Jump to content

WON Awards for 2010


Happ Hazzard

Recommended Posts

  • Moderators
I don't buy 442 to read about rugby and I'm not going to subscribe to WON to have half of the content focusing on another form of entertainment completely. I wouldn't expect to subscribe to a MMA newsletter and expect them to give so much time to pro wrestling.

 

I'm not disagreeing that UFC is a lot hotter than pro wrestling right now, but when the football season's finished for the summer do all the footy mags start holding awards for the Ashes?

 

However, I do know that the WON has a strong following and people do enjoy both wrestling and MMA, so fair play to them, I just think wouldn't spend my cash on it.

How is MMA an "entirely different form of entertainment completely"?

 

How many footballers also play cricket at the highest level?

Ian 'Beefy' Botham.

 

Denis Compton

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 57
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Paid Members

I'm one of those people who does directly compare pro wrestling and MMA. They are both based entirely around getting over characters and personalities that people are interested in, putting them in matches that people want to see and making people pay to actually see it.

 

From a stylistic point of view, MMA is the sport which most closely represents what pro wrestling would look like if it were real as opposed to a performance.

 

In addition, they are both fighting for the same PPV dollars from pretty much the same audience at the same time.

 

Of course, it is fair to admit that quite a bit of the above could equally be said about boxing (which, to be fair, Meltzer does include in business comparisons and news about buyrates, draws, attendance, etc)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm one of those people who does directly compare pro wrestling and MMA. They are both based entirely around getting over characters and personalities that people are interested in, putting them in matches that people want to see and making people pay to actually see it.

 

From a stylistic point of view, MMA is the sport which most closely represents what pro wrestling would look like if it were real as opposed to a performance.

 

In addition, they are both fighting for the same PPV dollars from pretty much the same audience at the same time.

 

Of course, it is fair to admit that quite a bit of the above could equally be said about boxing (which, to be fair, Meltzer does include in business comparisons and news about buyrates, draws, attendance, etc)...

 

No. MMA can't promote who they want. They need to be proper hard too.

 

In Pro Wrestling, the champion could be The Miz.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of Boxing, MMA and Pro-Wrestling, there's a far bigger crossover between wrestling fans and MMA fans than there is between either of those and boxing fans. The business model of MMA is far closer to pro-wrestling than it is boxing. It's really the same thing in every way except MMA is legit and wrestling is pre-determined.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
BEST NON-WRESTLER

 

1. VICKIE GUERRERO (296)1,935

 

Wow. Never seen that coming.

 

 

WORST TELEVISION ANNOUNCER

 

1. MICHAEL COLE (310)2,167

 

Disgusting, as are most of the other categories. Will the Observer voters ever get tired of fitting the smark stereotype perfectly?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
Will the Observer voters ever get tired of fitting the smark stereotype perfectly?.

So a group of people who voted John Cena as best wrestler and Vickie Guerrero as best non-wrestler FIT the smark stereotype? I'm going to need a new guidebook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
Will the Observer voters ever get tired of fitting the smark stereotype perfectly?.

So a group of people who voted John Cena as best wrestler and Vickie Guerrero as best non-wrestler FIT the smark stereotype? I'm going to need a new guidebook.

 

 

That's two awards, even then Corny came second in the non-wrestler one. Do you think WWE's even arguably the 3rd worst promotion?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Dangerous Dave does think they're the same thing though, his bitching at Kosckeck "turning face" after his fight with GSP was priceless. I'll see if I can find it...

 

 

Edit.. "Honest to God, it's one thing for Koscheck to do a babyface turn on the crowd after losing.

 

It's another for Georges and Joe Rogan to be doing it.

 

It's really WCW level stupidity. Particularly in this specific case. With guys who do a little trash talking for fun it's one thing. But when you have something people believe in, and this was one particularly Koscheck because people really believed he was an asshole, and then the minute the fight is over, the announcer and the top star tell the fans who bought the show that it was fake, it's mind boggling they don't realize how if they keep doing it how it'll hurt future business. There were people who bought that show based on a premise and had their faces slapped for buying, just like the people who bought Survivor Series and the next day got the title change for free on TV."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
So a group of people who voted John Cena as best wrestler and Vickie Guerrero as best non-wrestler FIT the smark stereotype? I'm going to need a new guidebook.

 

Innit.

 

I

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People like Meltzer and Alvarez link pro wrestling and MMA together due to hatred for WWE. There coverage is always "ha ha look at the buyrates". It's a deal where people desire to see someone take down WWE and there's no other pro wrestling company that is capable. of doing so. So that's where they rally behind UFC as their great hope. That's the real reason behind linking WWE with UFC. It's just a case of their bias. They're like the Apter mags in the 1980's or Bob Ryder during the Monday night wars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...