|
|
Post by barryhorowitz4ever on Jan 21, 2006 4:40:43 GMT -5
when comparing the first king of the ring ppv to wrestlemania 4, i am left wondering why one tournament was so good, and the other so utterly lifeless. anyone have any thoughts?
|
|
The Masked Jobber
Mephisto
I am the Brady Boone to Midnight Rose's Billy Jack Haynes.
Posts: 746
|
Post by The Masked Jobber on Jan 21, 2006 5:12:28 GMT -5
The talent in each tournament was different, so there were style clashes. Also they probably weren't given enough time to put on decent matches, just told to go out there for 15 or 10 minutes and put something together.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mister Yummy on Jan 22, 2006 16:45:56 GMT -5
Am I the only person who truly liked Wrestlemania 4? As a matter of fact, I'd have to say it's in my top 5. It's probably mostly nostalgia for me, though. I can visualize the whole event, and there really weren't any great matches. Savage vs. DiBiase was good, but the finish kind of ruined it. I also liked Steamboat vs. Valentine. But all of the other matches weren't all that great.
I checked the WWF Roster for March 1988, and every single wrestler with the company at the time was at Wrestlemania 4.
|
|
