tomk Posted December 16, 2009 Report Share Posted December 16, 2009 I will try my best. Maybe it's easier to digest his tomes in print. Probably not, but maybe. From the Amazon site, it is listed as 406 pages. FOUR HUNDRED AND SIX PAGES OF BABYSACK!! You are a masochist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilclown Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 I get the feeling that they're just doing it to fuck with Snowden. John I am starting to think it must be a rib. Yesterday Dave admitted he was consulted on the Coleman-Takada "finish" in PRIDE. Can you imagine Brett Favre asking Peter King for suggestions about how to fix the Super Bowl and then writing about it 10 years later like it was no big deal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Dude it's all pro wrestling you know that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Yesterday Dave admitted he was consulted on the Coleman-Takada "finish" in PRIDE. Can you imagine Brett Favre asking Peter King for suggestions about how to fix the Super Bowl and then writing about it 10 years later like it was no big deal? Dave has spent years claiming that Takada turned into a joke because of his Pride stuff. And here he's copping to giving creative assistance to it? "Does this make logic?" -Konnan Anyone have Dave's write ups of Takada-Coleman? It would be interesting to re-read what he wrote about it. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eduardo Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 JDW, Dave admitted this years ago in a WrestlingClassics thread, I thought it was common knowledge that Dave helped with the Coleman-Takada fight since it's popped up in MMA boards. I think the thread has been deleted now, but I have had the Meltzer WC quote saved in an email: "Coleman-Takada was a work. I can tell you that 100% because weeks before the fight I was involved in a discussion regarding how they would work the finish. There's a lot more to this story but people who don't understand Japan, wrestling and the fight business will never get this, but had Takada not been given some bought and paid for wins early on, Pride would have folded long before Sakuraba got hot and turned it into what it turned into. Business was not good those early years and Takada was the only guy over, and people were losing faith in him. He needed a big win at that moment. It's never been an issue in Japan because all they were drawing were pro wrestling fans until probably 2001 anyway, and they understood business is business. " Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 Dave has spent years claiming that Takada turned into a joke because of his Pride stuff. And here he's copping to giving creative assistance to it? Obviously Takada became a joke because they didn't take his advice! I imagine Dave doesn't think it's that big a deal, as I'm sure he's had countless discussions with wrestling and MMA promoters about their booking and match making. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted December 17, 2009 Report Share Posted December 17, 2009 The Takada-Coleman post by Dave is coming back to me - I think I read it at some point after he tossed it up. I don't think it was written about at the time of the Takada-Coleman match, and the comment about Sak tends to confirm that. I doubt Dave thought it was a big deal either. I've seen him give career advice (on request) to a HOF in the back seat of a taxi in Tokyo... and Dave not thinking it was anything big, and instead a common thing. I also don't think anyone at the time thought that Takada-Coleman was anything other than a work to give Takada a win, and I'm sure Dave wrote that up at the time. Just don't recall him tipping his involvement in the finish *at the time* in the WON. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilclown Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 The Takada-Coleman post by Dave is coming back to me - I think I read it at some point after he tossed it up. I don't think it was written about at the time of the Takada-Coleman match, and the comment about Sak tends to confirm that. I doubt Dave thought it was a big deal either. I've seen him give career advice (on request) to a HOF in the back seat of a taxi in Tokyo... and Dave not thinking it was anything big, and instead a common thing. I also don't think anyone at the time thought that Takada-Coleman was anything other than a work to give Takada a win, and I'm sure Dave wrote that up at the time. Just don't recall him tipping his involvement in the finish *at the time* in the WON. John That's what is so interesting about the Observer. Look at the stuff he did at the time and compare it to the occasional historical retrospective he puts out (like the history of WCW). It's like night and day. The Observer he DOESN'T write every week is much better than the one he does! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 The Takada-Coleman post by Dave is coming back to me - I think I read it at some point after he tossed it up. I don't think it was written about at the time of the Takada-Coleman match, and the comment about Sak tends to confirm that. I doubt Dave thought it was a big deal either. I've seen him give career advice (on request) to a HOF in the back seat of a taxi in Tokyo... and Dave not thinking it was anything big, and instead a common thing. I also don't think anyone at the time thought that Takada-Coleman was anything other than a work to give Takada a win, and I'm sure Dave wrote that up at the time. Just don't recall him tipping his involvement in the finish *at the time* in the WON. John I looked it up. He was pretty clear that it was a work both before and after the match. I didn't see him mention that he was consulted on it though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerpride Posted December 18, 2009 Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 What did Bryan say about Johnny Damon? It seems that Todd Martin is the same way. Every week he claims to not know the celebrity WWE books, and blasts them for booking them Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted December 18, 2009 Author Report Share Posted December 18, 2009 Bryan was doing a segment-by-segment review of RAW and when he got to the point where they announced next week's host he stated based on the pic they showed it looked like he had no charisma. Listening to Dave have to explain that Damon is not only a charismatic dude (for baseball) but also a pretty big star was awkward to say the least. It seemed like he was trying very hard not to clown him for not knowing, but still had a "dude, don't you fucking KNOW who this is?" tone to his voice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Liska Posted December 20, 2009 Report Share Posted December 20, 2009 Here's a challenge for the posters here that know how to figure out Dave's "read between the lines" comments. There's currently a discussion on the Observer board about Wade Keller being overly ticked off about Bret Hart coming back. Poster V0708 posted, "Keller's audio about Hart returning to wrestling took negativity to new levels. It almost felt like he was personally offended and this is why Bret Hart is wrong, and this is why you the listener are wrong if you agree with anything he says, etc etc. It was almost as bad as reading one of Caldwell's columns about Hart back in the day (Montreal) that even Meltzer crapped all over." Dave's reponse, "There is a certain psychology at work here. Try and connect the dots and I'm surprised nobody has yet." The question - what is Dave talking about? Does it have something to do with Wade being mad about Dave getting this story before anyone else? That's all I can think of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer Posted December 20, 2009 Report Share Posted December 20, 2009 What did Bryan say about Johnny Damon? It seems that Todd Martin is the same way. Every week he claims to not know the celebrity WWE books, and blasts them for booking them Some Todd gems of the top of my head "Johnny Knoxville is a D list celebrity" "I've never heard of the A-Team and probably no one my age has" (He's in his late 20s) IIRC he didn't know who Piven was either Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted December 20, 2009 Report Share Posted December 20, 2009 Also, he had no idea who Ken Jeong was. While he's not close to a big name (especially pre-Community), he's incredibly recognizable from his roles in the Apatow and related movies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted December 20, 2009 Report Share Posted December 20, 2009 Don Johnson is scheduled to be one of the guest hosts at the 1/18 RAW. It's too bad Steve Austin is unlikely to be there and referred to by Johnson only as "Detective Jake Cage" in different segments of the show. The references would go over Todd Martin's head in hilarious fashion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted December 20, 2009 Report Share Posted December 20, 2009 Remember the "OMG AUSTIN MAY RETIRE AND DO A JAKE CAGE SPINOFF OF NASH BRIDGES SO HE CAN SPEND MORE TIME WITH HIS KIDS IN LIGHT OF THE DIVORCE FROM JEANNIE" rumors? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Didn't Austin say that he would retire at the time if it meant he could keep custody of his children? Or was that another Internet rumor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tawren Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Also, he had no idea who Ken Jeong was. While he's not close to a big name (especially pre-Community), he's incredibly recognizable from his roles in the Apatow and related movies. OK, now you're reaching a bit. It's one thing to have no idea who Johny Damon is (although not knowing details also isn't a big deal), but not knowing Ken Jeong is not a big deal at all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rovert Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Didn't Austin say that he would retire at the time if it meant he could keep custody of his children? Or was that another Internet rumor? He said it around January 1999 on Michael Lansburg's show I think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Also, he had no idea who Ken Jeong was. While he's not close to a big name (especially pre-Community), he's incredibly recognizable from his roles in the Apatow and related movies. OK, now you're reaching a bit. It's one thing to have no idea who Johny Damon is (although not knowing details also isn't a big deal), but not knowing Ken Jeong is not a big deal at all I'm not saying it's a big deal, just somewhat surprising for someone in his age group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cox Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 It really shouldn't come as a huge surprise that the folks in the Observer clique aren't hip to anything remotely pop culture related, if you remember Dave and Bryan getting completely worked about Bret Hart buying Montgomery Burns' mansion. I think those folks tend to be in something of a wrestling/MMA bubble, so I can't say it's a huge surprise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 There was also Dave not knowing about the 90210 CW sequel show, claiming that a reference to "90210" by on WWE programming name was dated, even though he was a big fan of the original. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 I live in Wisconsin and I wouldn't be able to identify a single Brewers player out of a police lineup, nevermind whatever team Dammon plays for. On the other hand, this is Alverez we're talking about, so I'll allow myself a big ass laugh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Damon is a huge star and you at least know OF him even if you don't know he's a Yankee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marty Posted December 21, 2009 Report Share Posted December 21, 2009 Also, he had no idea who Ken Jeong was. While he's not close to a big name (especially pre-Community), he's incredibly recognizable from his roles in the Apatow and related movies. OK, now you're reaching a bit. It's one thing to have no idea who Johny Damon is (although not knowing details also isn't a big deal), but not knowing Ken Jeong is not a big deal at all I'm not saying it's a big deal, just somewhat surprising for someone in his age group. In fairness to Todd Martin, the Apatow movies are an acquired taste. I happen to like them myself, but I know many others who don't care for them. To each their own. I wonder if Martin writes all these "I don't know who this person is" comments as a rib on Alvarez and Meltzer (mainly Alvarez). I'm not expecting that either, as he comes across as a more obvious wrestling/MMA nerd than even those two sometimes, but it wouldn't surprise me. Re: Damon. He's a very good player, but due to being with the Yankees, calling him a "huge star" is debatable. I'd argue that guys like Jeter and A-Rod are bigger stars. Damon was probably a bigger star with the Red Sox due to a lot less "big name" (for lack of a better term) talent, plus he had a very unique look. Right now, he has the appearance of just another player, even if he's very, very good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.