The Wade Keller Appreciation Thread

[rovert]

98.5% Wade Keller a PWTORCH.COM subsite.

 

Keller being Keller lets see how long he keeps this up.

[rovert]

I know some of you think Bryan and Dave have shitty taste in wrestling, so here is Wade Keller:

DANIEL BRYAN (w/The Bella Twins) vs. WILLIAM REGAL

Early in the match Bryan hit Regal with a barrage of roundkicks in the corner. He ran right into a punch by Regal seconds later for a two count. Regal hit a series of uppercuts, but Daniel countered with an attempt at a backslide. Regal countered with a Regal stretch attempt. Bryan escaped. Bryan then twisted into the Lebell Lock for the tapout win. Each Bella kissed Bryan on the face after the match and he acted flustered.

WINNER: Bryan in 5:00.

STAR RATING: * –– Pretty good five minute TV match. Regal’s been putting on quite a bit of

mid–section weight again

On his Livecast radio he elaborated by saying that he found it too exhibitiony and not a fight/contest. It mentioned that a wrestler (got to be Waltman going by twitter and past association with Wade) calling him up about the star rating say it should be **1/2 at least.

[soup23]

Based on the latest hotline, Wade may be getting more scoops lately as he had some tidbits of info today. It could just be who he talked to at the Smackdown tapings, but with my interest in MMA wavering big time this year, I see myself going more and more to the Torch website over the observer which I would have found impossible 2 years ago. A revitalized Wade has been a pleasant suprise and provided a lot of good content.

[rovert]

Based on the latest hotline, Wade may be getting more scoops lately as he had some tidbits of info today. It could just be who he talked to at the Smackdown tapings, but with my interest in MMA wavering big time this year, I see myself going more and more to the Torch website over the observer which I would have found impossible 2 years ago. A revitalized Wade has been a pleasant suprise and provided a lot of good content.

Yeah Ive been liking Wade a lot for a good while. The Livecast has gotten kind of old due to the same callers over and over though. He can be overly analytical and get caught up in the strangest things but at the very least he thoroughly recaps shows. Dave and Bryan skipping over the first segment the previous week's Raw really annoyed me.

 

Had to laugh at him in part in jest wondering what was the carbon footprint of the 14 Divas used in the 1 minute tag on Raw.

 

There is very little to complain about with Wade these days.

[soup23]

With the livecast I only listen to the Wade shows with either Bruce, Jason, or Pat and avoid the rest and even with those, I listen to the first part of the conversation and the VIP after show and skim through the callers to avoid the Chris from NY and Boris from Chicago ilk.

 

In regards to the Observer, I know I have harped on them in the past, but I see no reason why Bryan will watch every World of Hurt show and not watch Smackdown. Again to use a tired comparision but this would be like Peter King writing about a SMU/Houston college football game instead of talking about MNF every week in his column. I think Bryan thinks that no one is affected by this and that no one cancels their subscription, but I let mine lapse two months ago, and the free B&V show this week certainly didn't make me compelled to resubscribe. Wade's views on how to change Smackdown from a Hotline a few weeks ago were pretty poignant and interesting and not as "crazy" as other Wade ideas in the past. I also thought Wade was a lot more spot on the problems with MMA in that same podcast.

[NintendoLogic]

So how do all those anti-Jericho stories look now that Jericho has basically corroborated them in his book?

[Bix]

Still, nobody took Jericho aside to tell him what he was doing wrong until he started getting heat for it. Just tell him that he needs to bump on each punch or if you have a preference about how stiff/light he works or that you think he hasn't adjusted well to working with bigger opponents.

[rovert]

So how do all those anti-Jericho stories look now that Jericho has basically corroborated them in his book?

Wade took it as a vindication of what he reported at the time.

[smkelly]

Is that wrong for a journalist to do?

[Loss]

How so?

[NintendoLogic]

Still, nobody took Jericho aside to tell him what he was doing wrong until he started getting heat for it. Just tell him that he needs to bump on each punch or if you have a preference about how stiff/light he works or that you think he hasn't adjusted well to working with bigger opponents.

That's apparently their SOP. Dave Lagana recently recounted a story about how when Punk first came to the WWE, a lot of the agents had it out for him for similar reasons as Jericho. It took Shawn Michaels of all people to stand up and say "Um, if you don't like something the kid is doing, why don't you work with him to fix it... instead of killing him?" for things to turn around for him.

[rovert]

Up until recently I thought Wade was pretty on point and interesting for a significant amount of time then the Cena-Rock feud happened. Since then he has gone crazy. I forgot my earphones in work today ( ) but here is something someone on F4W said about his Raw review:

 

 

Jesus fuck. I dare anyone here to get through the RAW analysis recap without pulling your hair out. Talk about completely over fucking analyzing and pulling shit out of his ass. He's so anti-Rock now that it's absolutely weird. He goes on and on about Rock pandering, the crowd not being on Rock's side, and just being full of shit. Talking about how Rock's line about Cena's wife could legitimately bother her and all this other bullshit.

 

He also thinks that the Tellitubby line was a sign of Rock basically telling the audience that his heart isn't with WWE anymore and his mind and passion are in movies. I've always been skeptical of Wade since I've always found him kind of pretentious but I liked his analysis. If he keeps on with this bullshit reporting I am SERIOUSLY considering not renewing. It's fucking atrocious and I don't see how Bruce hasn't spoken up yet and told him how fucking nutso he's getting.

 

And of course he speculates on everything being a fucking shoot again.

Wade also last week alluded to a mystery rumour Cena is holding over Rock's head to keep him from verbally *shooting* on Cena that could destroy Rock's Hollywood career.

 

I know he has to create "copy" but he has being regularly doing 40 minute bizarre podcasts on Cena-Rock than has me fearing for his sane and judgement the past few weeks.

[kjh]

Wade's probably just being fed bad info, either deliberately being worked or just listening to the wrong people. Dave's a lot more clued into The Rock's mindset and he's not talked about any real life heat or friction with Cena.

[rovert]

Wade's probably just being fed bad info, either deliberately being worked or just listening to the wrong people. Dave's a lot more clued into The Rock's mindset and he's not talked about any real life heat or friction with Cena.

Nah this is like 10% inside info and 90% conspiracy. Wade creates a theory at the start of the podcast and at the end of it he starts talking about it like it is fact. He is pouncing on every kernal of information that might given credence to his theories. It is genuinely really weird and it is alienating people.

 

I could be made a fool when Rock and Cena start shooting on each other and the Florida "screwjob" happens when the entire WWE locker room runs out and attacks Rock for betraying WWE but there you go.

 

^ This a combination of Wade's theories btw.

 

He's Bill Apter now.

[Loss]

To be fair (sort of), Wade has always had a healthy amount of speculation in what he writes. I think in his mind he somehow thinks it's his job to "hype" what he's reporting, so he throws stuff out like that to create intrigue. I might be off on that, but that's the only thing that makes sense to me.

[kjh]

The new ECW documentary has led to another online squabble between Dave Scherer and Wade Keller, after Keller posted an old 2006 Torch story about how PWTorch was unfairly scapegoated in WWE's book about the history of ECW.

 

IS WADE KELLER OF THE TORCH A LIAR?

 

Note from Dave: The following came in as a Q and A question. Honestly I have no interest in rehashing this 16 year old story but since the Torch's Wade Keller posted an item that he originally wrote in 2006 on his website a few days ago (and I have no real idea why he would all of this time later), I will be glad to answer his claims. For the record, I had not seen this column until a few days ago since I don't follow his work so this is all new to me, seven years after Keller wrote it. Also, I was sent some questions that didn't pertain specifically to me, so I won't address those. The items in bold, with quotes, are things that Keller wrote in the story. The items only in bold came from the reader.

 

On his website, Wade Keller posted a story he wrote in 2006 presenting his side of the ECW-Request TV story. He wrote the following items that pertained to you so I wanted to get your response on them. Is Wade Keller a liar or did this happen the way he states?

 

"Errors about the controversy and the Torch’s involvement in it have circulated for years on the Internet, with competitors to and critics of the Torch fanning the flames with misinformation and self–serving conjecture."

 

I can't speak about anyone other than myself. All I have ever reported was the truth, and I did it when the situation actually happened in 1996. I didn't do it ten years later when the "facts" were harder to challenge or corroborate properly. I wrote about what happened when it happened. Elite members can read those stories in our Lariat archive if they care to. After reading Keller's piece that you sent, I do find it ironic that he uses the term "self-serving" because that is the tone that permeates what he wrote.

 

"In fact, even before the Torch reported this story, rival reporters with conflicts of interest were tipped off by people in ECW that the Torch had called the PPV companies and caused problems. Those reporters were quick to bite on the story, eager to try to make the Torch the target of the venom of angry ECW fans who were excited about ECW taking that next step. Because the Torch wasn’t online yet, most people commenting on the Torch’s involvement hadn’t even received in the mail yet the cover story detailing the situation. Conjecture and speculation and outright falsehoods, fanned by competitors of the Torch who also worked for ECW, made the Torch the scapegoat, just as Heyman did ten years later in the recently published book. By the time the actual Torch cover story was in the hands of subscribers, the story had taken on a life of its own."

 

The real story got out online because the internet was in place and people were using the medium to report news as it broke, not days later. As it turns out, that was the start of quite a trend wasn't it?

 

In 1996 my newsletter was not online either, but I was. So was Wade, truth be told. He was asked in the rspw Usenet group, which he monitored, to comment when the story broke. He chose not to. So it wasn't like he wasn't able to defend himself. He chose not to do so. I believe he chose not to do so for a reason. He had the ability to address what was being reported head on and did not. That is damning to me.

 

I have to assume he was referring to me as being on the ECW payroll (since while he mentioned me later he didn't do so there, which is a good way to imply someone is something and not get sued for it). His reference is a lie, and I have addressed it before and I know he knows that. But for the sake of clarity, here are the facts.

 

I never received one check from ECW, in any of its ownership capacities. Not one. I would guess that ten years after the fact Wade got a bit confused about that. Again. But hey, why let the truth get in the way of a self-serving story right?

 

He is probably referring to the fact that I ran the ECW website. I did, but here is the kicker: ECW didn't own it! Bob Ryder started it on his dime. I ran it for him and honestly, it didn't make much money at all the first few years. We were people that believed in the concept of ECW and we wanted to help in any way that we could by offering services that ECW couldn't afford. We weren't alone in doing that either. A lot of people donated their talents, or gave them at a very discounted rate, because they believed in the company and the people that worked so hard for it.

 

So we ran the ECW website because WE, not THEY, felt they needed an online presence at the time when the net was taking off. And, it was probably number 473,234 on Paul Heyman's list of things to do at that time. When the site made money, YEARS after it started, Bob paid me. When he sold his part of the site when ECW went on TNN in 1999, Joey Styles paid me. LONG before that time I had divorced myself from writing about ECW to alleviate any conflict of interest. But Paul Heyman or HHG Corp. (the parent company) never paid me a dime. Or a penny. To claim they did was a lie and Wade knows it.

 

That isn't the kicker though!

 

The thing that makes Keller's lie laughable is that the situation with Request TV went down at the end of 1996. At that time, ECW's website didn't even exist yet! It was not there! You can't work for something that doesn't exist Mr. Keller!

 

If Wade were a bit more thorough in his job, and done a simple WHOIS search, he would have found this:

 

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, LLC (http://www.godaddy.com)

Domain Name: ECWWRESTLING.COM

Created on: 03-Dec-97

Expires on: 31-Dec-13

Last Updated on: 30-Dec-12

 

Yes Wade had me "working" for an entity that wouldn't even exist for another year. So either he is very poor at fact checking or he tried to besmirch my good name as way to make himself look like a victim. Obviously, this is a lie.

 

"A couple reporters (Bob Ryder and Dave Scherer, both of whom worked for ECW for years in various capacities—such as travel bookings and website reporting—while also reporting news on “independent websites” and before that newsletters) claimed that the Torch sent the tape of the incident to Request TV. "

 

I already told you about the lie above where the website is concerned. Here is lie number two. 1Wrestling.com, where Bob and I first went on the web, was not born until the summer of 1997! Bob ran the Prodigy wrestling board. I owned and ran The Wrestling Lariat newsletter. Wade lied again.

 

"They claimed at the time that Bruce Mitchell bragged during a 900 audio update that he sent a tape of the Kulas incident to Request TV. Ryder days later retracted his claim and apologized for jumping the gun, and earlier this year, Scherer clarified his contention."

 

I never claimed Mitchell did anything. I cited what Bob Ryder reported on Prodigy after he heard the hotline. I would have listened to the hotline the next morning but Mitchell deleted it immediately (and I mean within minutes) after Ryder filed his report. To me, the only reason for Mitchell to do so is because what he said was extremely damning and upon seeing it recapped, he was told by his boss to pull it. Say what you want about Bob Ryder but he is honest. He never, ever lied to me about anything. Meanwhile, we just proved that Wade lied above.

 

“To me, the issue never was about IF they supplied a tape,” Scherer wrote on Feb. 17, 2006 on his current website’s message board. “It was about Mitchell gloating about how they got the PPV canceled on his hotline. I know he mentioned a tape, but I don’t remember exactly what he said. That isn’t the issue. The issue was that he gloated about getting the PPV canceled due to their call.”

 

That was ALWAYS the issue! I will get into that more below.

 

"In fact, a week after Ryder and Scherer were inaccurately claiming that Mitchell bragged on a hotline report days before Christmas about sending a tape of the incident to Request TV which led to the PPV being cancelled, Panero told the Torch, on record (as quoted in the Jan. 7, 1997 Torch), that he still hadn’t received a copy of the tape as of Dec. 30. “No. We are actually trying to get a copy of it now.”"

 

Again, Bruce chose to delete the evidence of his hotline. Wisely so because had he not, Wade would have never been able to write this bit of fiction. The issue to me was always about Mitchell and Keller going to Panero and making him aware of the tape, which I believe they did out of having heat with Paul Heyman. Again, had Bruce not deleted his hotline, his words would have been etched on the record. It should also be noted that while Mitchell worked for Wade, he did his hotline reports on Dave Meltzer's hotline. I never understood how that worked.

 

You can question whether Keller and Mitchell were doing their duty as journalists by bringing up the tape to Panero. If that was the case however, why not own it? Make your case when it happened. Don't wait ten years to revise history.

 

"(Mitchell re–recorded his hotline report a few hours after the first recording was made available to listen to. He re–recorded it because it was a sensitive and complex story. Within a few hours, Internet reports were misconstruing what he said. When that was brought to his attention, he felt it was prudent to re–record and be more clear and decisive regarding exactly what his role was in the controversy. That attempt at clarity and thoroughness fueled false claims that he bragged about sending a tape in the first recording, and then in essence retracted it a few hours later.)"

 

This is laughable to me. It really is. Bruce did the hotline late at night. Bob Ryder listened to it shortly after it went up and reported on it. Shortly after that, it was pulled and there wasn't a new report until the next day. I don't buy that excuse. Anyone that does please email me so I can sell you some lovely oceanfront property in Nevada.

 

"So let's be very clear. Anyone today who still says ECW's PPV clearance was cancelled because Bruce Mitchell sent ECW a tape of the Revere incident is ignoring these points:"

 

That was never the issue and Wade knows it. He is basically saying, "Anyone who claims that I, Wade Keller, is the President of Mensa is wrong!" Yes they are Wade but that isn't the issue. Wade putting so much focus on a non-issue is telling to me, and it tells me he is confusing the reader.

 

"Two reporters who initially claimed that have since retracted that allegation or clarified their stance to exclude any accusation Bruce sent a tape."

 

That was never, ever this reporter's issue. and he knows it. "Receiving a tape" was never the issue. Bragging about telling the head of the one PPV company that would air the show about the tape and precipitating its cancellation was the issue. Bob Ryder heard Bruce brag that they "got" ECW on the hotline. I know the rest of the story. The actions of those two in their dealings with Hugh Panero got the show canceled.

 

OK, now some questions.

 

1) If WWE let Paul Heyman lie so badly about Keller and Mitchell, why didn't they sue the company?

 

That is a good question. If Wade felt the need to write such a long column ten years later, why wouldn't he sue a company with big pockets? I guess you have to ask him.

 

2) Would you consider suing Wade? What he wrote could be seen as libel or slander. Especially when you consider it's been in the public domain for a decade.

 

I have no desire to interact with him in any way. I can post the truth here. That is enough for me.

 

3) Did you respond at the time he wrote it and if not, why not?

 

I never saw it. I don't read his work, for good reason. I never even knew this existed until you sent me the link to what he posted on his site on 4/19/2013.

 

4) Why should I believe anything that Wade says in that piece or at all, if you prove he lied in this piece and he doesn't retract it?

 

That is something I would wonder too if I were you.

 

5) Do you think he will retract his lies, if they prove to be lies?

 

Considering that he knew the truth when he wrote it, my guess is he will silently fume that the truth got out, wonder why he was stupid enough to post the story on his free site and then ignore it. Or spin it.

 

6) And finally, who is right Heyman or Keller?

 

We are, in the Lariat archives! But honestly given what I saw in the entire column you sent me, go with Paul. It's not even close.

NEW ECW DOCUMENTARY "Barbed Wire City" - Must-read supplemental Torch articles by Bruce Mitchell and Wade Keller on Kulas-New Jack incident (w/Addendum)

 

[Addendum: Dave Scherer contends, in a published response to this article on Apr. 21, 2013, that he never said Bruce Mitchell sent a tape, but rather cited what Bob Ryder reported on Prodigy; Ryder initially alleged that Mitchell boasted of sending a tape, but within days did clarify that he just interpretted Mitchell's comments as boasting about the Torch having a role in the cancelation. Mitchell did not send a tape and never bragged about sending a tape, and has been clear about that from the first day the false allegation was made. Hugh Panero also is on record saying neither he nor anyone at his company received a tape. Scherer also noted, in a published response to this article, that the ECWWrestling.com website that he ran did not yet exist during the time of his initial public comments about the Torch's role in reporting on the ECW PPV situation in late 1996/early 1997, but rather was registered in late 1997. Scherer's initial comments on the ECW PPV controversy were made in his Wrestling Lariat newsletter and on Internet message boards. Scherer also noted that ECW didn't initially own the ECWwrestling.com website that he ran. By the time this article was published in 2006 in direct response to the newly WWE-published ECW book with new Paul Heyman quotes, Scherer - who continued to publicly discuss the Torch's role in the ECW PPV story over the years including recently - did have a history by then of running the official ECW website during the time ECW was on TNN, so at the time this article was published, the info on Scherer was accurate. Scherer says that during the time he did receive money for his work on the official ECW website, he stopped reporting on ECW matters on his non-ECW-affiliate website.]

[Guest stanley]

I dislike Keller. But I would not waste that much time in my life burying the guy. Ironically its very Keller like.

[jdw]

Wade actually is a very nice person. One can be critical of his work, and like everyone there are valid things to be critical of or disagree with. But he is a good person.

 

Mr. Schemer, on the other hand, is a rather vile human being.

[dexstar]

Is The Torch VIP sub worth the price? I like reading the old Observers over at F4W and wish they'd move faster, so the archive at the Torch definitely appeals, but is the info good? I haven't really read much Keller but what I've read over the past couple years I didn't really like. Has he changed a lot over the years or will it be similar?

[Guest stanley]

So who is this Schemer guy.

[Guest stanley]

One guilty pleasure I have is reading his fans comments after articles on his site. Holy fucking shit. Only the best and the brightest reside there:"Should Jake Roberts end Takers streak"? ""Should Hogan wrestle Piper at Wm 30"? My favorite one "Roman Reigns could end Takers streak and then absorb his magical powers and be the new Taker." I wish I was lying.

[Ricky Jackson]

They brought back the comments option on the Torch site? My God, 5-6 years ago that was the most vile slum in the online wrestling universe.

[Loss]

I think paid message boards operate under a faulty premise, because how do you moderate or ban someone who's paying for the service? There's precedent for paid message boards sort of not living up to their potential, even when they have some of the most knowledgeable people around participating.

[jdw]

So who is this Schemer guy.

 

You only need to go up a few posts from yours to find a big, massive junk of his bullshit.

[jdw]

I think paid message boards operate under a faulty premise, because how do you moderate or ban someone who's paying for the service? There's precedent for paid message boards sort of not living up to their potential, even when they have some of the most knowledgeable people around participating.

 

My thought would be that even if someone paid for your product, if he posted stuff similar to what you guys have banned folks recently her for, then you'd ban them even on a pay board.