Brudaker

Not sure if anyone will be particularly interested in this but in real life I'm a poet and run a small production company. As you can imagine wrestling doesn't come up a lot in the poetry scene but I finally crowbarred it in and released a wrestling poem. The fella who edited has gone from never watching it to never missing a Dynamite over the last 18 months so it's only AEW footage. I don't post a lot but I've been on here forever so it'd be really cool to read what you guys think of it. 
 

Not entirely sure what your point is dude but as this is a forum I'd assume all debate is valid, I wasn't saying otherwise.

For the sake of clarity I'll rephrase. My personal opinion is that the vast majority of stunt bumps in the last few years have looked exactly as safe and staged as this one and I personally think it's odd that it's being so heavily criticised when the story around it is so good.

16 minutes ago, RedRooster said:

You’ve misunderstood - what you seemed to imply was that the way the stunt looked wasn’t important because of the story, and I don’t think that’s hugely different from taking the WWE approach of thinking that it’s acceptable to ignore plot threads.

In each situation it’s ignoring details that  you think don’t matter - and that’s not a good place to be because inevitably someone out there thinks that they do. And in each case it’s avoidable, so why do it? 

Might be what you inferred but as I said in my last post that's not what I was saying. If I'm watching a movie or TV show, even wrestling, I'm personally more concerned with the story being compelling than whether it looks fake or not. Thanos doesn't look remotely real but his character and impact on the story around him or no less compelling. If you disagree that's cool but you're currently arguing against a point I'm not trying to make.

55 minutes ago, RedRooster said:

It's not odd at all. No one sensible is suggesting that they should have killed Jericho, just that if you're going to do a bump like that, you should be extra mindful about how you execute it. "It doesn't matter how it looks, it's about the wider storyline" is dangerously close to "it doesn't matter if we drop this plot thread, no one remembers it anyway" as far as logic goes. 

If you really decide that you HAVE to go with this spot, it's not like it was impossible to make it look better. And if it is impossible to make it look better, don't do it. 

Had they run these on Dynamite before, or was this a Dark thing? It's not something I ever remember seeing. 

For what it's worth I think there are loads of better ways to end the match and I personally would have kept it in the cage. I also didn't say it doesn't matter how it looks. My point was that none of these bumps look real and nor should they, protecting the wrestlers should absolutely be the priority. That everyone is kicking off about this particular bump, which looks no more fake than similar ones done in WWE for years and AEW since it started, is what I personally find odd.

Don't really see how saying story is important is similar to saying it doesn't matter if we finish stories. Seems to me like those two points of view are pretty contradictory.  

Would have been better on PPV where they didn't have to work the pacing round ad breaks but an excellent match overall. Really sold the animosity between the stables and felt like a violent fight much more in the vein of the original War Games matches than the NXT versions have been.

Honestly the debate around the Jericho bump is odd. Sure the production could have been better but where are all these incredible cage bumps that weren't obviously onto pads? I haven't bought into any stunt bump in decades but that doesn't matter in wrestling today, we all know it's a work. What matters is the story and the characters and in my opinion this nails it. It shows how twisted and driven MJF is, cements the bond between the Inner Circle, gives Sammy a wrong to try and right, makes The Pinnacle look legit, etc. 

1 hour ago, unfitfinlay said:

Isn't that the point though?

MJF provoked Sammy into quitting the Inner Circle but, if anyone accuses him, he's got that as an out. He's been caught doing dodgy stuff on TV before after all. In fact that was the reason Sammy threatened to quit in the first place.

Basically he set Sammy up by making him think he was setting him up.

Yeah, I took it the same way. Sammy was clear that if MJF kept messing with him he'd leave so MJF messed with him in a way he could plausibly deny. Good stuff in my opinion, neither looks an idiot but Sammy looks like a babyface that has let their passion get the best of them and MJF looks like a dick heel who's ready to exploit that.

It's hard with JR, he still has moments of excellence and is capable of really adding to matches he's invested in. I think WWE had the right idea when they would bring him in to call specific high profile matches. I'd really like to see AEW use him for more sit down interviews, something he is still excellent at, and have him join the commentary team for the PPV main events, maybe Dynamite ones as well. That way they can keep him doing what he loves, use him in backstage roles, and lend a special big fight feel to title matches. I think JR has more than earned a spot in any locker room and I totally get why folk in the industry would feel a duty of care, it's a good thing *insert DDP gif here*, but it's a hard line to walk between care and quality and the show is really starting to suffer from having him out there calling matches he obviously doesn't give a toss about.

I also think it's hurting Excalibur. I know some people aren't his biggest fans and I really wasn't either, I was never massive n PWG outside of BOLA and I really didn't rate him at All In. He's improved massively over their TNT run though and his found the balance between insider fan service and main stream announcer in a way guys like Striker,  Matthews and Ranallo never quite managed. His tuff with Taz on Dark is amazing but he knows it wouldn't work for the main shows and he's able to do that code switch effortlessly but having Jr constantly snipe at him on live TV absolutely throws him off. how could it not.

2 minutes ago, King Coconut said:

  

We've known since the dawn of the internet that we shouldn't rise to the deliberately obtuse, yet we persist. If I was boss of the internet I'd get the feeders up against the wall, not the trolls.

Wow what a horrible turn of phrase, I guess it's a good thing you're not then.

1 hour ago, FlushFunk said:

I can’t disagree with anything he said.

Wrestling has changed. It is soft. The content isn’t as good, it’s not as fun to watch.

The ratings alone tell you this & I can’t see how it can be argued with.

In general right now it’s the drizzling shits at the top level.

His political views are not important to me although I’m happy to hear he’s a Trump supporter & supports cops, shows class & sense.

WWE Profits are at an all time high.
The existence of AEW,NJPW,MLW,IMPACT,ROH shows a strong and better funded base to the wrestling industry than in previous eras.
WWE expansion into Japan & India,
TNT announcing AEW will now be available on TNT Africa.
WWE has also essentially won YouTube and social media, not just standing far ahead in their own industry but also in sports in general.
You could even look at the rise of The Rock and Cena in Hollywood, both treated far more seriously than Hogan and reaching much higher. Also encouraging the production of various wrestling themed movies and TV shows

Now I don't think any of that actually indicates a better product but if you're going to pick one analytic and compare it to where the industry stood years ago like nothing has happened in the time in between and leaving out a dozen other measurable metrics then you're being deliberately obtuse. 

The product IS miles better though. Better production, better athletes, better life expectancy, better matches and it'll continue to get better the more the old guard fuck off.

You are conflating reasonable debate on issues with de-radicalization. The conversation here has changed from 'should Jericho host a show debating ideas that have no merit and what danger is there in giving credence to dangerous ideas?' to  'well you have to engage in debate'. Daryl Davis didn't debate KKK members, he patiently and compassionately explained why they were wrong and forced them to confront that with evidence. 

The earth isn't flat! Racism is bad! Trump lost! Gravity exists! The sky is blue! None of these statements need a Jericho podcast to explore the merits of the argument because there is no argument. Anyone who disagrees shouldn't be 'debated' they should be told they're wrong. Simple.

39 minutes ago, honor87 said:

I couldn’t agree more with you that I feel this is absolute key to society making any progress.

If this weren’t true then how could the likes of Daryl Davis convert some 100’s of klan members by mere engagement with them, how could Megan phelps formerly of Westboro Baptist Church turn her life around after living and believing the views of that hateful place?

Hillary Clinton who I sure many would have rather had as president that Trump had Robert Byrd, (a founding member of a Klan Chapter) in her own words as a friend and a mentor.
Obama even gave a eulogy at his funeral. How was it he could be saved and turn his life around if not for engagement, about why his viewpoints at that point were appalling.

Albeit that these are obvious cherry picked examples of successful change & many discussions may fall on deaf ears, but without engaging with people and actually discussing their ideas and challenging them, how can society progres? 
 

For those that just seem to repeat the ‘never engage’ mantra, what/how do actually and realistically propose dealing with those sorts of individuals??

I haven't seen anyone here suggesting you shouldn't speak to folk with opposing views or not try to convince those with dangerous ones that they are wrong. Daryl Davis didn't get people to leave the clan by suggesting a white ethno state might have some benefits or treating their racism as acceptable. There is a difference between treating people respectfully while debating and indulging their wild ideologies or conspiracies.

'Robert Byrd used to be in the KKK' being an argument here is just ridiculous! This idea that folk are entitled to behave however they see fit in the quest for balance is dangerous and leads to recruitment for violent organisations. Robert Byrd learned, that no matter how well argued or intentioned, the KKK is a fucking hate group! No two sides to every story bullshit. That's how he gained respect and forgiveness. Not by treating hate as a worthwhile argument!

"I know now I was wrong. Intolerance had no place in America. I apologized for a thousand times ... and I don't mind apologizing over and over again. I can't erase what happened."
- Robert Byrd

They should make it Cody just to spike their social media numbers with the inevitable Twitter meltdown. Fuck it, have him win after a Brandi, QT, and Snoop Dogg run in. First defense in a triple threat against Shaq and Tyson. Money!

Or any other nonsense answer that isn't Page, it surely has to be Hangman. Don't give me that Kota stuff either, he's got his belts, he's fine! Hangman needs this. NO, YOU'RE CRYING!

One was a series of peaceful protests at the murder of an unarmed man by police. It turned into riots after protesters were met with unreasonable levels of state force from the police. The swell of international solidarity and the rise of a grassroots movement show that the issues at play were to do with hundreds of years of systemic racism that has still to be addressed, all while a historically disenfranchised group of people are still disproportionately murdered and incarcerated.
The other was a bunch of entitled fascists storming the seat of US Government, many admitting for the purpose of overthrowing the Government, so they could over turn a legal election that they don't like the result of. All to a minimal police response and international condemnation. 

Yeah same thing...give me strength 🙄

15 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

AEW, conversely, are letting wrestlers come up with their own stories, ad-lib their own promos, and wrestle their matches more or less without constraints. When you're a Jon Moxley or an Eddie Kingston, that's a tremendous boon to how much of a star you'll come across. When you're a Cody Rhodes it can quickly become self-indulgent. If you fall anywhere in the middle, you have the opportunity to stand out in a way that WWE seems purpose-built to prevent, but you also run the risk of your match looking exactly the same as the one before it, or repeating spots that have been done earlier in the night because there's no one governing it all and saying, "no suicide dives in this match, lads, there were six in the match before". 

Spot on. I think a great example of this is someone like Wardlow. The dude has had 15 matches in AEW and a bunch of those were squash matches on Dark but he's been presented as this huge threat, his only singes losses coming from Cody and Hangman. I know who he is, despite having almost no mic time, and I'm excited for a bunch of potential matches for him down the line (Hager, MJF, Luchasaurus, etc). He's been given the chance to work with and learn from people with vastly more experience than him while being protected, gaining exposure to the AEW audience, and having the strengths he already possesses utilised to help the current top guys like MJF, Jericho and Cody. 

Compare it to guys like Bronson, Matha, Bononi, Kato even someone like Thatcher or Lumis and I know what spot I'd rather be in. That's before even getting to all the folk who did well in NXT only to hit the main roster and do nothing forever. Does anyone think Olmos and Ryker are going to get the same chance to shine as Wardlow or Hobbs.(Ignoring the fact that that's probably for the best in Rykers case!)

21 minutes ago, Nick James said:

They can't win though, in fairness. If it was pre-taped instead they would have been complaints about them doing too many pre-tapes etc, similar to the Dexter Lumis jump over the ropes. They aren't at their best and haven't been for a long while, but sometimes they just can't win.

It's not a case of "They can't win". They are a billion dollar production company and have no excuse for it. They should be capable of editing a sequence without it being obviously staged and they should be be capable of staging a fight with actually battering someone. Film and TV production companies with a fraction of the money and experience that WWE have manage it all the time. I've long since stopped watching Raw but in the gif I saw of Dom getting hit they deliberately cut away so you don't even see the strikes land, totally unnecessary.

Nice to see Trips couldn't resist pointing at a champ even way back then!

36 minutes ago, Liam O'Rourke said:

No, he really shouldn't be, not arguing that. 

My point is there is an assumption of knowledge here that hasn't been proven yet, and the story could just as easily be him thinking things were different based on what's been posted, and people aren't bothering to wait, they're tagging Tony Khan and Cody and telling them to fire him.

And they have every right to. Just as you have every right to disagree with them, at the end of the day it's a private company and they'll make a financial calculation. The person who shared those screenshots didn't accuse Roberts of a Crime they simply shared a conversation that Roberts was happy enough to be involved in at the time. If people are connecting Roberts in their minds to the similar accusations of actual crimes then it demonstrates those individuals are able to identify a type of behavior that adds to a systemic problem. Of course there will be people who go "But what he did wasn't a crime...what he did isn't the same..what he did was only morally reprehensible not illegal!" and I'm sure everyone can draw their own conclusions as to why that moronic train of thought would appeal to someone! 

Maybe there is hope for Aliyah yet!

Ah, my bad, forgot to remove Braun. Has Dawkins really been about 7 years in developmental? I thought he signed 2016.

I, like wwe, forgot Nakamura existed.

If you got rid of everyone who had had a contract with the company prior to and including 2013 these would be your Raw and Smackdown rosters...Christ I'm bored

 

Raw
AJ Styles, Akam, AkiraTozawa, Aleister Black, Andrade, Angelo Dawkins, Appolo Crews, Asuka, Bianca Belair, Billie Kay, Cedric Alexnder, Charly Caruso, Erik, Humberto Carrillo, Ivar, Kairi Sane, Kevin Owens, Liv Morgan, Mike Rome, Montez Ford, Nia Jax, Peyton Royce, Rezar, Ricochet, RiddickMoss, Ruby Riott, Samoa Joe, Vic Joseph

Smackdown
Braun Strowman, Drew Gulak, Elias, Ember Moon, Greg Hamilton, Jaxson Ryker, Kayla Braxton, Lacey Evans, Mandy Rose, Mustafa Ali, Nikki Cross, Otis, Sarah Schreiber, Sonya Deville, Steve Cutler,

The Dark Order stuff is an interesting one. I lean towards thinking it's a bit rubbish using Brodie as a Vince parody but as long as it doesn't go too far it won't sour me on the whole thing. 

Two of my mates have started watching AEW regularly. One has been watching properly since full gear and he has gone hardcore pretty quick. He likes the Brodie as Vince stuff cos he reads the reports and feels like he's discovering all this insider gossip. I can see how that would be interesting if you've not been reading the same lunacy for the last 20 years.

The other dude used to love Jeff hardy in the 90's and kind of remembers Jericho. He's been watching since just before Revolution and with lockdown in effect the three of us hung out on discord and watched the show last night. When I asked him about Brodie he said the dude is scary cos he's huge but doesn't act like it and that he sees him as a new age cult leader who wants control of everything because he is totally out of control inside. He didn't seem to think he was missing an inside joke.

Now the Hardy stuff did have him scratching his head. Kind of laughed it off in the end, proof Jericho can salvage anything I guess.

Obviously this is one anecdotal example but I thought it might be interesting to have a bit of the casual perspective.

48 minutes ago, King Pitcos said:

There’s no stakes there when they’re using the same breath to undercut Cody’s promises and show they mean nothing. “I mean it this time though, honest!” 

Not if Cody sticks to that stipulation for a large chunk of time, until storyline and fan demand push the issue. In that case at very worst fans would see the career on the line stipulation as a risk of Cody being off TV and PPV for a considerable length.

The point I'm making isn't about specific booking but about illustrating that there are plenty of options to use the stipulation to tell an amazing story. If Batman swore never to be batman again then inevitably became batman again you wouldn't think there are no stakes in the story when Bane suddenly appears and cripples him. Even though you can bet your ass he'll end up back as batman again.

WWE not being able to hold their load on anything for more than an ad break doesn't mean AEW should be prevented from using an interesting narrative device. Maybe see if he ever challenges again and judge the context and story around it before writing the whole thing off.

The whole Cody stipulation argument is an odd one if you ask me, I don't think you have to stick to a stipulation forever to demonstrate you take them seriously. As other people have pointed out there are obvious issues when companies only let them last a couple weeks like with Punk but, when done right, overcoming a stipulation like the one Cody has can lead to an amazing story.

Him refusing to go after a heel champ like Jericho when le champion he's beaten all the other faces is the perfect angle to go into Double or Nothing. Cody deciding he can only do it if he goes double or nothing and puts his career on the line would be hugely compelling in my opinion

They did reset to 0-0 for everyone, though as mentioned on commentary everyone still has a career tally The intro graphics for wrestlers coming out were updated to reflect that, saying "career" rather than "overall". They do need to do more at the end of 2020 to make having the best yearly record actually mean something though

56 minutes ago, Accident Prone said:

This is all very presumptuous. As Tiger pointed out, that Page promo could've gone anywhere in live show (some of those matches really didn't need to go the time they were allotted). Makes zero sense having it as a Fite and live crowd exclusive when it's the TV market who should be AEW's main aim. 

There was also nothing about that finish that would push the TV audience towards AEW'S social media. There was no "Oh, follow us on Facebook and Twitter as Adam Page will be joining us!" or "How will this affect AEW next week? Check out our social media pages for exclusive info". There was nothing that the match, the match result or the post-match that screamed "FOLLOW US!!! QUICKLY!!!". 

If anything, I'm not really looking forward to next week's episode because they clearly have no grasp on how to shine a light on the stories that they want to tell. I want them to succeed, and hopefully this will be fixed up as time goes on, but I shouldn't be left feeling like a two hour episode of wrestling only pushed one major angle whilst leaving everything else to fend for themselves.

Tell that to the million or so watching on TV, my man. 

I agree that it would have been nice to see the Page promo on the main show and while I think you're spot on the TV is AEW's main aim I think it's important to remember it's not their only aim.

One of their major aims after TV is obviously maintaining a live audience, it has been one of their biggest successes and any drop in attendance would hurt them. The commentary team is constantly pushing the "There's nothing like seeing AEW live" line and I think things like last nights post show segment that is only for the live audience (though obviously subsequently shown on Dynamite or Dark) are a great way to encourage folk who might need a little nudge to buy a ticket.

You're also right that Excalibur wasn't shouting hashtags at the end but personally I'd prefer they don't go down the route of over promoting as I feel it drags audiences out of the moment. They did promote AEW Dark very effectively throughout the show though and Dark has done a good job of including the bits you don't see on Dynamite, not only matches but things like the segment with the Orange Cassidy kid. 

It's still early going and so I think it's natural that there is one big story receiving most of the focus though suggesting AEW shouldn't forget about everyone else is always worthwhile as it i so often the main issue companies fall into. I don't see that as the case though. You've got the issues between Mox and Kenny, The Elite vs The Inner Circle, The Tag Tournament, within that you have a personal issue between SCU and the Lucha Bros, you've got Baker and Priestley, and the cody MJF story that were all at least touched on this show. Obviously you might not be interested in all those storylines and you could certainly highlight areas where more focus could be shone but I think it's unfair to say that the two hour show only pushed one major story because Hangman had to cut his promo on the post show.

I would tell it to them but twitter and reddit hurt my soul so I'll stick to ranting at the fairly reasonable guy who streamed it.