soup23

I think the Taka/HHH match should be included because it is the type of match that now 10 years later you know would never headline Raw and be as competitive as it was.

Hasn't the Rashad/Jones angle happened in pretty much every corporate situation.

I say Zack Ryder, its entirely possible he will be getting fired soon, but that was a good possibility anyway. Now, with his youtube show and social media presence it is likely that either a. when he is released they will be a big outcry and as long as he prices himself reasonable he could do a lot of indy shows or b. someone in WWE actually gives him a shot based on him making a name for himself on his own.

Really like too that this video happened right after his announcement, whether he knew or not that he was being drafted, moments of immediate reaction like this with raw emotion being displayed are missing greatly in the WWE product.

Really since the Jan 4 TNA restart, the Torch has grown leaps and bounds. I stopped subscribing in 2009 when we were getting Raw reviews on Thursday and Mitchell was filing in with Caldwell. Now, Wade has went almost a year straight of DKH which mix in a good variety of ask the editor, TV reviews, and general news updates. The Bruce/Wade and PPV roundtables remain consistent and enjoyable. The Livecast at least gives a platform for varying opinon among hosts and callers. Wade also seems to be breaking some more news lately in TNA and with the Morrison/Snooki thing that was initially laughed at by Alvarez and then reported as true. It is very encouraging how good the Torch has gotten.

This explains my sentiments exactly. One of the big things I am pro Torch on is their customer service. Wade in the forum gives answers and explanations even on some uninformed positions and people that challenge his arguments. Alvarez would call them a Geek and be done with it.

Definitely enjoy the World Cup data John. While, I think there were more than 78k in the building for WM, I can accept that one true answer will more than likely never be established, what I have a harder time grasping is how one could think there was 78k for WM and 86 for Pope.

I commented in the thread that the only three options I see for the actual attendance at the three events is one of the following: 1. Pope legit had 93,600 in the building and WM had legit 93,172 or close to it 2. WM had 78,000 and Pope had anywhere from 78,000 to 80,000 3. The numbers are in between those and the difference between the two events is less than 2,000 or so I was then given responses such as " 7,000 - 9,000 people could not be accounted for due to the naked eye" I was also given the common tow line of that the promoted and the WWE internal have the figures, why would they lie? This is especially comical to me that someone with the ethics of WWE would overinflate any numbers they can to make the company look good but either wouldn't have the savvy or ethics to underinflate the number internally for some financial gain. I think the main problem that no one challenging the argument can grasp is that no is saying with 100% certainty there were 93,172 at WM. All the people are bringing up is that based on historical data compiled for football capacities and other sources the 78,000 number seems low, AND that it seems not plausible that 7,000-9,000 more people were in the building for the Pope than WM based on photographic evidence. Are all wrestling promoters shady except in this one case where everyone 100% is telling the truth in the 78,000 figure?

In arguing with people about this on the board we also have found a wonderful new straw man defense, that based on the photos the "naked eye" could miss a 7,000-9,000 people difference.

I also don't see how last weeks over run got completely blamed on the Miz since they took a commercial break at 4 past 11 with Cole saying the "Rock was there." Miz didn't even appear until around 8 after the hour so we are blaming the whole over run on one guy who didn't even show up until it was half over.

I posted a question on the F4W forum to Dave on whether he has seen the Pope's pictures and would argue that there was 7-9k more people in the building for that event than for WM.

Excellent post Bix, I think the number is close to 93,000 in the building and I also find it funny how everyone thinks its no surprise that Vince would inflate the number to be carny but would not actually deflate the number to defer obligation of payment for taxes and what not.

Well I did some more digging and looked through the records and it looks like Dave actually thinks that the 85,000 that the Pope's people announced is a "legit" number and that the Pontiac people just inflated that to over 93,173 since it was more than the WM audience. Still even with that assumption I do not see how there is 7,000 more people for the Pope than WM. The side camera angle shows close to capacity from that side and down and when Gorilla and Jesse introduce the whole side of the stadium shown there is full, so the audience looks like a full crowd and no evidence has suggested that there were a ton of seats taken by scalpers.

One of the things I have never understood on the WM 3 attendance thing is that Dave and Co act like the Pope 93,000 number is a legit total. If that number is a legit total then how can WM 3 be at 15,000 less people based on pictures of both events. The evidence has to point to that they are not as many fixed seats in the Silverdome as claimed and that both events had worked numbers. This also does not make sense to me though as John in some other thread somewhere brought up Superbowl attendance numbers and it seemed like they no motive of fixing Superbowl attendance numbers because they decreased in some years and increased in others.

I just watched this match this morning and I wish Yoko would have dropped a leg drop or something onto Bret after the salt got into his eyes. It just seemed weird that Bret would be pinned solely on that.

The argument to me that the main reason Miz is not getting over as champion because of inability to win clean matches and not look like a legit tough guy are conflicted by Vader in arguments sense. Vader definitely looked menacing, won many clean, great matches against top level opponents and still this was one of the low periods buyrate wise for PPV.

I know sometimes it can seem cliche that wrestling is not like it used to be, and I think I am more of a defender than most that the current amount of available quality wrestling right now is at the highest point it has been in twenty years, but seeing a match like Kawada/Kobashi be the 53rd ranked match in a given year when I would have a hard time finding 10 matches I liked better last year is mind boggling to me.

Kawada & Taue vs Hayabusa & Shinzaki 1997 RWTL This was one of the first puro matches I ever saw with some people you are familiar with but in different promotions. I thought it was very well worked and opened my eyes to people like Taue due to being so junior deluded in my puroresu watching. This was also left on the cutting room floor in the Kawada set making it a good addition here.

Judging by Todd Martin's Raw review he wanted Miz/Cena vs. Gabriel/Slater to be a 50/50 affair.

I am shocked at some of the feedback to this PPV being negative because it was too predictable, this is coming from people who blast TNA because the booking doesn't make sense. Make up your mind.

That is a really funny example, and again I can understand mistaking or misunderstanding something, but at least say something to the effect of, "I didn't hear Cole say the line after the bell rung and I guess we will have to wait and see what direction they are going with the angle on Monday."

Essentially last week's ending of Raw and the connotation that Punk was sacrificing himself to Mason Ryan. That was the initially argument and I feel Rovert was correct in his assumption and that Alvarez contradicted himself in some responses. To me the respectful response to this would be, "I am sorry it was confusing to me, I see where you are coming from now but disagree because of this..." Instead he denies any wrong doing and then basically it just was relegated into multiple pages of insults slung around. A good comparison is the Gabe/Keller debate on facebook in regards to DGUSA. No personal insults were made and I think both people got their points across and responded appropriately until it was time to say ok lets agree to disagree.

Alvarez's debate with Rovert on the board is really sad and unprofessional. I can't think of many other instances of a co-owner of a business being juvenile and insincere to someone who PAYS him at least $10.00 a month for his website. Debating an issue is one thing and fine, but to throw insults is another. I guess I shouldn't be alarmed at this behavior from the board but it is just mind boggling what goes on there sometimes.

Even though I think Alan overrates a lot of what he sees, I do appreciate the enthusiasm he brings to wrestling and he justifies his opinon and the matches he likes fits his style.

I get the impression that Dave on Smackdown either doesn't watch it at all or just one segment on his busy weeks or watches the main highlights and skips the filler on other weeks.