Guest Ransome Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 It's unbelievable that, in spite of all the firings, WWE have kept Michael Cole on TV for so long. Given that he's commentated since 1998 and is still terrible, why are WWE keeping him as commentator? WWE always presents itself as the big leagues, and it seems an anomaly that the prominent position of SD commentator would be filled by Michael Cole. There must be hundreds of people in the wrestling world (and many in WWE alone) that could do his job better than him. SD's move to Friday nights would be as good a time as any to replace Michael Cole and provide some much needed freshness to the SD commentary booth. I realise JR & King are equally stale on Raw, but at least JR used to be good and King was funny once upon a time; Cole has always sucked. However, I understand that Cole is great at WWE production (rumoured he put that WWF history Desire video together), so why not restrict him to that? Can anyone else explain to me why Cole is still employed? Anyone want to predict how long is it going to be before WWE finally gives up on Cole and takes him off the commentary team?
Danville_Wrestling Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 I totally agree that Michael Cole needs to go, but I don't see it happening. I think that the commentary teams in the WWE today are absolutley terrible. I can stand Tazz and I think the Coach is a breath of fresh air on Raw, but JR acts like its 1998 and his freaking out at everything act has grown stale. Meanwhile, Jerry Lawler doesn't even try to a heel anymore (although he'll agree with Coach on various things, but nothing more than that) and just acts like he's creaming his pants when a diva comes out. His 'puppies' act needs to be eliminated as well. I just believe that the commentary teams aren't trying to put anyone over on commentary, bury workers by saying that they have no chance at beating certain wrestlers, etc. and it hurts the product because fans have no reason to sit through a match. I miss the days when WWE commentators tried to add a plotline to every match so that you knew it meant something, but hell we don't even get the old "a win will move them up the rankings" argument anymore. With all of this said, though, Cole isn't going anywhere. Who would they replace him with? I wouldn't mind Vince going back on commentary, but that's not possible with him still being a storyline character, so who knows.
Guest FromBeyondTheGrave Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 Michael Cole reminds me of Brick from Anchorman. When he talks all I hear is LOUD NOISES.
Guest thebooker Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 They are all bad, only one who is any good is the coach, It's just part of the whole booking by numbers system that exists at the moment. the staleness of the product is just reflected in the commentary. . On a side note how come the king was creaming himself over shawn this week, wasn't it only a couple of weeks ago he kicked him. still if jr can forgive kane setting fire to him then why worry about anything as small as a kick to the face.
Golgo 13 Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 Who would they replace him with? Josh F'n Matthews. In fact, even if Cole doesn't go anywhere anytime soon, and I don't think he will, it wouldn't hurt to try out something like the three man format on SD. Cole doing PBP, Tazz throwing in his jokes, non sequiturs and the like, and Josh providing analysis.
MillenniumMan831 Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 Unfortuantely, Matthews wouldn't last 2 minutes on Smackdown. He'd mention how Spanky is returning after a stint in ROH and be canned immediately . . . assuming Spanky ever makes it to the main show.
cabbageboy Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 Ladies and gentlemen I give you....Steve Romero. The weird thing about Cole is that he's the last guy in a long line of lame pretty boy type announcers and for some inexplicable reason he has hung on. I mean he's not any better than Craig DeGeorge, Sean Mooney, Todd Pettengill, etc. A guy I knew in college said this about Cole: "They finally fired Todd Pettengill and then replace him with a guy that sucks just as bad."
AlaskanHero Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 I once thought Todd Pettengill and Michael Cole were the same person. Personally, I don't think Cole is a bad PBP guy, but if he had to be replaced then I'd like to see Josh Matthews in the booth. I've never really gotten to see many Velocities, but from the few I have, Josh does a pretty good job.
CanadianChick Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 I'm pretty sure he does some video production for WWE, and since that is pretty well the best part of the shows, he's not going anywhere.
Guest Coffey Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 I'm curious how someone like Fit Finley would do as a heel color commentator. As far as play-by-play goes, I've always been under the impression that anyone can do it. It's just the people that are considered "good" are because they have good interaction with whomever is on color.
Guest JMA Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 Has there ever been a reason provided for why Kevin Dunn likes "young, pretty boy announcers"? Is he gay or something? Seriously, does anyone know?
SuperJerk Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 Has there ever been a reason provided for why Kevin Dunn likes "young, pretty boy announcers"? Is he gay or something? Seriously, does anyone know? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm willing to bet Dunn isn't gay based purely on comments he made in the very first episode of Tough Enough.
Guest JMA Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 Has there ever been a reason provided for why Kevin Dunn likes "young, pretty boy announcers"? Is he gay or something? Seriously, does anyone know? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm willing to bet Dunn isn't gay based purely on comments he made in the very first episode of Tough Enough. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Maybe he's faking it?
Gary Floyd Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 I don't think he's that bad. WWE have done much worse in the past (Todd Pettingale). That out of the way, I think that the announce team on Raw have improved as of late.
Prophet of Mike Zagurski Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 Isn't Cole fed lines from Jim Ross anyway?
The Mandarin Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 Yeah, WWE's commentating team is bad, but they don't actively lower the quality of the show (unlike ROH's) because the show is already so bad. Commentators not named CM Punk or Dave Prazak in ROH are absolutely unbearable. I can tolerate most or all of WWE's team, even Todd Grisham.
Kahran Ramsus Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 I don't have a real problem with Cole. I used to hate him in 1998, but he's gotten better for the most part. The problem with the televised shows is that Vince dictates to the announcers what they are supposed to say. This is a big problem on RAW too. Try watching the commentaries by Cole & Tazz on Benoit's & Eddy's DVDs. It is 100x than anything that the company has done on their A-shows since 1998.
natey2k4 Posted September 3, 2005 Report Posted September 3, 2005 I like Cole... but all announcing sucks right now... why? Because every single show is the same.
ChrisMWaters Posted September 4, 2005 Report Posted September 4, 2005 No, Cole and Todd aren't the same person. Todd has more hair. See?
Vyce Posted September 4, 2005 Report Posted September 4, 2005 Ugh, is that a pic of Todd and Jessica Simpson?
LaParkaYourCar Posted September 4, 2005 Report Posted September 4, 2005 Replace him with Dusty Rhodes, he is a part of the WWE now. I always used to love Rhodes on commentary.
The Mandarin Posted September 4, 2005 Report Posted September 4, 2005 I don't have a real problem with Cole. I used to hate him in 1998, but he's gotten better for the most part. The problem with the televised shows is that Vince dictates to the announcers what they are supposed to say. This is a big problem on RAW too. Try watching the commentaries by Cole & Tazz on Benoit's & Eddy's DVDs. It is 100x than anything that the company has done on their A-shows since 1998. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I really enjoyed Cole & Tazz commentating on Benoit's Super J-Cup run. They seemed really enthusiastic. That DVD was probably my favourite work from Michael Cole.
daileyxplanet Posted September 4, 2005 Report Posted September 4, 2005 I could see Tazz choking out Rhodes, if you wheeeeeeeeeeeel.
Prime Time Andrew Doyle Posted September 4, 2005 Report Posted September 4, 2005 Big Dusty on WWE TV has the potential to be both good and bad on so many levels
Hunter's Torn Quad Posted September 4, 2005 Report Posted September 4, 2005 Has there ever been a reason provided for why Kevin Dunn likes "young, pretty boy announcers"? Is he gay or something? Seriously, does anyone know? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> They want good looking people as announcers. Knowledge of the product is secondary to good looks. Knowledge of the product is even a detriment.
EricMM Posted September 4, 2005 Report Posted September 4, 2005 what strikes me is that WWE commentators are less about the in ring and more about telling the viewers what they're supposed to think about the characters, both in and out of the ring. Instead of talking about moves and whatnot, they're just calling people bullies or blue chippers. Instead of talking about the current event, they're obsessed with the Diva search.
Si82 Posted September 4, 2005 Report Posted September 4, 2005 what strikes me is that WWE commentators are less about the in ring and more about telling the viewers what they're supposed to think about the characters, both in and out of the ring. Instead of talking about moves and whatnot, they're just calling people bullies or blue chippers. Instead of talking about the current event, they're obsessed with the Diva search. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That is the most annoying thing about WWE commentators. They constantly feel the need to review the points of a story line while the match is going on in the ring instead of simply calling the action. That, or spewing a bunch of cliches and wrestler nicknames.
Fartsauce Posted September 4, 2005 Report Posted September 4, 2005 Kevin Kelly said that Michael Cole is not the kind of pretty boy he gives off on tv. He said that Cole can drink brews with the best of them and complains about everything, including the fans.
Mr. S£im Citrus Posted September 5, 2005 Report Posted September 5, 2005 (edited) what strikes me is that WWE commentators are less about the in ring and more about telling the viewers what they're supposed to think about the characters, both in and out of the ring. Instead of talking about moves and whatnot, they're just calling people bullies or blue chippers. Instead of talking about the current event, they're obsessed with the Diva search. That is the most annoying thing about WWE commentators. They constantly feel the need to review the points of a story line while the match is going on in the ring instead of simply calling the action. That, or spewing a bunch of cliches and wrestler nicknames. That's the main reason why I've always felt that Monsoon and Ventura were the greatest commentary team in the WWF. Although, in the thread I created in General a few months ago, people made the argument that Monsoon/Heenan had better chemistry/banter, Ventura/Monsoon (and, later, Ventura/Ross in WCW) were two of the best-ever commentary teams in terms of calling the action, and actually attempting to put the talent competing in the match over, rather than going off on a tangent about whatever the "Flavor of the Month" was. EDIT - Did I say a few months ago? I meant a year... Edited September 5, 2005 by Mr. S£im Citrus
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now