rzombie1988

Glad to see I'm not the only one that doesn't like Karl Anderson. He's too goofy to be believable and his constant diamond cutters are annoying.

Did WoS ever have midget wrestling?

Jake wasn't consistently more over though than Hogan was(Yeah I know, unaired Snake Pit angle). I watched everything WWE for a year and DB had Cena beat in pops all year. I've never seen the problems in pushing different wrestlers and seeing what happens. It's not like WWE is going to bomb ratings wise for putting someone different over for a few weeks to see if it clicks or not. The best wrestling companies always had multiple people at the top whether it be the AJPW Big 4, the Three Musketers or Lawler/Dundee/Idol.

Southeastern was really very good. I have around 47 discs or so of it and have really enjoyed it. It's honestly pretty well represented though there's not a ton in the pre-Continental days. However, with Continental/Southeastern I think there is around 70-90 discs. Golden, The Fullers and Armstrong were a great core that all are hall of famers in the own right and putting them together in various scenarios was guaranteed quality. All of them could be faces or heels and make it work. I also really enjoyed Charlie Platt and people like Mr. Olympia and Austin Idol were very good in their roles. Most of the wrestlers in Continental that wore masks were really obvious, but I think they designed it that way. You had Fuller, The Flame, The Bullet and others. There's a really great unmasking angle from Continental that I covered here: http://prowresblog.blogspot.com/2012/08/co...985-part-2.html

I reviewed USWA TV 2/13/93 here: http://prowresblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/us...993-review.html Overall thoughts: Pretty lame show overall. The matches all ended as soon as they started and the promo's weren't enough to save them. The show pretty much peaked at the first segment and just never got going. Some shots from the show:

This is the part where I ask you to show me this post. If I sound disbelieving, it's because lots of people have claimed to have seen it in the past, and no one's ever provided any hard evidence. There has been many an opportunity to prove that it happened, and no one ever made good on it. Typical cryptozoology bullshit. Gimme some proof, and I'll take it seriously And thus proves nothing. There were plenty of unremarkable/marginal guys who Schneider/TomK et al pointed to as being better than Michaels in that thread, but the one apologists point to is almost always Snitsky...who they didn't say was better than Michaels. Ever. Are you drunk? And if you have an opinion, then clearly everyone must share that opinion, unless they are just saying so to be an Anti-Meltzerite trying to look cool on the internet. Or, stated honestly, it's above criticism. jdw to the white curtsey phone....The Other Arena guys were the ones on top of that at the time. Outside of this board? I don't think anyone is trying to argue SD6 criticism is some kind of mainstream opinion...just an opinion that's not new to this niche. "And I assume Resident Evil would tell you that Steiners v Heavenly Bodies was better because it was worked like proto-Smackdown Six with lots of meaningless moves to get pops." -TomK, 8/24/2007 Possibly because no one here has actually said they think it sucks as a whole, just that it may not have been this pinnacle of quality wrestling - even just within the confines of WWE - that some people claim it is. - The thread is now gone from the internet, even after a wayback search. I saw Snitsky and you're not going to tell me I didn't. The source was perfectly fine. - Not even gonna respond to the next point because you are trying to be cute and are putting words in my mouth. - I asked for outside the board. Bye now.

I really liked his AJ match and his match with Joe. He did a lot of stuff with Ace's that occupied his whole year and kept him out of singles. Yeah. The only ones I remember clearly were the cage match with Anderson in January (which was a piece of shit) and AJ at Slammiversary (which I found painfully mediocre, but moreso because of Emo AJ than anything Angle did). I'm sure I watched the Joe match but I can't remember anything about it. Didn't he also get suspended or something from TNA this year?

I really liked his AJ match and his match with Joe. He did a lot of stuff with Ace's that occupied his whole year and kept him out of singles.

Why exactly would that even matter? I don't need to have seen that many 2013 Angle matches (think I saw maybe two or three for the record) to know what I think about Angle's work from 2002-03, and I don't think a comprehensive knowledge of Angle's 2013 work is really all that crucial to understanding or criticising his career on the whole. I've seen enough Angle in my lifetime to know what I think of his matches and his strengths and weaknesses as a worker. Well, Kane had a damn good 2012 that I wouldn't have believed if I didn't see it. I'm still not even sure if I believe it. 1993 Ozaki was really good. 2013 Ozaki was a contender for the worst wrestler of the year. On the other hand, we had wrestlers in the past like Ray Stevens who were supposed to be superworkers, but we can't see the footage from his peak years to ever know. I grant you that (although in this case, I'm pretty sure if Kurt Angle, of all people, had some crazy good year of matches, someone would have said something, and I haven't heard anything in that area) but at the same time, by this point in Angle's career, I don't think one really strong year is going to remarkably change my overall perception of him. There are 13 other years of his career that I've watched and torn my hair out over. Being able to add "hey, he had a pretty good 2013 though" to the end of it doesn't really change or negate what I see as his flaws as a worker, which span his entire career as a whole. I'm with you on actually watching the footage, by all means, but at the same time, I don't think taking only a cursory glance at one year of a 14 year career means one can't form valid opinions about that career. I don't really blame you for basing your opinions off of what you've seen as a whole. I understand it. I still can't believe Kane had such a great 2013 though. Never would have seen that coming.

Why exactly would that even matter? I don't need to have seen that many 2013 Angle matches (think I saw maybe two or three for the record) to know what I think about Angle's work from 2002-03, and I don't think a comprehensive knowledge of Angle's 2013 work is really all that crucial to understanding or criticising his career on the whole. I've seen enough Angle in my lifetime to know what I think of his matches and his strengths and weaknesses as a worker. Well, Kane had a damn good 2012 that I wouldn't have believed if I didn't see it. I'm still not even sure if I believe it. Angle was a completely different worker before he started working with Benoit. 1993 Ozaki was one of the best. 2013 Ozaki is one of the worst. Daniel Bryan in my opinion was the best he ever was for a short time this summer. We can make generalizations. but we can't trust they will be always correct. It's best to make conclusions on stuff we see regularly, though for most of us, it isn't possible.

I can understand it, though I never hated him that much. It took me until the middle of his Rated R Superstar run to like him.

It was said by Kerry Von Erich backstage at WrestleMania VIII, right before he debuted as the new Ultimate Warrior after Jim Hellwig had died. Actually, seeing as how the old stuff from the DVDVR board has been inaccessible for a while now, how recently/regularly did you read that thread, if at all? I should be fair...there wasn't hate in the strictest sense of the term. But as others are pointing out, there isn't really hate now - just people saying it's not above criticism, and that it doesn't all hold up, and that you can do better, and that's been said by people since it happened. You questioned people's ability to honestly criticize Angle because.... You presume people critical of the Smackdown Six are speaking from ignorance and therefore must have a sinister ulterior motive, but pulling out stuff like "they said Snitsky is better than Michaels!" and the general idea that SD!6 criticism is a totally new phenomenon reveals that you are speaking from ignorance in your criticisms of people who disagree with you, and while it doesn't necessarily mean you have a sinister ulterior motive, it does at least make you a massive hypocrite. Ah, just because you didn't see a post, it didn't exist? Got it. I wish I had that power with your post. Which thread? The original thread is gone but like the infamous DVDVR "latina floppies and bacon strip" post, some things live forever, much like your insistence that Kerry became the Warrior Not Snitsky, but I found an old post where people were talking about wrestlers better than HBK: http://www.cookdandbombd.co.uk/forums/inde...c=10164.50;wap2 Where was your pal Kerry Von Smarkbait on this one? Nothing is above criticism but I haven't seen WWE come close to that level since. They did some good stuff this year but they have most people appearing on 2-3 shows or more per week, as opposed to the one the SD6 had. I'd still put their best stuff against anything WWE has done and I think only selected DB/Cesaro/Shield matches would come close from this year. There definitely are some issues here. I asked some of the people ripping on Angle earlier in the thread about how many recent Angle matches they had seen this year and Dylan was the only one to respond. Again, I have never seen criticism of the SD6 until this thread and I've been around way too long. Why don't you show me some criticism of the SD6 outside of this board? I think it would help your argument. We've had a few people claim that they didn't like Angle and that they don't like Benoit the performer because Benoit the person was bad, but that's about it. Nothing about how the SD6 sucks as a whole.

There was SD6 hate while it was happening, and there's been growing criticism for it ever since. People's criticisms aren't valid if they haven't watched someone recently/regularly if ever, but criticisms of those criticisms are valid if you haven't read them recently/regularly if ever? You mean the one that never actually said said Snitsky was better than Michaels, but a lot of Michaels apologists claim that it did because it was easier than defending him on his merits? You realize this effectively gives you away as either a liar, or as someone who never actually read that thread. In which case...people's criticisms aren't valid if they haven't watched someone recently/regularly if ever, but criticisms of those criticisms are valid if you haven't read them recently/regularly if ever? Have a little consistency, man. I saw the Snitsky/HBK comparisons with my own eyes. Never seen the hate for the Sd6 before here. I mean I guess if you hate good wrestling, it makes sense. Not sure what there is to critique as a whole unless you somehow hate Eddie, Benoit, Angle, Edge, Chavo and Rey. I'm gonna guess if you do, the Snitsky/HBK comparisons make more sense. Don't even know what the second question is asking.

That era of SD had more than 6 guys. As I mentioned, I always considered Brock the real sixth guy. Show was also good, A-Train was having his best matches of his career at that point, Matt Hardy was entertaining with the 2.0 stuff plus we got the goods from Tajiri and others. Take out the Mr. America and Dawn Marie stuff and it would have been even better. The thing is with the current era is that the good stuff is really stretched out amongst the various shows, while the SD6 had SD and little else. It's not really fair as The Shield sometimes has appeared almost 4 times in one week with Raw, SD, NXT and Main Event at one point. The Shield also has the extra hour of Raw to play with.

Don't worry about this shit man. If you happen to criticize Angle it is because you are reflexively anti-Meltzer AND a sheep. Man you are a trolling machine today. I am honestly impressed that I was able to get to you that badly.

How can they discuss it if they haven't seen it? It's your site, so you can shill as much as you want, just I don't think the timing was appropriate. You of all people are going to complain about shilling? You make 20 posts a week at DVDVR linking to your blog, The only thing I have linked since September there were 2-3 Memphis reviews. There's a 3-5 picture posting rule on DVDVR so it's not like I can post the whole thing. Hell, I can't even load some of my own reviews for big shows in under 5 minutes. At some point, you have to link. My site was also free and involved no monetary gains through advertisements or anything else. I basically did it because I enjoyed pictures and gifs as much if not more than anyone else. Judging by the PM's I've gotten, it seems others enjoyed it too. I wish I could review everything but I don't have the time, care or sanity to do so anymore.

Also, my assumption on why I didn't think people saw some of his stuff this year was through various TNA Impact show threads at DVDVR, Reddit, F4W and of course my blog. I've seen Impact threads not even hit a page. Not that I blame anyone, but I haven't seen Impact in months and have no idea if it is good or bad. Maybe I'm not right with my assumptions but there's a reason a Wrestlemania thread can go 30-50 pages and an Impact thread can't go 3-5.

How can they discuss it if they haven't seen it? How do you know they haven't seen it? I admit I don't watch a ton of TNA, but I've still seen several Angle matches from this year. If we looked at his post-WWE career I've seen a ton of Angle matches, including many praised ones, the vast majority of which I strongly disliked. I should have made it clear that I meant the Smackdown 6 era. I watched every televised match Kurt had this year up until about September. I can look them up but off the top of my head I remembered liking his match with Samoa Joe and AJ. I think the Joe match was in a cage. IIRC, he spent a lot of the year involved in Ace's stuff. However, it is quite hard to provide good discussion on anything if you haven't seen it.

How can they discuss it if they haven't seen it? It's your site, so you can shill as much as you want, just I don't think the timing was appropriate.

Ugh. I think you are on the wrong board if you think I am not getting a shill in. So is this what the thread and our discussion were all about? From what I can tell the discussion was basically about your believing people only disliked Kurt Angle because Meltzer likes him, which isn't exactly the best way to drive serious debate Please see my original post:And on to Angle, the hate for him is honestly overblown and half there because of Meltzer's love for him. Pretty sure most of the people who rip on him haven't even watched him regularly for years, if ever. Reminds me a lot of the infamous HBK DVDVR thread where people were saying Snitsky was a better worker or the Tiger Mask is the worst wrestler ever propaganda. Keyword = half.

Ugh. I think you are on the wrong board if you think I am not getting a shill in. So is this what the thread and our discussion were all about?

I get it and all, but ugh.

You just have to seperate reality and wrestling. Finlay and Arn were giant assholes towards me and I still really enjoy their work. I think they are shitty people but I'll watch their matches. I'm sure there are some people who just don't like Angle, but a lot of it is sheep thinking or anti-Meltzer stuff. Again, I'd have to ask, how many people watch Angle on a regular basis? I know it's a low number because I see the weekly Impact threads.

This is complete bullshit. There are plenty of detailed examples in here of why people do not like Kurt Angle. This is also a place where tons of people do not like Edge. Add the stink of Benoit and why would people praise it? That is three of the six guys who people may not enjoy. When they are in the majority of the matches, people are going to be cold to the product. Again, I've never seen hate for the SD6 until this thread. Even if you didn't like some of them for whatever oversmarked out reason, you still had Brock, Hardy, Show, Taijiri and others mixing with them to put on good performances. What's the stink of Benoit in ring? That's the first I've ever heard of it. I never liked Edge until the end of his run and even he performed very well in his role. And on to Angle, the hate for him is honestly overblown and half there because of Meltzer's love for him. Pretty sure most of the people who rip on him haven't even watched him regularly for years, if ever. Reminds me a lot of the infamous HBK DVDVR thread where people were saying Snitsky was a better worker or the Tiger Mask is the worst wrestler ever propaganda. The stink on Benoit is that he killed his family and some people do not enjoy watching him in the ring. Again... I call bullshit. You have several criticisms of the Benoit-Angle match where people had revisited this match recently. This thread opens up discussion of the SD6 and it gives people reason to post when they didn't feel the need prior to the thread being started. As for Angle, people started hating him because Meltzer loves him? Do you really think a Phil Schneider or Dylan Waco or whatever other Angle hater is out there gives two shits if Meltzer has a hard on for Angle? Chris Benoit the wrestler and Christopher Michael Benoit the person are two different people. It would be like hating Michael Jackson's music because of his issues with kids. We all know what Benoit did but none us will ever know the full story. Angle/Benoit is one match. If everyone loved or hated a wrestler forever due to one match, there would be no wrestlers left to like. Can't think of one wrestler who didn't have an opponent or match that I didn't hate. I said the Meltzer love was a piece of it with the other half being people joining in on the sheep mentality. He would definitely get less heat if Meltzer didn't pimp his as much. Any anti-Angle thread has a Meltzer HOF mention in there somewhere. If Angle is half as bad as everyone claims he is, wrestling has gotten better.

This is complete bullshit. There are plenty of detailed examples in here of why people do not like Kurt Angle. This is also a place where tons of people do not like Edge. Add the stink of Benoit and why would people praise it? That is three of the six guys who people may not enjoy. When they are in the majority of the matches, people are going to be cold to the product. Again, I've never seen hate for the SD6 until this thread. Even if you didn't like some of them for whatever oversmarked out reason, you still had Brock, Hardy, Show, Taijiri and others mixing with them to put on good performances. What's the stink of Benoit in ring? That's the first I've ever heard of it. I never liked Edge until the end of his run and even he performed very well in his role. And on to Angle, the hate for him is honestly overblown and half there because of Meltzer's love for him. Pretty sure most of the people who rip on him haven't even watched him regularly for years, if ever. Reminds me a lot of the infamous HBK DVDVR thread where people were saying Snitsky was a better worker or the Tiger Mask is the worst wrestler ever propaganda.