Guest Boseephus Jones Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Ok, I realize I may get banned from the forum for this and it most definitely will be taken down in no time, but I think this is long over due. Coming to a place like this board is great. There are not many places on the net where people know thier wrestling like this board. And that makes it all the more frustrating when I have to deal with the constant cynicism. I mean, I know RAW is crap now. That's great, there IS another show. And I know that people wouldn't bitch if it was a good product, but when has there never been bitching. When has there been an overall good consensus on the product for more than, say, two weeks at a time. That being said, I am trying not to be too preachy. Just read this article. It's well done and funny-as-hell at times. And, please, read the whole thing before commenting. It just bugs the hell out of me when I see in the RAW thread that it is the worse RAW ever and you see that the guy posted it about ten minutes into the show. I know this isn't necessarily the place, there may be another folder for this. But we all know that it is probably in place so people don't have to read the stuff. I know this is where it will get the most views, so here it is. http://www.onlineonslaught.com/columns/max.../20021025.shtml
Guest cue_meanie Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 I for one, don't think this link should get you banned because while he does bash this board... There's a whole lotta truth in what he says. I have absolutely loved wrestling for as long as I can remember and I spend way more time now just being on the net reading about wrestling then I do watching it.... and that's how I send my messege, its not about the constant bitching and moaning because that isn't gonna solve a thing... You don't like it stop watching. Since June i've watched RAW maybe three times From 93' to 2002 i missed RAW maybe 3 times...If you don't like the product don't watch it. ROH, NWA-TNA, NOAH, AJPW, NJPW are all great alternatives. or hell go buy some tapes from 96-98 and relive the glory. There' s way more productive ways of dealing with your ultimate letdown with the current product, and bitching everyday with the same arguments isn't one of them.
Guest jester Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 My reaction? It's such a smark thing to bash other smarks.
Guest oldschoolwrestling Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 My reaction? It's such a smark thing to bash other smarks. And to bash Scott Keith too. He should pick someone like Eric S who would love to shut him down in an instant.
Guest Boseephus Jones Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Doesn't it occur to you guys that he is probably NOT doing this to get cheap attention. Maybe his points are well thought out. I've had this view point for years. Keith is basically telling me what to like. His bitching gets in the way of his whole reports. If Taker opens the show, watch out, because the rest of the report is peppered with complaints about it. You can hardly get a straight reveiw out of him. And, regardeless of the intents, what the guys is saying is true. Don't try to dodge the point by saying it's just smarkbashing for the sake of attention.
Guest oldschoolwrestling Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 He says we shouldn't watch if we're going to bitch about it. I bitch about the Yankees buying all the players and winning every year (although not the last 2 years) but that doesn't mean I'll stop watching baseball or stop bitching about Steinbrenner holding everyone down. And lately everyone has been bitching about Vince and Steph and the stupid angles. So what would he say about that?
Guest Jobber of the Week Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 I've long thought that people here bash HHH for things that he probably isn't responsible for. That said, I spent two years as a mark and 18 months as a "smark" and I can't tell which I enjoy more. Probably the mark times, simply because back then I gave a shit about midcard feuds where as now I can spot "filler." He's a little overboard in his name calling and dick stroking, but if you can see past all that, there's a well-meaning point in there.
Guest Boseephus Jones Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Exactly, Jobber, I know he's a bit harsh but I can see his intentions. That being said, oldschoolwrestling, I think you're taking his "don't watch it if you're bitching" point too literally. He just says it to make us reflect on what we're saying and really think about the shit that's being said.
Guest AlwaysPissedOff Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 This was posted already in No Holds Barred like 4 days ago. Dames and Dr. Tom both e-mailed him about that defending the board. And really, it kinda goes in Site Feedback, but it's been discussed already and addressed by the people who work for the site(check Tom's latest Midweek News article), so it's not really anything new...
Guest jester Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Don't try to dodge the point by saying it's just smarkbashing for the sake of attention. I didn't say it was smark bashing for the sake of attention. I don't find his arguments particularly enthralling, so I will try to keep this brief. All of his points can be turned around and applied against him. If he hates Keith so much, stop reading him. Stop writing about him. Much like he thinks Keith is the biggest HHH mark, his essay comes off like he's the biggest Keith mark. If Keith truly is not worthy of attention, don't give it to him. Scott Keith publishes his opinions, I've never read any instance where he has said that only his opinion is the only one that counted. This board spews plenty of hhhatred sure. Way too much? Ok, I'll buy that. But to say that ALL discussion is about HHH is about is accurate as saying "All WWE's problems can be pinned on HHH." There is plenty of positive discussion. People like Smackdown on this board. And as for why no-one praises Steph for the writing on Smackdown, it's generally believed (whether or true or not) that Heyman is the real brains behind Smackdown. In fact, the segments with Stephanie still get bashed. This is consistent. Is it fair? Maybe not, but it's consistent. Oh, and which Raw this month had just three spots with HHH in it? One more thing about Scott Keith. Like his writings or opinions or not, Keith knows enough about this business that he gets PAID to write about it. For the rest of us, it's just a hobby. Plenty of people still find some value in what he says, otherwise nobody would give him a book deal. I myself like to read him, though I don't always agree with what he says. In short, all I see here is someone acting as though their means of watching and talking about wrestling is better than someone else's. Again, I think that's the ultimate smark cliche.
Guest AlwaysPissedOff Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Where'd you get the idea that you'd get banned if you posted this from anyway? Geez... I kn9ow we have quite a few rules, but shit, it's not like we're Nazi Germany or the ex-Soviet Union...
Guest AlwaysPissedOff Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Oh, and one more thing: Kyle admitted that he just assumed the entire board was like the WWE folder(as if it wasn't noticable in the article).
Guest Big McLargeHuge Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 He made interesting points and all, but we've heard it all before. None of these columns really change anything. I, too, get tired of all the cynicism, but there's not much we can do. I don't really want to do anything. His first statement pissed me off though. The Golf line. It's all fine and well if you don't like Golf, but we DO like pro wrestling. We just don't like the state it's in at the moment. We bitch and complain because we know things can be sooooo much better. We wouldn't be here if we didn't care. I can see where these peices go, and I completely understand. But the assumption that the entire IWC is just a jaded bunch of fans who don't like anything is a tad extreme. The argument gets old after awhile. And the approach of renouncing your Smarkdom does little to impress to me. It outright irritates me.
Guest candie45 Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 I can't really be bothered to read the rest of an article that is bitching about people who bitch.
Guest Big McLargeHuge Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Does that mean we're bitching about an article bitching about bitching?
Guest RavishingRickRudo Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 And can I bitch at you guys for bitching at an article that bitches at people who bitch?
Guest Cataclysm911 Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 I actually take offense to the column because I have been stereotyped simply because I frequent these forums. That upset me. I try to remain positive towards wrestling, even during a "state of crisis." I mean, I went out of my way to defend Hogan when he first came back, and look at all the flak that I took for that one.
Guest Smark Hammill Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 That was bar none the best wrestling article I've every read on the internet. He's basically saying how you guys are a bunch of nerds for whining about where a guy wrestles or what fake title a guy does or does not hold at the moment. While it might be a bit harsh, there is a LOT of truth in it, especially the part about smarks saying they know wrestling is fake, but talk about a title like it's something that is EARNED. Nothing truer has ever been written on the internet about wrestling.
Guest evenflowDDT Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Didn't we go through this all already? Seriously... him stereotyping and making assumptions about all of us based on his own beef with someone who hasn't been involved in this site in over 6 months totally invalidates any point he could've made.
Guest Ram Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 they know wrestling is fake, but talk about a title like it's something that is EARNED. So, only people who believe it's fake can think it should be earned? Yay.
Guest Kingpk Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 We already discussed this, people.
Guest FeArHaVoC Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 While it might be a bit harsh, there is a LOT of truth in it, especially the part about smarks saying they know wrestling is fake, but talk about a title like it's something that is EARNED. Nothing truer has ever been written on the internet about wrestling. You can also look at it this way. Many guys have worked for years, paid their Dues, went through a lot of crap, low paying matches, Contracts, Apperances, etc, and put out good match, after good match, to FINALLY get to hold a Title and make the Big Bucks and be more famous. So in a way, fake or not, they do EARN it.
Guest Brian Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Didn't we go through this all already? Seriously... him stereotyping and making assumptions about all of us based on his own beef with someone who hasn't been involved in this site in over 6 months totally invalidates any point he could've made. AngleSault has only been MIA for like two days, not six months.
Guest snowfan Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Ok, I realize I may get banned from the forum for this and it most definitely will be taken down in no time, but I think this is long over due. Coming to a place like this board is great. There are not many places on the net where people know thier wrestling like this board. And that makes it all the more frustrating when I have to deal with the constant cynicism. I mean, I know RAW is crap now. That's great, there IS another show. And I know that people wouldn't bitch if it was a good product, but when has there never been bitching. When has there been an overall good consensus on the product for more than, say, two weeks at a time. That being said, I am trying not to be too preachy. Just read this article. It's well done and funny-as-hell at times. And, please, read the whole thing before commenting. It just bugs the hell out of me when I see in the RAW thread that it is the worse RAW ever and you see that the guy posted it about ten minutes into the show. I know this isn't necessarily the place, there may be another folder for this. But we all know that it is probably in place so people don't have to read the stuff. I know this is where it will get the most views, so here it is. http://www.onlineonslaught.com/columns/max.../20021025.shtml a bit self-indulgent and also a tad ludicrous... I am a Charger fan, always have been, and I always will be. The Chargers made some of the most idiotic personell decisions in the late 80s/early 90s in all football. I griped, and oddly still watched. That means I had a picture of Bobby Beatherd and Jurgens because I harped on how dumb he could be? No it doesn't. I love Pro Wrestling and I wish it were on Monday Nights instead of the HGH Variety 2 Hour Hour...
Guest Big McLargeHuge Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 That was bar none the best wrestling article I've every read on the internet. He's basically saying how you guys are a bunch of nerds for whining about where a guy wrestles or what fake title a guy does or does not hold at the moment. While it might be a bit harsh, there is a LOT of truth in it, especially the part about smarks saying they know wrestling is fake, but talk about a title like it's something that is EARNED. Nothing truer has ever been written on the internet about wrestling. Remember folks. He is NOT a Smark. No siree.
Guest Brian Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Considering a title means a gain in exposure, the ability to headline and be called the top guy, a chance to ride first class for the newer guys, a chance to draw bigger gates, and normally a larger raise, I'd say that's something that should be earned through either hard work or proven worth. And considering the title is a symbol that represents being the number one guy in the promotion, or should, and a sustained push with the fans, that's why wrestlers value it too. There's more to it thatn just being a prop for those guys; sure, it's a vehicle for feuds and has little value in the real world but when you're performer who makes their money that way, then it takes on a whole new meaning.
Guest AlwaysPissedOff Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Didn't we go through this all already? Seriously... him stereotyping and making assumptions about all of us based on his own beef with someone who hasn't been involved in this site in over 6 months totally invalidates any point he could've made. AngleSault has only been MIA for like two days, not six months. I think he meant Keith, not AS...
Guest Kingpk Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 While it might be a bit harsh, there is a LOT of truth in it, especially the part about smarks saying they know wrestling is fake, but talk about a title like it's something that is EARNED. Nothing truer has ever been written on the internet about wrestling. The Vince Russo Principle on Titles pollutes another mind.
Guest Mazelmavin Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Apparently, elitism knows no boundries... Fan1: I'm a wrestling fan. IWC: NO, I'M a wrestling fan, your just a Mark. Kyle: NO. Your just bitter and jaded. I'M a REAL fan. Where does it end?
Guest candie45 Posted October 31, 2002 Report Posted October 31, 2002 Does that mean we're bitching about an article bitching about bitching? It's not bitching if you aren't actually "bitching" about it.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now