rovert

Meltzer doesnt let anyone forget how badly he screwed the WCW pooch as well as restricting Eric con man act by doing the same.

I know we have a Meltzer thread but this in context of that radio show above. His reply lol to the show:

Only wish that he called into CageSideRadio. Eric and Bix could have their rematch 10 years in the making.

Bischoff calls into an obscure blogtalkradio show flipping his shit over the dude's facebook comments asking for Eric dismissal: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/michaelbarton...overing-all-the Listen from the start. Neither can prove their point.

Just to add to this he said he was repulsed in a similar way by Tully and Dusty's barbed wire matches in which they would intentionally just rip and tear open each other’s flesh. He made a joke that he makes an exception for Dan Severn.

Me too, alot of good ancedotes there. I dont get annoyed about the "if you broke into the business nowadays would you have tried MMA " stuff to the extent some people do but I have to say that it was refreshing to hear from someone who had zero interest in MMA on the show killing that line of conversation dead.

He was amazing in his role was the workhouse of the NWO in that feud in particular too.

KZ posted this on F4W: Im posting this here was it would suck massively if this stops you guys from doing shows.

Totally forgot but you are totally right. He had that one match with Orton and he was mega over and he was going to be the next JYD then nothing. Not even when Angle and Henry wrestled at Royal Rumble, really? Isnt the whole point that Henry total carried Angle coz he sux and Mark Henry is the best Mark Henry there is or some such.

I was under the impression that by the time Shimmer reached Vol. 20s that they were drawing more kids but I saw only saw like legit two rows of adult males on the video of Serena returning to Shimmer a few months ago. I remember hearing Shelley Martinez say not in these words that tolerating weirdos was part of the job.

Really? Ill have to dig up THAT thread.

Is this a custom DVD shill?

Never been under the thumb, Ditch?

You know I get more of a kick out of you than most people but I know that's not true. What? Ive only subbed two months out of this year?

I only recently returned to F4W so take my comments for what they are worth, Bix.

I think Ed has only recently seen CageSideSeats.

Rogan was on a serious ok lets drop the Pro Wrestling stuff kick last night. Before, during and after stating that it was all strictly hype.

Speaking of Bryan Alverez's taste in wrestling he expanded on his greatest workers bell to bell on Ed's blogtalk show: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/edward-loredo...reatest-matches starting at around the 19min mark. Wont spoil his picks, I let one of you guys hear it. EDIT: DVDR burial at the end

Sorry but I find these posts unbearable. You carry on like taste in wrestling is this completely objective thing. You are making sweeping claims about how much Bryan has actually watched with limited/little basis. As far as what he's watched, it's been clear for a while, but now we know he never saw a legendary match that's readily available on VHS and DVD until this past week. As far as the Michaels stuff, think about it: If someone never saw as much of the older stuff, of course they'd think Michaels was the best ever because he was the one guy left doing certain little touches that older veterans did, even if he usually wasn't very good at it post-comeback. Look at Dave: He's a Michaels fan but not close to as extreme as Bryan, who thought that Michaels' performances on Raw in the first 1/4 of 2007 made up the best run of any wrestler in history on the best run of wrestling TV in history. Dave likes Michaels, but he would never make a claim like that. If you take the all caps, tilde bang, mid rant review style of Bryan literally. I’m entertained by Bryan but he is the living embodiment of the recency principle. I think his light of day opinion is different or at least more moderate.

Again I wasnt shocked that Bryan says he never saw it but Vinny on the other hand that was super weird as he reviews a tonne of stuff for the newsletter and the match is on both the Piper & Starrcade DVDs. Sorry but I find these posts unbearable. You carry on like taste in wrestling is this completely objective thing. You are making sweeping claims about how much Bryan has actually watched with limited/little basis. Although I agree with you there some mitigating circumstances besides of course Yahoo, Smackdown is on a weird/late time in Cali or at least was before it changed channels to the best of my knowledge, Dave mentioned before that Friday is family night for him and lets face it dave must be shattered towards the end of the week, last week Bryan said that Dave fell asleep watching Smackdown which delayed him recording a radio show. In addition Smackdown has turned into a skippable show from the quaint wrestling it used to be. But yeah he should be able to watch it on DVR.

Wasnt calling him one I just said he was acting like one. That's just precious. Nice one, really adding to things here please, post more. So there isnt a difference in actually being and acting like something? Amazing. Getting bored of passive agressive attempts at board derails, guys. Come it is nearly Christmas. Im fairly sure they just forgot about it. Vinny at least has to have reviewed it in the newsletter.

Wasnt calling him one I just said he was acting like one. Never had any problems with SLL. Jeepers SLL your post is simply not worth the effort replying to especially after just coming home after finishing Christmas shopping. I dont know why you have a hard on for me or Coughlin. You probably have a better memory than I do, Im fine with that. You are entitled to your opinion about his writing but he is excellent in my opinion at breaking down fights in the opinion of his listeners as well as his colleagues. While Koscheck-GSP is in most people's memory a foregone and it is of course a rematch Mike's break down this week was once again thorough and entertaining. After this year quiz me about non-logical processes, not podcasts then you might get a definitive answer out of me, SLL! On the topic of Coughlin writing on his most recent podcast he says that this is article on Scott Smith is one of his more favourite pieces: http://www.f4wonline.com/index2.php?option...=1&id=18542 I think this is the correct article he is talking about, hey how many Scott Smith articles could there be right?

So, for clarification's sake, you're saying Coughlin is a quality analyst on his podcasts, but one whose analysis is so completely unremarkable that you can't actually remember any specifics about anything he's ever said without writing it out immediately after he says it for future reference? I mean, I guess it's possible to analyze a fight well without actually being able to deliver that analysis in a compelling manner, but is he really so unmemorable that you literally can remember nothing about anything he's ever said on his podcasts without taking notes as it happens? Seriously why are you being such an utter cunt here? I spent the last year not subscribing to F4W due to college so I don’t have any recent examples and those examples I did have been forgotten due to a very hectic year. Of course now you are now going to claim that Coughlin's analysis is forgettable or something. Before that I would be listening during work or hungover on a Saturday morning before I went to the bookies I was not listening for archival purposes, I was listening for near term (fight to fight, I wasnt compiling dossiers on every fighter), entertainment purposes. His technical analysis typically picks up on one or two habits/tics/quirks of fighters which I have never previously heard discussed normally which have a strong factor in the outcome of the fight. It is why people on F4W listen to him, like I said before it is his calling card. If you want greater detail on that ask people who have listened more consistently or intently than I have this year failing that you could yourself you know actually listen to his shows.