DeanoTheGame Posted November 22, 2014 Posted November 22, 2014 Makes no sense to me. If everybody goes to see a film because Brad Pitt is in it, then some new actor in it that nobody knows ends up stealing the film, people don't come out of the cinema saying 'that Jimmy Bollock was great in it, but Brad Pitt was the better actor'. Wasn't Blurred Lines the best-selling song of last year? So following this line of thinking, Blurred Lines was the best song of all of 2013.
Paid Members herbie747 Posted November 22, 2014 Paid Members Posted November 22, 2014 Why can't people differentiate between biggest draw & best match? They're clearly 2 different things. How is it a debate? Does the best scene in a movie have to include the main character that people paid to see? No. Does the best goal in a football game have to be scored by the biggest name star? Obviously no. Does Fight of the Night on a UFC show always go to the main event? No. This is no different.
Whiskey_Jim Posted November 22, 2014 Posted November 22, 2014 Why can't people differentiate between biggest draw & best match? They're clearly 2 different things. How is it a debate? Does the best scene in a movie have to include the main character that people paid to see? No. Does the best goal in a football game have to be scored by the biggest name star? Obviously no. Does Fight of the Night on a UFC show always go to the main event? No. This is no different. There is a difference in this case. What caused the bigger crowd reaction that night? The finish to Savage/Steamboat or Hogan slamming Andre? Wrestling is about eliciting reactions and emotions from people, its why Hogan has been the biggest draw ever and why 99% of wrestling fans have no idea who Johnny Saint is. Saint may be an master of what he does but his fanbase pales in comparison in Hogans and even Shirley Crabtrees. The better match is what gave the fans in attendance and fans watching at home what they wanted to see. How many do you think left that arena saying "Wow, Savage and Steamboat sure tore the house down!" compared to "Wow, Hogan slammed Andre!". Do you not understand?
Paid Members herbie747 Posted November 22, 2014 Paid Members Posted November 22, 2014 I fully understand - but I fully disagree. I'm also not saying that the biggest draw can't also be the best match; like Warrior & Hogan at WM6 (IMO) - but they are 2 different things. That match could have stunk, but still been what drew the crowd & PPV numbers. Andre vs Hogan was a stinker of a match, but was indeed a spectacle - an iconic moment where they faced off and when he got slammed. It drew the crowd. But it wasn't the "best match". IMO. If you thought Hogan vs Andre was the biggest draw AND the best match - then that's fine - that's your opinion. But they are 2 different things. According to you, who had the "best match" at WM10? And WM13? And WM17? And WM25? IMO it was HBK vs Razor, Bret vs Austin, TLC Match, HBK vs Undertaker. None of those were the main events though. Were they the main draws? Likely not for most part (WM13 had a stinker of a headliner). But they're 2 different things.
Whiskey_Jim Posted November 22, 2014 Posted November 22, 2014 I fully understand - but I fully disagree. I'm also not saying that the biggest draw can't also be the best match; like Warrior & Hogan at WM6 (IMO) - but they are 2 different things. That match could have stunk, but still been what drew the crowd & PPV numbers. Andre vs Hogan was a stinker of a match, but was indeed a spectacle - an iconic moment where they faced off and when he got slammed. It drew the crowd. But it wasn't the "best match". IMO. If you thought Hogan vs Andre was the biggest draw AND the best match - then that's fine - that's your opinion. But they are 2 different things. According to you, who had the "best match" at WM10? And WM13? And WM17? And WM25? IMO it was HBK vs Razor, Bret vs Austin, TLC Match, HBK vs Undertaker. None of those were the main events though. Were they the main draws? Likely not for most part (WM13 had a stinker of a headliner). But they're 2 different things. You're missing my point and missing the point of what a draw is, a draw is the worker/match that everyone is paying to see. The best of the situation is said worker/match giving everyone paying to be there what they want to see. Wrestlemania 3 is the biggest drawing wrestling show of all time and everyone that was there left feeling like they got their monies worth. That would of happened if Savage and Steamboat hadn't of even been there.
King Pitcos Posted November 22, 2014 Posted November 22, 2014 Very odd stance to take considering who he is. He's basically saying he never had the best match of the night his entire career (which may be true from both ends of the specrum to be fair). In the same interview, he says that he fucked up his career by not realising it sooner. By his own admission, he worked for movez and snowflakes and never reached his potential by focusing on trying to draw money. Essentially, that whole routine is him warning young wrestlers not to aspire to Savage vs Steamboat rather than Hogan vs Andre, because that will only get you so far. He's got a point as well, like. We need more Rybacks and less Dolph Zigglers.
Dr.PeterVenkman Posted November 22, 2014 Posted November 22, 2014 I fully understand - but I fully disagree. I'm also not saying that the biggest draw can't also be the best match; like Warrior & Hogan at WM6 (IMO) - but they are 2 different things. That match could have stunk, but still been what drew the crowd & PPV numbers. Andre vs Hogan was a stinker of a match, but was indeed a spectacle - an iconic moment where they faced off and when he got slammed. It drew the crowd. But it wasn't the "best match". IMO. If you thought Hogan vs Andre was the biggest draw AND the best match - then that's fine - that's your opinion. But they are 2 different things. According to you, who had the "best match" at WM10? And WM13? And WM17? And WM25? IMO it was HBK vs Razor, Bret vs Austin, TLC Match, HBK vs Undertaker. None of those were the main events though. Were they the main draws? Likely not for most part (WM13 had a stinker of a headliner). But they're 2 different things. You're missing my point and missing the point of what a draw is, a draw is the worker/match that everyone is paying to see. The best of the situation is said worker/match giving everyone paying to be there what they want to see. Wrestlemania 3 is the biggest drawing wrestling show of all time and everyone that was there left feeling like they got their monies worth. That would of happened if Savage and Steamboat hadn't of even been there. I thought Summerslam '92 had a bigger attendance? and Mania 3 isn't the biggest drawing PPV ever so what's that based on?
Paid Members herbie747 Posted November 22, 2014 Paid Members Posted November 22, 2014 I fully understand - but I fully disagree. I'm also not saying that the biggest draw can't also be the best match; like Warrior & Hogan at WM6 (IMO) - but they are 2 different things. That match could have stunk, but still been what drew the crowd & PPV numbers. Andre vs Hogan was a stinker of a match, but was indeed a spectacle - an iconic moment where they faced off and when he got slammed. It drew the crowd. But it wasn't the "best match". IMO. If you thought Hogan vs Andre was the biggest draw AND the best match - then that's fine - that's your opinion. But they are 2 different things. According to you, who had the "best match" at WM10? And WM13? And WM17? And WM25? IMO it was HBK vs Razor, Bret vs Austin, TLC Match, HBK vs Undertaker. None of those were the main events though. Were they the main draws? Likely not for most part (WM13 had a stinker of a headliner). But they're 2 different things. You're missing my point and missing the point of what a draw is, a draw is the worker/match that everyone is paying to see. The best of the situation is said worker/match giving everyone paying to be there what they want to see. Wrestlemania 3 is the biggest drawing wrestling show of all time and everyone that was there left feeling like they got their monies worth. That would of happened if Savage and Steamboat hadn't of even been there. Not missing your point at all. If you felt "everyone that was there (WM3) left feeling like they got their monies worth" and YOU personally feel it was the best match from the event - that's fine - then it was the best match in your opinion & theirs. And the biggest draw too - so it was both; great. As I said - the same match on a card can definitely be both biggest draw & best match. But your premise is based on the assumption that the biggest drawing match always gives the people what they paid to see - and that is not always the case - far from it. WCW failed because of that very notion. People paid to see disappointing main events and never came back. What if Hogan vs Andre drew that crowd (which they did), but then Hogan tripped on the way to the ring on a banana skin - they both laughed when facing off and killed all heat - he never bothered slamming him - they did a lame screwjob finish where Mean-Gene kicked Hogan in the bum and he collapsed and Andre won, then Andre danced in the ring & started jiggling his tits in his hands, and Hogan puked in the corner after losing and then pissed his pants & started crying - by your flawed logic, that was still the best match, right? Because it was what sold the tickets.
King Pitcos Posted November 22, 2014 Posted November 22, 2014 The match that sells the most tickets for the next show is the best match.
Loki Posted November 22, 2014 Posted November 22, 2014 Who's in the photo, Tommy? Good call Careful Tommy, this sort of terrible behaviour gets you a suspension nowadays. Shame on you.
Paid Members herbie747 Posted November 22, 2014 Paid Members Posted November 22, 2014 The match that sells the most tickets for the next show is the best match. I'd agree with that as a general rule - at least it holds water.
Dirty Eddie Posted November 22, 2014 Posted November 22, 2014 Claiming anything is "the best" is almost always subjective. It totally depends on who's saying it and what their personal needs/expectations are... From a business point of view, I'd agree with PITCOS, the match that sells the most tickets for the next show (or spikes a big rating, or whatever) is the best, because as a promoter you want to make money. For a fan or a critic it's a totally different question. It comes down to how entertained you were - it's as simple as that! You may have been entertained because there was a year-long build-up and a fantastic pay-off, or you might have been entertained because it was two stellar wrestlers pulling out all the stops and exceeding all expectations. If you don't personally profit in any way from the wrestling company you watch, how much money a match made or whether it spikes a rating shouldn't make the blindest bit of difference to your level of enjoyment.
King Pitcos Posted November 22, 2014 Posted November 22, 2014 From a business point of view, I'd agree with PITCOS, the match that sells the most tickets for the next show (or spikes a big rating, or whatever) is the best, because as a promoter you want to make money. As a wrestler, you want to make money as well. That rant's designed to motivate wrestlers he trains, though Al will shout the same stuff at anyone with a camera and a few hundred quid. I'm not sure which interview it's taken from, but I think it's the guest booker one? So in that one, he is coming very much from a business perspective (and then using bad, irrelevant 70s territorial shit in the booking part anyway). He might have very different answers if asked which matches he personally enjoyed, but he'd probably still have that moody face on him and constantly act like the interviewer's done something wrong.
Direct Impact Posted November 23, 2014 Posted November 23, 2014 Bull Buchanan is now a deputy in Georgia. I honestly don't think I'd recognise him had I not read the article. He looks like the Welsh fella from Extra's (Dullard) who wants to go for a meal with Andy.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.