From the A1 Message Boards: Me and Jerseyboy on the Money in the Bank Buyrate

Don't worry 'bout Punk
Photo Credit: WWE.com

Normally, I hate talking about things like buyrates and ratings. Like Jason Mann said, they're boring. However, sometimes, you get dragged into conversations with people who take those sorts of things seriously. In addition to my post on why I don't think they need to be taken seriously at Fair to Flair, I got into it a little bit at A1-Wrestling with the people reacting to ratings and getting a bit in a tizzy because ratings haven't shot up.

I posted the now-determined-to-be incorrect buyrate for Money in the Bank, which was actually really good, before I was corrected by poster and sometimes TWB commenter KoppoKick bringing up Meltzer's analysis of the sheets bringing the number down a bit. The correct number, 185K as compared to the erroneous number of 276K, was still pretty good, at least I thought. Here's the passage of three posts over there that I think dictates why, regardless of how "good" or "not good" the numbers are, why, again, we shouldn't really worry about the business side when it comes to what they're going to do on the side we SHOULD care about, i.e. the shows themselves. Two of my posts will sandwich one by poster and regular TWB commenter Jerseyboy, with whom I may disagree from time to time. Despite that, he really is smart when it comes to this kind of thing, and I'm glad he reads and comments.

Yes, this will be directly C&Ped from the A1 board, but I think it's worth sharing. At least I hope you think it's worth sharing.

Me:

[Referring to the discrepancy between the originally reported 276K and the real 185K] It just goes to show that wrestling journalism has a long way to go, and wrestling fans such as myself have a long way to go before trusting any of these sites. My bad.

That being said, 185K is still a good number.

Jerseyboy:

I agree. To me, it meant that Punk/Cena had some juice.

The big thing that people need to keep in mind is that if there's going to be business turnaround with Punk as the centerpiece, it isn't going to happen overnight. Again, the things to look at over the next 3-6 months aren't the TV ratings so much, but to see if there's a bump in PPV buyrates and house show attendance and merchandise sales. If Punk means something, that's where the initial bump's [sic] going to come from.

Of course, the WWE might look at ratings and a less than expected PPV number and decide Punk needs to be shunted back down the card. But I'm thinking at this point that they're pretty much out of options and will go all the way with him.

Because if you move Punk back to the mid-card, who do you move up in his place? Exactly.

Me again:

Yeah, I think you're right in that they won't move him back down for whatever reason. They're already seeing the initial bumps in merch. MitB was slightly up, from this time last year, which is still up. Ratings are ratings, but in the last two months, they've been mostly stable. Plus, as Triple H gets more influence, I think the decision making might turn more rational over the long term. I think Punk will be fine.

Normally, I don't care about this kind of thing, but I posted the number just to try and allay concerns (before I found out that I had bitten on a bad one, again, my fault there) that something that we found good was going to continue to pay dividends and that really, we should probably stop worrying about the business end of things. 10 million people watch the Jersey Shore. Is that a measurement of how enjoyable that program is going to be to you? Hardly. Therefore, why should it matter how many people consume wrestling if what the company is producing is good? And unlike Fatty, there really isn't a consensus on this angle being good or bad (although most people I interact with have loved the last two months with hiccups here and there).

If WWE was proving to be reactionary, then they wouldn't have put Punk over Cena at MitB, they wouldn't have put him over Cena again at SummerSlam, and they wouldn't have programmed him against someone who is so obviously hateable and polarizing the other way that everyone, not just the "Attitude Era holdovers", men and anti-Cena crowd, would cheer him. Say what you want about Nash and Punk being programmed against him, but again, the logic there isn't to bury Punk or put him out of mind. It's to get everyone to cheer the man, and it's a prelude into a potential feud with the boss. Whether you think Nash should have been the segue into that or whether you think that a boss/employee feud in 2011 is a good idea is one thing, but I think it's undeniable that Punk is a priority to WWE right now.

This is program #1 or at least #1a (with Cena/del Rio being #1). The moment that Punk gets thrown back to the Dolph Zigglers and Kanes of the world is when we start panicking, at least in my estimation. But again, I'll be utterly shocked if that happens. Call me myopic. Call me overly optimistic. Call me a "WWE fanboy" (like that means anything among adults in 2011, even if there wasn't a shitload of evidence to prove that I come down on what I feel is bad wrestling regardless of company) even. Just don't call me late for dinner. But I have a really good feeling about the direction of WWE right now, and when it's all said and done, I really feel like come WrestleMania time, CM Punk is going to be fully integrated into the main event firmament.

I think that's a passage worth relaying. Again, numbers are numbers, and even if they do affect what they put on the screen, you always have the option to vote with your own remote control and not watch. Life's not long enough to the point where worrying about the performance indicators of WWE is worth it.

Also, I encourage you, like I always have, to sign up for an account at A1-Wrestling and post there. It's a really good community with great discussion for wrestling and so much more.

The One Where TH Brings up Nitro Parties

Photo Credit: WWE.com

Fair to Flair Episode 8: He's Got Great Hair

It's my Fair to Flair podcast debut! I join Razor of House Kick-Out!!, Jason Mann and K. Sawyer Paul to discuss SummerSlam, Alberto del Rio, a little bit about Matt Hardy and somehow, Nitro Parties and Kevin Nash's hair. It's a quick jaunt comparatively speaking to the other FtF podcasts, but it's got some nice discussion. LISTEN!

The Wrestling Podcast, Episode 9: Razor of Kick-Out!! Wrestling

Logo credit: Razor

Episode 9: Wrestle-phenia

Razor of Kick-Out!! Wrestling and Fair to Flair appears on this week’s massive edition of The Wrestling Podcast. Obviously, CM Punk is the hot topic, but there are other conversations explored here. We talk about Razor’s deep-seated yet totally understandable hatred for Randy Orton, why the WWE Divas have a tough lot in professional life, why we love the idea of Wrestling Revolution and how wrestling journalism can be improved. Plus, my dog makes a few appearances.

Remember you can contact TH and ask him questions about wrestling, life or anything else. Please refer to this post for contact information. He always takes questions!

What They're Saying: CM Punk's Epic Promo

Punk's got people talkin', yo
Photo Credit: WWE.com

Here you go:

Razor (Fair to Flair)

Whether or not Punk is actually going to leave WWE is irrelevant; what’s important now is he managed to make people think that he really did just run down WWE, call Stephanie McMahon and Triple H “idiots,” say “Hi” to Colt Cabana and threaten to take the WWE Championship to Ring of Honor.

Again, the rules have changed, but the game is still the same.

Casual fans can sit back and watch the show like I wish I could, but it takes a different approach to get those jaded fans to feel something when watching wrestling. Am I suggesting that “worked shoots” should become the new norm? No, but it is an effective storytelling device in the right situation in the hands of the right actors.

I still use those terms, but I can see where Razor's coming from here. For me, I don't think enjoying the product and using those terms and analyzing in that light are mutually exclusive. That being said, I think I envy his outlook a smidge.

MVP

My verdict after watching the @CMPunk promo, he just had his Austin 3:16 moment. Don't fuck this one up @wwe .

Only if Punk isn't taking a break. The reason why 3:16 worked so well was because Austin went RIGHT into a feud with Bret Hart. Punk? If he leaves, then some of the impact (not all of it, but some of it) is lost over time.

Mark Madden

But the majority of the audience had little idea what Punk was talking about. Let Impact book for the IWC. WWE has prospered by booking for the casual fan. This was a rare departure from that. Let’s see how effective it is.

I'm all about giving equal time to all POVs, even if it's to a bozo. Anyway, Madden misses the point. Hardcore. But you know who got the point and articulates the shit out of it? The next guy...

David Bixenspan (Cageside Seats)

It was never implied that wrestling is a work, and the references catering to hardcore fans were structured in ways that could plausibly be understood by causal fans:

• Plenty of fans were watching when Paul Heyman was around and knew he was behind ECW. Everyone knows who Brock Lesnar is and plenty know why he left.
• Even if you aren't familiar with New Japan Pro Wrestling or Ring of Honor, you're immediately aware that they are other wrestling companies. Colt Cabana was clearly implied to be a wrestler in this strange "Ring of Honor" place.
• He laid out that John Laurinaitis was one of Vince's "douchebag yes men" before mentioning his name.
• Stephanie McMahon and Triple H are firmly established on TV as being a married couple.
• The ending implying that he was going to tell a story about the anti-bullying campaign being hypocritical in light of things Vince McMahon has said to him makes sense both with the hardcore fan interpretation of the real Vince McMahon and the on-screen character he portrays. It also works plausibly as the cut-off point, as sponsors, bad media exposure, etc. are more than just some references to other promotions existing and WWE higher ups being stupid/out of touch.

Take all that and wrap it up into a calmly furious, brilliantly delivered wrestling promo where he still positioned himself firmly as a heel (even using the infamous tales of fans that constantly harrass him and WWE wrestlers at airports in the process), and that's why it worked.

Not only are they awesome at investigative reporting, but they got opinion writing down pat too.

jerseyboy at A1-Wrestling

Oh, it was totally "teh shootz", but it wasn't as offensive here because the WWE doesn't do that all the time. The reason Russo's shoots suck is because TNA does them every fucking week.

Also, with Russo, his shoots are accepted as a part of Impact. WWE? They cut Punk's mic and abruptly ended the show. A promo like Punk's is only effective if people think that management is legitimately pissed at it.

Daniel Bryan

With revolution dripping off his lips with every word, @CMPunk was a god last night.

And you thought ol' AmDrag would be mad by Punk co-opting his "Best in the World" moniker... *emoticon*

Steve Austin

@CMPunk just melted my 52 inch TV with a scorching hot promo...delivery, content, and attitude...one of the best promos I've ever seen.

That's why a feud between Austin and Punk would rule. There's mutual respect there. You know they'd trust working with each other to make a story between the two be the most epic thing ever.

Justin Henry (Camel Clutch Blog)

Well, the final angle is what made it work, even if it’s as “worked” as anything else. But man, did Punk have that audience listening. Decent matches here and there, but that promo, oh man that promo.

Something else, man.

Co-sign.

Kurt Angle

CM Punk had classic promo last night. Good for Him. But if U ever say another word about Me again, Ur toast! If U don't believe Me, try Me!

More than likely referring to when Punk (rightfully) called him a drunk idiot after Angle went after Randy Orton... err, I'm sorry, when the "Twitter hacker" went after Orton. The last time I checked, threatening people for the things they say is generally frowned upon.

Bill Simmons

CM Punk's Monday Night Raw performance tonight was one for the ages.

By now, Simmons can be considered a "casual fan", I'd say. I'm telling you, this is watershed material here.

Brandon Stroud

What Traina isn’t considering is that Punk’s speech WAS real. It comes down to your definition of “real”. WWE is very concerned with making you think what they want you to think. If Kelly Kelly points at you and smiles as she’s trotting down to the ring, they want you to cheer for her. If someone says “each and every one of you” or “you people” into a microphone, you’re supposed to boo. This is supposed to translate into an emotional reaction that is hard to have if you aren’t five. That’s WWE’s reality.

What Punk did was smash a hole in that reality using OUR reality, the reality of the jaded fan on the Internet who wants what you’ve never seen to be the focus of television, and when that happens, wants something else. They didn’t support Scotty Goldman when he was doing picture-in-picture jokes on Smackdown, but they get excited when Colt Cabana is mentioned by name. They get excited when Matt Hardy shows up and blurts out “Ring of Honor”, but give up on him when they realize he’s still just in the WWE, and he’s still just Matt Hardy. That’s how we work, for better or worse. Most of us, anyway.

Punk took what we consider reality — held down wrestlers, pushes for guys who suck, “sports entertainment” replacing “wrestler” on TV, no promotion existing in the eyes of WWE except for WWE, Triple H, Stephanie, backstage WWE and basically everything Chavo Guerrero will be blogging about for the next six months — and used it as a tool to enhance WWE’s interpretation. That’s the genius of last night. Punk took a formula that doesn’t work (“everything else on the show is fake, but this part is real”), paired it with a few other things that don’t work (talking to the Internet on TV, mentioning backstage stuff 90% of your audience has no idea about), and willed them together into something that works by doing something nobody else who has tried has: being great.

Saving maybe the best take for last.

Remember you can contact TH and ask him questions about wrestling, life or anything else. Please refer to this post for contact information. He always takes questions!

The Wrestling Podcast, Episode 6: Mitch (PizzaBodySlam) f/ K. Sawyer Paul

Christian was one of the topics for this episode
Photo Credit: WWE.com

Episode 6: Darkness on the Edge and Christian of Town

Episode 6! And this is a landmark episode in that not only did I finally corner the wily Mitch of PizzaBodySlam, my blogging Bro-berto Luong-bro, but I also had a special run-in guest… K. Sawyer Paul, who came in at about the 55 minute mark. We pretty much talk about everything, including Fair to Flair, the quarterly, bad wrestling journalism, ROH, live wrestling, Christian, R-Truth and of course, the Stanley Cup Finals. As an aside, this was recorded Thursday, before the Canucks took a 3-2 series lead. Anyway, give it a listen, it’s a rollicking, fun podcast, even though it’s the longest one.

Remember you can contact TH and ask him questions about wrestling, life or anything else. Please refer to this post for contact information. He always takes questions!

Follow Friday: Fair to Flair

The quarterly!

Fair to Flair, for those who are just starting to follow this blog or who do follow TWB and missed out on all the posts describing it, is a blog that has set out to raise the bar in wrestling journalism. The premise is quality over quantity, with a focus more on the ephemeral qualities of wrestling, rather than NEWZ and rumors and bitching about ratings or knee-jerk reactions. It's about analysis through the lens of people who love wrestling for what it is, not for what it could be. It consists of five writers. There's myself, who, well, duh, you know me or else you wouldn't be reading. I know I've done this before, but again, it's reboot week and I do have ulterior motives. But anyway, here are the other four contributors to the site.

Jason Mann is the first on the list, found @wrestlespective, and he's the guy behind the idea. He's level-headed and often brings sense to situations where the Internet community might freak out. He also is a purveyor of really bad puns, which is endearing in a way. But yeah, he's the founder and without him, the project wouldn't have even been ideated.

Next up is K. Sawyer Paul, found @ksawyerpaul. He's stepping back from writing for the site because of personal issues, but he's still active in editing for the site as well as on Twitter and Tumblr, reposting articles and live-Tweeting DVD watching, most recently the Nitro DVD. He looks at things from a vastly different perspective than some, and he also HATES Bryan Alvarez's writing.

Third is my blogging Ric-Bro Suave, Mitch, whose handle is the ubiquitous @pizzabodyslam. He's the least active of the quintet, but for good reason. Dude has to do mad traveling for work. However, when he's around, he provides the RAW review in his standard WOO!/BOO! format. He also provides a look at wrestling from the most innocent point of view, in that he's probably the least jaded or "smarky" of the lot.

Last, but certainly not least, is Razor, whom you can find @kickoutblog. His angst and malaise towards Randy Orton is legendary, and it's a feeling I can certainly get behind. He also is the group's go-to personality for Tough Enough, video games and he's also in radio, so that makes him most valuable for podcasting when it comes around.

If you follow those four (and me, follow me!), as well as the actual @FairtoFlair feed, you'll get all the FtF posts, all our insights on wrestling and otherwise and just all the random fun we provide for free. Ah yes, that's the rub, "for free". We do have something that we charge for, and that's the Quarterly. I've pimped this before here, but it's worth doing again. Why? Because it's part of our mission statement, probably the biggest part.

Basically, we solicited for columns that would be memorable, that would be timeless, that would be as poignant five years from now as it is today. We got submissions from 11 of the best writers in the wrestling blogosphere (and from me), and all of them in some way contribute to this love letter to professional wrestling. It's chock-full of positivity and promise with critical thought mixed in. It's so different in tone than what you usually find in pay-for-print in wrestling that I guarantee you'll feel like you're underpaying for the whole thing when you order it. Again, my personal recommendation is to buy the digital copy for the low price of $10. You'll get a copy you can read on your e-Reader or laptop, and it's green to boot.

Listen, I know for a fact that some of you pay for the Observer or Torch. That's all well and good, and for news, yeah, I guess they're worth the money, even if at times, they get worked or report on things like spoilers that might change. Okay. But the commentary? It's often rambling, grammatically poor and so pessimistic, centered on ratings and other bullshit that you might not care about. It feels like it's not edited at times. And you can tell that some of them would rather be writing about MMA or that they disdainfully write about wrestling or they're disappointed that wrestling's not at the top of the world anymore. They don't appreciate the art. So, why not pay for commentary written by people who love wrestling, about topics you care about, and most importantly, edited by someone whose whole field of expertise is the written word? It's seriously professional grade, and at $10-25 an issue, depending on how you buy, that's a steal.

But hey, even if you don't buy the Quarterly, then at least give the FtF crew a follow on Twitter. You'll find that even the stuff provided for free is more than worth the price tag.

Remember you can contact TH and ask him questions about wrestling, life or anything else. Please refer to this post for contact information. He always takes questions!

TWIOT: Random Musings

A bit more in depth and philosophical than the "random thoughts" posts...

Twitter is a meritocracy, folks

- I like Twitter, and I like it when people follow me on it. I link every TWB post on it (as well as Facebook), so yeah, if you follow me on it, then you see every blog post around the time that it posts. Granted, I want to have as many Twitter followers as possible. However, I'm selfish and possibly delusional. I want all my followers to be cool, to be folks that WANT to follow me. I'd rather have 20 followers who read and appreciate TWB and who interact with me in a civil way than have 20,000 people who ignore my posts or are spam bots or mindless celebrity groupie wannabes. If you want to follow me, I want it to be because you want to follow me, not because of some fake sense of decorum.

That's why this "Team Follow Back" hashtag is so offensive to me. For one, it's basically begging for followers, which I think is just pathetic anyway. But I follow people based on how interesting I find them or if I know them and am cool with them. How arrogant must you be to think that I'd find you cool just because you follow me on Twitter? You boosted my follower count, great, but why should I do the same? Do you have anything good to say? Do you write an insightful blog that I might like? Or are your tweets consisting mostly of "Hey can I get a follow back?" or some other insipid bullshit?

Hell, pandering for followers is also a great way to get me to unfollow you if I already do. It's just unbecoming. Twitter isn't high school. Let's stop treating it as such, okay?

- One politician tweeted pictures of his junk to a coed, with the scandal breaking WHILE his wife was pregnant. Another used her media platform to spew blatant lies about the history of this country in order for personal gain. Can you guess which one is getting more media attention? IF you answered the former, you're correct, and you have your finger on the pulse of what's wrong with the coverage of American politics today.

Granted, I'm not advocating that our elected officials act like they're in college. Because they're our leaders, they need to be held to a higher standard, and I get that. Anthony Weiner showed incredibly poor judgment at the very least when he sent those photos and then lied about it on top of that. He deserves public censure, and if he resigned over it, I wouldn't be up in arms about it, despite the fact that hey, Americans could stand to lighten up a bit about sex and the private lives of individuals. However, what really ticks me off about all this is the fact that Sarah Palin's total bungling of the history behind Paul Revere's ride for her own political gain is being relatively ignored.

I mean, this isn't the first time she's shown a patent disregard for the history of our nation to make a confused, neocon talking point. She's pandering to the lowest common denominator and being met with rousing cheers. Isn't that what we DON'T want in people who are trying to sell themselves as legitimate candidates for the highest office in the land?

Don't get me wrong. This isn't a "Weiner is good, Palin is bad" post. Both deserve scorn for their misdeeds given the public nature of them and such. However, why is only one getting this intense scrutiny? If Palin wins the Presidency in 2012 based on half-truths, spin and borderline slander, then maybe we should start holding the media responsible for not putting more of a microscope on the dumb shit people say, liberal or conservative.

- Finally, on a lighter note, Bill Simmons and Chuck Klosterman launched Grantland this week, as I noted in the links dump yesterday. The concept is writing about sports at a higher level than what you'd find at ESPN with an ear towards bringing more unknown writers to ply their trade. I have to say, this sounds like an eerily familiar idea... oh yeah, it's what we set out at Fair to Flair to do with wrestling journalism and writing. Now, I'm not saying Simmons ripped us off at all. Actually, I'm glad he spearheaded this site. I think sports journalism, or at least opinion writing, needs a kick in the ass.

Obviously, Grantland is going to have a leg up on their market share than we at FtF have in ours, because they have the backing of ESPN. That being said, I know some in the audience have reservations about trusting ANYTHING Simmons will do because you may not like him as a writer. I've had problems with him in the past, but at the same time, he's the guy who made me want to write blogs and my column at The Triangle better. He's probably the single biggest influence on me and my writing style, so of course, I'm still a fan of his and I still support things he does. I'll have my eye on this, and maybe I, as well as the other folks at FtF, can learn something about marketing a premium blogging product.

Remember you can contact TH and ask him questions about wrestling, life or anything else. Please refer to this post for contact information. He always takes questions!

I Smash Your Trophy!

DESTROY THIS BELT

I finally got around to listening to the latest Fair to Flair podcast (and you should too, even if some of the stuff they talk about is already dated), and they were talking about the most reasonable endgames for Kharma (again, a bit dated, but hey, it was timely when they released it). The point made was that Kharma was more than likely to become larger than the Divas Championship. I agree with it fullstop, and I would hope that once she decimated the Divas, she'd move onto wrestling men, preferably as a tag team partner to Beth Phoenix. I WILL NOT GIVE THAT DREAM UP, YOU N00BS.

However, before she got to that point, she'd have to win the Divas Title, right? There'd be no way that she'd logically go from the women to the men without doing EVERYTHING there was to do in the Divas division, right? But what would she do with the Divas Championship after she won it, a prize that is so obviously below her that it's not even funny?

K. Sawyer Paul had the idea on the podcast that she should destroy it.

I was taken bit aback by the suggestion at first, but after a moment or so to process it, yeah, I'm totally digging on the idea. What other way would be fitting enough for the primal, savage Un-Diva to celebrate her more than eventual winning of the title belt? No other way, that's what. It really would be symbolic of her domination of the Barbie-type women in the WWE. But that's not what I wanted to write this post about.

When was the last time the WWE had a really good trophy-smashing or title belt desecration? I mean, when someone came in and destroyed another guy's accolade? Big Show going all hurricane mode on Jack Swagger's childhood trophy display was the most recent, but then again, those were props he brought in. When was the last time someone took a title or a trophy earned from a WWF/E-sponsored event and destroyed it? Was it Curt Hennig stealing and destroying Hulk Hogan's WWF Championship? Bret Hart smashing Bad News Brown's trophy?

Either way, it's an awesome visual, and a great way to get heat for a guy, obviously. It would also be a perfect opportunity to really associate someone with a title belt. For example, how about someone winning the spinner belt from John Cena, destroying it and having a new one made for him? Or someone foreign winning the United States Championship, destroying it and then renaming the title after the nationality the guy is. The heat would be off the charts.

So yeah, I really think they should do a good, old-fashioned accolade destruction. Hold a sham tournament and smash the trophy. Burn a title belt. Throw it in the incinerator. A trash compactor. SOMETHING! Why? Because it'd be awesome, that's why.

Remember you can contact TH and ask him questions about wrestling, life or anything else. Please refer to this post for contact information. He always takes questions!

Fair to Flair Quarterly on Sale Now!

Cover art: Leslie Lee III

Via Fair to Flair

Hey, you like reading The Wrestling Blog? And do you like magazines? And do you think that pro wrestling can be written about on a higher level of sophistication? And do you not mind paying for such content? WELL DO I HAVE NEWS FOR YOU!

The Fair to Flair Quarterly is ready for pre-sale. Now, what is the Quarterly? It's a magazine written by the Fair to Flair crew, including for this issue myself, Jason Mann and Razor, as well as a bunch of other talented contributors solicited by the FtF crew. Now, why is there a charge for this? Everything else on the Internet is free! Well, for one, it's a higher level of writing. It's less blog-quality (not that there's anything wrong WITH blog-quality, but yeah) and more "hey look, this is published" quality. Second, it's edited, like with a fine-tooth comb edited by K. Sawyer Paul. Third, well, if you choose to get it on real, honest-to-God paper, then that and the printing costs money.

Now, there are four different options you could go with. First is order the hard copy now or within the next two weeks for $20. Two, you could get it after two weeks for $25. So if you order it now, you'd get $5 off. Three, you could get a subscription, four episodes a year, for $90, which is a total of $10 off if you were to buy each issue piecemeal. Then, the final option is to get the digital copy for $10, which is a bargain, and it's greener! You can read it on your Kindle or your laptop or whatever other digital device you have, and you're saving trees!

So yeah, gobble this up. I previewed it, and it's got some really good articles. Plus one by me about Sean Waltman and King of Trios... but yeah, you knew I was going to write about Chikara in some capacity.

Remember you can contact TH and ask him questions about wrestling, life or anything else. Please refer to this post for contact information. He always takes questions!

Your Midweek Links: The Best of Randy Savage Tributes

It's Hump Day, so if you're having a little trouble getting through the midpoint, here are some links to get you through:

Self-Shilling

- If you haven't read either of my pieces here on TWB about Randy Savage, either the obituary or the personal tribute, check 'em out. [RIP Randy Savage] [What Macho Meant to Me]

- My Fair to Flair piece, praising Macho Man for his resistance towards coming back and diminishing his legacy. [The Macho Man and Letting Go]

- My Camel Clutch Blog column, which argues the merits of Randy Savage as the best of all-time. [Macho Man Randy Savage, The Best Ever?]

Wrestling Links - Macho Man Tribute Compendium

- Bill Simmons may not be your cup of tea, but if you're a wrestling fan, you need to read this. I think this is the best tribute to Savage I read all week thus far. [Sports Guy's World]

- The second best tribute I've read all week, different than Simmons', but still amazing and trenchant. [Deadspin]

- Fair to Flair Podcast Vol. 4, discussing the life and times of Randy Savage. [Fair to Flair]

- Speaking of FtF-related podcasts, K. Sawyer Paul talks to Bill "Baconhill" Bicknell about Macho Man. [Aggressive Art]

- Jim Ross' thoughts about Macho. [JR's BBQ Sauce Blog]

- Justin Henry recounts the fifteen greatest matches of Macho Man's career. [Camel Clutch Blog]

- Scott Bowden's tribute to Randy Savage. [Kentucky Fried 'Rasslin']

- A simple picture tribute. Just as a note, I had most of those old-school rubber WWF figures. [Unreality Mag]

- B Stroud's Savage memorial. [With Leather]

- A great read about Savage's early years working for his father and in an "outlaw" promotion that rivaled Memphis. [Cageside Seats]

- Macho's WCW debut. [South Atlanta Wrestling]

- The Trentonian gave Macho's death an above-the-fold headline. [Hugging Harold Reynolds]

- A slideshow tribute to Macho from Bleacher Report Uproxx and The Cajun Boy. [Uproxx]

As Always...

- You've gotta follow Where's Randy Savage on Tumblr or in your Google Reader. [Where's Randy Savage]

That's all. It's all Macho Man this week.

Remember you can contact TH and ask him questions about wrestling, life or anything else. Please refer to this post for contact information. He always takes questions!