than the AWA title, then you are not a World Title.
And that leads to the ECW Title, which, despite my comments about ROH above, I do consider a World title. The difference I see is that ECW, as a company, was a lot more influential than ROH in terms of impact on the business, coupled with the fact that it was revived by WWE which actually helped it’s case, again with WWE being the biggest ever, they can call the ECW Title a World Title.
ECW as a company was over. So the belt was over, and thus, it qualifies. But I’ll admit that can seem contradictory. But that’s the problem, most rules will let in too many titles, and you’ll never get consensus.
See below.
Jay asks about the Apter mags.
Hello Mathew,
First off, great weekly column.
My question centers around the “Apter magazines” of the 80’s and 90’s, specifically how they worked. I was an avid reader of PWI in my younger days, and I seem to remember that whenever there was a kayfabe interview with a superstar, or a superstar was quoted, it never featured a WWF personality. Even when there was an article about a WWF star, they would always have someone NOT affiliated with the WWF discuss the wrestler. Was there some sort of rift between McMahon and Apter?
Kinda. Vince had his own magazine, and he didn’t want anyone else speaking with authority about his wrestlers. He wanted, ideally, for the consumer to only know and follow and trust WWF for all their wrestling needs, so he didn’t work with Apter mags in any way, nor did he let them act as if they were working with them. Which is not to say that Vince hated Apter with the fiery hatred of a thousand suns, just that he was, in Vince’s mind, a business competitor. So why would he work with him?
Also, on a lesser note, it seemed that the language that the wrestlers quoted in the mag used were borderline ridiculous. Now, I understand that these mags were geared toward kids, but I recall even back then, thinking that it sounded stupid when Ric Flair, for example, would refer to himself as “a rule-breaker”. Did these quotes sound as goofy to you as they did to me?
Please shed some light on this for me, and feel free to add any other insight into these Apter mags that you can.
Thanks in advance.
Well, sure, but what would you rather they use? Heel? Bad Guy? There’s a finite number of words to convey he’s the villain, and most of them either sound childish and sound, as you say, goofy, or are too theatrical and thus imply it’s a show, or are flat out kayfabe-breaking which is totally out of the question.
As for Apter stories/insights, I didn’t grow up with them, so I got nothing. Readers?
Ace asks about Owen Hart.
I’m sure you’ve answered this once upon a time, but I just gotta know: why didn’t Owen Hart jump ship to WCW after the screwjob? Did McMahon actually refuse to let Owen out of his contract? Or was Owen promised the moon by Vince (to take over Bret’s top of the card spot) to stay? What was the deal? Because within a month Anvil & Bulldog were headed down south along with Bret.
Yes, Vince refused to let Owen out of the contract. Anvil was seen as no great loss, and Bulldog actually paid to get out of his contract, so he let them go. But Owen was a talent and a name, and he wasn’t about to let him go. Also, Owen was reluctant to go to WCW out of concern for money, as, according to Bret, he was sceptical that WCW would do anything with him, nor did he believe that they would match his WWF paycheck. So he stayed put. And that didn’t end so well.
Rahil finishes us off this week.
Is Sting vs Ric Flair the only match to have occurred in 4 seperate decades;
80s – Clash of the Champions, Starrcade 89
90s – Great American Bash 90, WW3 95, Nitro`s, e.t.c
00s – the last ever Nitro
10s- impact wrestling (sep 11)
???
Well I’m sure that there’s some two indy guys who have wrestled each other on and off for decades. But on the major scene, I don’t believe any other duo matches this. Some have 3 decades (Hogan/Flair, for instance) and thus could have 4 if they survive, but Sting/Flair are the only ones to be there yet.
Readers? Because this time, I really am stopping. See you next week, where we hopefully return to normal…
