Skip to main content

BOD Sunday Night Thread

Comments

  1. AnInternetToughGuyMay 3, 2015 at 6:47 PM

    I hate Dean's strikes, for real. Stop throwing them. Reminds me of RVD's awful punches, stick to kicks Rob!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Maybe true, but what does it take to get 5 stars? I mean really.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Man, if I was trying to get someone to take a ticket off my hands, I might mention what city the show is taking place in.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Waddam N. OoverMay 3, 2015 at 7:31 PM

    That's a fair point. The show's in Philly at the ECW Arena.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I agree with scott more than meltzer. If it's not japanese he don't care.

    ReplyDelete
  6. 26 needed shawn to blade and I think it would have added to the drama

    ReplyDelete
  7. Barry Windham

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's because the crowd was insane he did the same for punk vs joe also in Chicago

    ReplyDelete
  9. I agree I hate when the moves don't mean anything

    ReplyDelete
  10. Kamala had at least a brief cup of coffee with JCP in 1985 and a feud with Magnum T.A. I believe those two faced off at GAB 85.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Didn't read through all the comments but did anyone mention Terry Funk? You'd have to count NWA in the 70's as WCW, and I don't know if we're doing that or not.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Yet, this has been disproven so many times. Also, it's not like Scott and Meltzer's star ratings are really that different.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I still love it. It's my favorite match of the last 10 years, easily.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Oh totally. Star rating bitch fights are the worst fucking thing in the world. It's why I hate quarter stars, just opportunity for pointless cattiness.


    I also just don't see why people are like "Well, I really enjoyed that match, but it wasn't good" like...what more do you want from wrestling than enjoyment? Do you rate matches on their ability to cure your lower-back pain?

    ReplyDelete
  15. Then again, I hope he's fair-minded if he ever reviews BoD Raw.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Serious question, and this isn't me trolling, but is he autistic or mildly autistic? Was watching a video and got this vibe from him.

    ReplyDelete
  17. 26 was a fine compliment to 25, and everything leading up to it was gold. It was a damn fine way to see HBK go out.

    P.S. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Shawn do a lot of the booking for this and the Jericho feud? If so, I'm surprised he was never given the book.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I liked their raw match the best.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I've made it clear that I care about everything: the ringwork, psychology, storytelling, everything.

    You, on the other hand, have made it clear that all YOU care about is the storytelling and presentation. You've discounted bad ringwork as a virtue of the business, which is insane to me, seeing as wrestling is a fundamental part of wrestling.

    So let me turn your dumb question around on you, since it fits you better: why not watch actual TV shows and movies instead of wrestling if what's important to you is emotions and character work?

    ReplyDelete
  20. I was bred on WWF style too, and Dave is right.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I never got the appeal of the guy because I could never suspend my disbelief. When he's wrestling, I see him as a performer in a show, not as a legitimate fighter. Not sure if that's because of his execution. It might be an "intensity" or charisma thing. Other guys who fall into this category for me: Cena, Orton, RVD, Jericho, Chavo, and Lance Storm.

    His interviews also never struck me as "real". Pro wrestlers shouldn't talk about how they are the best on the microphone. Who (within storyline) gives a shit how good he is on the mic? All that should matter is how good he is in the ring.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Like anything with Akira Taue.

    ReplyDelete
  23. You aren't the first person to say this sadly.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Then Scott A'more and yourself are idiots.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Have you actually ever read the Observer? Do you actually understand the editorial?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Why does it matter? I don't think someone who isn't on the spectrum could do what he does for as long as he has.

    ReplyDelete
  27. I'm not sure, but he's definitely a very quirky guy. I think you have to be to do the job he does.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I stopped posting when they got rid of some threads, almost everyone complained and goodhelmet's response was basically tough shit. No way to run a message board

    ReplyDelete
  29. Yeah, that's a big pet peeve of mine. "Objectively it wasn't a good match but I LOVED IT!"

    If you loved it, it was good.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Obvious winner is obvious doesn't bring the match down for you at all?

    ReplyDelete
  31. I've clearly stated the importance of ringwork. Ringwork helps tell the story. But the most important thing is the story. You place equal importance on all these individual aspects, and that makes no sense. Having good camera work is important in a movie, but who would put it as more important than the characters or plot of a film? Emotional investment is the end goal, everything else is only important in how it leads to that.


    The Rock was bad at plenty of aspects of wrestling, but he was still a good wrestler because what he was good at (firing up the crowd), he was so good at it made up for everything else. In your checklist wrestling, the Rock is a bad wrestler because he was loose and sloppy.


    And I prefer movies and TV shows to wrestling, I'd call my wrestling fandom secondary to plenty of other things, I prefer books honestly. But, when wrestling is good, when the characters are on point and their actions in the ring reflect that, it's something that's truly of its own nature, nothing else like it.


    I don't think I've ever seen a wrestling match as visceral as something in the Raid series, or Banshee, or even Game of Thrones. I've never seen a match as pretty as a Wuxia fight scene. But, because of the continuity of wrestling and the more gimmicky nature, you can do things other mediums can't. There's so much history for these characters to call upon, as there's so much history of wrestling to call upon.

    ReplyDelete
  32. The only time I could make that argument is if the match was something you enjoyed, but you think it had the wrong result or it fucked up the story they were telling. Somebody turned when they shouldn't have, or the didn't turn when they should have.

    ReplyDelete
  33. At the time I was only watching occasionally and didn't realize it was obvious

    ReplyDelete
  34. It was great but shawn bleeding would have added alot to it. wm13s blood wirked great. Shawn and jericho and taker call there shots for the most part. Shawn wouldn't book cuz it would take him from his family

    ReplyDelete
  35. There pretty similar but dave wasnt into American wrestling in the 90s or was spoiled with Japan so that's why I'm more into scotts ratings.I don't agree with every rating from scott though

    ReplyDelete
  36. Was that a pun? or you're serious?

    ReplyDelete
  37. Woah, calm down there Meltzer white knight. If he was I think it's amazing that he didn't let what he has deter him from being successful.

    ReplyDelete
  38. He jumped into my head too

    ReplyDelete
  39. I wouldn't call me insane because I thought Bossman was a slower, lazier worker in 98 compared to the slimmer more motivated version of him in the early 90's. He was involved in some of the worst matches of that era for sure. Remember his terrible feud with Al Snow where he kidnapped his little dog and then they had the kennel from hell match which I recall being just a turd of a match. Never mind that it was probably Undertaker's worst Wrestlemania match and that's saying something.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment