NXT TakeOver Toronto/WWE Survivor Series Weekend

[Cap]

Joe vs. Nakamura in Japan has to be a set up for Nak to regain the title in his home country, right?

 

I'm not a Joe fan, but it really is time to call one or both of them up to the main roster. I'd dig Joe vs. Roman. That feud writes itself IMO.

I would tend to agree this is the logical next step. I think Nak wins it back from Joe (but I assume it is either at the rumble or mania takeover shows) and Joe gets called up after that. Putting it in Japan would make great sense for the brand and would let them maybe put Joe in the rumble without him pulling double duty.

 

Joe v Roman would be a lot of fun, and you are right that it writes itself, but I would rather him go to Smackdown first. Joe vs Styles in 2016 would be such an awesome and different match than we have seen from them in the past. Joe vs Cena is something people want to see (myself included).

[SomethingSavage]

Charles said it best on (I believe?) his GWE podcast. If they're serious about getting the most out of Samoa Joe on the main roster, then he needs to come in right away against the top guys. If they expect him to be perceived as a heavy-hitter, then he needs to gun for the likes of Taker, Brock, and Cena first & foremost.

 

After that, Joe can always cycle down the card and have competitive matches among the next tier - Styles, Rollins, Reigns, and eventually even the likes of Cesaro, Sheamus, or Ziggler for TV match purposes.

 

But it's a much more difficult task to go the other way with it. And I'm not sure I'd want to place that kind of faith in the company's booking anyhow.

[Childs]

Dave gave the same star rating (4 1/2) to the Survivior Series men's 5-on-5 as he did to the NXT tag match. I know it's beyond redundant to carp about him as a match critic, but that's just staggering.

[WingedEagle]

Dave gave the same star rating (4 1/2) to the Survivior Series men's 5-on-5 as he did to the NXT tag match. I know it's beyond redundant to carp about him as a match critic, but that's just staggering.

 

Yeah. I love Dave, as for over 20 years he's been responsible for me checking out more wrestling domestically & internationally that I otherwise wouldn't have. I also don't doubt his intentions when watching matches, but we've been on different wavelengths a lot whether it be this pairing, Charlotte/Sasha HIAC, or the barrage of snowflakes that are thrown at just about every single NJPW main event and G1 match. And I'm probably a bigger New Japan fanboy than most.

 

Yet the Observer arriving every Monday is still a tremendous highlight. Hopefully its far, far, far off, but we're in trouble if & when he decides to call it a day.

[Therealheel]

 

Dave gave the same star rating (4 1/2) to the Survivior Series men's 5-on-5 as he did to the NXT tag match. I know it's beyond redundant to carp about him as a match critic, but that's just staggering.

 

Yeah. I love Dave, as for over 20 years he's been responsible for me checking out more wrestling domestically & internationally that I otherwise wouldn't have. I also don't doubt his intentions when watching matches, but we've been on different wavelengths a lot whether it be this pairing, Charlotte/Sasha HIAC, or the barrage of snowflakes that are thrown at just about every single NJPW main event and G1 match. And I'm probably a bigger New Japan fanboy than most.

 

Yet the Observer arriving every Monday is still a tremendous highlight. Hopefully its far, far, far off, but we're in trouble if & when he decides to call it a day.

I disagree that we are in trouble when Dave calls it a day. I feel that what is happening here on PWO and with PTBN podcasts that we as a community have grabbed the ball and are running with it in a very positive way , people on here are looking at wrestling and viewing matches in ways that Dave Meltzer wishes he could have been able do 20 years ago! I think that guys need to recognize that Dave is, and was great , but to say that we can't move on without him is a bit harsh. Dave is not the only guy who is capable of introducing great wrestling to the masses , what we have going on here and the plans for the future that PTBN has shown me is far and beyond anything Dave is doing and the bar is being raised emensly every day from people who also deserve to have a voice and a valued opinion. Bruce Prichard has really opened my eyes towards Meltzer recently , he is confirming thoughts I have always had as a wrestling fan growing up when it came to my opinions of Daves work over the years. I am of the opinion of putting Meltzer in the back seat and letting new drivers guide us towards new heights. I mean look at the way he attacks Prichard , a guy who actually created the stuff he wrote about in the past , and now he slanders Bruce every chance he gets. I am moving away from everything Meltzer has done and I would recommend that others start doing the same.

[The Thread Killer]

Bruce Prichard has really opened my eyes towards Meltzer recently , he is confirming thoughts I have always had as a wrestling fan growing up when it came to my opinions of Daves work over the years. I am of the opinion of putting Meltzer in the back seat and letting new drivers guide us towards new heights. I mean look at the way he attacks Prichard , a guy who actually created the stuff he wrote about in the past , and now he slanders Bruce every chance he gets. I am moving away from everything Meltzer has done and I would recommend that others start doing the same.

 

If Bruce Prichard is "opening your eyes" about anything, you should probably be worried about your own judgment, not Dave Meltzer.

 

I don't have a subscription to the Observer, and I never will. However, if you have to classify Dave Meltzer as anything, he has always been a reporter. A reporter with an opinion and bias, sure...but all reporters have that. He reports on the con that is Pro Wrestling, and for the longest time he was the only reliable person doing that. You might not agree with his opinion on the news, but if he was reporting it, there was a pretty damn good chance it was true.

 

Bruce Prichard has made his living selling the con, not reporting on it.

 

Go back and watch any WWE produced DVD since the Attitude Era up until he got fired. There's good old Bruce, front and center, towing the company line, parroting whatever the office endorsed version of the truth is. No matter what, how bad the story was or how wrong WWE was, you could always count on Bruce Prichard to be the ultimate McMahon sycophant. He was part of Vince's inner circle for years. Those guys hated Meltzer because they didn't own him and they couldn't control him. And if Prichard hadn't gotten fired (for whatever reason you choose to believe, be it stealing, repeated drug abuse, or the jealousy of Stephanie) I'm sure he'd still be in Connecticut saying "Yes sir, No sir" to Vince.

 

The only reason Bruce Prichard is trying to sell himself as some sort of former insider with news and views that people should care about, is because he got tossed out of WWE, and then got tossed out of TNA. So what else is he going to do? This has been his whole life. It's sad, really. He can't exactly do anything else at this point in his life. So like Cornette, Russo, and others with a "name" from working behind the scenes in Pro Wrestling he is trying to keep himself relevant by doing shoot interviews and podcasts, where at least he can finally take shots and some of the people he hates. But it won't be much bad about the McMahon family, I bet. I am sure he lives in constant hope for the day he gets called back home to Titan Tower.

 

Of course there is bad blood between Meltzer and Prichard. Prichard was partially responsible for helping produce a lot of the crap that the WWF crammed down everybody's throats. Meltzer reported and told the truth about a lot of what went on with the WWF back in those days, and I am sure he was none too popular for it. And I am sure he did more than his fair share of editorializing on it as well. There are those who complained that Meltzer was clearly biased towards JCP during their heyday. I don't know, I didn't read the Observer then - but if he had been, could anybody really blame him? Whatever bad things Meltzer has said about Prichard now, I can guarantee Prichard has said about Meltzer in reverse.

 

We're not talking about two equals here. One is a reporter, the other is a carny.

 

If you're looking for somebody to "drive you to new heights" I suggest you look elsewhere. The only place Bruce Prichard is going to drive you to is Bullshit City, USA. Population: Him.

[Therealheel]

I can see that your on the side of Meltzer in this and that's fine. I am not so extreme in my view and opinion on this matter , but almost neutral to both sides , I can see both guys having an agenda and both guys pulling carny type tactics at times during the years , Prichard is not the only one who is a playing Carny , for you to think that Meltzer is not part Reporter and part Carny would be a mistake. Dave has been discredited and shown to be a lier and misinforming the people , so that can't be forgotten. I was saying that Prichard has reconfirmed my suspicions about Meltzer from day one and I have never trusted or felt his opinion to be anything of real value over anybody else. The "new Heights" I was talking about was directed not at Prichard taking it to new levels but personalities within this community here on PWO and PTBN doing so. I am not worried about my own judgement when it comes to viewing wrestling but I am concerned with the blind following and excepting of Meltzer as King within the wrestling community as a whole , that's my main concern here and I think that you may have reconfirmed my thoughts and added to my arguement with your Tirade about Prichard as if Meltzer is above and has been above Carny tactics himself , that's an example of blind following that I am talking about. I see Prichards side of the arguement and I am open to Meltzers side as well and I can't hold any one of them in higher regard to my own , that would be foolish on my part to do so. I must say that Prichard and his Something to Wrestle with Podcast has given me way more insight into the past and times of the WWE or WWF then Meltzer has ever given me , and this has been in just a very short time. I do sub to Daves News letter to this day and find it entertaining but it doesn't bring me anywhere near the level of information and insight that Prichard has been privalaged to be a part of. You can't condemn a guy for having a real INSIDE job like Prichard did for years , and I feel that's what you just tried to do with your last post. Does he walk the company line at times? Sure , but Dave also walks the company lines that he created for himself and his brand. It's called business and they both are great at it , so for me to totally bury anyone of them in the fashion you did is harsh and one sided. I can see people getting upset at this topic and at my opinions of Meltzer but my opinion is not actually a bad one , it's a meer look at the fact that other people have an opinion that is just as good or even more informed then Meltzer. Why would that be so hard to except without a lashing to the guy who is pointing this out?

[Zoo Enthusiast]

Dave gave the same star rating (4 1/2) to the Survivior Series men's 5-on-5 as he did to the NXT tag match. I know it's beyond redundant to carp about him as a match critic, but that's just staggering.

 

Even stranger was giving 3 to that Dusty Classic match. I hadn't subbed to the Observer for a couple years but re-upped for the Black Friday sale so I could catch up on all the DKP podcasts from the time I was gone. Was just reading this week's newsletter and definitely felt very out of step with the perception Dave has of current WWE/NXT to the point where I can't imagine staying a subscriber after my $4 month ends.

[fxnj]

I can't comment on the Bruce Pritchard thing, but I would agree with the general sentiment that places like PWO have created an environment for in-depth match discussion where, outside his hardcore followers, Meltzer's shallow recaps haven't been a relevant voice for many years in turning people to new stuff or swaying opinions.

 

Between social media, shoot interviews, and competing news sites, we also have more ways than ever before to get accounts of past and present news stories beyond just taking Meltzer's word as gospel.

 

I haven't been a subscriber since 2010 for those reasons.

[stro]

I love this idea that Meltzer is some renegade outlaw who bucked the system and stuck it to the man when he was in fact just some random dude writing about pro wrestling for a couple of thousand people and maybe 1% of the audience at any given event know who the fuck he was. His canonization by other fans has always been bizarre to me. He was essentially wrestling specific TMZ who bugged enough people that he got contacts in the industry.

 

I'm sure people here have read the 90s WO recaps on Wreddit where he's wrong constantly, both in reporting and analysis. He's an informative writer on the history of the industry, but he's a terrible writer from syntax and clarity perspectives. Even worse when he's actually speaking.

[The Thread Killer]

I love this idea that Meltzer is some renegade outlaw who bucked the system and stuck it to the man when he was in fact just some random dude writing about pro wrestling for a couple of thousand people and maybe 1% of the audience at any given event know who the fuck he was. His canonization by other fans has always been bizarre to me. He was essentially wrestling specific TMZ who bugged enough people that he got contacts in the industry.

 

I'm sure people here have read the 90s WO recaps on Wreddit where he's wrong constantly, both in reporting and analysis. He's an informative writer on the history of the industry, but he's a terrible writer from syntax and clarity perspectives. Even worse when he's actually speaking.

 

He was some random dude who was writing about pro wrestling for a couple of thousand people and probably less than 1% of the audience at any given event knew who he was.

 

I've never met anybody who claimed he was a good writer from a technical standpoint, because clearly he isn't. It has been amusing to me to see how little his writing has improved over the years, considering how much of it he does.

 

Having said all that...he was a "renegade" if you want to consider the actual definition of the word: "a person who deserts and betrays an organization, country, or set of principles." He broke "kayfabe" in an era where you didn't do that. On top of all that, he wasn't even one of the "boys" and on top of all that, he had the audacity to make money from it. He was the first person to do that.

 

I personally think that if there was no Dave Meltzer, the industry would look a lot different today, from the outside, at least.

[JaymeFuture]

Just to drop this in here for our regular listeners, the latest Squared Circle Gazette Radio is now up, as we talk about a huge weekend of shows for WWE! Discussing the ins and outs of NXT TakeOver: Toronto and the 2016 Survivor Series, we break down every match and talk all the big issues currently going on, including the shocking finish to Lesnar Vs. Goldberg, issues with champions on the show, struggling divisions, some great wrestling, and debating a litany of possible directions between now and WrestleMania. And as always, we get some of your thoughts about the happenings of one of WWE's bigger weekends of the year. Check it out and let us know what you think!

http://squaredcirclegazette.podbean.com/mf/web/eca3rh/SCG_Radio_105_-_NXT_TakeOver_Survivor_Series_and_Beyond.mp3

[Therealheel]

Just throwing this out about the Meltzer argument. Think about this for a minute , Meltzer HAS and always will take money from guys in the industry who want certain information leaked , he was on the "Take" in many different instances throughout history , if you think otherwise or don't want to believe this is the case then you are the perfect example of what "smart mark" is. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Meltzer is and always has been on the payroll of many companies throughout history. Would his five star rating on a match get fans to buy certain DVDs or videos back in the day? Wrestling companies love this guy! Give me a break , just because they pretend that they have heat with this guy means NOTHING.

[The Thread Killer]

Just throwing this out about the Meltzer argument. Think about this for a minute , Meltzer HAS and always will take money from guys in the industry who want certain information leaked , he was on the "Take" in many different instances throughout history , if you think otherwise or don't want to believe this is the case then you are the perfect example of what "smart mark" is. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Meltzer is and always has been on the payroll of many companies throughout history. Would his five star rating on a match get fans to buy certain DVDs or videos back in the day? Wrestling companies love this guy! Give me a break , just because they pretend that they have heat with this guy means NOTHING.

 

So just to be clear...you're suggesting that at points "throughout history" some wrestling companies have given Meltzer money to rate their matches five stars, so they could sell more DVD's?

[The Thread Killer]

I can see that your on the side of Meltzer in this and that's fine. I am not so extreme in my view and opinion on this matter , but almost neutral to both sides , I can see both guys having an agenda and both guys pulling carny type tactics at times during the years , Prichard is not the only one who is a playing Carny , for you to think that Meltzer is not part Reporter and part Carny would be a mistake.

In the sense that both guys want to make money, yes...they are both carnies.

 

From there, I don't see them as similar, nor do I see this as an issue which has "sides." You're comparing apples and oranges. Meltzer is a reporter. Prichard worked for the companies Meltzer reported on, until he got fired. I would suggest that if it came down to the question: "Who are you more likely to believe?" I would pick Dave Meltzer and it wouldn't even be close. As I said, we're talking about two people who had entirely different agendas for the majority of their respective careers. Prichard had a vested interest in keeping information secret and controlling what got out, whereas people paid Meltzer to expose and report on that information. They are not comparable entities, regardless of whether or not you think Meltzer is a "lier." Up until very recently, they weren't even trying to achieve the same thing from the business of Pro Wrestling, aside from making money, of course.

 

Dave has been discredited and shown to be a lier and misinforming the people , so that can't be forgotten.

That's a pretty big accusation. You're saying Dave Meltzer has been discredited as a reporter and been exposed as a liar. I would concede that he has been wrong on many occasions. I have no doubt that he has been "worked" by many of his sources in Pro Wrestling. I do not think he has been exposed as a liar.

 

I was saying that Prichard has reconfirmed my suspicions about Meltzer from day one and I have never trusted or felt his opinion to be anything of real value over anybody else. The "new Heights" I was talking about was directed not at Prichard taking it to new levels but personalities within this community here on PWO and PTBN doing so.

That's the distinction, though. You don't trust Meltzer's opinion. I don't even care what his opinion is. Believe you me, I lost any respect I ever had for his opinion back when he decided that MMA and Pro Wrestling were essentially the same sport and could be judged equally. That was when I decided once and for all that I didn't mind reading his site as a source for news, but as far as editorializing...not so much. Sure, Prichard can have a podcast and editorialize. So can PWO and PTBN, and about a zillion people on YouTube. I am drawing the distinction between reporting news and editorializing. I would prefer that Dave Meltzer didn't combine the two, but he does. But my point was that if it boils down to "who would you believe" between Prichard and Meltzer, it really isn't close.

 

I am not worried about my own judgement when it comes to viewing wrestling but I am concerned with the blind following and excepting of Meltzer as King within the wrestling community as a whole , that's my main concern here and I think that you may have reconfirmed my thoughts and added to my arguement with your Tirade about Prichard as if Meltzer is above and has been above Carny tactics himself , that's an example of blind following that I am talking about. I see Prichards side of the arguement and I am open to Meltzers side as well and I can't hold any one of them in higher regard to my own , that would be foolish on my part to do so. I must say that Prichard and his Something to Wrestle with Podcast has given me way more insight into the past and times of the WWE or WWF then Meltzer has ever given me , and this has been in just a very short time. I do sub to Daves News letter to this day and find it entertaining but it doesn't bring me anywhere near the level of information and insight that Prichard has been privalaged to be a part of. You can't condemn a guy for having a real INSIDE job like Prichard did for years , and I feel that's what you just tried to do with your last post. Does he walk the company line at times? Sure , but Dave also walks the company lines that he created for himself and his brand. It's called business and they both are great at it , so for me to totally bury anyone of them in the fashion you did is harsh and one sided. I can see people getting upset at this topic and at my opinions of Meltzer but my opinion is not actually a bad one , it's a meer look at the fact that other people have an opinion that is just as good or even more informed then Meltzer. Why would that be so hard to except without a lashing to the guy who is pointing this out?

I'm not even remotely upset about this. I don't subscribe to the Observer because I don't like how Dave treats Pro Wrestling as MMA's ugly sister. I also don't like his editorializing. I also don't listen to Prichard's podcast, for the same reason I don't listen to Vince Russo's. I don't respect him or anything he did in his career. I think he's full of crap.

 

That's really what my entire point to you was. You might think Dave Meltzer is full of crap. Maybe he is. But Bruce Prichard is even more full of crap.

[The Thread Killer]

Hey mods...maybe it might be a good idea to move a bunch of these posts into the Dave Meltzer thread in the Megathread folder? I don't want to derail this topic, and a couple of people over there were already discussing the Meltzer/Prichard rivalry, so these points might fit better over there?

[Therealheel]

 

Just throwing this out about the Meltzer argument. Think about this for a minute , Meltzer HAS and always will take money from guys in the industry who want certain information leaked , he was on the "Take" in many different instances throughout history , if you think otherwise or don't want to believe this is the case then you are the perfect example of what "smart mark" is. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Meltzer is and always has been on the payroll of many companies throughout history. Would his five star rating on a match get fans to buy certain DVDs or videos back in the day? Wrestling companies love this guy! Give me a break , just because they pretend that they have heat with this guy means NOTHING.

 

So just to be clear...you're suggesting that at points "throughout history" some wrestling companies have given Meltzer money to rate their matches five stars, so they could sell more DVD's?

Yes , thats exactly what I am saying , and not only DVDs but he is a huge contributor to bringing awareness good or bad to companies. He is a great tool used to propel business. I am sure him and Vince McMahon have sat down and discussed business that would benefit both parties involved , I find it very bizarre that in the world of wrestling that this would be so hard to belive. Its ok as a fan to belive that professional wrestling is a work , but it's not ok to think that Meltzer is also a work? Why would I think that Meltzer is legit or has an agenda that is anything but the same agenda as the companies he "reports" about? Meltzer is a tool for the professional wrestling buisness to make money. Period. That's his role. Media in general is used to propel buisness , it's used that way in every aspect of life not only Professional Wrestling. Media makes money for Corporate structures propelling ideas and ideologies , that's why it's crazy for me to think that in the Wrestling world this would be unique and different. Lets both move on from this topic and conversation , I am sure we both have better stuff to do and would probably both benefit from just leaving it alone. I understand your position and respect it , so let's move on now.

[...TG]

 

 

Just throwing this out about the Meltzer argument. Think about this for a minute , Meltzer HAS and always will take money from guys in the industry who want certain information leaked , he was on the "Take" in many different instances throughout history , if you think otherwise or don't want to believe this is the case then you are the perfect example of what "smart mark" is. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if Meltzer is and always has been on the payroll of many companies throughout history. Would his five star rating on a match get fans to buy certain DVDs or videos back in the day? Wrestling companies love this guy! Give me a break , just because they pretend that they have heat with this guy means NOTHING.

So just to be clear...you're suggesting that at points "throughout history" some wrestling companies have given Meltzer money to rate their matches five stars, so they could sell more DVD's?

Yes , thats exactly what I am saying , and not only DVDs but he is a huge contributor to bringing awareness good or bad to companies. He is a great tool used to propel business. I am sure him and Vince McMahon have sat down and discussed business that would benefit both parties involved , I find it very bizarre that in the world of wrestling that this would be so hard to belive. Its ok as a fan to belive that professional wrestling is a work , but it's not ok to think that Meltzer is also a work? Why would I think that Meltzer is legit or has an agenda that is anything but the same agenda as the companies he "reports" about? Meltzer is a tool for the professional wrestling buisness to make money. Period. That's his role. Media in general is used to propel buisness , it's used that way in every aspect of life not only Professional Wrestling. Media makes money for Corporate structures propelling ideas and ideologies , that's why it's crazy for me to think that in the Wrestling world this would be unique and different. Lets both move on from this topic and conversation , I am sure we both have better stuff to do and would probably both benefit from just leaving it alone. I understand your position and respect it , so let's move on now.

 

 

You're accusing - without a shred of evidence - the most widely read and respected pro wrestling journalist of regularly taking bribes from wrestling companies, and calling anyone who disagrees with you a "smart mark". And you want us to respect your position and move on from this topic?

[Parties]

It’s unfair to copy-paste passages of the current issue of the Observer for free online, but in the interest of addressing this, here’s everything in his review of the 5-on-5 that could remotely be construed as a positive of match quality:

1. “Jericho got a huge pop when he tagged in.”
2. “Rollins vs. Ambrose had good action.”
3. “Whatever you want to say negative about Shane being in there and some of his stuff not looking good, he is amazing for a non full-time wrestler at his age in the sense he can keep up and he does crazy stunts and lives to tell about them.”

In the same write-up, he criticizes Owens for looking fat, Shane for weak-yet-also-somehow-dangerous punches (“Shane’s punches were potatoing people left and right in that match, including bloodying Chris Jericho’s nose”), Reigns for accidentally punching Styles when he wasn’t supposed to, Styles for awkwardly standing around and watching his teammates get pinned rather than trying to save them, Strowman for recklessly throwing Styles out of the ring, Shane again for more terrible, dangerous offense, and the final two-on-two teams for having “lost the crowd a little” during the climax. To say nothing of how on the podcast with Alvarez he talked about how the match was way too long, had little excitement aside from the Shield team-up, and would have bored and disappointed the crowd if it had gone on last.

 

I rarely if ever read his match reviews anymore, but yes: this one’s incredibly weird and the rating makes no sense, almost to the point of me wondering if he mistakenly typed one snowflake too many and actually meant to give it 3 and 1/2. But then he’d be subtly acknowledging that the tag team jobbers looked better that night than Jericho and Rollins, and we can’t have that. Also worth noting that the 5-on-5 won the subscriber vote for MOTN: perhaps Dave just likes to have consensus with his readership on this stuff.

[The Thread Killer]

Yes , thats exactly what I am saying , and not only DVDs but he is a huge contributor to bringing awareness good or bad to companies. He is a great tool used to propel business. I am sure him and Vince McMahon have sat down and discussed business that would benefit both parties involved

Meltzer has admitted in the past that he has had conversations with Vince McMahon. I don't think those conversations were quite of the nature that you seem to think they were.

 

I find it very bizarre that in the world of wrestling that this would be so hard to belive. Its ok as a fan to belive that professional wrestling is a work , but it's not ok to think that Meltzer is also a work? Why would I think that Meltzer is legit or has an agenda that is anything but the same agenda as the companies he "reports" about?

Because he is a reporter. He's a journalist. Vince McMahon is a promoter. I find it bizarre that you think that just because Meltzer reports on Pro Wrestling, that he is automatically in the bag for whatever promoter waves a handful of cash under his nose. Putting aside what that implies about his personal code of ethics or his own journalism standards, I'm confused as to how that would even serve any purpose for him. He makes a couple of bucks, but what else good does it do him?

 

Meltzer is a tool for the professional wrestling buisness to make money. Period. That's his role. Media in general is used to propel buisness , it's used that way in every aspect of life not only Professional Wrestling. Media makes money for Corporate structures propelling ideas and ideologies , that's why it's crazy for me to think that in the Wrestling world this would be unique and different.

Once again, that it is a pretty big accusation to level at a guy who has spent the last 34 years making his living as a journalist.

 

But thank you for explaining to me the relationship between the media and business, because I had no idea how that worked.

 

Lets both move on from this topic and conversation , I am sure we both have better stuff to do and would probably both benefit from just leaving it alone. I understand your position and respect it , so let's move on now.

I find your attitude during this discussion to be puzzling. You have made some fairly brash statements - that you trust the word of Bruce Prichard over that of Dave Meltzer, and that Dave Meltzer takes financial compensation from Pro Wrestling promoters in exchange for good reviews in the Observer. You have claimed that Meltzer is just a tool of the big business of Pro Wrestling. But when I try and disagree with you about that, you react defensively and don't want to talk about it anymore.

 

I was under the assumption that one of the main functions of PWO was to further discussion of Pro Wrestling. Why would you make statements which you would have to know would garner a heated debate...and then withdraw when you get one?

[Therealheel]

Ok. I am not convinced that Meltzer is the most respected Wrestling Journalist , so no I am not accusing the most respected Journalist of anything. Listen now carefully fellas. I AM A SMART MARK! What is wrong with that? Is this a horrible term or offensive to anybody? If its offensive to you then tell me why? To think your not a smart mark when your browsing Wrestling forums and discussing things that is based on a foundation of a "Work" is just ludicrous. Calm down guys , if anybody needs any evidence to what I am talking about then just take a look at your reactions to my comments. Your smart marks....who the hell cares!! What is offensive about this at all? Meltzer is not a Journalist and your not going to convince me otherwise. I respectfully excepted your guys opinions on the issue and have moved on , I don't have time to care if you respectfully except my stance on this issue , that is the biggest waste of time for myself to do that , and its a huge waste of time for anybody to try and change my mind. We are all smart marks , live with it guys. Also I never asked anybody to respectfully except my stance on this. I said simply that I respect YOUR stance on this.

 

THREAD Killer , if you look back you will see you are putting intentions to my words and are actually accusing me of intending things that I don't actually intend. Its another example of the work that Dave Meltzer has done for 30 years....so I can see how you stick up for his work.

[The Thread Killer]

I don't even know what point you're trying to make now. I could care less if somebody calls me a "smart mark." Mark, smart, smart mark, smark...they're all just made up industry terms that don't actually mean anything. I'm a Pro Wrestling fan. If it makes you feel better to classify me as a smart mark, then okay...I'm a smart mark. That doesn't make any of the arguments you've tried to make during this discussion any more valid.

 

You also really can't sit there and make inflammatory statements like "Meltzer is not a Journalist and your not going to convince me otherwise" but then expect people to "move on." As I have said repeatedly, I don't even really like Meltzer all that much. I find him preachy, I don't care for his writing style, and I don't like his MMA fetish. But facts are facts. He has a degree in journalism, and people have paid him money to report on things. Mainstream publications like the New York Times and Sports Illustrated have called him the leading journalist in the field of Pro Wrestling.

 

So for you to now try and argue that he isn't even a journalist means you're either trolling or being unbelievably obtuse.

[Therealheel]

sooo what are you arguing again? You have totally put everything I have said out of context and have put intentions to my words. Your the one trolling here pal! You do your quoting of my words and put intentions on them that I don't have! That is trolling! I don't see what your arguing me about at all? Your arguing with yourself here. What I am getting from this interaction with you today is that you don't like Prichard , don't like Meltzer and everything else is just a bunch of fluff without any argument at all. You have agreed with me countless times but then attack if I say anything bad about Meltzer , so that makes me think that your full of crap and actually do care a great deal about Dave Meltzer. It is either that scenario I just laid out or you have nothing better to do today and just like to kill threads dead and then blame somebody else for doing so! I am done with you and have tried to be done with you since the first interaction I had with you. I made the comments and I stick by everyone of them about Dave Meltzer , but to think that you can bring me any type of relevant opinion on this is just a waste of time for me. You obviously would go on and on and on regardless of what the topic is. I cant waste anymore time on this buddy. Seriously you need to move on. This is the second time now I will be asking you to move on from this , the first time I asked you attacked me by saying I am recoiling and shying away from a serous argument and discussion. I am sorry if I don't consider this as a very meaningful or deep conversation with you , I am getting nothing of value at all from your comments and I find them to be reactionary at best. So please again I ask you to take your baggage and your need to argue about something and leave me out it. Stop taking my words and putting context to them and giving them intentions that I don't have! Is that possible for you to do? or would you like to continue ranting on?

[Coffey]

My head hurts...

[Ricky Jackson]

Makes you miss the glory days of jdw vs JVK