jdw Posted February 7, 2010 Report Share Posted February 7, 2010 Feuding with Babinsack seems kind of pointless by now. You've made your case that he's an idiot. But he's also a meaningless idiot. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted February 8, 2010 Report Share Posted February 8, 2010 Not feuding. I had already been posting some of his stuff in this thread and continue to do so, regardless of the existence of any book review I wrote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted February 8, 2010 Report Share Posted February 8, 2010 Hell, the whole reason the book showed up on Bix's radar is because was already well-established as arguably the worst guy writing about wrestling on the internet today. I mean, it's almost a disappointment to see something like his most recent SHIMMER review, which, while bad, is mostly bad based on minor flubs like this... Quote SHIMMER features more than just a few women who can work All Japan Level stiff, but two names that come to mind are Wesna “Croatian Panther” Busnic and Lufisto’s brand of “Hardcore Anime”. Somehow, I believe “Panther” is a reference to the WWII era German Tank. And it is befitting. Or this... Quote Dynamics, to me, are vital and this is as dynamic as it gets. Not sure why you would assume your Croatian wrestler would name herself after a tank used by the Nazi forces who conquered her country (well, Yugoslavia) during World War II instead of a badass jungle cat, and as I pointed out elsewhere when talking about an earlier Babinsack article, "dynamics" by itself is not a word. But that's small potatoes compared to other things he's written, and it's kind of a letdown. It's not really about feuding. It's about Babinsack being so stupid that you're let down when his articles aren't hilariously awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indikator Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 While Croatia was not really against Hitler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_State_of_Croatia) Babinsack is a fucking retard to make that assumption. Edit: To clarify, nobody, absolutely nobody I know who wasn't a child during WWII and had military trading cards back then knows anything about WWII era weaponry. Why should a child of immigrants (I assume she is) know anything about WWII at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 Intentional or not, why should it matter? It's just a tank. What does Babby think of Lex Luger? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted February 9, 2010 Report Share Posted February 9, 2010 Indikator said: Why should a child of immigrants (I assume she is) know anything about WWII at all? She's actually shoot Croatian, FWIW, but yeah, it's kind of a stretch. If nothing else, in doing research for the above complaint, I found out she grew up in Germany and started her career there. If you remember what happened to The Hart Foundation and JBL when they went to Germany, you'll know they're more than a little touchy about employing Nazi imagery for fun and profit. Unless she was stealthily trying to stick it to the man, she's not referring to the tank. If it's a nickname given to her in the States or elsewhere, you have to consider that she's largely worked face (not exactly conducive to Nazi allusions), and that it would have to be a name given to her by American promoters who knew about Croatia's role in WWII...long story short, it's not terribly likely. Mind you, I've never watched a second of SHIMMER in my life, and am telling you all of this based on a minute of looking at a Wikipedia article and basic common sense. Babbysack is slavishly devoted to SHIMMER, and somehow, I understand it better than him. Go figure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cox Posted February 14, 2010 Report Share Posted February 14, 2010 Dave from today's WON update: Quote *Kurt Angle vs. Mr. Anderson - Angle rarely has bad matches on PPV. And for all the faults of Mr. Anderson, he's not Mark Henry Yeah, Mark Henry is much, much better than Mr. Anderson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rovert Posted February 14, 2010 Report Share Posted February 14, 2010 Cox said: Dave from today's WON update: Quote *Kurt Angle vs. Mr. Anderson - Angle rarely has bad matches on PPV. And for all the faults of Mr. Anderson, he's not Mark Henry Yeah, Mark Henry is much, much better than Mr. Anderson. Given all the DVDR related fallout I dont know who is and isnt being sarcastic here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted February 15, 2010 Report Share Posted February 15, 2010 Plenty of wrestlers managed to have matches that weren't bad with Mark Henry in 2006 (most notably Rey Mysterio and Chris Benoit). Which makes Dave's talking point pretty silly (Kurt Angle's so great but even he couldn't carry Henry). Personally I'd partly blame all the injuries Kurt had clocked up by that point and all the pain pills he was guzzling to keep going for any off nights during that period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted February 15, 2010 Report Share Posted February 15, 2010 Undertaker had an excellent match on Smacktown with Henry in '06, too. It was pretty clear that Angle just couldn't have a good match outside of his comfort zone, which he only came close to successfully leaving against Rey Mysterio and Eddy Guerrero. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoos Leg Posted February 15, 2010 Report Share Posted February 15, 2010 Didn't Taker and Henry have a pretty darn good casket match at a recent Mania too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted February 15, 2010 Report Share Posted February 15, 2010 It was ok but not close to as good as their first SD match. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cox Posted February 15, 2010 Report Share Posted February 15, 2010 kjh said: Plenty of wrestlers managed to have matches that weren't bad with Mark Henry in 2006 (most notably Rey Mysterio and Chris Benoit). Which makes Dave's talking point pretty silly (Kurt Angle's so great but even he couldn't carry Henry). Personally I'd partly blame all the injuries Kurt had clocked up by that point and all the pain pills he was guzzling to keep going for any off nights during that period. Shit, Henry probably had more good matches in 2006 than Angle did. And unlike Angle, Henry isn't a crazy drug addict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted February 15, 2010 Report Share Posted February 15, 2010 He definitely had more good matches in '09 than Angle did (vs. Matt Hardy, vs. Christian, a bunch of tags, had a strong performance in the Championship Scramble match), and this was a year that most of your Henry supporters thought was a step down for him because of his jump to Raw. What did Angle do in '09 that was so great other than get carried by Jeff Jarrett? Did he and Tanahashi manage to pull some kind of miracle out of each other? Incidentally, I think the one guy who Henry did have a bad match with in his '06 run was Kurt Angle, and that was really because of Angle. So on a certain level, the line actually works, albeit awkwardly and not in the way Dave intended. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted February 16, 2010 Report Share Posted February 16, 2010 Todd brings the outrage for Raw this week, which is always amusing. Quote Next up was the Jerry Springer Show on Raw. Because, you know, WWE doesn’t want to be viewed as low brow, white trash entertainment. The announcers put Springer over huge and billed him as a television legend, which is sort of like Mel Gibson seeking to salvage his reputation by doing a buddy comedy with Michael Richards. The theme of the show was WWE’s most intimate relationships revealed. Quote This seriously may have been the low point in the history of Raw. Just the most moronic, interminable, negative stereotype-affirming nonsense. “Entertainment” by idiots and for idiots. And no, I don’t consider “it’s supposed to be awful” to be a particularly compelling defense for awful television programming. Holy hyperbole, Todd! Anyway, the guest GM concept has been more about drawing ratings than upping their image and well Jerry Springer doing a train wreck spoof of his talk show should have been more successful than most guest GMs. So it's hard to say it's the lowest point in the history of Raw, especially when the booking of Raw at it's most popular was heavily inspired by what was being done on the Jerry Springer show. Quote HHH beat John Cena via DQ. Cena hit a fisherman buster and threw HHH over the top, but accidentally dove into the barricade. HHH got heat during a commercial break but Cena quickly came back with shoulder blocks and the five knuckle. He went for the FU but HHH got out and hit a clothesline. HHH went for a superplex but Cena blocked and hit a top rope rocker dropper. Cena went for the STF but HHH reversed into a half crab. HHH hit a high knee, face buster and spine buster. He went for the pedigree but Sheamus ran in with a big boot for the DQ. He gave Cena the big boot too and hit a razor’s edge on HHH. I just don’t buy that in 2010 crap finishes help build PPV matches. They’ve been done way too frequently for way too long and they just make matches feel pointless. I’d much rather they book TV matches where guys go over and then match up the guys who go over at the PPV to settle who the best is. Instead, they have a bunch of matches with crap finishes and then the same guys wrestle on the PPV. The hook for watching the PPV seems to be that this time we may actually give you a real finish. WWE is essentially like a really stupid con man running a shell game. He offers you a free try, only he rigs it so you lose. Then he tries to get you to play again, only this time for $45, and says this time he’s going to play fair. This is not a very profitable con job. There are better strategies to be had, both in terms of engendering goodwill with your audience and in profiting more on PPV. I'm not sure how this was a crap finish, unless you think all DQ finishes are crap. The WWE champion comes out looking strong, taking out his two biggest threats in the Elimination Chamber match. That makes a lot more sense than Hunter or Cena winning the match clean and Sheamus not interfering at all. Also when has there ever been a DQ finish in an Elimination Chamber match? Doing a non finish, whether it be DQ, count out, blood stoppage or time limit draw, to set up a gimmick match where there must be a winner is one of the oldest tricks in the book. One that has worked forever, provided you don't start doing screwy finishes in the gimmick match too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wahoos Leg Posted February 16, 2010 Report Share Posted February 16, 2010 He REALLY wants wrestling to be booked like MMA, doesn't he? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sean Liska Posted February 16, 2010 Report Share Posted February 16, 2010 I don't get the degree of outrage at the Springer segment. It was supposed to be a parody. They hit all of the classic Springer "spots" - paternity tests, transgender revelations, cheating spouses, white trash brawling, etc. I won't argue with anyone that thought it wasn't funny, but a low point in RAW history? For a harmless sketch with a bunch of prelim people? Compared with HLA, Katie Vick, Kane setting JR on fire, midget court, Dr. Heiny, Wayne Bobbit saving Val Venis from castration, Kane electrifying Shane McMahon's nuts, and on and on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeCampbell Posted February 16, 2010 Report Share Posted February 16, 2010 Given Todd's propensity for parrotting Meltzer, I'm guessing his reply to that (perfectly valid) criticism would be that you can't compre wrestling from the last decade to this one. It's two different eras. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted February 16, 2010 Report Share Posted February 16, 2010 The Springer segment wasn't good but the only offensive/insulting part was when Lawler did his "LOL it was a loving parody" explanation at the end as if anybody hadn't figured it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Morris Posted February 16, 2010 Report Share Posted February 16, 2010 Not to mention that Todd was all up in arms about the DQ ending to Sheamus/Randy Orton when it was clearly being used to build the Orton vs. DiBiase/Rhodes program. Martin is just one of those guys who believes "all DQ endings suck, no matter what," but then would turn around and complain about how stupid it is to have a clean finish because it makes one guy look weak/being buried/fallen out of favor with management/come up with some other reason why said clean finish was bad. EDIT: Oh, and let's not forget that, next week, Martin will be complaining about how nobody knows who Ty Murray is or cares about bull riding, when in reality, it's Martin who doesn't care and some people actually do watch rodeo and know who Murray is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer Posted February 16, 2010 Report Share Posted February 16, 2010 Sean Liska said: I don't get the degree of outrage at the Springer segment. It was supposed to be a parody. They hit all of the classic Springer "spots" - paternity tests, transgender revelations, cheating spouses, white trash brawling, etc. I won't argue with anyone that thought it wasn't funny, but a low point in RAW history? For a harmless sketch with a bunch of prelim people? Compared with HLA, Katie Vick, Kane setting JR on fire, midget court, Dr. Heiny, Wayne Bobbit saving Val Venis from castration, Kane electrifying Shane McMahon's nuts, and on and on? The fact that Todd didn't seem to grasp that it was a parody was kind of alarming. I didn't like the segment but I wasn't offended and it was full of a bunch of midcarders who fill time. Not going to affect business in any way Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 Todd Martin is a guy who once PM'ed me on Classics about how we needed to start an "affirmative action" campaign to get Sting into the WON HoF. This would be bizarre under any circumstances but was made more bizarre by the fact that I was arguing against including Sting in the HoF at the exact same time Todd was reaching out to me as an ally for his weird crusade. Also keep in mind that I didn't have a vote for the HoF and I'm not sure Todd did at the time either. Point is that Todd seems to have a very strange way of viewing things even by the standards of wrestling "journalists." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted February 18, 2010 Report Share Posted February 18, 2010 William Colling on how WWE can learn to promote an annual PPV tournament from a regular series of British boxing tournaments shown on Sky Sports. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boondocks Kernoodle Posted February 20, 2010 Report Share Posted February 20, 2010 Really stretching now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strummer Posted February 20, 2010 Report Share Posted February 20, 2010 Boondocks Kernoodle said: Really stretching now. I was just going to post this this has to be a lowpoint in the ten and a half years of Meltzer online 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.