Paid Members SpiritOfTheForest Posted May 21, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted May 21, 2013 Aye Heyman was great. Whenever I think of him on the headset I immediately think of "GORE! GORE! GORE!". He really put Rhyno over as a proper killer when he arrived. He was great at winding JR up too which invariably would lead to Ross reaching his limit and snapping back at him which was always a bit amusing to witness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShowOff Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Paul Heyman was my favourite commentator, for the short time he did it. Always tried to put across the psychology of the wrestlers, give explanations for what they were doing. He was passionate as well and had a way with words. Â Yeah he was utterly fantastic, so glad he did Wrestlemania 17. He seemed genuinely able to get a rise out of JR as well which made JR get passionate about his points too. Â EDIT: Spirit beat me to the JR trolling point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted May 21, 2013 Moderators Share Posted May 21, 2013 Yeah, Heyman was a decent colour guy. My favourite was Michael Hayes though. Him and Jimmy Garvin with Lance Russell (best PBP man ever bar none!) on WCW Pro was such a fun team. Always wondered why WWE never used Michael Hayes on colour more than they did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ShortOrderCook Posted May 21, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted May 21, 2013 Totally with Ian and Butch here and can't see what the fuck Eddie and Loki are going on about. They do establish the moves, the moves that matter, their signature moves and do it really well and that adds to the wrestlers aura and gives them identity. Every single signature move is well established and the name is put over massively by the commentators and put on t-shirts. Giving all the other little things particular names is pointless, doesn't add anything to the wrestler in question unless they're really pushed as a technician and would take away from the signature moves that are well established if they did too much of it. Anything else that is a regular feature from a wrestler is made clear by Mickey Cole calling it vintage. That works just as well. The balance is right for me, i'm with Butch and I can't see what help it has labelling every single style of suplex or throw that isn't a signature, unless you're really pushing them as technical wrestler. Â Regal does like to call a lot of moves though, but that's not surprising really. I do quite like his style now, I wasn't sure about him initially but the last couple of times I've caught NXT I think he does a grand job in getting lots of little details over which do really add to the wrestlers persona and aura. He's totally all about calling the psychology behind the moves too though, certainly more than Monsoon ever did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted May 21, 2013 Moderators Share Posted May 21, 2013 I really like that focus in commentary on the psychology of the moves, it can make a big difference to my enjoyment and it's something I personally feel the rest of them could do more of in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members ShortOrderCook Posted May 21, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted May 21, 2013 Yeah, the last couple of times I've caught NXT it's been really refreshing viewing. I was very pleasantly surprised by just how good Regal is now, seems to have really settled into it and seems genuinely passionate about getting those guys over. I think Dawson works pretty well paired with him too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members wandshogun09 Posted May 21, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted May 21, 2013 Yeah, Heyman was a decent colour guy. My favourite was Michael Hayes though. Him and Jimmy Garvin with Lance Russell (best PBP man ever bar none!) on WCW Pro was such a fun team. Always wondered why WWE never used Michael Hayes on colour more than they did. Â Might be more one for the Questions thread, but as it's come up here, did Hayes do colour for any other WWF PPVs besides SummerSlam '95, back in the 'Handsome' Dok Hendrix days? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Eddie Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 My main gripe is that I see no difference in saying "big throw by Lesnar" or "big german suplex by Lesnar" in terms of putting over the psychology or the story of the match. The second version just gives a bit more depth and I personally think makes the announcers sound more professional. Mentioning the proper moves can't actually take anything away, can it, unless you go overboard like Striker did. Â I re-watched the Hitman Vs Perfect SS91 match half an hour ago out of curiosity. Â Heenan, Piper and monsoon all do a great job getting over the story of each man and the match, while showing loads of passion and utterly getting into the moment. That doesn't stop Gorilla (the play by play man) using terms like "hip-lock" "crucifix pin" "sunset flip" and all that stuff as the action is happening. Â They had no problem establishing everyone's finisher and trademark moves back then (while also calling the rest of the moves) so what's actually the problem now? Â It's no big deal, at all but like I said, as a little kid I liked that stuff and it's part of the reason I enjoyed wrestling. As a kid everyone tried to be able to name all the champions in order (of than era, anyway) and remember when matches happened and stuff like that, knowing the names of all the moves was just an extension of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted May 21, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted May 21, 2013 Might be more one for the Questions thread, but as it's come up here, did Hayes do colour for any other WWF PPVs besides SummerSlam '95, back in the 'Handsome' Dok Hendrix days? Â He also replaced Lawler at In Your House and King of the Ring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Totally with Ian and Butch here and can't see what the fuck Eddie and Loki are going on about.  There's a surprise. But wait...  Regal does like to call a lot of moves though, but that's not surprising really. I do quite like his style now, I wasn't sure about him initially but the last couple of times I've caught NXT I think he does a grand job in getting lots of little details over which do really add to the wrestlers persona and aura. He's totally all about calling the psychology behind the moves too though, certainly more than Monsoon ever did.  Exactly my point, so thanks for actually coming round to my point of view  There's a sweet spot, though, isn't there. Mike Tenay calls way too many moves which is unnecessary as you're not doing a commentary for blind people. But the WWE has gone too far the other way, and seem to actively avoid naming moves, and also as a result getting into why the wrestlers are doing particular things.  It's just part of the general bland-ising of the product. Like not naming the referees, which I think it still enforced at the moment. I think it takes more away than it adds. It's personal taste of course, but it's a definite trend since the Attitude era (he says in an attempt to drag the thread back on topic). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted May 21, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted May 21, 2013 Howard Cosell was WWF's original choice of commentator in 1984. He'd have done every broadcast and every PPV for years if Vince would have got his way. You may never have even seen Vince on TV in the early years since his original act was was a rip off of Cosell. Vince McMahon's idea of what a commentator should be is all "that's a great move" and "my god thats devastating". It is and always has been about how is presented. Not what is said. Its why Vince himself always took the lead over Jim Ross until Vince had to pack it in. Vince thinks he's the best commentator ever. That's why he's still in the headset telling everyone what to do. He'd probably still do it now if his voice wasn't shot and he could keep up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted May 21, 2013 Moderators Share Posted May 21, 2013 And then Vince tried to kick off on the 60-odd Howard Cosell when he said "no". That's my favourite part of the story. Vince thinking he could have got the voice of the NFL was absolutely insane, and also Classic Vince. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dart Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Might be more one for the Questions thread, but as it's come up here, did Hayes do colour for any other WWF PPVs besides SummerSlam '95, back in the 'Handsome' Dok Hendrix days? Â He also replaced Lawler at In Your House and King of the Ring. Â He did Rebellion 99 too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members wandshogun09 Posted May 21, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted May 21, 2013 Cheers Raid and Dart. I should have remembered him stepping in for the King in '95 while the Bret feud was going. Â This reminds me, bringing it nicely back to the Attitude era - I forgot all about Hayes' brief run as the Hardy Boys manager in 1999. He wrestled a match or two as well, didn't he? I definitely remember one against the Acolytes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted May 21, 2013 Moderators Share Posted May 21, 2013 And then Vince tried to kick off on the 60-odd Howard Cosell when he said "no". That's my favourite part of the story. Vince thinking he could have got the voice of the NFL was absolutely insane, and also Classic Vince. Â Â This reminds me, they wanted to nick Mike Goldberg from UFC a couple years back, didn't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.