Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

Dave Meltzer stuff


Loss

Recommended Posts

I'm almost caught up on BtS.

 

This is from the 1/30/95 Observer:

 

"The match reminded me of a very good opening match in Tijuana where you'd see a lot of great high spots, but the psychology was limited and the brawling looked bad in spots (***). It's a lot better watching guys with weaknesses work their butts off then to see guys stalling and shortcutting through a match."

 

I kind of hate it so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 9.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

I believe that's a reference to Linda calling Dr. Zahorian and telling him to destroy/get rid of any records of dealing with WWF wrestlers/Vince after she was tipped off that he was being investigated by the FBI for steroid distribution, thus eliminating a potential smoking gun during Vince's trial years later

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe that's a reference to Linda calling Dr. Zahorian and telling him to destroy/get rid off any records of dealing with WWF wrestlers/Vince after she was tipped off that he was being investigated by the FBI for steroid distribution, thus eliminating a potential smoking gun during Vince's trial years later

 

Yes. The story goes someone tipped off Linda at (I believe) a party that Zahorian was being looked at by the feds, so she was able to give the heads up so that there would be no direct links tying the company to drugs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He does have a point that it's kind of patronizing that they only seem to honor the same 5-6 people each year.

Black History Month as a whole is pretty patronizing IMO.

 

I have different views on race than other people, but until we can get past race, whether it be for good reasons or bad reasons, race is always going to be an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do agree with Dave on how out-of-touch WWE is with their "only blacks can be talking heads for black history month videos" deal. It would not have hurt to have had a caucasian with awareness of sports history talk about Jackie Robinson, instead of Alicia Fox.

 

It probably wouldn't hurt MLB to include some players not of color as speakers in the video packages they use in the stadiums every year on Jackie Robinson day, but they only include African-Americans from around the league, and they've been doing it for 20 years now. Don't see it changing anytime soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a lot more MLB players overall than the main WWE roster. Probably a higher proportion of African-Americans in the MLB as well. Few would be upset (or notice) if John Cena said a few words about Jackie Robinson over Alicia Fox.

 

Also, both Dave and Bryan talked a lot last WO Radio about how stupid the "you deserve it" chant is. I agree more with Bryan's take tho.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's also embarrassing when they keep repeating stuff like saying Jackie Robinson is the only person to have his number retired by every team in a sport (99 is retired in the NHL for Wayne Gretzky). It makes them look like they are putting in the minimal effort possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's bad, and not trying to defend WWE at all, 'cause they should have had that right, but that's something major outlets continue to get wrong year after year. Even Ken Burns' impressive, 4+ hour documentary on Jackie Robinson, which had so much research and interview put into it, stated that exact same myth. And that aired on PBS last Spring in 2016. It's one of those myths that lingers on, year after year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real issue with WWE's BHM stuff is they have such a terrible track record with black talents that every year it feels like the most blatant PR stuff they ever do, and they have explicit PR segments on the reg.

 

It was only 2 years ago their gimmick for a stable of 3 black men had vignettes with all black church choirs and them dancing like James Brown. After the very initial start was ANGRY BLACK MEN and Xavier going to by Dr. X as a mix of MLK and Malcolm. Go back a few years prior and their 2 most heavily pushed black men were BIG SCARY BLACK MAN and abnormally stupid rapper who sees invisible children and came to the ring dressed as a Confederate soldier. We're not talking the 80s or 70s. We're talking 2010s. Call me crazy for not believing they really care about honoring the legacy of black performers in their industry or others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While we're talking about Dave being oblivious, can we talk about him making big deal on WOR about how the Raw main event saw a significant ratings drop in the female teen demographic and how that means Bayley is failure? I've seen people taking this and running with it without actually stopping to think that TEENS AREN'T HER TARGET AUDIENCE! She's like a female John Cena and I don't think 12-18 was every really a strong demographic for Cena so why should it be for Bayley? Her character seems directly targeted at the 12 and under crowd, not teens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

also (as Dave has noted) the female audience as a whole has been leaving Raw in droves the last while so it can't just be Bayley for one week on top. Dave and Bryan have been trying to figure out why females have been tuning out and I think they are just mindlessly spitballing on some of their guesses

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When is the last time a Raw main event hasn't lost viewers, though? Hour 3 in general is a success when it loses less than the normal average. Put Goldberg in the main event in the 3rd hour of Raw and it won't have as many viewers as hours 1 and 2.

 

Yet, argubaly demos matter, because they'll usually be "stickier" over time.

 

Additionally, WWE puts more weight into certain demos because they better translate and correlate to $$$.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny how we only hear this when certain people get a shot, and we never hear anything about it when others get a shot. We heard constantly about bad ratings and merchandise figures when Daniel Bryan was the top challenger, but nothing about declining ratings when Seth Rollins was champion in 2015 and got a ton of TV time, and I don't think we've ever heard anything at all about his merchandise sales. I can't recall Dave discussing Charlotte's ability to move the needle either way. Double standards every way you turn. Despite conventional wisdom, numbers too have opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember the weekly lowest records ever being attributed to Seth's terrible reign and mega push. That was discussed in a lot of places. I did, at least. It was obvious he was a flop as a top guy from day one, though. It took him from the week after he turned until cashing in at WM to get reactions. Crowds did not give a SHIT about him for the first 8 months of his solo run. Not even mixed reactions like Roman or anything. Just silence. The whole time people were complaining about Roman's push, it was clearly Seth getting the mega push despite crowds not wanting it, but because he had his indie cred and is a "great" worker, most boards conveniently overlooked that he was accelerating the ratings decline, having dead crowds, and generally making the shows miserable having about 50% of screen time on Raw/SD.

 

HHH decided Seth was his guy and stuck with it even when it was dreadfully clear it wasn't working at all. So then they do the face turn and fans still really don't care much about him in either direction. For a guy who has been pushed as hard as he has for the past few years to still be getting the reactions he gets today is a pretty big reg flag. Say what you want about Roman/Dean's in ring work, crowds aren't ever "meh" for them. Crowds pop for Seth's entrance and then are pretty bored during his matches, and there have been multiple times since he came back where the crowd was cheering the other guy in the ring, including Roman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seth Rollins is in my top 5 guys that could disappear tomorrow and I wouldn't care. This goes back to Age of the Fall days with him in RoH. His inring is solid to good but dear God he gives you zero reasons to give a shit about him.

 

He gets way too much of a pass for tanking ratings to historical lows during his title reign and he's been a pretty big failure in the current run. I would say he's a bigger failure than Roman is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Loss was specifically talking about the company feeding Dave info about Rollin's lack of ratings production or not selling merch, not necessarily message boards and social media criticizing him. If you'll recall when the Bryan fiasco went down in early 2014 the company told Dave they couldn't push him because his merch wasn't selling well and his segments weren't drawing ratings. Yet nothing of the same with Rollins or Reigns I suppose.

 

 

Rollins got plenty of criticism online for his 2015 run but WWE internally was light on criticism of him

 

 

and to be fair to Seth his reign was booked horribly with being subservient to Hunter and Stephanie and losing a ton in non title matches. Remember it was supposed to be heroic babyface Roman in that spot getting the big push

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...