RavishingRickRudo

You are exactly right, some people love the Bret/Shawn Iron Man match and others think it's horrible "Love" can involve external factors. That night, during that match, a man may have proposed to his girlfriend and she said yes and they live happily together. Whenever he watches that match he gets this warm feeling deep inside. He loves that match. Is it because of the content of the match? Is it because of the effort Bret and Shawn put it? Of course not. Then he gets a divorce and when he sees that match he gets deep feelings of pain, anger and regret. He hates that match. Has anything *in* that match changed? Nope.

In someone's opinion, Chris Benoit could be the best wrestler. In another person's opinion, The Big Show can be the best wrestler. It's all subjective - which leaves room for discussion on why these people feel the way they do. The reasons behind those opinions, however, is not subjective. There are certain elements that make up a good match, a good promo, and a good wrestler. If the reasons for why Big Show is the best wrestlers are poor (He's Big! I like his hair! His music rox!), then that persons opinion is poor. I believe that you can effectively measure a wrestling match by judging various elements in it - is it an exact science? No. But I believe it can be effective and put to good use. "What is Good" is a universal discussion, I've had it in a creative writing class a few years ago, and essentially you CAN determine from a work of art (literature, film, wrestling) what is good and what isn't. However, that requires people actually believing that one could have a differing opinion. Looking at these things as being subjective actually promotes continued discussion. Acting as if there's nothing to discuss is only hurting things. You can like Big Show. You can say that Big Show is your favourite wrestling. To say that Big Show is the best wrestler in the WWE is wrong.

ARC is a good board (some excellent match reviews and thoughts) but has the distinction of having its most popular thread being related to "dumb quotes". Some of which come from this board. "Rumors, unless they're Observer/Torch/1Bob rumors, are not worth discussing." Disagreed 100%. Rumours have underlying, fundamental, concepts attached to it that can pertain to anything WWE-related. As for "everything getting a topic" that's what I LIKE about this board; everything is covered. If you care about it or want to throw your 2 cents in, you can. If you don't, you can ignore it.

WDI board (since the beginning) SNKT Other folders on this board You can lump these all together as they have the same people saying the same things. These are former TSM posters (or current TSM posters). I won't go far in commenting as I like SNKT and the majority of the posters there; I will, however, say that I don't put too much stock in what they say about the WWE Folder. Airraidcrash This is predominantly aimed at the Puro folder... and they generally hate everyone. Godblessum. Two harsh opposites do not create balance. Balance would be more posters who can see both the good and the bad in the product, and the praise is as strong as the criticism and vice versa. Very few meet that description. Sure it does, you just happen to have one group of people strongly praising and another group strongly criticising. If you had everyone open minded then it wouldn't be that interesting.

As for those wanting to know what people actually say about the folder, I'll be blunt, but the general opinion I've gathered is that you have a folder full of people who blindly bash everything WWE does because it's something that's criticized by Dave Meltzer or Scott Keith, and that you're left with a group of posters who are unable to think for themselves. Not true. There's a severe lack of knowledge of wrestling history and too many short posts with nothing of substance. Semi-true. They are unwilling to give new angles and new storylines a chance to develop and constantly come up with the stupidest conspiracy theories. And 99% of the time, we're so right. On the other side, you have the diehard apologists who will defend everything WWE does until the death that fail to see any flaws in the product at any time, and use "you're just a bitter smark" to solve all of their arguments. Semi-true. I would direct the apologists remark (who I now call Spin-Doctors ) more towards PPVs and how they can't seemingly get a bad one - despite it being more-than-likely a bad one. There are few posters who do step in and make good points, even some who post regularly and make great points, but they are ignored or not grasped by the majority of the other people in the threads. And that can be said of just about every board on the net. There are also too many post whores who have nothing to say who won't shut up and that the folder stays too busy, despite there being maybe 5-10 posts of substance on a day that probably has thousands of posts. True. The perception is that a new thread is started anytime even an inkling of a rumor is going around and that those things aren't always worth discussing, yet they always get discussed. Nothing wrong with that; infact, we're better for it. What some people can't understand is that we're debating the concept of it, not whether it will happen or not. Discussions turn into flaming too often, and the same topics are discussed ad nauseum. I agree with the ad nauseum, the flaming thing isn't that true. So what we have here is some truths and misconceptions. Saying this board blindly follows Meltzer and Keith is ridiculous. Saying all we do is hate the WWE or all we do is blindly follow the WWE doesn't really make sense; which are we? And is it wrong to be "balanced"?? We do have too many people throwing in worthless posts and too many similar topics get started BUT with a board this big with so many people that's inevitable; but it can be fixed which is why I am for the rules, but the reasoning that "other boards say bad things about us!" is pure crap. I still like to know who says it.

It's Mauro Ranallo, not Damon Perry (who I liked). He did the Bushido and Shockwave shows.

Yeah, that's pretty much well like his Muay Thai commentary LOL.

How was the new(er) announcer? I've heard his Muay Thai commentating on TSN but haven't heard his PRIDE stuff.

Why he stays around Angel? To Annoy him, mainly.

Cause it would kill the importance of his death and therefore her respect for him.

Are they just all idiots and you know more about what makes a wrestler great, or are so many of you blinded by kliq hate you cannot clearly see what everyone else is saying? A lil from Column A, and a lil from Column B

I'd like to know who all these people are who make fun of the WWE folder and what do they exactly say? And the "WWE Hijinx" folder totally takes the fun out of the joke. Stuff like Tomko & Fertig are fun cause they're spontaneous and have a short shelf-life of maybe a day (2 days tops). To put them in their own folder is so "corporate".

Basic, as in it's importance to actual wrestling. And since it's basic, it shouldn't be taught in favor of more advanced spots? That's like saying to someone who's learning math: "You don't need this Multiplication stuff. Here's some complex Algebra try THAT instead." Where did I say that the basics shouldn't be taught? All I'm saying is that in University, they shouldn't just be doing 1+1. Big Leagues. WWE. Basics can be done and learned in OVW. By the time you get up to National Television you should be well beyond the basics. Then again, I guess the opportunity to spout off some halfwitted remark was just too great, huh Rudo? Just like putting words in my mouth? More advanced isn't necessarily better, and straying from the norm isn't always successful. Wrestling history should make that very apparent. Advanced shows better skill. Better skill shows effort and discipline. Advanced is better. If you know more than one way to escape a hold then your matches won't be repetitive; if you can DO more in the ring, then your matches will be more interesting. Advanced is better.

Eh, "Some guy" just has a better ring to it

What's wrong with the hot tag spot? It's the most basic spot in pro wrestling. Are you answering your own question here? This is the WWE, the big time, why should guys be doing "basic"? Shouldn't it be more advanced??

If you pick up the WWE's 50 Greatest Wrestlers of All Time magazine, there's an article about the McMahons going from Jess McMahon to Vince Sr. to Vince Jr. which has James Dudley featured. If he is on pay-roll that makes a lot of sense, cause I can't imagine anyone from that era still saying good things about the WWE.

This is NOT being done to take away the fun of the folder but rather to give the WWE Folder the intelligent discussion that it deserves in order for everyone to participate and enjoy. 1. If your goal is to promote intelligent discussion, then "everyone" won't participate . I used to listen to the LAW (and still infrequently do). However, ever since Jeff Marek left, the show has gotten so freaking bad. There's a lot more callers now, which I guess is good for the LAW, but they are SO STUPID. Once Marek was gone, there was nothing to stop the rubes from calling in and giving their thoughts on wrestling... and I use the term "thoughts" loosely. The current hosts, Dan Lovranski and Jason Agnew, are idiots and they really promote intelligent discussion... Marek did. So if you're hoping these new rules are going to get more "intelligent" people into the folder, then you're mistaken. 2. The most enjoyment I get from the WWE Folder is with off-topic stuff like Tomko & Fertig, Steve Urkel Raw GM, The Book on the WWE, John Cena's Christmas Carol, etc. It's WWE-related (involves WWE wrestlers, parodies certain WWE concepts), but specifically off-topic. I can understand barring completely unrelated topics like football, politics, religion, etc. but having to take out the goofy stuff like that is certainly taking a bit of "fun" out it; at least, to me it is (and it seems like others as well).

Good show: Matt Hughes vs. Some guy Hughes showed some excellent boxing, nice takedowns, and some fedor-esque GnP. A lot of the fight was stalling in the guard, but Hughes periodically turned it up and delivered some sick punches that bounced his opponents head off the mat. Jeremy Horn vs. Some guy Quickest tap out I've seen. Horn was in the guard one second and had his opponent tapping to an armbar the next. Blinked and you missed it. John Lewis vs. Some guy Lewis made me laugh. What goofy stand-up; he did it with confidence too!. I have no idea how this ended cause I didn't bother watching it through. Chuck Liddell vs. Some guy. Eh... Chuck basically owned him and it ended with a doctors stoppage (cut). It was really interesting to hear Liddell talk about Tito as his "good friend" and a "good guy" at UFC 22, but then at the commercials advertising UFC 47, they're tearing into each other.

UFC 22 Part 2 is scheduled to be on TSN tonight at around 12:00 am Eastern.

Don't know what show it is yet, but the last two 2 hour blocks they've shown have been UFC 20 and UFC 23. When I find out which event it is, I'll let ya know.

Was I the only one reading "Harold Redekopp"'s name and thinking "Robocop"?

http://www.carlosnewton.com Great Site, looks fantastic, user-friendly, and has a contest where you compete with Carlos for a chance to win some autographed merch. GO NOW!

Buffy's "true love" was Angel. That was the relationship that was being built up for 3 years. There was no relationship with Buffy, just a love-lorn Xander crushing on the new girl and Willow having to be the shoulder to cry on (Willow/Xander being the real focus of Xander's Buffy crush). I don't think there was anything to botch between Xander and Buffy; it was what it was.... Xander playing Duckie. Xander/Willow getting together was tried, it got complicated, they figured they'd be better off just-bein-friends. Quite frankly, I found their lil escape to be frustrating at the time -and still do now. It just didn't seem right (which is the effect they probably wanted) Season 4 pretty-much-well rewrote all the rules. Willow in College "experimenting" in new things, Xander left behind and banging the resident slut as a consolation prize. Xander and Anya began as fuck-buddies and grew from that - they came together as two discarded people looking in on a world they do not know. Willow/Tara came from Willow seeing in Tara what she used to be and could identify with and from also sharing a life-changing experience in the witchery. I think Tara/Willow Season 5 was the best "relationship" on the show besides Buffy/Angel. I also really liked Anya/Xander in Season 5 as well. Besides, everyone knows that in Joss's world, you don't end-off happy in these kinds of things (of course, Willow found Kennedy *which I hated* and they are living happilly ever after - which is the only relationship I can think of that stuck in either Angel or Buffy). I don't think I can even count on both hands how many primary relationships ended up breaking up horribly... I might need my feet.

"Orton's Test". or.. "Orton is Test". ... I'd like to hear what Anglesault has to say.

HHH can have his rematch at Backlash saying to Benoit "I've lost the title before, not to worry, I always get it back" and Benoit proceeds to beat him again. There shouldn't be anything to "clear up" once WM is over.