Skip to main content

Worst 'Mania Debate

Hi Scott--

So I'm working my way through the Wrestlemania shows in anticipation(?) for this year's event, and just got done with 27. Good night, that is a miserable PPV. This inspired me to think; now that we have 30 of them in the books, which one is now the reigning, defending undisputed worst Wrestlemania in history?

After thinking about the buildup and payoff for reach show, my final four read thusly;

WM 2: Yes, we all love the Bulldogs victory at this show, but man there is a lot of fast-forwardable drek on this stinker. From the women's match to the flag match, from the epic Adonis v. Elmer confrontation to Hogan and Bundy in the Big Blue Cage, very little about this show is appealing/holds up well.

WM 9: The one most people bring up as the worst ever. Dull matches with little point, the worst Undertaker match in 'Mania history, and the Hogan egofest at the end. At least Shawn carries Tantanka to a decent match, and Bret walked IN with the title, right?

WM 15: I know you're fond of the phrase "Vince Russo ruins Wrestlemania" for this show, and yes, up and down 15 most likely has the worst undercard of all time, but Austin/Rock I is still awesome in all of it's Attitude Era-glory. This is the ultimate example of a show you bought for one match, and that one match delivered 100%. The atrocity that is the rest of the card is hard to overlook, though.

WM 27: I didn't remember the show being as horrendous as it is until I viewed it again. Sweet Chocolate Jeebus it is awful. Snooki, the anonymous Raw GM, an 8-man match that lasts all of 4 minutes, and lest we forget HEEL MICHAEL COLE on commentary, as well as his turd of a match with Lawler. When even Rock's charisma can't save a show, you're in trouble. Plus, the absolute worst built, boringly wrestled, and worst booked main event in 'Mania history. Yeah, it has Taker/HHH, but I don't think the match holds up well, certainly not like the Shawn/Taker matches, or even the rematch from WM 28. For two guys who would run down ECW, there is an awful lot of "car crash move/lie on mats" psychology in that match.

So what do you think? As reviled as 9 is, I'm leaning towards 27 as king turd. Maybe it's the nostalgia of performers I enjoyed in my youth, but I find 9 to simply be a boring show, whereas 27 is one of those "hours of my life I'll never get back" experience for me. Which one do you think is the reigning cham-peen, and do you think 31 has a chance to take the title this year?

--J

Well, for me, I didn't see 27 until years later and it stands as the first Wrestlemania where I actually skipped the show out of apathy, so that's pretty damning.  I will say at least 9 and 15 are fascinating car wrecks and have that going for them.  I think 4 and 5 should also be in the conversation, specifically the four hour slog that is 4, with the worst WM crowd in history and no memorable matches.  I just can't give the crown to 27 with that HHH v. Taker match going for it, but I can see where others might not like it and thus it would stand as the clear worst.  

Comments

  1. Can I stab this person who included 9?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I have to say 11. There was just nothing there. It got a lot of buzz with LT vs Bam Bam but it also killed his career. There's no reason to see that show from a historical perspective even.

    ReplyDelete
  3. for me it's 2. There is absolutely nothing interesting and the flipping to three different venues is distracting, there is no flow. It felt like watching a glorified Prime Time. It's just SO boring.

    ReplyDelete
  4. WM 9 actually starts off really well with Tatanka/Michaels and a solid Steiners/Headshrinkers match. I still say the goofy set design and the historical factor of the Hogan finish keep it from being the worst.


    WM15 is godawful, with possibly the worst WM match ever in Bossman/Taker. It has historical value with the first Austin/Rock WM match and Triple H's heel turn.


    WM27 has the Taker/Triple H match but also decent matches in Cody/Rey Edge/Del Rio and a pretty damn good one in Punk/Orton. Downside is The Miz was in the main event...and won! The Rock came out looked like a bigger star than either of the guys in the main event. Snooki was there. But still, the undercard wasn't as bad as people make it out to be.


    I'd say either WM2 or WM11.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It was exciting if u watched it live (on a Monday night no less). It just doesn't hold up well today

    ReplyDelete
  6. 4 has the Demos killing Strike Force, a personal fave.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Sometimes it depends on age and context. For me, that was when I first got into wrestling, so seeing it a few months later as a kid was cool. I just wanted to see Hogan beat Bundy. But I can see where people think it sucks because really, that's the truth. It had the goofy boxing match too as an unique feature.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The only shows I can really go back and watch with any kind of regularity are 3, 6-10, 13, 17, 19-21, and 30. Maybe 5 or 24. Otherwise, 'Mania has become more about the hype than anything else for me (although they're a lot of fun to watch live).

    I'd actually say 1 is the only one where there's absolutely nothing I would want to go back and watch again. 27 had some decent matches, and you know you love Snooki.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Hogan vs Bundy is cool, I've always liked the atmosphere and look of 9, although most of the matches sucked. I absolutely love 4 and 5. 15 is really bad, and so is 27. So I would go with one of those two or 9 as the overall worst.

    ReplyDelete
  10. WM9 is disqualified from any worst-ever convo based solely on the unique venue.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Sure there is. It's called "What's going to happen to Roman Reigns".

    ReplyDelete
  12. 20 needs to be on that list. It was great.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Plus there wasn't really anything else on that card. Just boring all around. I'm surprised this didn't make Scott's original list.

    ReplyDelete
  14. WM15 felt like an episode of Raw with the running storylines throughout the show. Like, I already bought the fucking show, you don't have to keep me hooked.

    ReplyDelete
  15. AverageJoeEverymanMarch 13, 2015 at 12:29 PM

    It is. As in 19-21 would include 20.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Yeah, I never got why it was so underrated. It might not be much for snowflakes, but it was unique, the main event was an entertaining clusterfuck, and I have fond memories of this period and the beginning of RAW.

    ReplyDelete
  17. 27 was pretty bleh and had maybe the worst finish in WM history, but it also had HHH/Taker, Cody/Rey, and Orton/Punk, and that's more than I can say about 2 or 9.

    ReplyDelete
  18. IX avoids the bottom of the barrel because there's a handful of really good matches and a unique atmosphere for the time. 15 gets my vote. Just awful, and it looked like any other show.
    And why the hell is WM 1 still given free passes? The wrestling sucked and the first half of the show is prelim junk from any other MSG show. It should be graded just as equally as WM 2 (sucked) 9 (sucked), 15 (sucked), and 27 (sucked).

    ReplyDelete
  19. I edited that from "19-21" to "19, 21." I dunno, that show is just too damn l-o-n-g.

    ReplyDelete
  20. It's kinda weird how right when WWE hemorrhaged their AE fan base for good, they reeled off three great Manias in a row with 19, 20, and 21 (shit main events but my God that undercard is awesome).

    ReplyDelete
  21. The dreary appearance of the NY and Chicago locations doesn't help. LA is the only well lit portion of the show, with mostly quality effort all around (or as much as 4 matches can be).

    ReplyDelete
  22. Gotta go with 15. 14 was surprisingly really good, but 15... the hideous swerve booking, the poor matches, that terrible HIAC match, and overbooking the main event.

    ReplyDelete
  23. I'd still like to punch whoever made WM 20 5-hours long. Back when this was still being released on VHS, I'm pretty sure most of the undercard is clipped out.

    ReplyDelete
  24. I give those early Manias a pass b/c the business was a lot different back then. House shows were the focus so I think you have to judge shows back then differently.

    ReplyDelete
  25. 27, 11, 2 and 4 are all varying degrees of awful.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I was there. It was fun. The main-event delivered. Nowhere near the worst for me

    ReplyDelete
  27. Lolz at a band (Napalm Death) naming their most recent album "Apex Predator" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apex_Predator_%E2%80%93_Easy_Meat

    ReplyDelete
  28. I have all of it on one VHS when I taped the original show lol

    ReplyDelete
  29. I might be wrong, but I remember Keith posting a WM 27 review right after the show ended.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Why should WrestleMania 1 get a pass because it was just another show at the time? It just seems like a double-standard. If something is bad, it's bad. WM 2 sucks, and a lot of people dump over it freely, but never WM 1. WM 1 had a lot of hype, but the undercard was so much nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  31. It's hypocritical to dump on one but not the other. I don't dump on either b/c they were from a different era. I wouldn't say they're bad in the same way one of the modern WM's like 27 is bad.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Probably because it was the first Mania I saw live, but I didn't hate 15. Fond memories of XPac v Shane and HHH v Kane. OK I only remember 3 matches. But that's not too bad...3 matches are about par for every Mania except 17 for me.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I know I'm going a bit off the rails here, but WrestleMania 3 is highly regarded and is quite possibly the best ever. Is it not held at the same level of a WM 17 or 19 because of the era? Why should a great show from years back be regarded so highly, but poorly executed shows given a free pass for being of a different era?

    ReplyDelete
  34. Best part of Mania XV: Butterbean knocking Bart Gunn's block off.

    ReplyDelete
  35. See I appreciated because of the running storylines.

    ReplyDelete
  36. You get to see Shawn be a complete asshole and sandbag one of his best friends. So there's that.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Theberzerker, #1 HUSS CHOMPIONMarch 13, 2015 at 12:59 PM

    I still contend that IV can't be the worst because, as long and boring as it is, the Demolition & Savage title wins were awesome little moments in themselves.
    IX is still the most bleh show all around, with HBK/Tatanka being the only real highlight, and an average one at that. Like 1, 2 gets a pass for historical reasons (plus the Bulldogs win), XV had an awesome main event (and lets not forget that at that precise moment, that kind of undercard was what people actually wanted), and 27 had HHH/UT (which I actually like better now upon repeated viewings) and some nice undercard moments like Edge/Del Rio, Orton/Punk, & Cody/Rey. It's underwhelming, like this year's will be, but not cold soup like IX is.
    As for this year, it'll either end up just underwhelming, or a gigantic awesome clusterfuck. I'm hoping for that, personally. A Bash '91 show that's actually fun to watch.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Don't forget about 1-2-3 Kid's martial arts pajamas.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I like Rey/Cody a lot from 27, Edge/Del Rio is pretty good and has the feel-good moment of Edge going out as champion, Punk/Orton is ok although I don't like it as much as some, and HHH/Taker is solid but a bit slow. However, Cole/Lawler has to be my least favorite match of all-time. It feels like a 60 minute Iron Man Match, Cole dominates the match for some reason with his terrible offense, and then it has a terrible reverse finish. Just total garbage. Plus, Miz/Cena might be the worst Mania main event of them all, both multi-person tag team matches were rushed and pointless, and Daniel Bryan/Sheamus was bumped from the show, which still pisses me off. Therefore, I'm leaning toward 27 as the worst of them all. And did I mention how much Cole/Lawler sucks?

    ReplyDelete
  40. Theberzerker, #1 HUSS CHOMPIONMarch 13, 2015 at 1:01 PM

    The undercard is shit now, but at the time everyone loved it. Watch the show, it's not like everyone's sitting on their hands like they are now.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I have a tough time ranking V as one of the worst. Gorilla and Jesse hit a commentary peak that makes the show very easy to watch.



    9 is the worst from every angle. If you're a smark, the match quality is God-awful and between the chloroform, Tatanka count-out and Hogan win, the outcomes insult your intelligence. If you're a mark, nearly ALL of the bad guys win. Even the ones that lose (ie: Michaels retains his title, Money Inc. retain their titles, Yokozuna beats Hart before losing to Hogan.)

    ReplyDelete
  42. Theberzerker, #1 HUSS CHOMPIONMarch 13, 2015 at 1:02 PM

    I really liked Orton/Punk at the time, thought it was a forgotten classic. Watching again, it falls some with all the OW MY LEG drama bogging it down, but it's still a good match with a decent story to it, remarkable continuity, and a fan-fucking-tastic finish.

    ReplyDelete
  43. 29 was pretty bad, too.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I think 4 is the worst. It is the most criminal misuse of talent until King of the Ring 2000, too many rushed matchups to get the tournament in, and Cunt Hogan stealing Savage's moment.

    ReplyDelete
  45. 11. No big story. Most memorable match involved a celebrity. Not a great match to be seen. Held in a place I honestly never heard of and not a big city with a memorable arena. Celebrities were barely anything.


    Kevin Nash as world champion.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I was very indifferent at the time, but I loved the main event. Now, even the Main doesn't hold up compared to their matches at Mania 17 and 19.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Yeah that was BRUTAL~!

    ReplyDelete
  48. I tried re-watching WM27 last week and I had to tap out after about 30 minutes. Heel Cole was the absolute worst. You just had him screeching over everyone and Josh Matthews being too much of a milquetoast commentator to offset him.

    ReplyDelete
  49. The stuff with Hogan/Savage was meant for fuel for their eventual match at Mania 5... so in context of the storyline, he WAS Supposed to be a jerk stealing the spotlight, and he did it again and again, and started getting more friendly with Elizabeth in the process.

    ReplyDelete
  50. That's fine for a B-level PPV, but this is Wrestlemania - it's supposed to BE the blowoff, not the build.

    ReplyDelete
  51. What blowoff was Mania 4 supposed to have? Someone shoe-horned into winning the WWF Title in a bloated tournament? Savage's win was a cool moment, but it wasn't like he was chasing the champion. The build was to go all in with Mania 5 a year before the show, and it did tremendous business.

    ReplyDelete
  52. The main events of 2 and 9 are underrated; plus 2 had the tag match and the battle royal (which was fun). 9 had a solid tag match in Steiners-Headshrinkers, and Perfect-Luger.


    ReplyDelete
  53. I didn't think 27 deserves the hate it gets. It has a legit great match, a solid mid card it's just the World Title matches I was let down. Miz was NEVER any good in the ring but I really wished Del Rio would have gone over in that World Title match. Card was solid, if a little bland and there are Manias that are much harder to watch.

    ReplyDelete
  54. It blew off the biggest angle in company history (Hogan losing the title) and started the next "biggest angle in company history," THE MEGA POWERS EXPLODING.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I'm a big defender of Mania 9, but Perfect/Luger was pretty bad. Probably the worst match that had build up. Even though it's quite boring, I think the Money Inc/Mega Maniacs is dumped on too harshly. It's not great, tops at maybe **, but it's far from an anti-classic as it has gotten a reputation of being. Just another shit finish in a series of them.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Yeah, so it was anticlimactic and poorly built up. Worst WM ever.

    ReplyDelete
  57. I lost track of things... are we talking 4? Yeah, it's pretty bad. I have nostalgic memories from it, but it's so dull with the worst crowd ever. Still doesn't make the finish awful.

    ReplyDelete
  58. WWE's had changed wrestling more in the 24 months between WM 1 and WM 3 than possibly any period ever.

    Of course 3 was a completely different kind of show than 1 was.

    ReplyDelete
  59. The finish looked cool, but it felt too telegraphed in my opinion. Punk looked stupid standing there forever and then diving right into that RKO.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I thought it was awful, especially leading to WM 5, because Savage was RIGHT. Hogan was "grandstandin' and hotdoggin"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrlSz-Xxo50

    ReplyDelete
  61. That is some of the greatest wrestling dickery of all time. That match is all Shawn, bumping all over the place, hitting Diesel with killer babyface aerial attacks, PLUS getting the visual pinfall. If Nash gave more of a shit, wouldn't he have clobbered Shawn the second they both got backstage?

    ReplyDelete
  62. Nor to mention Diesel kicking out of SCM at 1 and turning the fans further against him.

    ReplyDelete
  63. 11 sucked as much as 9, plus it didn't have the cool venue going for it. I'd say 11 is worse than 2, 9, and 15.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Was Nash even aware of what Shawn had done at the time?

    ReplyDelete
  65. Wouldn't you have to be aware that the supposed heel with the bodyguard was wrestling like a hot shit face and making you look like a lumbering oaf?

    ReplyDelete
  66. Wrestlemania 2 is the obvious answer here for me. Horrible celebrity guest commentators, a bunch of short matches with crap finishes, the best match was a boxing match instead of a wrestling match, hated the whole three venue idea (although I think the idea was a cool and inventive thing for them to try out), etc. The battle royal was fun and the main event was pretty decent, but probably still one of the weakest ones in Mania history.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Wrestlemania 1 was entertaining overall. While none of the matches were entertaining, nothing was really bad either. While in many ways it did resemble the typical house show for the period but at least it didn't have those boring 15-20 minute preliminary matches. Wrestlemania 2 outside of the Bulldogs-Dream Team and the battle royale match was just very bloated and is a chore to sit through for the most part.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I've gotten up to 16 in my marathon and 2, 4, 5, and 16 were all pretty bad. 9 honestly isn't that bad, it's just the ending leaves a black cloud over the whole show. I thought 15 was entertaining enough despite the booking stupidity. 16, much like the three 80s Mania, felt like a bloated show that WWF mailed in as nothing more than a throwaway special attraction so they could cash in on their huge popularity at the time.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Yeah 29 is up there. Everything ranges from bad to simply ok, with the exception of Punk/Taker being pretty damn good.

    ReplyDelete
  70. 2 was my first WWE big show that I was old enough to remember watching in full so I have a soft spot for it. I have to go with 9 just because there were no matches worth watching more than once and the horrible ending with Hogan getting a title shot and winning an unscheduled match. The atmosphere for the show was the only thing that was cool.

    ReplyDelete
  71. That botched powerbomb spot was brutal. Diesel should have done two more whether Shawn wanted to or not.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Someone needs to email Scott about "Sentimental Favorite Wrestlemania". Like the one you like most not necessarily because of the matches but just because it was a big period in your fandom. For me it's 6, hands down. First Wrestlemania ever, and I still love every single match, even if they're not all great by smark standards. Also, Orient Express had bangin' entrance music.

    ReplyDelete
  73. LOL!!!

    You are put into a steel cage match with Brock Lesnar. What is your instant plan of action?

    EC3: Have someone play the person he is feuding with's theme music, so he is distracted and I school boy him.

    ReplyDelete
  74. I just really, really hate that Cole/Lawler match. I actually thought Cena would have gotten a good match out of Miz, so their match disappointed me quite a bit. I was not mad about Del Rio losing though, he's always bored me.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Any dating tips?

    EC3: Be yourself. Unless you are a wrestling fan. Then don't be yourself till like 6 months in.

    ReplyDelete
  76. I think 15 will hold that honor for a lot of people, myself included. Wrestling was so exciting then that even this weak show is still fun to watch for me today.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Wrestlemania 16 or Wrestlemania 2000 as they called it at the time. I can't really explain why I thought it wasn't bad but i just liked it for some reason. Its not 19 or 3 or 17 obviously but not the worst.

    ReplyDelete
  78. 4, and it's not even all that close. All the other contenders have a memorable match or two, 4 is just a bloated crawl of lousy matches in front of a dead crowd. I'm sure the tournament seemed like a good idea at the time, but they couldn't have executed it worse.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Adam "Colorado" CurryMarch 13, 2015 at 1:51 PM

    So was 28.

    ReplyDelete
  80. 13 just because I was there live. Yeah, most of it sucked but seeing Bret/Austin in person was awesome.

    ReplyDelete
  81. As someone who was at 13 live, I can say that if not for the Bret/Austin classic, this would rank high among the worst shows. Rocky/Sultan, tag-team 4-way, HHH/Goldust, Owen/Bulldog vs Vader/Mankind and a bad main event of Taker/Sid. The street fight was good but aside from that and the submission match, it's a real case of "one classic match surrounded by crap."

    ReplyDelete
  82. I would say 13 but Hart vs Austin and the Street fight saved that show. If not it would be one of the worst shows ever.

    ReplyDelete
  83. 27 has one legitimately great match and a few good ones. It has poor atmosphere, bad booking, a SHIT main event with a dusty finish and a heel winning and lots of problems.

    It however does not come even CLOSE to the desperate stink of the god fucking awful Wrestlemania 11. Looks like it was held in a high school gym, terrible wrestling. Bret Hart dogs it. Diesel vs. Shawn Michaels - overrated pile of shit. Lame "celebrities" everywhere and all those fake paparazzi. God that was the lowest low.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Oh I agree and that's the only thing that keeps it off the "worst Manias" list but take that out, it's a shitty show.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Battle Kat LitterMarch 13, 2015 at 1:55 PM

    I said it on another thread and I'll say it again here - I don't hate WM9. At all. It has a few half decent matches and a great atmosphere/feel to it. It's a nice representation of 1993 WWF which had a certain charm to it.

    ReplyDelete
  86. I feel like given the amount of injured workers on the card (I think Sid, Vader, Foley, and Bulldog - along with Austin (!) and others were all working through severe injuries), the poor roster depth, and the amount WCW was ass pounding them - WM13 was as good as it should have been.

    If Bret and Shawn had gone on last and Undertaker/Sid had been shorter I wonder if it would draw as much antipathy.

    ReplyDelete
  87. I love that PPV. I had it on a tape with KOTR '93... it was my most watched tape by far.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Agree. Savage and demolition have historic moments. Even Bad News double crossing Beer and Jimmy Hart getting hiss haircut are great moments as well.

    ReplyDelete
  89. A parking lot with some set dressing does not a cool venue make.

    ReplyDelete
  90. WM9 has really fun commentary. I remember I was marathoning the Manias on the way down to a family vacation in the back of the car and my dad caught my brother and I laughing at Heenan on commentary and turned on the audio for the whole car and listened to WM9.


    It certainly is nowhere near as dire and miserable as WM11.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Battle Kat LitterMarch 13, 2015 at 1:58 PM

    *high five*

    I like KOTR93 too :)

    ReplyDelete
  92. King of the Ring 93 was dope!

    ReplyDelete
  93. 8. The first WM I caught up with after I got seriously back into wrestling in '93 (don't ask!). Beside the two well-known high points, Michaels-Santana was a fun opener, Taker-Roberts was a satisfying squash , Sids promo is pure awesome (shame about the match, but you can't have everything) , everything else is at least watchable and Gorilla and Bobby are in top form.

    ReplyDelete
  94. 10, because I was (still am) a HUGE Hart mark. TWO BRET MATCHES?? I was too young to jizz my pants, but I would have if I could have. Also, as much as I loved Bret, as the younger brother in my family, I sympathized with Owen. And then Bret beat Yokozuna, so huzzah!


    Oh yeah, and some ladder match or something. Whatever. I hated Shawn Michaels.

    ReplyDelete
  95. I'm glad someone brought this up. This is my least favorite Wrestlemania. Bret Hart and Bob Backlund had two great matches before this one, and somehow saved their worst for last. All of the undercard matches were boring, especially Undertaker/Bundy and Allied Powers/Blu Brothers. Diesel vs. Shawn Michaels was okay, but they had a better match a year later. LT was serviceable, but the fact that he was in the main event was a joke. Wrestlemania IX sucked, but at least it had an interesting ending (I'm not saying it was a good ending, or even an effective one - but it was interesting - you have to admit that).

    ReplyDelete
  96. Well, I mean... I think that one is universally loved... especially if you're on Team Bret like I've always been. But WM9 gets too much shit. The atmosphere alone is enough to keep it from being the worst. Now if you split WM 9 into three separate, dimly lit locations, with tons of video and audio miscues... then yeah, it would be the worst ever, hands down.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Bret beat three very different wrestlers with three different moves (none being his finisher), using his opponents own momentum against them. Amazing.

    ReplyDelete
  98. I stopped watching after 26. I was going to order 27 - but I hadn't really watched the product in months and my friends Jenn and John refused to even come over and watch it because of Snooki.

    I thought 15 was great at the time - just because of Kane beating up Pete Rose again.

    9 was great because of Hogan winning the title.

    11 was pretty boring, although I love seeing the Undertaker show his strength by bodyslamming the 700 pound bundy though.

    23 was missing Hogan vs. Khali - dang politics.

    ReplyDelete
  99. The I quit stipulation killed it. Just letting them go all out for 10-15 min in a straight ahead grudge match would have improved XI enormously.

    ReplyDelete
  100. The camera exploded in Hogan's face.

    Savage: What the????

    ReplyDelete
  101. Summerslam was pretty good that year as well.

    ReplyDelete
  102. What's a Chicago street fight?

    ReplyDelete
  103. There are probably bad Manias that i didn't see. I barely remember anything after 22 but i know i saw 23 and 24. Just can't tell you what the matches were. 25 through 29 i have no idea if they were good or not because I wasn't watching WWE at all.

    ReplyDelete
  104. But Hogan got to slam Andre again - and Gorillia Monsoon said there goes the tree!!!

    ReplyDelete
  105. Hogan vs. Yokozuno is overrated?

    ReplyDelete
  106. But it does have Undertaker slamming Bundy.

    ReplyDelete
  107. No. I wasn't a big Scott fan back then, but I think he reviewed it almost a year after.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Team Bret represent! Michaels had the better career by a long shot, but on their respective best days, Hart was better at telling a story and making his opponent look good.

    ReplyDelete
  109. I love Savage, but his four victories at Mania IV are so underwhelming in comparison. Traditional dodge-the-move-then-drop-the-elbow, a small package, a damn DQ (when a legit victory over Gang would have given him tons of cred in the eyes of the marks) and a Hogan chairshot.

    ReplyDelete
  110. That would be 8 for me. Attended it live; as a big Ric Flair mark, I sat their pissed when he lost, as my Savage-loving siblings ragged on me for the rest of the night. I even wore a homemade Big Bossman costume that got some nice compliments. (Why yes, I was quite the ladies' man in high school, thanks for asking.)

    ReplyDelete
  111. Do I have to be that guy that defends 27?

    ReplyDelete
  112. I really wanted to see Hogan vs Big Show at 23. It could have happened. Instead they did Kane vs Khali.


    Hogan wasn't happy with his previous SummerSlam pay day, claiming he was the draw of the show and the one the fans would stick around for. So he goes on the outs with Vince and does that independent show against Big Show and draws a staggering crowd of... 2,200.


    Ouch, brother.

    ReplyDelete
  113. Michael Xavier has a new username?

    ReplyDelete
  114. I don't think you have to defend it from being the worst...Triple H vs Undertaker saved it.


    But what else ya got for it?

    ReplyDelete
  115. One had a great commentary team. It has Bundy squashing Jones. It has Andre slamming Studd.

    ReplyDelete
  116. I agree. Call an audible, hit him with another powerbomb, and dare him to fuck it up again.

    ReplyDelete
  117. I love Punk v. Orton so much. It was my MOTN.


    Del Rio v. Edge is fun, stupid booking aside and I like Cody v. Rey. That Austin Rock segment is great too

    ReplyDelete
  118. Let's also remember that WrestleMania 27 teased a potentially good match in Bryan vs Sheamus and then scrapped it at the last minute because screw you for buying a PPV for an undercard match. Then they did the same thing the next year and scrapped it in 8 seconds.

    ReplyDelete
  119. Wrestlemania 9 has four title matches:


    Two ended in DQ and two ended because of salt.


    Taker v. Gonzalez is awful. Perfect v. Luger has a screwy ending. Razor Ramon v. Bob Backlund WTF?

    ReplyDelete
  120. I was one of the 2,200. Greatest match ever.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Oh man, I forgot Punk/Orton was on that one. I liked that match a lot too, fun stuff. Del Rio was just so incredibly boring to me... never could get into him. Cody/Rey, I thought was OK... and yes, any time Austin and Rock are on screen together is pure magic.

    ReplyDelete
  122. IC Title match was a count out.

    ReplyDelete
  123. That was when Cody debuted his new Titantron and it ruled.

    ReplyDelete
  124. 28 was a fine show

    ReplyDelete
  125. Mania should not have matches end with two DQs and one countout. There's two matches that don't have fuck finishes

    ReplyDelete
  126. I wish I could be remotely objective about 9, at least enough to amir it sucks. However, I'm 30 so it was the first WM I saved up to pay for on my own and to this day I enjoy the venue. To me, 11, 2, 4 are MUCH worse.

    ReplyDelete
  127. I think it's more an example of the 4-hour running time and excessive 'Mania hype causing it to be a disappointment, like a lot of the modern shows suffer from. Just skimming through Scott's rant it seems like a perfectly decent show (fucked if I remember, I watched a crappy stream while drunk and doing homework).

    ReplyDelete
  128. You can give that a pass though because in those days finishes like that were common.

    ReplyDelete
  129. WM 3 had several non finishes - BJ Haynes v Hercules, Bundy and the midgets, Duggan interfering...

    ReplyDelete
  130. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:25 PM

    WM 2 is pretty bad all around.


    WM 4 would have been OK if they had just cut out a round of the tournament and focused on booking good matches in the PPV rounds.


    WM 15 had a main event that felt like a main event at least. With the roster they had at the time, that show was never going to be a workrate fest by any stretch, but they could have easily cut down on the booking nonsense so it didn't feel like an episode of Raw.

    ReplyDelete
  131. WM V is in no way, shape, or form in the running for worst

    Both top title matches (World and IC) plus Blazer/Owen are enough to blow any argument out of the water

    ReplyDelete
  132. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:27 PM

    I feel like Wrestlemania 9 is the easiest of these to fix, even just with the roster they had.


    Hart vs. Savage, WWF Title
    Hogan vs. Yoko
    Luger vs. Tatanka (Lex ending the winning streak)
    Perfect vs. Razor
    Money Inc. vs. Steiners, Tag Titles
    Michaels vs. Jannetty, IC Title (Who cares if Marty was wasted; so was Shawn most the time)
    Taker vs. Bigelow
    Crush vs. Shango
    Backlund vs. Doink (Semi-squash to re-establish Bob)

    ReplyDelete
  133. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:27 PM

    Wrestlemania V is automatically DQ'd from this discussion, because Savage-Hogan blew off maybe the best story arc of all-time and there was plenty more fun stuff on that card.

    ReplyDelete
  134. Agreed. Not sure why 5 gets that much hate. I also have a soft spot for Rockers/Towers and the Strike Force breakup.

    ReplyDelete
  135. It's easier to give more recent shows more flack because frankly after 20 or so years, they should know better. So i forgive shows like Wrestlemania 2, or wrestlemania 11 (it was a bad period) I would have to say objectively Wrestlemania 9 is probably the worse wrestlemania because there is literally no redeeming factor at all...whereas most bad wrestlemanias have at least one or two good matches. I know people love to shit on Taker vs HHH 1, but it's a 3 1/2- 4 star match AT WORSE and that immediately disqualifies the show from being worse than wm9.

    But holy shit it was such a bad wrestlemania all the way through...that's why i dont feel TOO bad for wm31, as fashionable as it is to hate the product right now (not saying it's undeserved) but Miz vs Cena...finishing in a DQ?! (raw level match with a raw level ending) I seriously doubt anything that this years show will do will sink that low.

    ReplyDelete
  136. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:33 PM

    Maybe just because I was a kid for that show, but I'm a mark for the Demos & PoP finally meeting, plus the Rude vs. Warrior title change.

    ReplyDelete
  137. I love doing that whole wrestlemania rebook thing, and it's obvious if they had JUST gone for the whole Punk/Cena feud early it would have solved a 100 different problems down the line in retrospect (we might not have had the magic that was money in the bank at chi town, but holy shit...imagine topping off the event with a 5 star cena/punk classic) heck if Edge had figured out his problems a couple of months before, we might have even had that great feel good christian moment with that great ladder match he had with alberto the month after on the show as well.

    It's amazing how much potential WM27 had...and they squandered it just to build up WM28.

    ReplyDelete
  138. 23 and 24 are so so underrated it's not even funny, in fact wm's 19-24 is a great streak of shows...it's probably why they were so underappreciated at the time because the standard was so high. then we started getting shows like 25,27 and 29.

    ReplyDelete
  139. I forgive one match cards at wrestlemania quite easily, because they still succeed at being historically relevant. No one is ever going to really say wrestlemania 25 was a waste of money considering shawn vs taker was easily worth the price alone.

    ReplyDelete
  140. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:40 PM

    Wrestlemania 4 would have benefited from a shorter tournament. Remember, they had a battle royale on that card, so there was room for everyone to get a payday while still trimming some fat from the tournament itself.

    ReplyDelete
  141. 14....it was my big comeback wm, stopped watching the product around 93, became a wcw kid, then just caught a replay of wm14 after a complete blackout of anything that was going on at the time (much easier to do that back then) DX, Mike Tyson, Steve Austin, Kane v Undertaker, Rocky Maivia and the nation of domination, chainsaw charlie and cactus jack vs the new age outlaws....what's not to love.

    ReplyDelete
  142. WM2000 is a really shockingly shit show, outside of the obvious triple ladder tag match and the pretty good triple threat IC/Euro match...the rest of the card was just garbage, and the booking was horrendous (there wasn't even any singles bouts) but the product was in such an upswing, with so many over people all over the card it truly felt like something fun and special, a shitty card in a tiny area....felt far more special and prestigious than the usual big dream cards in mega venues like they are nowadays.

    ReplyDelete
  143. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:45 PM

    By simply reshuffling some personnel around, Wrestlemania 5 is easily trimmed to a more manageable 12 matches (with two of those being brief semi-squashes).


    1. Hercules vs. King Haku
    2. Twin Towers vs. Strike Force (short and sweet, as Martel walks out on Tito)
    3. Beefcake vs. Dibiase
    4. BrainBusters vs. Rockers
    5. Jake vs. Andre
    6. Harts vs. R&B
    7. Perfect vs. Rooster (Hennig is Bobby's avatar)
    8. Demos vs. PoP, Tag Titles
    9. Warrior vs. Rude, IC Title
    10. Duggan/Bushwhackers vs. Bravo/Rougeaus
    11. Bad News vs. Garvin (semi-squash for Brown)
    12. Savage vs. Hogan, WWF Title


    Only dude left off the card after reshuffling is Blue Blazer and he was just a job guy at that point anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  144. At least none of them are in the title matches.


    Plus, Bundy killing the midget is funny

    ReplyDelete
  145. 9 is not as bad as everyone says. Not good, but I'd watch it in a heartbeat vs 2, 11, or 15.

    ReplyDelete
  146. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:47 PM

    I'm a fan of the Punk-Cena retcon, but was Punk actually at that status pre-Pipe Bomb? I wasn't paying any attention at that point, so I'm genuinely asking.

    ReplyDelete
  147. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:50 PM

    I find it interesting that WM 11 doesn't get more disdain. Diesel vs. HBK was real good and the celeb match delivered, but the rest was marginal at best. How is 11 not in the discussion, but 5 is?

    ReplyDelete
  148. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:52 PM

    For a combination of in-ring SUCK and lack of historical significance, I feel like Wrestlemania 2 has to be close to the top, if not the worst ever.

    ReplyDelete
  149. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:54 PM

    Yeah, it's a fair point. There are periods (2, 9, 11, 15) where there just wasn't a great roster available. They weren't going to put together ANY combination of guys that was gonna make a top-to-bottom good card some of those years. However, the more recent era has been loaded with talented guys, by comparison, so putting on lackluster Wrestlemanias after about 2000 is laughable

    ReplyDelete
  150. I did not like that HHH/Taker match, no I did not.

    11 was the first one that I skipped. I never saw it until years later and I've still only watched it a couple of times. I was anti Diesel, and anti Main Event Shawn.

    Probably 2 though, really. I mean there was really nothing on there other than Hogan/Bundy and that's only cool because Bundy is big.

    ReplyDelete
  151. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:56 PM

    5 for me, just because I was so invested in half that card as a kid.
    14 is another one that I thought felt like a "big event" at the time and can still enjoy the simple, sensible booking of it all.
    17 for obvious reasons.

    ReplyDelete
  152. 27 is my least favorite. There isn't anything sentimental about that show and it encompassed everything wrong about the product at the time.
    9 and 11 have sentimental value for me.

    ReplyDelete
  153. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:57 PM

    I feel as though our viewing period probably parallel quite a bit. I gave it up in '93 and got back in during the run-up to Mania 14 too. I had never heard of Stone Cold, D-Generation X, or most the roster, but remember Shawn Michaels, Undertaker, Vince McMahon (the announcer), and holy shit Mike Tyson is involved now??

    ReplyDelete
  154. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:58 PM

    And he said, with pre-jizz in his pants, it was the best two Bret Hart matches he ever saw in the same show

    ReplyDelete
  155. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 3:59 PM

    I was there for that show and, as much as I wanted my first/only Wrestlemania to feel like a "Big Event", it just didn't. Not during the run-up and not during the show.

    ReplyDelete
  156. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 4:01 PM

    Diesel vs. Shawn just didn't feel like a Wrestlemania main event to me.

    ReplyDelete
  157. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 4:02 PM

    That's what made that story arc so great. You could easily side with either guy.

    ReplyDelete
  158. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 4:04 PM

    27 just needed a big match. HHH vs. Taker is not it. It really was the perfect to run Undertaker-Cena and/or unify the two world titles to give the show something "special"

    ReplyDelete
  159. 28 had Taker/HHH, Punk/Jericho and Rock/Cena. Sure, the rest may have been filler for the most part, but it wasn't bad.

    ReplyDelete
  160. I'm still mad about that match at 27 being cut so that Cole/Lawler could go 3 hours.

    ReplyDelete
  161. I was going to defend the honor of 9 but I just saw you like 27 so you are likely a crazy person.

    ReplyDelete
  162. I think 6 is pretty bad, except for the miraculously awesome main event.

    ReplyDelete
  163. I think he had it for a few weeks up to that point but it looked awesome on that cool Tron setup they had

    ReplyDelete
  164. 11 is so forgettable no one remembers it, while 5 is 4-hours in front of a bunch of gamblers sitting on their hands. 11 is definitely worse from a creative and match quality perspective.

    ReplyDelete
  165. Perfect wasn't managed by Heenan until after WM 6.

    ReplyDelete
  166. I think 2 has to be the worst though. The Hogan-Bundy match is bad, the NFL battle royal is ridiculous, the boxing match us head scratchingly horrible, and the celebrity announcers suck.

    ReplyDelete
  167. I was at 27 which helped, but HHH v. Taker is incredible and Punk v. Orton was just a great wrestling match.


    Defend 9 though...what ya got?

    ReplyDelete
  168. 12 is actually really bad with Piper and Goldust never actually wrestling, a wear undercard, a lousy match between BDC and Undertaker, and a boring main. Why is it so highly regarded and never on these lists?

    ReplyDelete
  169. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 4:25 PM

    Yeah, just keep Perfect vs. Blazer. Red Rooster needed to never be a thing anyway

    ReplyDelete
  170. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 4:27 PM

    Agreed. That show deserves as much apathy as some of these others are getting. The IronMan match and Diesel-Taker were fine, but nothing else was worth a damn

    ReplyDelete
  171. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 4:27 PM

    Another one that just needed to be trimmed down to a more manageable running time. A battle royale or multi-man tag match would have helped that card.

    ReplyDelete
  172. The world wouldn't complain if the Young Stallions, Sika (SIKA!), and Sam Houston were removed from the battle royal in favor of Duggan, Bravo, Muraco, and Reed.

    ReplyDelete
  173. It's 50/50. The Main Event started, no joke, at like 8:30 that night. Assuming they did a 7 pm ET start like I'm remembering. Most of the undercard was equal to the time of the Iron Man. It's an OK show for its era. Better than 11 and 15, but on par with 13.

    ReplyDelete
  174. If I'm Vince, I'd give Flair one big payday to do the retirement match at Mania. And give him an automatic release from his non-compete to WCW.

    ReplyDelete
  175. Probably because you are dead wrong about the main event being boring. Sorry no one dove through a table or got there balls stapled to a piece of plywood. Don't worry though, N2R 97 is the on the network, have a blast watching guy that, guy with shitty taste in wrestling.

    ReplyDelete
  176. 27 feels like just another show, 9 truly feels like a WrestleMania. Miz/Cena is a worse match than Hulk/Yoko. Orton/Punk is fine but it is no different than any other 15 minute match you get on Raw nowadays.

    ReplyDelete
  177. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 4:32 PM

    IronMan match was very good, especially for a time when they just didn't do long main events like that in the WWF. Probably necessary to take up a big chunk of the show with the main event too, seeing as the roster was pretty thin in 96

    ReplyDelete
  178. Burt Macklin, FBIMarch 13, 2015 at 4:33 PM

    LEAVE 27 ALONE.

    Bottom 4: 2, 4, 5, 12

    Top 4: 17, 19, 21, 7. That's a random ass top 4 don't hold me to that.

    ReplyDelete
  179. The OP is a monster.

    ReplyDelete
  180. If you think HBK working Bret's arm and Bret being a douche and no selling makes for a great match, enjoy!

    ReplyDelete
  181. 12 is one of the best off the main event. 27 sucks. Otherwise I agree.

    ReplyDelete
  182. It's one of the best matches of all time, and I guy named Pat Patterson lists it has his favorite match ever so perhaps you don't know how to watch a wrestling match. Like I told the other guy, no worries, plenty of Ball Mahoney matches on the network for you to enjoy while I watch Bret and Shawn put on a classic.

    ReplyDelete
  183. Just to go right out there with it, WM 7 might be the most under-rated. Take away the awful storyline for the main event, and it's a really good show, especially for another bloated card. Hot opener, shockinglty good Warlord/Bulldog match, good tag title and IC title match, classic career-ending match... even Hogan/Slaughter was good from a technical standpoint.

    ReplyDelete
  184. Classic boring with dickish no-selling. Just because they went an hour, doesn't mean it's good. For instance, steamboat/flair is easily 1000 times better.

    ReplyDelete
  185. Burt Macklin, FBIMarch 13, 2015 at 4:38 PM

    I love 7. The best Mania until 17 rolled around.

    ReplyDelete
  186. OK but why don't you address what I wrote about the rest of the card. And call me a mark, but it's weak that Geno Monsoon screwed over Bret at the end. Can't change rules as you go along, even in a fake sport.

    ReplyDelete
  187. You're not the real dougie, but you are about as fucking stupid as he is.

    ReplyDelete
  188. When is the next CZW show bro? I only watch matches where they break the cheese grater.

    ReplyDelete
  189. Only if you have Shawn v Bret at 5 stars. Otherwise, probably not.

    ReplyDelete
  190. Biff Kensington Has a PosseMarch 13, 2015 at 4:43 PM

    WrestleMania I was pretty bad, worse overall than 2. But my personal pick is XI - shit card, annoying celebrities and it didn't feel like a WrestleMania.

    ReplyDelete
  191. That was not a stipulation.

    ReplyDelete
  192. You're an idiot, "bro." You really are. I haven't followed wrestling in over 10 years and only look at Scott's site to keep up. But I'd kick your sorry ass in any wrestling trivia contest from 1985-2000, and wouldn't have to try hard to do it.

    ReplyDelete
  193. Glad you know your trivia, sad you don't understand how a wrestling match actually works. i guess call it a push.

    ReplyDelete
  194. For me the "real & proper" Wrestlemania II card & crowd was actually the "Big Showdown" outdoor card in Toronto that also had the proper feuds......Hogan / Wonderful should have main evented Mania II & you also had Steamboat / Roberts and I believe Andre / Studd? Can't remember. I liked the idea & effort of the tri-location concept, but the card was just straight weak. Extra points though for the big blue cage every time.

    ReplyDelete
  195. Fat, Ugly Inner-City SweathogMarch 13, 2015 at 4:46 PM

    You know what would have helped Wrestlemania 6? A 20-man battle royale and a re-shuffle of a couple name guys.

    How about this?:

    1. The Rockers vs. Orient Express
    2. Rick Martel vs. Tito Santana
    3. Colossal Connection vs. Demolition, Tag Team Titles
    4. Brutus Beefcake vs. Mr. Perfect
    5. Ted Dibiase vs. Jake Roberts
    6. Rick Rude vs. Dusty Rhodes
    7. Big Boss Man vs. Akeem
    8. Randy Savage vs. Roddy Piper
    9. Earthquake wins 20-Man Battle Royale*
    10. Hulk Hogan vs. Ultimate Warrior, WWF/IC Titles

    * Battle Royale: Earthquake, Duggan, Bad News, Hitman, Anvil, Barbarian, Koko, Volkoff, Zhukov, Snuka, Bravo, Hercules, Warlord, Genius, Luke, Butch, Hammer, Roma, Brawler, Honky.

    Gets everyone on the roster a payday, cuts 5 matches, ups the workrate & star power, plus showcases Earthquake as the next big thing,

    ReplyDelete
  196. Really? You don't think "how a wrestling match works" is subjective? You wouldn't I guess.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment