Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only
Loss

Dave Meltzer stuff

Recommended Posts

I don't even get the controversy. WON is an insider newsletter. It's about the business. This is less being mad at like, the movie review section of the NY Times publishing spoilers and more like being mad that Deadline Hollywood is reporting that an actor is leaving Game of Thrones or something. It's a trade journal, not a fansite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want to listen to spoilers about LU = I don't listen to Dave spoiling LU. But it's kind of his job to report on pro-wresting, ya know

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maria trying to start a Twitter feud with Dave was both funny and sad at the same time. It really is amazing how it seems TNA has managed to convince most of the roster that everything bad that happens is just Dave making up lies despite all evidence to the contrary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maria trying to start a Twitter feud with Dave was both funny and sad at the same time. It really is amazing how it seems TNA has managed to convince most of the roster that everything bad that happens is just Dave making up lies despite all evidence to the contrary.

 

Elaborate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically she said the line "Davey M's 5 star matches" during a TV segment and Dave responded on Twitter by saying no one will remember her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It goes back further to Maria using the hashtag #LowMorale on Twitter to make fun of Meltzer's reports that TNA wrestlers had low morale. Also, Mike Bennett using the heel line about how he's going to be a first ballot Hall of Famer could also be another troll of Meltzer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently this goes back a while to Bennett thinking ROH lowballed him because Dave rated his matches lower than he did for other guys with a similar push on the roster.

 

Really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave getting criticized on twitter for being sexist because he keeps mentioning Bayley has a short shelf like because she is 27 and getting older and no one will buy her character as she ages. Someone mentioned Cena is 39 and still appeals to kids but Dave seemed to blow that off as a different character. This stuff is pretty surreal to read

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cena wasn't positioned as a childlike character like Bayley was. People trying to bag on Dave for sexism are really reaching here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bayley hasn't been the "adult who acts like a child" character in years. She's totally evolved into a adult version .Shes now a grown up serious hard working and plucky wrestler who is a role model. Old Bayley would have thought the inflatable men were real, current Bayley just enjoys having a fun and happy entrance that little kids and adults can both enjoy.

And let's face it, she's hot. The last time a woman's breasts were that wrapped down and hidden, Louis B. Mayer gave the order while giving Judy Garland a handful of speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dave's point is that all characters in entertainment have a shelf life, and people are losing their shit because this particular instance is a woman. I thought he made a good point that it's no different than a Ricky Morton type trying to still be a teenage heartthrob years past the expiration date of the gimmick.

 

 

Yes, the Bayley gimmick has evolved from the early days where people were wondering if she was supposed to be doing some kind of Aspberger's gimmick with how socially awkward she was. Dave's point was she's more like the big sister little girls want to be like and you can't play that role forever either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen Dave's tweet, but it sounds kinda silly because Bayley has evolved as a character from early days and will continue to evolve. The Bayley we see five years from now will not be the same Bayley we know today. One quick example: she will eventually, inevitably turn heel. That would be a catastrophically bad idea now, but it may not be five years from now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right, but his point is that WWE is wasting her potential by not calling her up yet. She could be a huge star with little girls because of her "big sister" quality. Once she evolves past that, the opportunity will be over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't seen Dave's tweet, but it sounds kinda silly because Bayley has evolved as a character from early days and will continue to evolve. The Bayley we see five years from now will not be the same Bayley we know today. One quick example: she will eventually, inevitably turn heel. That would be a catastrophically bad idea now, but it may not be five years from now.

 

Right, and Dave is saying that she's very marketable on the main roster right now because of her unique look and gimmick, and they're squandering that potential by keeping her in NXT. But because Dave is Dave and Twitter is Twitter, his point is poorly made and poorly understood.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She's worth so much more as a big fish in a small pond in NXT. The act would get diluted and the purity of message blurred if she was on TV in front of apathetic crowds week in and week out. She's an actual draw in NXT. I don't think there's any value in bringing her up ever. They should lean on her more as NXT continues to become a touring brand.

 

I don't think she'd be worth anything at all on the Main roster past month two or so, for reasons not at all her fault.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I too question the main roster's ability to get Bayley based off the bad fumbling of Emma the first time around. They really don't get how to use 'fun' as a character trait. Maybe if Smackdown gains more of an identity without having to cross over with Raw, they can protect Bayley better there than they would otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My wife is 34 and one of the very few wrestlers she likes is Bayley. She is the best babyface in wrestling, she is not just a kid's wrestler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Bayley doing a lot better than expected, though I understand the cynicism. Enzo and Cass, the vaudvillains, and the other three horsewomen have done WAY better with their transition than I imagined. WWE's main roster still has some trouble booking women, but I think Bayley will get over and I think she will stay over. What she will lose a bit by being in a bigger physical and metaphorical space (which she will lose something to her act) she will make up selling more merch being on a bigger stage. Her act is a merch selling act for sure (bright colors, likable character, appeal to kids and adults). Vince will love that and make sure she is in a good spot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Enzo is tailor made for current WWE, with his ability to be entertaining with the usual crap writing he's given to work with, yet still you get the impression Vince still just sees him as the guy paired up with the tall guy he really wants to push.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best counter I saw to Dave's point is that the Bayley character isn't sexualized, so she doesn't have the same limited shelf life that someone like Victoria (one of Dave's examples) might have had in WWE.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there's plenty of examples of older male wrestlers who did the "childlike" gimmick at older ages; Eugene and Festus were only in their early 30s when they did those gimmicks, but their hairlines made them look middle-aged at the very least. The audience still bought it just fine, those guys were over. Hell, you could argue that Hacksaw Jim Duggan has been playing that kind of character for the past three decades.

 

But Goodear's right about the current main-show WWE not knowing how to do "fun" characters well. Just look at how consistently they've mishandled Cena's kid-friendly character for so many years now. It's sad that the Attitude era seemed to condition everyone into expecting that most wrestling characters are violent sociopaths who despise all other human beings and have such short tempers that you literally can't leave two of them alone in a room without a fistfight breaking out. The whole sense of fun is sadly missing from today's gimmicks; you don't have anything like, say, Giant Baba's ear-to-ear grin when he's getting his shit in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×