Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mark_Doctor

Dave Meltzer - yay or nay?

Dave Meltzer  

98 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

I'm blocked from Cornette's twitter for the Phil Mitchell stuff that I never tagged him in and didnt mention him, but he took it as a valid source anyway. Which makes me think all those stories in the 70s and 80s of how everyone went 180 minutes a night and then ripped the fans orbital bones out from their spines might not be on the up and up and just hear say bollocks.

As far as Dave goes, he's fucking mental. He just turned 60 and spends his days like vintage Ian on the UKFF, arguing all day. Pitcos is spot on about him. I think his marriage ending, which increased his trips to wrestling shows (he went to PWG all the time and even flew to Wrestle Kingdom and the UK of all things for the first time in years) has given him a sense he's back with the boys. He's like a sobre Ric Flair when he was in Evolution and was acting like he was 25 again.

Meltzer did a shoot interview with Joey Janela recently, where Janela was the host of it. It was an absolute abortion of a interview, and fascinating as hell. Janela's trying to do comedy, Dave doesnt register a thing. He's making jokes about six star matches, and Dave begins defending himself, as if he's Piers Morgan at the Leveson inquiry. Its a total shitshow. He seems to have nothing in common with the people he worships.

I actually think he's done Kenny Omega a great disservice. He's a really good wrestler, and had some belting matches, but to say he's better than Shawn Michaels is just mental talk. Michaels job wasnt to have the best matches every night. He just did. And he did it before his somas kicked in. Try that one.

Edited by IANdrewDiceClay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Meltzer honestly believes that the ratings/opinions he gives on matches are objective - maybe he has a checklist, or a system by which he reaches that conclusion, who knows. But he seems incapable of acknowledging that the way he talks about Omega and the Bucks, or anyone as being the greatest ever, is his opinion rather than fact. An informed opinion, but opinion all the same.

He's perfectly capable of doing it to others - when people criticise modern wrestlers as being too showy, or too flippy, he'll be quick to point out that people said the same of Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair, or Harley Race. But when it's his opinion, it tends to be presented as fact. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always been a fan of Cornette and would instinctively gravitate more towards his POV rather than Meltzer's on a lot of modern wrestling. But fuck me, this is plainly ridiculous and both sides come out of it looking like complete tools.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

I think Meltzer honestly believes that the ratings/opinions he gives on matches are objective - maybe he has a checklist, or a system by which he reaches that conclusion, who knows. But he seems incapable of acknowledging that the way he talks about Omega and the Bucks, or anyone as being the greatest ever, is his opinion rather than fact. An informed opinion, but opinion all the same.

He's perfectly capable of doing it to others - when people criticise modern wrestlers as being too showy, or too flippy, he'll be quick to point out that people said the same of Shawn Michaels, Ric Flair, or Harley Race. But when it's his opinion, it tends to be presented as fact. 

What informs him in his opinion though? Being a long term fan? He has never been a wrestler nor ever accepted into wrestling other than a journalist. People act like he is informed but no more than any other life long fan imo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Michael_3165 said:

What informs him in his opinion though? Being a long term fan? He has never been a wrestler nor ever accepted into wrestling other than a journalist. People act like he is informed but no more than any other life long fan imo. 

The "he's never been a wrestler" argument doesn't hold weight. Roger Ebert never directed a film, yet no sensible person ever suggested it made him less informed as a critic as a result. 

Meltzer has been covering wrestling to a high standard, with multiple inside sources, since at least the '70s, he's a member of the Cauliflower Alley Club, so it's not true to say he's never been accepted in wrestling.

I'm not particularly a fan of the guy, and would disagree with him on several points, but it's disingenuous to suggest that his opinion doesn't carry weight, or isn't informed by decades of work in the industry. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Michael_3165 said:

What informs him in his opinion though? Being a long term fan? He has never been a wrestler nor ever accepted into wrestling other than a journalist. People act like he is informed but no more than any other life long fan imo. 

Bit ridiculous. Jose Mourinho and Jürgen Klopp didn’t excel at playing football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, SuperBacon said:

Bit ridiculous. Jose Mourinho and Jürgen Klopp didn’t excel at playing football.

Thats a bit of an odd comparison, hes more the guy that works for national news paper reporting and rating football. Hes never had a chance to book a company or be involved in the ring. The people mentioned above have a proven track record in the sport

 

Edited by quote the raven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Michael_3165 said:

What informs him in his opinion though? Being a long term fan? He has never been a wrestler nor ever accepted into wrestling other than a journalist. People act like he is informed but no more than any other life long fan imo. 

You are aware he used to work for the WWF right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, quote the raven said:

Thats a bit of an odd comparison, hes more the guy that works for national news paper reporting and rating football. Hes never had a chance to book a company or be involved in the ring. The people mentioned above have a proven track record in the sport

How many people who have been directly involved with wrestling or booking wrestling would you say have more knowledge of the industry's history than Dave Meltzer? It's not an odd comparison at all. He's built that knowledge base without ever stepping foot in the ring and I don't think it would have made one difference if he had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said:

How many people who have been directly involved with wrestling or booking wrestling would you say have more knowledge of the industry's history than Dave Meltzer? It's not an odd comparison at all. He's built that knowledge base without ever stepping foot in the ring and I don't think it would have made one difference if he had.

Depends if we are discussing his knowledge or his right to tell people whats good or bad i dont think the are the same thing. If he was a proven wrestler or booker then his opinion would carry alot more weight IMO. There is no doubt he has a massive knowledge of facts and figures probably more than anyone else in the world.

Edited by quote the raven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, quote the raven said:

Depends if we are discussing his knowledge or his right to tell people whats good or bad i dont think the are the same thing.

When has he done this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Devon Malcolm said:

When has he done this?

Matter of speech probably wrong wording my behalf.  I mean his ratings are fast becoming the standard the industry is basing its self on.

My point is there is probably loads of people / fans that know more facts about football than say klopp, but you wouldn’t take their analogies over his. Hence the comparison is off 

Edited by quote the raven

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, quote the raven said:

I mean his ratings are fast becoming the standard the industry is basing its self on.

"fast becoming"? They've been analysed, used and abused for 20 years widely. They are what they are. If you agree with him, probably useful. If you're looking for a vague guide to something, perhaps useful. If you don't love what he loves, absolutely meaningless. But as much as he isn't for me, they're not uneducated ratings. They're just personal.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...