DrVenkman PhD Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 For those who care but don't care enough to get the Observer: Rey/Matt: **1/4 Taker/Show & Train: *1/4 Trish/Jazz/Victoria: **1/4 Team Angle/Los Guerreros/Benoit & Rhyno: *** Michaels/Jericho: ****1/4 Helmsley/Booker: ***1/4 Hogan/McMahon: *** Austin/Rock: **** Angle/Lesnar: ****1/4 And he said the show was "phenomenal" and probably the second best WM ever Credit: Matt on the DeathValleyDriver.com board
Guest EternallyLazy Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 I agree for the most part. If it's not the second best, I think it's without a doubt the third
Guest Lord of The Curry Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 Austin/Rock ****? Ease up on the crack rocks Dave.
Guest WhenDanSaysJump Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 For those who care but don't care enough to get the Observer: Rey/Matt: **1/4 Taker/Show & Train: *1/4 Trish/Jazz/Victoria: **1/4 Team Angle/Los Guerreros/Benoit & Rhyno: *** Michaels/Jericho: ****1/4 Helmsley/Booker: ***1/4 Hogan/McMahon: *** Austin/Rock: **** Angle/Lesnar: ****1/4 And he said the show was "phenomenal" and probably the second best WM ever Credit: Matt on the DeathValleyDriver.com board *** for Hulk/Vince? Maybe if rated strictly on sports entertainment... but otherwise I'm going to have to cordially disagree...
TheFranchise Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 Show and Albert got more than one star??
The Dames Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 I also have to take issues with Hogan/Vince and the Austin/Rock star ratings. Hogan and Vince didn't do much besides sloppy brawling, a ladder spot and outside interference. Rock and Austin didn't build off of their previous matches, which they should have, in order to get ****. Dames
Guest EternallyLazy Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 For those who care but don't care enough to get the Observer: Rey/Matt: **1/4 Taker/Show & Train: *1/4 Trish/Jazz/Victoria: **1/4 Team Angle/Los Guerreros/Benoit & Rhyno: *** Michaels/Jericho: ****1/4 Helmsley/Booker: ***1/4 Hogan/McMahon: *** Austin/Rock: **** Angle/Lesnar: ****1/4 And he said the show was "phenomenal" and probably the second best WM ever Credit: Matt on the DeathValleyDriver.com board *** for Hulk/Vince? Maybe if rated strictly on sports entertainment... but otherwise I'm going to have to cordially disagree... I agree with the rating. For entertainment value, it was great. The crowd was into it, the drama was there. The story that was told was great. It featured a holy shit shock when Piper made his surprise return. Sure... they weren't suplexing the shit out of each other, or doing complex submission moves... but it was one of the most entertaining matches on the card. IMO of course... but that's all you can really ask for between two 50 year old non wrestlers.
Guest godthedog Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 chosyu was right all along. meltzer really is a crackhead.
Guest oldschoolwrestling Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 Hogan and Vince didn't do much besides sloppy brawling, a ladder spot and outside interference. Dames But, but......Everyone backstage said it was the match of the night.....
The Dames Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 Hogan and Vince didn't do much besides sloppy brawling, a ladder spot and outside interference. Dames But, but......Everyone backstage said it was the match of the night..... Was that with or without Hogan and Vince in the same room? Dames
Guest oldschoolwrestling Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 Hogan and Vince didn't do much besides sloppy brawling, a ladder spot and outside interference. Dames But, but......Everyone backstage said it was the match of the night..... Was that with or without Hogan and Vince in the same room? Dames That was with Willie the Worker mode off.....
Guest ViciousFish Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 Hogan and Vince didn't do much besides sloppy brawling, a ladder spot and outside interference. Dames But, but......Everyone backstage said it was the match of the night..... Was that with or without Hogan and Vince in the same room? Dames It depends on how you look at it. Now if you look at it from a sport entertainment perspective it was a pretty good match, especially since the 2 men who brought sports entertainment to the mainstream were involved. Toss in the fact that Hogan is probably a couple of guy's idol, you got a pretty decent match. From a wrestling perspective...horribly shitty match.
Guest creativename Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 I don't blame Meltzer too much for Hogan/Vince...it was entertaining, though mostly because of Piper. So rating simply based on markout value *** isn't too high. **** for Austin/Rock however...come on, that's silly.
Guest RedJed Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 I think he was pretty correct on most of those ratings, dare I say he could have given HBK/Jericho and Lesnar/Angle even higher, IMO. Rock-Austin was about *** 1/2 or so though, it was nothing we haven't seen so many times before from them, and most of the other times it was better (i.e. Mania 17)
Guest Mad Dog Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 I think he slightly overrated everything and really overrated Hogan/Vince, Trips/Booker and the Hoss match. And he really is on crack if he thinks that was the second best Mania ever. This came no where close to X-7, VII or X.
Guest FeArHaVoC Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 Team Angle/Los Guerreros/Benoit & Rhyno: *** I wouldn't give that match that high a rating, nor do I really care about star ratings. I thought the match was VERY disappointing.
Guest AndrewTS Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 I agree for the most part. If it's not the second best, I think it's without a doubt the third I doubt it was better than VIII or X7. Although below that I'd probably put below that WM2000 and WMXIV.
Guest AndrewTS Posted April 9, 2003 Report Posted April 9, 2003 I think he slightly overrated everything and really overrated Hogan/Vince, Trips/Booker and the Hoss match. And he really is on crack if he thinks that was the second best Mania ever. This came no where close to X-7, VII or X. I think it would be below X. X had 2 great matches, good booking, and the rest was fairly entertaining. This year had a Taker squash, shitty booking in the Booker/HHH match, a botched finish in the main, and too much time devoted to the yawner matches.
Guest RedJed Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 I think he slightly overrated everything and really overrated Hogan/Vince, Trips/Booker and the Hoss match. And he really is on crack if he thinks that was the second best Mania ever. This came no where close to X-7, VII or X. I think it would be below X. X had 2 great matches, good booking, and the rest was fairly entertaining. This year had a Taker squash, shitty booking in the Booker/HHH match, a botched finish in the main, and too much time devoted to the yawner matches. I don't know about that. First regarding Mania X........it had a GREAT opener, a GREAT ladder match, and then what about the rest? They were all IMO ** to ** 1/2 and had little time in each just because the ladder match and Bret-Owen each got 20 minutes IIRC, and it was a under 3 hour card with 10 plus matches. I don't get what made VII so great other than the Warrior-Savage match. Every Mania with the exception of a handful has a match that is really memorable and solid, so I dont get what made this Mania stand out to anyone just from Warrior-Savage. As far as XVII, that still holds the best ever workrate seen on a WWE ppv, but with that said, I think the fact that the top 5 matches at this Mania all had over 20 minutes each is saying alot (plus how can you say too much time was given to the yawner matches when there was 5 matches booked in one hour that generally were considered by many -other than the opener- to be yawner types?), and is justified then in the match ratings they got for the most part and also, the fact that its right up there with Mania XVII as the best WWE ppv (and Mania) ever. I know I'm biased since I was there, but I think its easily in the top 3 regardless, up there with Houston and then either Mania III or Mania X, take your pick, I thought they were equally awesome but I can't decide what should be number 3 all time, Mania 3 had the whole atmosphere and etc plus Savage-Steamboat, and Mania X had the two damn near perfect matches but a hard to sit through rest of the card. I agree that the Booker/HHH match had a shitty book job, but ONLY in terms of the finish, the rest of that match was very strong IMO, and if the finish would have been bearable, I would have given it an easy ****. As for a botched finish in the ME, I didn't really see it as such since Angle did the improv job there, and kind of made up for a botch. Kudos to Angle for that BTW.
Guest Kahran Ramsus Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 I don't get what made VII so great other than the Warrior-Savage match. Every Mania with the exception of a handful has a match that is really memorable and solid, so I dont get what made this Mania stand out to anyone just from Warrior-Savage. He probably means VIII. I would put V in the top group as well. It is just a fun show all around, and at least three good matches (Perfect/Blazer, Strike Force/Brainbusters, Hogan/Savage). I happen to enjoy Herc/Haku & Rockers/Two Towers too. It also has Rick Rude's finest moment in the WWF. Great show, even with the bad stuff (Duggan/Bad News, Andre/Jake, Rougeus/Bushwhackers).
Guest Markme123 Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 For pure entertainment, the best WMs are: 1.WM X-seven (best bar none) 2. XIX (6 good-great matches) 3. XIV (everything was fun; battle royal was kept short) 4. VIII (entertaining show show w/ World and Intercont. titles matches) 5. 2000 (Tag, Inter./Euro, World title matches were good) 6. X (2 great matches, the rest is absolute shit) 7. V (good at times)
Guest Coffey Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 So, is this the thread where we all argue over star ratings again?
Guest THE MIGHTY THOR Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 Meltzer is a crack addict, he is addicted to Vince's ass crack.Either way it must've been a good WM but it seems that the low buyrates doesn't back up that statement.
Guest nikowwf Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 Meltzer takes entertainment value into account. Two people doing spots for 20 minutes that build to nothing is not a **** match to him. If you look at his ratings, he's very consistent in what he likes and what he does not like. You're looking at one show, disagreeing with one rating, and calling him a crack addict. I dont get it.... niko
Guest THE MIGHTY THOR Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 Meltzer takes entertainment value into account. Two people doing spots for 20 minutes that build to nothing is not a **** match to him. If you look at his ratings, he's very consistent in what he likes and what he does not like. You're looking at one show, disagreeing with one rating, and calling him a crack addict. I dont get it.... niko Dude i was making a joke, crack addict,Vince's ass crack,get it??
Guest Mad Dog Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 VII had faily soild matches in it. It had a very good Rockers vs. Haku/Barbarian match the classic Savage/Warrior match a very underrated Bossman/Mr.Perfect match a good Dibiase/Virgil match and a match from Hogan/Slaughter that was better than it had any right to be
Guest MARTYEWR Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 For those who care but don't care enough to get the Observer: Rey/Matt: **1/4 Taker/Show & Train: *1/4 Trish/Jazz/Victoria: **1/4 Team Angle/Los Guerreros/Benoit & Rhyno: *** Michaels/Jericho: ****1/4 Helmsley/Booker: ***1/4 Hogan/McMahon: *** Austin/Rock: **** Angle/Lesnar: ****1/4 And he said the show was "phenomenal" and probably the second best WM ever Credit: Matt on the DeathValleyDriver.com board Using SK's ratings as a comparison: Rey/Matt: * Taker/Show & Train: 3/4* Trish/Jazz/Victoria: ** Team Angle/Los Guerreros/Benoit & Rhyno: **1/4 Michaels/Jericho: **** Helmsley/Booker: **1/2 Hogan/McMahon: **1/2 Austin/Rock: ***1/2 Angle/Lesnar: ****1/4 Overall, I think I'm slightly siding with Meltzer here. I think Keith was WAY too hard on the Cruiserweight match. Yes, it was far too short compared to what it should've been, but it was quite possibly one of the best 5-minute matches I've ever seen. There weren't any blown spots (or anything serious at least) and both guys were game. HHH/Booker, Hogan/Vince, and Austin/Rock were 1/2* differences, so no real debate there, I think. The one match from Dave's perspective that REALLY raised me eyebrows was Taker/A-Train & Show, but at the same time, I could see how some people like Undertaker's new MMA style approach...
Guest RedJed Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 Meltzer is a crack addict, he is addicted to Vince's ass crack.Either way it must've been a good WM but it seems that the low buyrates doesn't back up that statement. You must never read the Observer for one thing, he's certainly not very pro-WWE or pro-McMahon. So if Mania gets a low buyrate is means the show itself sucked huh? Nice reasoning there........excuse me while I shit on it!
The Dames Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 JUST to try and make myself feel important...(and I will be when EWR 4.0 comes out...if it ever does), here's my star ratings in my WM Diatribe as compared to the other 2. Dave Meltzer: Rey/Matt: **1/4 Taker/Show & Train: *1/4 Trish/Jazz/Victoria: **1/4 Team Angle/Los Guerreros/Benoit & Rhyno: *** Michaels/Jericho: ****1/4 Helmsley/Booker: ***1/4 Hogan/McMahon: *** Austin/Rock: **** Angle/Lesnar: ****1/4 Scott Keith: Rey/Matt: * Taker/Show & Train: 3/4* Trish/Jazz/Victoria: ** Team Angle/Los Guerreros/Benoit & Rhyno: **1/4 Michaels/Jericho: **** Helmsley/Booker: **1/2 Hogan/McMahon: **1/2 Austin/Rock: ***1/2 Angle/Lesnar: ****1/4 The Dames: Rey/Matt: ** Taker/Show & Train: 3/4* Trish/Jazz/Victoria: *1/2 Team Angle/Los Guerreros/Benoit & Rhyno: **3/4 Michaels/Jericho: ****1/4 Helmsley/Booker: **1/4 Hogan/McMahon: * Austin/Rock: ***1/4 Angle/Lesnar: ***3/4 Dames
Guest bob_barron Posted April 10, 2003 Report Posted April 10, 2003 You WAY underrated the womens match Dames. You gave the 3-way at Armageddon a higher rating. I'm not feeling it
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now