|
Post by aggressiveperfectpoor on Nov 7, 2019 10:29:45 GMT -5
I just think in this situation, people heard exactly what they wanted to hear from Dave. It was an opportunity to pile on Seth Rollins, and that's the edgy thing to do right now. Because it's 1996... Seth has officially entered that weird ‘company’s babyface that’s actually the company’s biggest heel’ similar to reigns or cena. which is beyond weird because while Seth maybe should delete Twitter, his wrestling career has been nothing less than amazing. Because remember when everyone would cup Seth's balls at every move and get on their knees to sniff his farts? Those same people turned on him. Life's funny and people like that suck. Unfortunately those people INFEST the IWC
|
|
|
Post by hitmancmedge on Nov 7, 2019 11:50:47 GMT -5
Seth has officially entered that weird ‘company’s babyface that’s actually the company’s biggest heel’ similar to reigns or cena. which is beyond weird because while Seth maybe should delete Twitter, his wrestling career has been nothing less than amazing. Because remember when everyone would cup Seth's balls at every move and get on their knees to sniff his farts? Those same people turned on him. Life's funny and people like that suck. Unfortunately those people INFEST the IWC They wanna rebel against whatever the company is doing or whoever they are pushing. It’s essentially been like that since 2002 when The Rock won the belt, they have rejected the top baby face since then minus Eddie Guerrero. But Cena, Triple H, Roman, Batista the last two months of his first face reign and beyond, Kofi, hell even Punk there were a ton of people. He has had it enough, time to take the belt off him, boring, stale etc. I am convinced people won’t be happy.
|
|
|
Post by aggressiveperfectpoor on Nov 7, 2019 15:41:08 GMT -5
Because remember when everyone would cup Seth's balls at every move and get on their knees to sniff his farts? Those same people turned on him. Life's funny and people like that suck. Unfortunately those people INFEST the IWC They wanna rebel against whatever the company is doing or whoever they are pushing. It’s essentially been like that since 2002 when The Rock won the belt, they have rejected the top baby face since then minus Eddie Guerrero. But Cena, Triple H, Roman, Batista the last two months of his first face reign and beyond, Kofi, hell even Punk there were a ton of people. He has had it enough, time to take the belt off him, boring, stale etc. I am convinced people won’t be happy. I just wrote a novel and deleted it as a reply. But instead I'll go down this road...I used to always buy Wrestling shirts to wear along with band shirts and my Nike, Jordan, Adidas, comic shirts in the late '90-Early '00s. Now, I don't care if it's the coolest wrestling shirt there ever was and it was bestowed to me by Bret, Shawn, Hogan, Austin, Eddie's Spirit, RVD, The Rock,Flair, Dusty's Spirit, Andre, Macho, Roddy, And Warrior's spirits, Triple H, and Angle, in a secret round table ceremony...I STILL wouldn't wear it in public, because nowadays, not wrestling, but FELLOW WRESTLING FANS embarrass me. Since back in '07 when I was wearing an old ECW RVD shirt and had a bad experience with some idiot while shopping at a grocery store telling me how "RVD sucked because he blew his chance by not giving up pot and would never be anything more than a jobber anymore and I was supporting a loser..." OUT OF NOWHERE LIKE A ING RKO! That moment, people were staring, I decided never to wear another wrestling shirt in public due to the CHANCE of encountering one of these socially intellectually- disabled idiots. Even if wrestling has another boom period, I'm still not going to. I'll support the show by watching and buying the networks, or AEW PPVs, but no more shirts. Not all...not most...but A LOT of today's wrestling fans are embarrassing, and it's normally that they are the ones that make the most noise.
|
|
|
Post by terraryzing on Nov 7, 2019 15:49:40 GMT -5
If you've never read an issue of the Wrestling Observer, and get your 20 second clips and news Dave puts out there on a click bait/copy & paste site gloating about when he's wrong, it shows a lot about you.
Call me biased but I'm a 20 year WON subscriber and nearly 15 year F4W subscriber. You'd have a totally different view of them both, and the difference between the freebie sites and the real thing.
WON/F4W are my go to site. ANd I've had subscriptions to the other paid websites (in some cases years on them) and the Observer always was my go to. If you don't subscribe, check it out for a month, 11.99. Cancel if you don't like it. But if you are a wrestling fan you will enjoy it, and most likely your opinion will change once you read/actually listen to the FULL work they put in.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Nov 7, 2019 19:58:18 GMT -5
The fact that a subscription to WON costs more than the WWE Network, Netflix, Disney+, is absolutely mind boggling. The only thing more confusing is that some actually choose to pay it.
|
|
|
Post by LK3 on Nov 7, 2019 23:26:59 GMT -5
Way too many times I see websites posting stories as “reports” from Meltzer, and when seeing his tweet or quote they provide it’s simply an OPINION from Dave. I think people are too conditioned to believe whatever he says, and even if it’s his opinion on something people think what he says is right because he’s Dave Meltzer.
|
|
|
Post by FLUX '97 on Nov 8, 2019 0:39:04 GMT -5
If you've never read an issue of the Wrestling Observer, and get your 20 second clips and news Dave puts out there on a click bait/copy & paste site gloating about when he's wrong, it shows a lot about you. Call me biased but I'm a 20 year WON subscriber and nearly 15 year F4W subscriber. You'd have a totally different view of them both, and the difference between the freebie sites and the real thing. WON/F4W are my go to site. ANd I've had subscriptions to the other paid websites (in some cases years on them) and the Observer always was my go to. If you don't subscribe, check it out for a month, 11.99. Cancel if you don't like it. But if you are a wrestling fan you will enjoy it, and most likely your opinion will change once you read/actually listen to the FULL work they put in. I don't even want to listen to Dave for free, I'm sure as not going to pay to listen to his ramblings and AEW fellatio.
|
|
|
Post by RuthlessFigs on Nov 8, 2019 6:04:06 GMT -5
Meltzer will cost Rollins the Rumble
Rollins will cost Meltzer the title at Elimination Chamber
Meltzer will 'Injure' Rollins before Mania
Rollins will fight injured and go over at Mania in heroic fashion
So predictable... 2 stars.
|
|
|
Post by aggressiveperfectpoor on Nov 8, 2019 18:59:57 GMT -5
If you've never read an issue of the Wrestling Observer, and get your 20 second clips and news Dave puts out there on a click bait/copy & paste site gloating about when he's wrong, it shows a lot about you. Call me biased but I'm a 20 year WON subscriber and nearly 15 year F4W subscriber. You'd have a totally different view of them both, and the difference between the freebie sites and the real thing. WON/F4W are my go to site. ANd I've had subscriptions to the other paid websites (in some cases years on them) and the Observer always was my go to. If you don't subscribe, check it out for a month, 11.99. Cancel if you don't like it. But if you are a wrestling fan you will enjoy it, and most likely your opinion will change once you read/actually listen to the FULL work they put in. I did, it was horrible. Never again. I really gave it a chance, read it, used all the fratures, and no...it wasn't worth A FRACTION of the 12 bucks I paid...I actually IIRC payed more than 12 for the month.
|
|
|
Post by terraryzing on Nov 9, 2019 7:13:22 GMT -5
I'm not here to argue with anybody, or even sell anything to those who don't want it (and I apologize if that's how my last post came off), but it's crazy to see how much hate there is for these guys (not just Dave). As a fan, things changed for me when I first found the Torch, and shortly after subscribed to the Observer. I became hungry for knowledge & history of the business, started reading books that covered the history of not just WWE, but tracing back decades to other promotions, territories, top guys from different era's, etc.
Guess it's a different time. There's more than just rumors talked about in these newsletters. But I guess some people don't even care to know. They have their "Burn It Down" shirts on and read copy & paste sites and form their own opinions. Which there's nothing wrong with. But speaking from experience, you're doing yourself a dis-service by not digging deeper if you truly want a firm grasp on the business.
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Nov 9, 2019 9:03:28 GMT -5
I'm not here to argue with anybody, or even sell anything to those who don't want it (and I apologize if that's how my last post came off), but it's crazy to see how much hate there is for these guys (not just Dave). As a fan, things changed for me when I first found the Torch, and shortly after subscribed to the Observer. I became hungry for knowledge & history of the business, started reading books that covered the history of not just WWE, but tracing back decades to other promotions, territories, top guys from different era's, etc. Guess it's a different time. There's more than just rumors talked about in these newsletters. But I guess some people don't even care to know. They have their "Burn It Down" shirts on and read copy & paste sites and form their own opinions. Which there's nothing wrong with. But speaking from experience, you're doing yourself a dis-service by not digging deeper if you truly want a firm grasp on the business. I used to be far more neutral to Meltzer, but after listening to several 83 weeks podcast episodes, bischoff makes it abundantly clear why Meltzer and those similar are very much cancers to the business. there’s zero real fact checking. they get rumours from wrestlers, which are often slanted to benefit those wrestlers. that’s why he spoke so well of the flock in wcw - they were clearly some of the ones leaking info. he’s just not required and it’s far closer to tabloid than journalism.
|
|
Thunder Chunky
Main Eventer
Joined on: Aug 1, 2010 21:57:30 GMT -5
Posts: 4,488
|
Post by Thunder Chunky on Nov 9, 2019 9:44:49 GMT -5
I'm not here to argue with anybody, or even sell anything to those who don't want it (and I apologize if that's how my last post came off), but it's crazy to see how much hate there is for these guys (not just Dave). As a fan, things changed for me when I first found the Torch, and shortly after subscribed to the Observer. I became hungry for knowledge & history of the business, started reading books that covered the history of not just WWE, but tracing back decades to other promotions, territories, top guys from different era's, etc. Guess it's a different time. There's more than just rumors talked about in these newsletters. But I guess some people don't even care to know. They have their "Burn It Down" shirts on and read copy & paste sites and form their own opinions. Which there's nothing wrong with. But speaking from experience, you're doing yourself a dis-service by not digging deeper if you truly want a firm grasp on the business. I used to be far more neutral to Meltzer, but after listening to several 83 weeks podcast episodes, bischoff makes it abundantly clear why Meltzer and those similar are very much cancers to the business. there’s zero real fact checking. they get rumours from wrestlers, which are often slanted to benefit those wrestlers. that’s why he spoke so well of the flock in wcw - they were clearly some of the ones leaking info. he’s just not required and it’s far closer to tabloid than journalism. Bischoff used to go to Meltzer directly back in the 90s. He's full of it when he says he didnt.
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Nov 9, 2019 9:48:09 GMT -5
I used to be far more neutral to Meltzer, but after listening to several 83 weeks podcast episodes, bischoff makes it abundantly clear why Meltzer and those similar are very much cancers to the business. there’s zero real fact checking. they get rumours from wrestlers, which are often slanted to benefit those wrestlers. that’s why he spoke so well of the flock in wcw - they were clearly some of the ones leaking info. he’s just not required and it’s far closer to tabloid than journalism. Bischoff used to go to Meltzer directly back in the 90s. He's full of it when he says he didnt. it’s not really about bischoff here though. countless times on that podcast meltzer will be quoted for writing a scenario that can be proven did not occur regardless of bischoff. I wouldn’t doubt for a second if Bischoff interacted directly. he admits to as much but claims he gave up over time. I don’t listen to that podcast to believe everything Eric says, he’s a worker as is anyone else in the business. but it gets to a point where the level of discredit to meltzer is just too readily apparent.
|
|
|
Post by terraryzing on Nov 9, 2019 10:44:34 GMT -5
Bischoff used to go to Meltzer directly back in the 90s. He's full of it when he says he didnt. it’s not really about bischoff here though. countless times on that podcast meltzer will be quoted for writing a scenario that can be proven did not occur regardless of bischoff. I wouldn’t doubt for a second if Bischoff interacted directly. he admits to as much but claims he gave up over time. I don’t listen to that podcast to believe everything Eric says, he’s a worker as is anyone else in the business. but it gets to a point where the level of discredit to meltzer is just too readily apparent. Meltzer always says the biggest critics (from the business) are the biggest con-men. Over the years, Bischoff & Prichard have both been referred to as this. Just saying.
|
|
|
Post by k5 on Nov 9, 2019 12:30:46 GMT -5
it’s not really about bischoff here though. countless times on that podcast meltzer will be quoted for writing a scenario that can be proven did not occur regardless of bischoff. I wouldn’t doubt for a second if Bischoff interacted directly. he admits to as much but claims he gave up over time. I don’t listen to that podcast to believe everything Eric says, he’s a worker as is anyone else in the business. but it gets to a point where the level of discredit to meltzer is just too readily apparent. Meltzer always says the biggest critics (from the business) are the biggest con-men. Over the years, Bischoff & Prichard have both been referred to as this. Just saying. Mabel was the 3rd man? c’mon. hindsight makes a lot of his claims look as ridiculous as they are, bischoff’s input or not. even Conrad realized only a few episodes in that 75% of meltzer’s hot takes are just bs and that it was going to be uphill with using meltzer as a source.
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Nov 10, 2019 22:49:07 GMT -5
Because remember when everyone would cup Seth's balls at every move and get on their knees to sniff his farts? Those same people turned on him. Life's funny and people like that suck. Unfortunately those people INFEST the IWC They wanna rebel against whatever the company is doing or whoever they are pushing. It’s essentially been like that since 2002 when The Rock won the belt, they have rejected the top baby face since then minus Eddie Guerrero. But Cena, Triple H, Roman, Batista the last two months of his first face reign and beyond, Kofi, hell even Punk there were a ton of people. He has had it enough, time to take the belt off him, boring, stale etc. I am convinced people won’t be happy. 1. Fans boo’d Rock not because he was the top face. He was boo’d because he was leaving for Hollywood. Don’t believe the WWE revisionist history. 2. Fans accepted Brock, Benoit, Eddie, and Batista as the top faces from 2003-2006. They were hardly boo’d (if ever) during this timeframe when pushed as the top faces. 3. Punk wasn’t boo’d as a face when holding the World and WWE Titles. Fans boo’d because he was booked as 2nd fiddle to Cena and Big Johnny. Jeff Hardy wasn’t boo’d in 2009, nor was HBK in 2002, Taker in 2007, HHH in 2008, Bryan in 2013/14, or Dean in 2016. 4. The booing started with Cena because he was stripped of everything that made him unique and was pushed as a modern day Hogan. He was booked to be Superman and went over far more popular performers. This went on for 10+ years. Reigns fell into the same WWE booking trap starting with the original Shield breakup. Fans today don’t want superman. 5. The booing of Rollins is a mixture of WWE booking and his crappy real-life personality. It’s not his fault the WWE stuck him with Corbin for months, made him look inferior to Becky, or being apart of arguably the worst HIAC ever. The WWE basically booked him as Superman, just like Cena and Reigns, and the fans don’t want that. But the crappy booking doesn’t excuse him from fighting with fans at live events and on social media. The guy comes off as unlikable. Fans won’t boo if they are given something to care about. What was difference between Rollins and Kofi? They were both booked as generic characters who worked hard, smiled, and went over everyone. Not much adversity. Not much character. Really nothing to get invested in. Styles was booked the same way the year prior. That’s why fans boo so often.
|
|
|
Post by hitmancmedge on Nov 10, 2019 23:23:34 GMT -5
They wanna rebel against whatever the company is doing or whoever they are pushing. It’s essentially been like that since 2002 when The Rock won the belt, they have rejected the top baby face since then minus Eddie Guerrero. But Cena, Triple H, Roman, Batista the last two months of his first face reign and beyond, Kofi, hell even Punk there were a ton of people. He has had it enough, time to take the belt off him, boring, stale etc. I am convinced people won’t be happy. 1. Fans boo’d Rock not because he was the top face. He was boo’d because he was leaving for Hollywood. Don’t believe the WWE revisionist history. 2. Fans accepted Brock, Benoit, Eddie, and Batista as the top faces from 2003-2006. They were hardly boo’d (if ever) during this timeframe when pushed as the top faces. 3. Punk wasn’t boo’d as a face when holding the World and WWE Titles. Fans boo’d because he was booked as 2nd fiddle to Cena and Big Johnny. Jeff Hardy wasn’t boo’d in 2009, nor was HBK in 2002, Taker in 2007, HHH in 2008, Bryan in 2013/14, or Dean in 2016. 4. The booing started with Cena because he was stripped of everything that made him unique and was pushed as a modern day Hogan. He was booked to be Superman and went over far more popular performers. This went on for 10+ years. Reigns fell into the same WWE booking trap starting with the original Shield breakup. Fans today don’t want superman. 5. The booing of Rollins is a mixture of WWE booking and his crappy real-life personality. It’s not his fault the WWE stuck him with Corbin for months, made him look inferior to Becky, or being apart of arguably the worst HIAC ever. The WWE basically booked him as Superman, just like Cena and Reigns, and the fans don’t want that. But the crappy booking doesn’t excuse him from fighting with fans at live events and on social media. The guy comes off as unlikable. Fans won’t boo if they are given something to care about. What was difference between Rollins and Kofi? They were both booked as generic characters who worked hard, smiled, and went over everyone. Not much adversity. Not much character. Really nothing to get invested in. Styles was booked the same way the year prior. That’s why fans boo so often. Fans were absolutely booing Batista cause they wanted heel Eddie to win the belt in that feud. It’s all some sort of excuses why the fans boo, but at the end of the day it’s who the top star is, fans cheer til the guy gets to the top and then it’s all about who’s next.
|
|
crashholly2002
Superstar
Joined on: Feb 18, 2017 3:56:41 GMT -5
Posts: 821
|
Post by crashholly2002 on Nov 11, 2019 0:19:52 GMT -5
nothing to see here people just 2 dirtbags fight themselves on Twitter while (hopefully) people laugh at them both just move along and watch this dumpster fire unfold, i got popcorn if you need any...
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Nov 11, 2019 11:36:58 GMT -5
1. Fans boo’d Rock not because he was the top face. He was boo’d because he was leaving for Hollywood. Don’t believe the WWE revisionist history. 2. Fans accepted Brock, Benoit, Eddie, and Batista as the top faces from 2003-2006. They were hardly boo’d (if ever) during this timeframe when pushed as the top faces. 3. Punk wasn’t boo’d as a face when holding the World and WWE Titles. Fans boo’d because he was booked as 2nd fiddle to Cena and Big Johnny. Jeff Hardy wasn’t boo’d in 2009, nor was HBK in 2002, Taker in 2007, HHH in 2008, Bryan in 2013/14, or Dean in 2016. 4. The booing started with Cena because he was stripped of everything that made him unique and was pushed as a modern day Hogan. He was booked to be Superman and went over far more popular performers. This went on for 10+ years. Reigns fell into the same WWE booking trap starting with the original Shield breakup. Fans today don’t want superman. 5. The booing of Rollins is a mixture of WWE booking and his crappy real-life personality. It’s not his fault the WWE stuck him with Corbin for months, made him look inferior to Becky, or being apart of arguably the worst HIAC ever. The WWE basically booked him as Superman, just like Cena and Reigns, and the fans don’t want that. But the crappy booking doesn’t excuse him from fighting with fans at live events and on social media. The guy comes off as unlikable. Fans won’t boo if they are given something to care about. What was difference between Rollins and Kofi? They were both booked as generic characters who worked hard, smiled, and went over everyone. Not much adversity. Not much character. Really nothing to get invested in. Styles was booked the same way the year prior. That’s why fans boo so often. Fans were absolutely booing Batista cause they wanted heel Eddie to win the belt in that feud. It’s all some sort of excuses why the fans boo, but at the end of the day it’s who the top star is, fans cheer til the guy gets to the top and then it’s all about who’s next. You book two popular stars together and the fans are forced to choose a side. Fans never wanted to boo Eddie in the first place, and he was often cheered over Rey. Look at his other feuds that year and Batista was crazy over. My point still stands though. Give us interesting characters and story’s and fans won’t have a reason to boo.
|
|
|
Post by vampiroporvida on Nov 11, 2019 14:40:12 GMT -5
I don't see why it would be something Rollins gets mad about, regardless if it is wrong or right...it didn't paint him any different than he is looked on already, and really, just ignore it. I like Meltzer as a personality, though his ratings aren't 100% for me. Rollins is a killer wrestler, just a bit too snippy as a tweeter. Bret made people angry being too snippy with fans too, lest we not forget. He just isn't salt of the earth
|
|