Guest Joe Gagne Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 I've picked this up again. The whole thing is just so strange - it's just short bios of dead/tragic wrestlers and how it makes Scott Keith feel. I look at a 13 page bio of Bret Hart's career and wonder "Why bother?" You learn literally nothing new if you've been on the 'net for a while (not counting all the mistakes - within one page he lists two 2/3 fall matches (Rumble 89 and Summerslam 90) as only lasting 2 falls, when neither did). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.L.L. Posted November 3, 2008 Report Share Posted November 3, 2008 http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/the-smark-2...ctober-20-1997/ Just want to say thanks to everyone who’s bought the new book thus far, as it’s currently sitting in the top 10 wrestling books on Amazon and has been getting great feedback. I really think it’s my best one so far, although I do want to address one point that a few people have e-mailed about after reading it. In the book, I say that I can separate the man from the performer and continue to enjoy his matches, while on the blog a few days back I said pretty much the opposite. Well, the short answer is that the book was written more than a year ago, when I thought I could cope and move past it. As it turned out, I couldn’t, and I still can’t watch his matches. Well, bully for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LShunter Posted November 5, 2008 Report Share Posted November 5, 2008 http://www.rspwfaq.com/2008/11/the-smark-2...ctober-20-1997/ Just want to say thanks to everyone who’s bought the new book thus far, as it’s currently sitting in the top 10 wrestling books on Amazon and has been getting great feedback. I really think it’s my best one so far, although I do want to address one point that a few people have e-mailed about after reading it. In the book, I say that I can separate the man from the performer and continue to enjoy his matches, while on the blog a few days back I said pretty much the opposite. Well, the short answer is that the book was written more than a year ago, when I thought I could cope and move past it. As it turned out, I couldn’t, and I still can’t watch his matches. Well, bully for him. It must be nice to be so righteous... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeCampbell Posted November 6, 2008 Report Share Posted November 6, 2008 Ryan Beyers Review of the book confirms what we all know. I somehow doubt that Skeith will be plugging that in his blog. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boondocks Kernoodle Posted November 9, 2008 Report Share Posted November 9, 2008 In a recent blog entry, Scott refers to the Rock-HHH feud in 2000 as "The biggest money-drawing feud in the history of wrestling up until that point." Is there any truth to that? It just seems wrong althoug they did headline a number of big-money PPVs during the boom, so I guess it could be... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted November 10, 2008 Report Share Posted November 10, 2008 I don't get that one- how does that make him look stupid? The buried thing, not his Benoit quote. At the risk of rehashing the entire Montreal debate again, Scooter's still an unabashed Hitman fanboy and still refuses to even consider the possibility that maybe Bret wasn't completely blameless in the whole affair. Also him pointing to everything as proof of a burial on RAW makes him seem clueless to the fact that Bret was a heel (maybe not to him but to the rest of the world - Canada) and DX was the new face group catching fire. If the WWF would have booked the heel to get the better of the up and coming face group, Keith would have bitched about that had it involved different participants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boondocks Kernoodle Posted November 10, 2008 Report Share Posted November 10, 2008 Except that DX weren't faces at all when Michaels was part of the group. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boondocks Kernoodle Posted November 10, 2008 Report Share Posted November 10, 2008 Another Scooter gem is in his recaps of the October 1997 Raws from WWE 24/7, he's now pointing out every instance of how Bret was being "buried" leading up to You Know What. I mean, it's not as if Vince was in the midst of trying to wiggle out of the 20 year contract he agreed on or anything. Oh yeah, he totally was. And this. You seem to be arguing that the fact that Vince was trying to get out of the contract somehow refutes the claim that Hart was being buried, when in fact it supports it. I don't know exactly what he wrote, but if it looks like they were trying to make Bret look bad, they probably were. He was the one on his way out. Nothing wrong with that. That's what you do when one of your stars is leaving for the competition, you bury them. Especially when Bret's reluctant to leave. You want to make the decision easy for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted November 10, 2008 Report Share Posted November 10, 2008 I know all that, I'm just saying Keith makes it sound like Bret was somehow the first person in history to experience such a thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BruiserBrody Posted November 13, 2008 Report Share Posted November 13, 2008 I'm reading "Wrestling's One Ring Circus" (I know, I know) Keith just wrote "Gold Dust was fired for asking Vince McMahon for breast implants, to enhance his character. I don't recall that being the reason at all.... Tell me otherwise guys... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boondocks Kernoodle Posted November 13, 2008 Report Share Posted November 13, 2008 From an old RSPW post: Another reason why Goldust (Dustin Runnels) was released from the WWF, most likely now heading to WCW because his father now has a lot more booking power, besides him having a bad back and divorcing Terri Runnels (who they felt was more marketable), was because of a crazy idea that he came up with. Meltzer says Runnels suggested to Vince McMahon that he wanted an operation to have breast implants put in his chest, and even have the operation filmed for television, so he could take the Goldust character to a new level. McMahon wasn't willing to go that far and Runnels felt that the WWF weren't giving him a chance to reach his potential, which led to his exit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BruiserBrody Posted November 13, 2008 Report Share Posted November 13, 2008 I thought the implant story was a long while before his release. Keith wins this round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Evans Posted November 14, 2008 Report Share Posted November 14, 2008 I thought the Implant story was around 98. Didn't Dustin leave in 99? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boondocks Kernoodle Posted November 14, 2008 Report Share Posted November 14, 2008 If Dustin had a bad back, a boob job is the last thing he should have wanted done! OR At the rate he's growing, he'll have a sizable pair of natural breasts soon enough! TAKE YOUR PICK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted November 14, 2008 Report Share Posted November 14, 2008 Keith had listed magnum TA as being drunk when he crashed his car in 86. A few hours later he edited his blog and said his sorry's to Magnum. Wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted November 24, 2008 Author Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 Another negative review at 411. Replying to a comment in his blog linking the 411 reviews: Meh, I never got the bad blood from the 411 guys after I left for InsidePulse. Both reviews came off a tad pretentious to me but then we’re just getting into reviewing reviews and that’s silly. Love it, hate it, whatever, the money’s the same either way.Keep in mind that he was openly pushing for wrestling writers to obtain review copies so he probably gets no money in these cases. I seriously doubt any of the negative reviewers would have paid for it. I got so fed up with that bullshit response that I replied with some venom and a link to my pre-411 review. I wonder where that will go... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted November 24, 2008 Report Share Posted November 24, 2008 I like how even the positive reviews from his fans point out how he lazily cribbed stuff from his old books. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LShunter Posted November 25, 2008 Report Share Posted November 25, 2008 Yeah, his response is "Eh, my opinion hasn't really changed so I saw no need to provide any new content." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerpride Posted November 28, 2008 Report Share Posted November 28, 2008 I skimmed some of the book. The amount of errors and mistakes is astounding. I thought of compiling a list and sending them to him, it's really that bad. And yep, a lot of the book is just c-n-ped from Buzz on Pro Wrestling Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted November 30, 2008 Report Share Posted November 30, 2008 Yeah, his response is "Eh, my opinion hasn't really changed so I saw no need to provide any new content." That and a little of "that other book is out of print so I see nothing wrong with basically selling it again with a different cover". My wife reads romance novels and they literally will release the same books every 5 years with different covers to the point where she checks the copyright date on "new" books to make sure they aren't reprints. Scooter's take on publishing seems very similar. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerpride Posted December 4, 2008 Report Share Posted December 4, 2008 How are you buddy? Long time reader of your colums. Really like the setup you have now. I was reading through some old posts and I saw you mention that Shawn Michaels was supposed to do the JOB to The Undertaker at Wrestlemania 2000 but HHH had to take his place because Shawn was to messed up to perform. I seemed to have missed this at the time time and was wondering if you could elaborate more on the topic as I thought Shawn had no thoughts of performing between basically Wrestlemania 14 and Summerslam 2002. It was Wrestlemania X-7, actually, and Shawn wasn’t going to wrestle, he was going to interfere and give HHH the win over Undertaker. Then he showed up in no condition to do much of anything and the result was changed to punish HHH, who had basically gone to Vince and vouched for Shawn’s sobriety. Is that true? I always thought HBK would cost HHH the match at X-7 leading to a feud. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boondocks Kernoodle Posted December 4, 2008 Report Share Posted December 4, 2008 From the WOL episodes I've listened to from that period, it seems HBK was supposed to have Austin's spot in that tag match at Backlash, teaming with HHH vs Taker & Kane. Where that would leave the new champion, Austin, I don't know. But he was supposed to come back with HHH and he was going to wrestle, but obviously didn't. I think. I swear Dave said that. I don't know. I hope it's in an old F4W. EDIT: Wait, no. Keith was wrong. It was supposed to be HHH-Shawn for Backlash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sek69 Posted December 4, 2008 Report Share Posted December 4, 2008 They were going to have Taker's streak with a bullshit finish like that? Not saying that wasn't the plan, but what an underwhelming end to the streak that would have been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerpride Posted December 4, 2008 Report Share Posted December 4, 2008 And X-7 was in his hometown of Houston. That's why I call BS, was curious if anyone knew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted December 4, 2008 Report Share Posted December 4, 2008 (1) The streak wasn't really played up at all in 2001. (2) WWE loves to job wrestlers in their hometowns. (3) Undertaker was billed from Death Valley. 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.