Wrestling News & Rumours Thread ***NO CHAT***

sky88

Agent Coulson wrote: »

To be honest the WWE don't need Meltzer to sour people off the product they do a good enough job at that themselves.

Do you honestly think the target audience of the WWE actually even know who Dave Meltzer is.

Online fans honestly overrate how well known meltzer is most of these stories they probably never hear about until they see them in places like sports illustrated like what happened this roman story

leggo

J. Marston wrote: »

He makes money from people with a dislike of WWE. The type to sign up to his newsletter are the people who love AEW, NJPW and consider Vince's non-pushing of certain wrestlers a hate crime. He caters to this audience.

You’re not wrong, but I look at it as a chicken/egg situation. Does he cater to those people or did he help foster that attitude to begin with and people follow what he says? If you take one look at his Twitter, it’s clear he’s a full “well actually” know-it-all who prides himself on knowing info that others don’t and condescending them. A defining character trait of that type of fan, no matter what the industry, is “they hate the thing that makes the most amount of money.” They’re not special if they like what everyone else likes, so they have to hate the most popular thing and find obscure alternatives to show their superiority.

I think Meltzer, given that he was the only reliable source of ‘inside info’ for so long, helped create this attitude towards WWE that’s so prevalent these days. Fans wanted to be insiders and not look like ‘marks’, they saw this was how *the* insider fan acted, and it spread. You can spot a Meltzer fanboy a mile off the way that they talk about wrestling and particularly WWE (“Michaels/Taker was fine and all but it’s no Kobashi/Akiyama”). And look, there’s a compliment in there somewhere about how influential he’s been. But sadly it’s a fairly toxic influence.

Monokne

leggo wrote: »

I think Meltzer, given that he was the only reliable source of ‘inside info’ for so long, helped create this attitude towards WWE that’s so prevalent these days. Fans wanted to be insiders and not look like ‘marks’, they saw this was how *the* insider fan acted, and it spread. You can spot a Meltzer fanboy a mile off the way that they talk about wrestling and particularly WWE (“Michaels/Taker was fine and all but it’s no Kobashi/Akiyama”). And look, there’s a compliment in there somewhere about how influential he’s been. But sadly it’s a fairly toxic influence.

I do think there is something in this in more ways than one. I don't think you can overstate his influence on the psyche of the wrestling fan, because decades ago his was the only 'insider' voice which was heard. It then influenced a generation of writers and reporters (your Kellers, Meltzer, Mitchells, Tenay, Madden) who have influenced generations from there and that in turn has influenced the fanbase.

Just the fact that the perception on what makes a good wrestler involves terms like 'workrate' or 'technical wrestler' is him. How many great matches did John Cena have? Yet because he couldn't throw a punch and his work was not 'technical' you get mocked by much of the internet fanbase for acknowledging he was a tremendous performer. That is Meltzer talking.

His twitter is an embarrassment. The manner in which he behaves - NEVER admitting wrong - only gives credence to the perception your Prichard's and Bischoff's of the world want to give of him as a conman.

Ultimately I think he is mostly a good journalist and definitely an invaluable resource in terms of historical information. But I wouldn't be taking everything he says as gospel by a long shot, and the manner in which he plays favourites is brazen.

Itssoeasy

Monokne wrote: »

I do think there is something in this in more ways than one. I don't think you can overstate his influence on the psyche of the wrestling fan, because decades ago his was the only 'insider' voice which was heard. It then influenced a generation of writers and reporters (your Kellers, Meltzer, Mitchells, Tenay, Madden) who have influenced generations from there and that in turn has influenced the fanbase.

Just the fact that the perception on what makes a good wrestler involves terms like 'workrate' or 'technical wrestler' is him. How many great matches did John Cena have? Yet because he couldn't throw a punch and his work was not 'technical' you get mocked by much of the internet fanbase for acknowledging he was a tremendous performer. That is Meltzer talking.

His twitter is an embarrassment. The manner in which he behaves - NEVER admitting wrong - only gives credence to the perception your Prichard's and Bischoff's of the world want to give of him as a conman.

Ultimately I think he is mostly a good journalist and definitely an invaluable resource in terms of historical information. But I wouldn't be taking everything he says as gospel by a long shot, and the manner in which he plays favourites is brazen.

It's not just me then. His behaviour on twitter is ridiculous. I thought maybe it was twitter and the limited amount of characters to make a point but it doesn't seem like it's a twitter issue.

sky88

I actually think Bruce and Dave are similar just on opposite sides of what they think is good wrestling and both have big egos who never admit when there wrong

Monokne

sky88 wrote: »

I actually think Bruce and Dave are similar just on opposite sides of what they think is good wrestling and both have big egos who never admit when there wrong

One difference is that Dave does make an attempt to be balanced and fair for the most part. Prichard only ever makes an attempt to see his own side. Meltzer will argue both sides of an issue forever, unless it's one of those things where he has a strong and firm opinion on it.

sky88

Monokne wrote: »

One difference is that Dave does make an attempt to be balanced and fair for the most part. Prichard only ever makes an attempt to see his own side. Meltzer will argue both sides of an issue forever, unless it's one of those things where he has a strong and firm opinion on it.

Disagree a bit on Dave doesn’t always do things fair and balanced There’s so many people I feel he protects a bit more than others and defends them more than most

DM_7

Mr Meltzer is probably on AEW's payroll now in an era of 'influencers'.

Monokne

sky88 wrote: »

Disagree a bit on Dave doesn’t always do things fair and balanced There’s so many people I feel he protects a bit more than others and defends them more than most

Yup. I said "for the most part" as opposed to always for that specific reason.

Itssoeasy

Meltzer is reporting that vince doesn't want to work with CM punk and Alberto del rio again. And I agree with vince although as much of an eijit as del rio turned out to be in many ways I'd still at a push take del rio over the happiness vacuum that is CM Punk. I was a huge fan of punk as a wrestler and he gave the undertaker a cracker of a match at wrestlemania 29, but he makes Austin Aries look like a happy person in comparison.

leggo

Yeah I’d definitely disagree on him being fair and balanced. Maybe that was true once but recent years have totally eroded that. It could be since he joined Twitter...nothing makes someone more stubborn and hardened in their views than a bit of backlash against them, to the point that now he’s a parody of himself in terms of objectivity. Some of his slanted reporting of AEW, where you could tell he knew better but still chose to spin it a certain way, showed him up and would’ve seen him sacked even working for a local newspaper if you applied any reasonable standard of journalistic ethics. But he gets away with it because people don’t care about ethics and what else do we have? Plus you’ve got a wall of people who’ll stand in front of everything he says at all times because they’ve dedicated their entire adult fandom to believing his word and have a terminal dose of investment bias.

I respect the likes of Satin more tbh. At least his biases are out for us all to see so you can apply them towards his stories (he doesn’t get extra points for WWE scoops because we know he’s directly fed them for positive spin, but then on the flip side we know what he’s saying is likely to be true too because he’s getting it firsthand). Meltzer is too stubborn to do that and swears he’s being objective, so you have to question everything he says as a result because there’s that fundamental dishonesty at play.

Riddle101

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Meltzer is reporting that vince doesn't want to work with CM punk and Alberto del rio again. And I agree with vince although as much of an eijit as del rio turned out to be in many ways I'd still at a push take del rio over the happiness vacuum that is CM Punk. I was a huge fan of punk as a wrestler and he gave the undertaker a cracker of a match at wrestlemania 29, but he makes Austin Aries look like a happy person in comparison.

I'm the opposite. I wouldn't want anything to do with Alberto Del Rio but at least Punk would get the fans attention.

Vince has a tendency to take things personally though. But usually he tends to settle down and work things out. If Punk really wanted to return to the ring in WWE, Vince would probably reach out to him. I seem to recall Triple H and Stephanie saying the door was open for Punk and the old "never say never" quote comes to mind.

Monokne

leggo wrote: »

Yeah I’d definitely disagree on him being fair and balanced. Maybe that was true once but recent years have totally eroded that. It could be since he joined Twitter...nothing makes someone more stubborn and hardened in their views than a bit of backlash against them, to the point that now he’s a parody of himself in terms of objectivity. Some of his slanted reporting of AEW, where you could tell he knew better but still chose to spin it a certain way, showed him up and would’ve seen him sacked even working for a local newspaper if you applied any reasonable standard of journalistic ethics. But he gets away with it because people don’t care about ethics and what else do we have? Plus you’ve got a wall of people who’ll stand in front of everything he says at all times because they’ve dedicated their entire adult fandom to believing his word and have a terminal dose of investment bias.

I respect the likes of Satin more tbh. At least his biases are out for us all to see so you can apply them towards his stories (he doesn’t get extra points for WWE scoops because we know he’s directly fed them for positive spin, but then on the flip side we know what he’s saying is likely to be true too because he’s getting it firsthand). Meltzer is too stubborn to do that and swears he’s being objective, so you have to question everything he says as a result because there’s that fundamental dishonesty at play.

I say this from reading and/or listening to full length podcasts back when I listened to them.

I would agree that he comes across like an ass-hat almost 100% of the time on twitter.

I am not a fan of Satin either, for similar reasons. His timeline is filled with stuff about how he is not biased toward WWE, meanwhile he defends or lauds the dirt worst angles.

The White Wolf

I think Twitter exposes both Satin and Meltzer, really when you think about it they show how social media can set you up to be an utter twat regardless of age.

briany

If any of ye are watching, or have watched, Tiger King on Netflix, it may interest you to know that its star, Joe Exotic, was a colour commentator for NWA Texoma.

https://lastwordonprowrestling.com/2020/03/28/pro-wrestling-the-tiger-king-joe-exotic-the-nwa-videos/

beakerjoe

briany wrote: »

If any of ye are watching, or have watched, Tiger King on Netflix, it may interest you to know that its star, Joe Exotic, was a colour commentator for NWA Texoma.

https://lastwordonprowrestling.com/2020/03/28/pro-wrestling-the-tiger-king-joe-exotic-the-nwa-videos/

You can tell hes wrestling fan. He cuts plenty of promos on Carole Baskin, esp the interviews with mannequin Carole... very pro wrasslin

Loughc

This is amazing and fantastic logic and fantastic depth. But of course this isn’t what WWE had planned they just had Goldberg go over to feed to Reigns before Covid-19 got involved.

Monokne

A man saying Bray makes everyone flip sides is fantastic depth? Easy crowd

Loughc

Monokne wrote: »

A man saying Bray makes everyone flip sides is fantastic depth? Easy crowd

And ignore the whole Goldberg defeat and all that. But hey whatever makes you feel like a big man on a PW forum

CastorTroy

I think Bray would also have trouble with Big Show.

Loughc

CastorTroy wrote: »

I think Bray would also have trouble with Big Show.

Easy big show would revert to Paul Wight. Or the Showster. :pac:

Insect Overlord

Loughc wrote: »

Easy big show would revert to Paul Wight. Or the Showster. :pac:

Captain Insane-O.

sky88

not going to happen but going through the different versions of jericho would be great in a funhouse style

Monokne

Loughc wrote: »

And ignore the whole Goldberg defeat and all that. But hey whatever makes you feel like a big man on a PW forum

The Goldberg defeat was not particularly germane to my point, big man.

beakerjoe

Id love to see one more match with Wyatt and Goldberg. Ok love is an exaggeration, but given the momentum Bray will have coming off Mania, have him squash Goldberg to a blood pulp. Goldberg would be game ball seeing as he just wants a payday. Have him put over Bray on his way out and it will go a long way in terms of rehabbing the fiend after their previous encounter.

leggo

Monokne wrote: »

A man saying Bray makes everyone flip sides is fantastic depth? Easy crowd

To be fair they’ve literally said he does this on WWE TV, it’s a part of the character. His dolls are representative of different times in his career/aspects of his personality and so on. It’s one of the more deep characters they’ve done in recent years and I think it’s because they’ve given him a lot of freedom to develop it, where it’s fallen down at times is its overall presentation in the show.

I agree that the Goldberg thing was just random though. Like it made sense last night that Wyatt/Cena wasn’t for the belt, but still there were other ways around that.

Lithium93_

Oh Hulk..... Maybe you just should've kept your mouth zipped..

Maybe we don’t need a vaccine. Maybe we need to take this time of isolation from the distractions of the world and have a personal revival where we focus on the ONLY thing in the world that really matters. Jesus.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/07/hulk-hogans-scary-coronavirus-message-to-millions-maybe-we-dont-need-a-vaccine/

Itssoeasy

Meltzer is reporting and I hope that he's wrong but WWE are taping more TV this week to bring them up to money in the bank so four weeks. Just stop please WWE.

Lithium93_

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Meltzer is reporting and I hope that he's wrong but WWE are taping more TV this week to bring them up to money in the bank so four weeks. Just stop please WWE.

It's 50/50, but yeah they (AEW as well) just need to shut it down, or just run whatever they managed to tape before **** hit the fan, it's not really worth either company running the risk.

sky88

There all at it

Wonder if the tv companies are befging them for content or is it strictly a money issue if they don’t put on new shoes

https://twitter.com/wonf4w/status/1247586072403427328?s=21