Guest Loss Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Posted here I'm specifically interested in your response to his thoughts on Wrestlemania XX, and while we're at it, other WWE shows he's reviewed, such as Royal Rumble 2004, No Way Out 2004, the 12/29/03 RAW (HBK v HHH) and Wrestlemania XVIII. He also reviewed the 2003 Royal Rumble here. I thought this might make an interesting discussion, especially considering that he put both HHH/Jericho and Hogan/Rock from Wrestlemania XVIII ahead of Benoit/Angle, and I'd like to hear your thoughts on that as well. Have at it. I'll chime in as this gets going. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kardo 0 Report post Posted June 17, 2004 He's right though. No one goes to try to tell a consistant story in the ring. Wrestling is about telling a story through every move you do, the performers in the WWE just can't grasp that. Neither can most wrestlers out there, you have to be basically looking at every move you do and how it contributes to the match, the back story and everything else if you really want to hit the ****+ region. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Loss Report post Posted June 17, 2004 There are some matches that do a decent job conveying a story, even, and some of the small stuff brings the match down a little. One point that Chris made in #61 that I thought was strong was that instead of figuring out a counter to the pedigree, HHH simply lets go of the move so Shawn can throw him over. There have been more tenacious counters to moves in the past that don't involve so much obvious cooperation. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MARTYEWR 0 Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Coey's writing has been growing on me lately. I'm glad he spends the odd column writing on WWE shows that I have, because the analysis he gives makes me think more rather than criticize him in a negative matter. I like his writing style of giving analysis rather than too much play-by-play, because then when I watch, or re-watch a certain match like one of the HBK/HHH matches or Benoit/Angle or Rock/Hogan, it causes me to think about the consistency more, something I'll admit to missing a lot. That's not necessarily good or bad, but it gives another dimension of watching the matches. The lack of play-by-play isn't necessarily a bad thing, and in fact doesn't completely spoil a match for a reader wanting to watch a match that's covered by him for the first time. I don't know if I'd put Rock/Hogan ahead of Benoit/Angle. It's been a while since I've seen both matches actually, and I've never seen them back-to-back. I've only watched Benoit/Angle once actually, and I myself am probably the type who needs to watch it several times. The criticism from Coey as it relates to the storyline and psychology of the Benoit/Angle match isn't the first I've heard, and would definitely be something I'd pay more attention to, especially with the Benoit DVD coming soon, and being able to compare Benoit/Angle to one or all of Benoit's Japanese performances. Coey, for better or worse, causes a reader to think. That's much more than a lot of other recappers on the web. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JacK Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Yeah, I like his stuff on WWE, it's interesting and a different perspectice and all. The Japan stuff has absolutely no meaning to me though, since I have no idea what the hell it any of it is, with no backgrounds and all. It'd be interesting to read about some Indies though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Loss Report post Posted June 17, 2004 He did review the 02/23/02 ROH show a little while back on his site. He also did the 2001 King of the Indies show at one point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JacK Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Where's his site? He doesn't link to it in his CR-UNCH thingies Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Loss Report post Posted June 17, 2004 http://www.airraidcrash.com Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JacK Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Ahh, of course, that's where his email's hosted. I'll have to check that out now, thanks Loss! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kardo 0 Report post Posted June 17, 2004 #53 = Ring Of Honor - Era Of Honor Begins Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Art Sandusky 0 Report post Posted June 17, 2004 From the thread down in Site Feedback: Well, you get a special feeling when you think of certain matches. The Triple Threat at XX gave me that, as I thought it was the best three-way I'd ever seen (although granted, all I've seen are North American ones and was very underwhelmed by the supposed 2002 MOTY three-way), and the idea of Benoit finally trapping HHH and making him (FINALLY) give up his prized title by submitting after realizing there was no way out of losing makes me flutter a little, just by how well I thought it was all executed. After seeing someone go over it with a fine-toothed comb, it's lost some of its shine. It's kinda like when you really like a movie and think it's genius, but someone tells you all the crap that's wrong with it that you didn't see before through pure personal fandom. You don't look at it the same way, and sort of wish you'd never been educated. Still, thanks to Coey, I can more accurately rate match quality, but I don't think I'll ever be able to expand on why I rated it what I did as much as he can/does. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JacK Report post Posted June 17, 2004 But if you really like something, and you really truely believe it was that special, then it doesn't matter about someone else's opinion's, or in this case the extremely-hard-to-refute evidence provided. Courage of your convictions is important. Does his site have heaps of gateway timeout's for anyone else? They're quite frustrating, it appears internet wrestling sites don't get along with me, what with the constant Fatal Error's of this one and all. Edit: Wow he sure does run his board tightly . . . no wonder there's only 80 people I'm scared that he'll hunt me down if I join and don't post Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spaceman Spiff 0 Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Edit: Wow he sure does run his board tightly . . . no wonder there's only 80 people I'm scared that he'll hunt me down if I join and don't post I registered on his board, just so I could read it. After a couple days, I got a message to the effect of "You gonna post anything?". I told him probably not, and that he could delete me if he wished, and that I wouldn't have a problem with that. Sure enough, I wasn't registered there anymore. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest wildpegasus Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Agreed with some things, disagreed with others as I do with almost any review by anyone. Anyway, this thread should make him happy that he's getting some more feedback now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Fook Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Coey's reviews certainly make you think about matches in a new light, but I find he spends too much time harping about what he would like to see in the match (see the Benoit/Angle review where he talks about the multiple Germans). I agree with him on the WMXX main event, but not Jericho/Christian. As far as Benoit/Angle, I agree with him about Angle's selling (or lack of it) and how it hurt the match, but I would rate it higher than the *** he gave it. (I would give it ****). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Art Sandusky 0 Report post Posted June 17, 2004 I will say that now I have two scales I use, the WWE Scale and the Overall Scale. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Loss Report post Posted June 17, 2004 The problem with that though, is that if a WWE match happens to tip the overall scale, it doesn't get its full due. Wrestling is wrestling, regardless of where or when it takes place. I do understand the need to make yourself feel better about the majority of what you watch by rating it highly. It's something I used to do too. But one day, two WWE wrestlers just might put on a legitimate ***** match. And that praise will seem somewhat empty since other matches that are being put at that level, whether they deserve it or not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Art Sandusky 0 Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Oh, believe me, I have no problems with giving a WWE match a good overall rating if it warrants one. I kinda root for WWE to put something out that will make even the most hardened wrestling viewer and writer stand up and say "god-DAMN that was good!" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest goodhelmet Report post Posted June 17, 2004 And to refute Kotz's comment from site feedback with my own post from site feedback... That may be the case BUT I prefer it that way. I am tired of reading net reports where every other match that has any positive aspect is given **** for the hell of it. If a match doesn't hold up after being drilled and dissected, it really doesn't deserve the praise or snowflakes that are given blindly. Critical analys is a great way to determine what the true classics and great matches really are. When you notice all of the flaws in a match, it makes a match like Jumbo-Tenryu or Jumbo-Funk or Misawa-Kawada stand out that much more. With that said, I don't think it takes away from Benoit's moment. When the match first aired, I marked out like every other Benoit fan. Then, when the DVD came out, I was ready to mark out again. I was really underwhelmed by the match when watching it on DVD but I was still happy for Benoit. I chalk this up to the "special moment" category, not the "special match" category. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Loss Report post Posted June 17, 2004 No doubt we all want that. WWE is the most accessible wrestling company there is for most of us. If they were also the best and were constantly raising the bar, it would become easy to be a wrestling fan again, just like it used to be when there was competition. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest goodhelmet Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Oh, believe me, I have no problems with giving a WWE match a good overall rating if it warrants one. I kinda root for WWE to put something out that will make even the most hardened wrestling viewer and writer stand up and say "god-DAMN that was good!" You should check out the discussions Loss and I had at SNKT... both of us looked at WWE matches from the past and determined if they were really worth all of the salivating. Some of them were (Foley-Michaels, Austin-Hart), some of them weren't (Candian Stampede 10 man). Several, we disagreed on (Warrior-Savage, Savage-Steamboat), but either way, WWE has put out some great matches worthy of praise. The main point is that stars shouldn't be given out on a silver platter because you mark out. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Art Sandusky 0 Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Oh, I read the Stampede, Hart/Austin, and Warrior/Savage editions of that. My want for WWE to put on some blowaway stuff is partially because it'd be better to watch (although I'm extremely accepting of what we get already), but also because I kinda feel sorry for the company and North American wrestling in general in light of how regularly Puro supposedly (because I've not really gone out of my way to watch any) trumps it. It's like wanting the team that always loses to start winning a few, so you don't feel like such a dope for rooting for them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest wildpegasus Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Coey's reviews certainly make you think about matches in a new light, but I find he spends too much time harping about what he would like to see in the match (see the Benoit/Angle review where he talks about the multiple Germans). I agree with him on the WMXX main event, but not Jericho/Christian. As far as Benoit/Angle, I agree with him about Angle's selling (or lack of it) and how it hurt the match, but I would rate it higher than the *** he gave it. (I would give it ****). Yeah, I noticed to a degree he likes to talk about matches the way he wants them done as well although in truth we're all guilty about that. Personally I gave Benoit vs Angle 4 1/4* for reasons I was just talking about in the rescent Kane/Benoit thread. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Loss Report post Posted June 17, 2004 If it makes you feel any better, Puroresu has been in a major slump for a while too. The point has never been that wrestling in Japan was better than wrestling in the US, but rather that we should track down the best wrestling and for many years, it just happened to be in Japan. But WWE is easily the #1 wrestling company in the world right now, even with the problems they're having. You'll notice on Chris's board that many of Backlund's title defenses and a ton of WCW matches get praised as well. That has nothing to do with where the matches are taking place. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Art Sandusky 0 Report post Posted June 17, 2004 Eh, once you get past my base opinions on this particular subject I don't have much to back myself up with, so I'll defer to others in this thread from here on. There's just a point with wrestling critique where I'm in over my head. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest JacK Report post Posted June 17, 2004 I don't get the whole star thing though . . . to me it's either good, bad, average or wow. Since I watch so little wrestling these days, I catch a couple of Raw's or smackdowns a month, and see the Freeview TNA's; when I do see something I figure it's a special occassion and I enjoy it all the more. *That's* the less-is-more approach WWE should be going for, not cutting down on innovation in match's and what not. You saturate the market and eventually most people will get sick of it. That's just my theory, anyway. And man did Dave O'Neill get taken apart on that board. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
