Comments that don't warrant a thread

[gordi]

 

 

Danielson does throw his body around with abandon at times in many of his matches, but I would argue that the style he wrestles -- being mainly chain-wrestling-intensive, mat-work-heavy, and character-based with only a small number of relatively dangerous big spots mixed in -- is less damaging overall than the largely chairs-and-tables-based ECW style. I'd also argue that what's most damaging to the wrestlers' bodies and to their emotional well-being is the neverending WWE schedule and the culture of drug abuse that it engenders.

 

 

This isn't particularly at gordi, but why not; One talking point that I'll never really understand is how WWE's "insane" schedule will kill you, but then on the other hand, there is never ending complaining about how if so-and-so goes to WWE they'll never get a chance to shine and be working short TV matches. Bryan Danielson is the iron man of the US indies, and a lot of people expect to see him and see him go all out for half an hour, or do restholds for half an hour, then a finishing stretch of half an hour to reach a draw. Danielson isn't Flair, and his opponents aren't guys like Dusty Rhodes. Danielson going 60 or even long is a whole different world from what it was in the 70s and 80s to go 60.

 

I'm just not following if its supposed to be 'going to WWE means they will never wrestle' or 'going to WWE means they are going to work too hard' as the main point of contention against the evil Vince empire. In WWE you'll work maybe 4 nights a week, doing maybe a total of 45 minutes of in-ring a week. Working 3 nights in various indies and being a guy like Danielson will probably equal out to about 2 to 2 and a half hours of wrestling, and in a waaaaay more dangerous style. No indy uses road agents to help lay out matches, where they would call you a moron for wanting to go out and get dropped on your head 4 times in a row.

 

You raise some good points, but I don't know if they really address what I was writing about. What I think is (figuratively and literally) killing so many WWE guys is the lack of any real time off. The human body is amazing in its capacity to heal itself, but you need to rest in order to heal.

 

The other (related) problem with being on the road constantly is the drug culture. You pretty much NEED pain killers to keep going night after night after night with even minor tears and strains. Speed to keep moving, downers to help you sleep, steroids to keep the look up to standard... there's all there, all available, all part of the life style.

 

It's not like that stuff isn't available on the indy scene, but it's pretty apparent now that it's pervasive on the WWE scene. I'd say that, in the long run, those factors do more damage than wrestling longer matches in a stiffer style.

[kjh]

I wasn't sure whether this warranted a new thread, so I decided to put it here:

 

Did Randy Orton attempt suicide? - Irv Muchnick

 

If this is true, WWE better hope that Congress doesn't pick up on it.

[Loss]

Wow.

 

If this is true, I don't think Meltzer would have the guts to break the story, but he would certainly comment on it afterward if he had to.

 

We may never know on this one, nor am I sure we really need to know, unless it somehow becomes relevant in the scheme of everything else. Don't get me wrong, it IS relevant, but I can see why WWE or Orton wouldn't want it out. There are reasons that aren't in the least questionable why they would want this kept under wraps if it's true.

[Jingus]

(Orton acquired the gimmick “Legend Killer” after WWE blithely turned Eddie Guerrero’s 2005 death into just another “angle”).

It would help Mushnick a lot if he didn't make obvious mistakes like this, since Orton had already been doing that gimmick two years earlier.

[Guest Portalesman]

(Orton acquired the gimmick “Legend Killer” after WWE blithely turned Eddie Guerrero’s 2005 death into just another “angle”).

It would help Mushnick a lot if he didn't make obvious mistakes like this, since Orton had already been doing that gimmick two years earlier.

 

I had no earthly idea when Orton started the gimmick.

[Loss]

Maybe it would help, but this is quickly becoming a common wrestling fan defense. Nancy Grace makes logical points about wrestling being a steroid-infested business, but thinks someone can be demoted from the Four Horsemen to RAW, so her entire opinion is worthless. Irv Muschnick breaks what has the potential to be really big news in the wake of some horrible times for WWE, but states the wrong timeline for Orton developing his current gimmick, so his entire report is worthless.

 

This is in no way an attack on any one person, it's just something I've noticed in quite a few places. Wrestling fans need to realize this is a story that really goes beyond just wrestling fans, at least to a greater degree than any other wrestling stories ever have. Getting dates/names/times of storylines and stables right, while it would be nice, doesn't detract from the greater point, and picking details like those apart only wastes time when the focus should be on the bigger issues at hand.

[tomk]

Muchnick article has been ammended.

 

Readers have pointed out that the blog item about Randy Orton’s rumored suicide attempt referred erroneously to his “Legend Killer.” Orton began using the gimmick well before Eddie Guerrero died. It is both accurate and fair to note that the gimmick was applied with a special new level of tastelessness subsequent to Guerrero’s death. This correction is being inserted into the earlier item.

[Tim Evans]

If this does go to Congress, I wonder who leaked this out to Meltzer and Irv?

[tomk]

If this does go to Congress, I wonder who leaked this out to Meltzer and Irv?

 

Has Meltzer mentioned this?

 

I mean I remember him talking about a worker on suicide watch within the last year.

 

At the time everyone assumed it was Angle.

With the recent events I think most people assumed it was Benoit..

But really if it was Randy then Meltzer recent stuff raking WWE over the coals for the bad pr they will get as a result of not suspending Orton seems either dumb or like he was playing dumb.

 

The flip response I wrote at dvdvdvr:

 

Yikes!!!

 

If true, Meltzer really is a fool for giving the WWE such shit for failing to suspend Orton after multiple violations.

 

If I had to run WWE pr, I’d much rather deal with fallout for failing to suspend Orton from the road than with fallout from finding Orton suspended from his ceiling at home.

[Al]

Irving Mushnick from what I've seen though has a real desire to expose wrestling's dark side. Not that there isn't a dark side of course, but I get too much of a sense of bias from his work.

[Jingus]

Maybe it would help, but this is quickly becoming a common wrestling fan defense. Nancy Grace makes logical points about wrestling being a steroid-infested business, but thinks someone can be demoted from the Four Horsemen to RAW, so her entire opinion is worthless. Irv Muschnick breaks what has the potential to be really big news in the wake of some horrible times for WWE, but states the wrong timeline for Orton developing his current gimmick, so his entire report is worthless.

My point was, wrestling fans have been doing exactly that for a while, so anyone who doesn't want to be dismissed by the fanbase as an outsider who knows nothing really, really needs to make sure that their reporting doesn't contain any factual inaccuracies.

 

But really if it was Randy then Meltzer recent stuff raking WWE over the coals for the bad pr they will get as a result of not suspending Orton seems either dumb or like he was playing dumb.

Wait, you're saying if Orton was suicidal, then he shouldn't be suspended for any reason? It's not the company's responsibility to police the mental health of their employees, since that's pretty impossible to do from an objective standpoint. It's not like there's a test where you have all the wrestlers pee in a cup and then you can tell which ones are crazy(/ier).

[Loss]

It's not the company's responsibility to police the mental health of their employees, since that's pretty impossible to do from an objective standpoint.

Impossible? Have you never heard of a psychiatric exam?

 

And my point is that making inaccurate statements about wrestling characters and storylines is NOT A BIG DEAL when you have talk show hosts accurately discussing the bigger issues like steroid use in wrestling. If someone is breaking news about Randy Orton having attempted suicide, news that no one else has broken (and yes, I realize it's more rumor right now), talking about the timeline of when he earned the nickname "Legend Killer" seems silly and a waste of time.

 

The only people who care about those things are a tiny, tiny, tiny portion of wrestling fans who pay attention to continuity. Tiny, tiny, tiny group of people. Accuracy is always nice, yes, but the big picture - and the accuracy of the big story - is what's important here.

[Jingus]

It's not the company's responsibility to police the mental health of their employees, since that's pretty impossible to do from an objective standpoint.

Impossible? Have you never heard of a psychiatric exam?

None of them are 100% reliable, or hell even 75% reliable. There's not much scientific consensus on how to definitively identify problem cases before they act out. Psychiatrists around the world still violently debate over exactly what makes us act the way we do.

 

And my point is that making inaccurate statements about wrestling characters and storylines is NOT A BIG DEAL when you have talk show hosts accurately discussing the bigger issues like steroid use in wrestling.

Yeah, I know that and you know that, but not only the marks but the WWE as well will use any excuse possible to discredit negative press about the company. If no factual errors are made, it makes it that much harder for them to slip out of trouble.

[Tim Evans]

Wasn't Irv the one that did the Von Erich expose years ago?

[Bix]

Yes, and it's a must-read.

[S.L.L.]

It's not the company's responsibility to police the mental health of their employees, since that's pretty impossible to do from an objective standpoint.

Impossible? Have you never heard of a psychiatric exam?

None of them are 100% reliable, or hell even 75% reliable. There's not much scientific consensus on how to definitively identify problem cases before they act out. Psychiatrists around the world still violently debate over exactly what makes us act the way we do.

It's better than 0%, but the real problem (which Meltzer has already pointed out) is that therapy really requires the patient to discuss their feelings openly and honestly, and wrestlers are so deeply wrapped up in a culture of lies that it would be near impossible for them to do that.

 

And my point is that making inaccurate statements about wrestling characters and storylines is NOT A BIG DEAL when you have talk show hosts accurately discussing the bigger issues like steroid use in wrestling.

Yeah, I know that and you know that, but not only the marks but the WWE as well will use any excuse possible to discredit negative press about the company. If no factual errors are made, it makes it that much harder for them to slip out of trouble.

 

No one with the power to hurt the WWE will be convinced that a minor continuity error is reason to let Vince & co. off the hook. Not one.

 

The marks who are still convinced that everything's fine aren't convinced of that because of the press making minor errors when discussing angles. They're convinced because their trapped so deeply in the wrestling bubble that they can't see the forest for the trees. If they need to discredit the media to make themselves think nothing's wrong, they'll find ways of doing it whether Irvin Mushnick knows the timeline of Randy Orton's career or not.

[Tim Evans]

I'm wondering how Irv knows that Orton tried to kill himself. I'm guessing he got it from Meltzer. But why wouldn't meltzer give it to his butt buddy Alverez? I'm guessing if Meltz said it that he would get sued? I don't know the law that well but would that be slander?

[Jingus]

the real problem (which Meltzer has already pointed out) is that therapy really requires the patient to discuss their feelings openly and honestly, and wrestlers are so deeply wrapped up in a culture of lies that it would be near impossible for them to do that.

Yes, exactly.

 

The marks who are still convinced that everything's fine aren't convinced of that because of the press making minor errors when discussing angles. They're convinced because their trapped so deeply in the wrestling bubble that they can't see the forest for the trees. If they need to discredit the media to make themselves think nothing's wrong, they'll find ways of doing it whether Irvin Mushnick knows the timeline of Randy Orton's career or not.

It's still just good journalistic practice to make sure that what you're reporting is actually true. Sadly, that tends to be less and less common in this day & age (looking at you, Rather). And every time someone makes a dumb "demoted from horsemen to raw" faux paus, we all have to hear ad nauseum from the smarks about how that person knows nothing about wrestling and all of their points are thus invalid.

[Loss]

Meltzer said that would be the problem with counseling, that guys wouldn't do it.

 

Voluntary counseling he's probably right. Required annual psychiatric exams would be a little different.

[S.L.L.]

The marks who are still convinced that everything's fine aren't convinced of that because of the press making minor errors when discussing angles. They're convinced because their trapped so deeply in the wrestling bubble that they can't see the forest for the trees. If they need to discredit the media to make themselves think nothing's wrong, they'll find ways of doing it whether Irvin Mushnick knows the timeline of Randy Orton's career or not.

It's still just good journalistic practice to make sure that what you're reporting is actually true. Sadly, that tends to be less and less common in this day & age (looking at you, Rather). And every time someone makes a dumb "demoted from horsemen to raw" faux paus, we all have to hear ad nauseum from the smarks about how that person knows nothing about wrestling and all of their points are thus invalid.

 

Well, yeah. It's just that it's a very, very minor problem in the grand scheme of things.

[tomk]

But really if it was Randy then Meltzer recent stuff raking WWE over the coals for the bad pr they will get as a result of not suspending Orton seems either dumb or like he was playing dumb.

Wait, you're saying if Orton was suicidal, then he shouldn't be suspended for any reason? It's not the company's responsibility to police the mental health of their employees, since that's pretty impossible to do from an objective standpoint.

 

No what I was saying was that if Orton had a history of suicidal behavior than it's not surprising that WWE at this point in time would want to keep him under watch...

 

It doesn't matter wether that makes for good mental health policy or good company morale policy or anything else. The WWE doesn't want another suicide on their watch.

[Tim Evans]

They better release Chris Masters then. The amount of ridicule that guy has been exposed to would kill a normal man.

[kjh]

It's not the company's responsibility to police the mental health of their employees, since that's pretty impossible to do from an objective standpoint. It's not like there's a test where you have all the wrestlers pee in a cup and then you can tell which ones are crazy(/ier).

Hmm, you'd think all Orton's backstage problems you've been so quick to point out in the past would have tipped WWE off that he was crazier than the average wrestler.

[Marty]

The marks who are still convinced that everything's fine aren't convinced of that because of the press making minor errors when discussing angles. They're convinced because their trapped so deeply in the wrestling bubble that they can't see the forest for the trees. If they need to discredit the media to make themselves think nothing's wrong, they'll find ways of doing it whether Irvin Mushnick knows the timeline of Randy Orton's career or not.

It's still just good journalistic practice to make sure that what you're reporting is actually true. Sadly, that tends to be less and less common in this day & age (looking at you, Rather). And every time someone makes a dumb "demoted from horsemen to raw" faux paus, we all have to hear ad nauseum from the smarks about how that person knows nothing about wrestling and all of their points are thus invalid.

 

Well, yeah. It's just that it's a very, very minor problem in the grand scheme of things.

 

Seriously. It's like reporting about how Pat Sajak was involved in a serious car accident, and bringing up how he's been the star of Family Feud for years and years. Or, more similarly, it's like reporting how a soap opera star was seriously depressed, while linking some sort of depression storyline that they were involved in into the article.

 

Not saying Orton article is true or not, but as S.L.L said, stuff like that is very minor.

[goodhelmet]

So I watched some of the extras on the Horsemen DVD yesterday. Good stuff. I was down on it for a little while, but honestly, Flair/Arn is a great match and I don't understand the criticisms of it. You often hear the criticism of this that fights between brothers are usually more violent, but this wasn't really a hate-filled feud. This was a case of a guy who walked behind Ric Flair feeling underappreciated after doing so for 10 years and not really wanting to wrestle his best friend, but having to do so to prove something to Ric and to himself. So you get a lot of mat wrestling early on with Arn doing a lot of arm work to remind Ric where he comes from and make a point that he can keep up with Flair as a wrestler. This storyline was soooo good.

 

Wrestling is often talked about in more detail with more complexity than it deserves. I'm guilty of it plenty, and so are others. But this match is actually a pretty subtle, complex match with some pretty deep layers of storytelling going on, in the context of pro wrestling. The spot where Flair does his typical apron running to fake Arn out then ducks when Arn tries the usual Flair/Sting/Nikita lariat to stop him in his tracks is just greatgreatgreat. Flair still had a lot in the tank in 1995 and Arn was still as good as he always was.

 

I think they could have worked this for a year and gone in a million directions with it, other than the predictable Horsemen reunion the following month by beating up Sting, even if that angle was executed so strongly it had Flair, Arn, and Pillman all shining. The finish with Pillman was well done also, and Arn going over really had to happen.

I agree 100%. When I put this on my Arn sampler, I didn't see where all the criticism was coming from but I am beyond trying to psychoanalyze individual matches. I think this may be the last great Flair match I have seen.