Scott's Feedback Feedbag!
- Still no idea what exactly is going on with our main server, but I can no longer FTP into the site, either, so I take that as a good sign because it (hopefully) means that the computer is being wiped clean and prepped for reinstallation. (Sadly the website was nearing the end, as we permanently merged into 411 shortly afterwards and permanently saved me the trouble of dealing with that kind of shit from then on.)
On with the hostility! (I don’t even need to 2013 Scott sez this one, it’s just me against the masses for daring to not love Rock v. Hogan. Strap yourself in!)
An AOL User writes...
"Dude, you just FLAT OUT SUCK. I mean, suck...YOU suck....dude, if you
weren't digging the Hogan/Rock drama then you're not a wrestling fan. And
you know how assclowns like you say "hate me but you still read my
columns"..yada yada bs. Well, honestly, that was the last time I'll ever
read your column, because, like a neutered dog, you just don't get it. You
really flat out suck.
Now choke on that slapass."
You know, that letter was going fine until the Jeff Jarrett insult. I mean, sheesh, at least pick someone who drew some money.
Another AOL user writes...
"How dare you berate the Hulkster..........just like the fans of Toronto,
everyone in my living room watching the show was out of their seats going
crazy when Hogan hulked up.......greatest reaction out of any of us since Mr. Perfect made it to the Final 3 in the Rumble and we were celebrating a
possible Perfect ending to that match. "
Hi, it's 2002. Just thought you'd like to know.
HG McFadden writes...
"Dear Mr. Keith,
You are so utterly full of shit that were you to be pricked with a pin,
the resultant excremental explosion could fertilize 40 acres of barren land."
Well, everyone's gotta be good at SOMETHING, HG.
Kevin Andrews writes in response to Wrestlemania...
"I couldn't agree with you more, Wrestlemania was shit! Thumbs in the middle was putting it mildly. The bands were shit, the hardcore title vignettes were shit, the crowd was shit, the matches were shit, Hogan Vs Rock was shit. Wrestlemania was shit! Come to think of it Wrestling is shit, thanks for showing me the light!
Like shit! If you didn't find last nights Wrestlemania a good PPV your not a fan, period. So why don't you save your bitching, stop watching wrestling and find something to fill the void in your life, you fucked up manic depressive!"
And then he writes AGAIN after RAW...
you were right. What do the whiny Hogan fans know, we dont know wrestling like you! Who are we to voice our opinion about a match we thought was one of the greatest of all time! Hell, we've never even worked a match! You're the man Scott! I mean what the fuck do all the wrestlers know? X-pac, Test, Sgt Slaughter, Jeff Hardy, Rob Van Dam etc. they dont know shit about wrestling! You on the other hand Scott, you have an innate enthusiasm for wrestling, you write such positive reports each and every week. It isn't often you criticise a segment/match on WWF Television, thats why your derogatory comments concerning Rock Vs Hogan and indeed, Wrestlemania as a whole had such an esteem about them. You are the man Scott!
Like shit, why the fuck do you watch wrestling you miserable fuck? Get your head out of your ass and watch the actual show without your ingrained bias against every fucking minute of WWF television!
Yur the man Scott, we dont know shit!"
I agree with the last sentence.
Another, mellower, AOL reader asks...
" Hey, I was wondering if you could explain what was up with the crowd reaction at wrestlemania. I couldn't for the life of me figure out why Hogan was getting such a positive reaction while Rock was getting booed. And to top it off when the match ended the crowd cheered for Rock as if to say, Yeah we never liked that Hogan guy anyway. Also, you noted that the crowd was burned a lot, why was that?
On an unrelated note, when you review a show, how do you deal with your own anticipation? In 1998 the wwf had a string of ppv's that I felt were unbelievable. But ever since then I seem to be holding the wwf to that high quality, and as a result I haven't enjoyed that many ppv's since. But for shows like this one and Royal Rumble a few months ago I had no expectations for, and as a result ended up enjoying them. Do you have this problem? Do you even try to stay objective? "
1) The crowd decided that Hogan was going to be a babyface WAY before the bookers did. Nostalgia is a powerful thing -- witness WCW Mayhem in 1999 where the fans were cheering Curt Hennig like the #1 babyface and chanting "Razor" at Scott Hall. The Torch website had a really interesting take on things -- the fans are now actively rebelling against the booking by cheering who THEY want to see, and walking out during the main event. Not that I support Hogan rising to power again, but any time that fans take a more active role in determining the direction of the company, I think it can only be a good thing. As for switching back to the Rock, well, if I could UNDERSTAND wrestling fans as a whole, I'd start my own company.
2) I noted that the crowd was "burned out", as in too tired out from the Rock-Hogan match to give HHH-Jericho any love.
3) The only shows I really feel any sense of anticipation for, all things being equal, are Royal Rumble, Wrestlemania and Summerslam. For everything else it varies wildly depending on what the matches look like on paper and what the major angle looks to be. I generally don't let it affect my overall thoughts on a show, however, since I generally watch a PPV twice to get a more detached viewpoint on it before writing a rant. I watch it once to experience the "live" feel, then again once any previous expectations are out of my system so I can properly rate the matches.
Our next letter comes from "WallzOfJericho" on AOL, with one of those bizarre short-memory types of letters that I get a lot...
"Scott, I USED to enjoy reading your rants on Raw and on the PPVs, just
because they seemed to be so true. If something was good, you made sure to
praise it. If something was just horrible, you made sure to stand up about
it. But see.....now you changed. For some strange reason, you've become way
too bitter over something that's doing its best to entertain you. Ever since
the WWF started this year in January, you've been complaining incessantly and
non-stop. Sure, some reporters may gripe about certain things time-to-time,
but you just can't give praise to ANYTHING ! Anything the WWF has put on the
TV, you've whined about. EVERYBODY else can find just one aspect of the show
that they enjoyed, except you."
See, this is funny, because I gave Royal Rumble an easy thumbs up, and that was only two shows ago, and not so long ago I was known for being biased TOWARDS the WWF.
"Ric Flair comes back.....time to complain because Vince makes him look bad."
Which he does.
"The nWo comes back......time to complain, simply because the ambulance attack
If you consider Rocky getting run over by a semi-truck and returning two weeks later with a small piece of bandage to be not insulting, huzzah for you.
"If you had any BETTER suggestions, you would be laying them
out in your column so other people could view it. Instead, you just whine and
moan about things that you NEVER seem to know how to improve."
Where does this line of thinking come from? I'm not here to babysit the WWF creative team through simple things they should already know from common sense (ie, don't follow up an intense interview segment with a cartoonish attempted murder). For legal reasons the WWF can't take suggestions from fans anyway, so why waste my time worrying about it?
"WrestleMania X-8 last night was a GOOD Pay-Per-View. And you just can't admit
that. You've been talking for the past month about how the hype is poor and
how it will be one of the worst WrestleMania's ever. Yet, the card turned out
to exceed EVERYONE'S expectations......everyone but yours."
It exceeded my expectations. I thought it would be horrible and it was an okay show.
"And once you
realized "Hey. This card was better than I thought it'd be," you knew you
just couldn't come out and say it. That would "ruin" your reputation, so
instead, you trash most of it. For no good reason. Apparently, Scott, you are
just the coolest, because you could badmouth everything - and have people
believe you !"
Where do I "badmouth" everything? Most of the matches were average or good. Oh, wait, I badmouthed HOGAN, therefore I hated the whole show.
"Your rating on Rock/Hogan was pathetic. There, I said it."
And there's the entire argument.
"These two men put on a GREAT match. An EXCELLENT match. It wasn't scientific in the sense of Jerry Lynn or Chris Benoit, but it was a great effort by both men involved."
"Losers always whine about 'doing their best'. Winners go home and fuck the prom queen."
- Sean Connery, "The Rock" (irony!)
"However, ALL you do in the entire rant is berate Hogan and start crying about
how he's old and he drags the entire thing down."
"Jeezus ! This match had the atmosphere, it had the crowd enthusiasm, it had the signature moves, it had the legacy.....it had EVERYTHING you could ask for in a match !"
Because nothing livens up a match more than Hogan doing his backraking and bug-eyed chokeholds.
"But because it involves Rock......and because it involves Hogan.....you just can't bring yourself to pay it a compliment."
"That was one of the best-booked bad matches I’ve seen – I’ve gotta admit, even I was cheering pretty vociferously for Rock (more than usual) by the end and getting into it. "
- Me, at the end of the Rock-Hogan match.
Seems like a compliment to me.
And BACKDAFUCKUP on that Rock comment, boyo. I dare you to go back and find ANY match after 1998 where I slag Rock's participation in it. ROCKY IS MY HERO.
"Get off your high horse for a second and realize this match was THE match of WrestleMania."
What does this have to do with my rating?
"You want to know why Hogan/Warrior got such a higher rating back then ?"
Because Hogan worked harder and was 12 years younger, and the match had better psychology and pacing, and the styles were more compatible?
"Because you weren't a complete and total stiff ! You actually tried to enjoy the match and give it its just due."
What the fuck is "just due"? It's a WRESTLING MATCH. It's not "entitled" to any rating.
"But now, just because YOU think Hogan shouldn't be in there,
you can't give him his props for actually HAVING a good match. Pathetic man.
If I didn't think he HAD a good match, I can't really give him props, now, can I?
"I don't know what happened to you. You used to actually have an opinion that
I liked to read. But now, you're nothing more than a conceited whiner. But
hey, who cares about being impartial and actually LIKING things once in a
Being impartial does not imply "liking things". I believe the phrase you're looking for is "agreeing with my opinion".
"You still got some books to sell and some things needed to be bought
for you off Amazon.com. You need to do the Internet a favor and just hang it
up already. You're already a parody by everyone who realizes that you moan
and groan about storylines, but never seem to have a solution to them. Scott,
your column is no longer a column I read to get a humorous, honest opinion on
a wrestling show. Instead, it's just used to see how you could possibly find
fault this time.
Your column: Thumbs down ! Way down !
WrestleMania X-8: No thumbs in the middle. Up ! Way up ! It provided enough
entertainment to keep me enthralled for 4 hours.....but apparently not you.
Just put in your Canadian Stampede tapes and flashback to the 1980s, when you
PERHAPS weren't such a bitter buffoon."
If I flashed back to the 1980s, Hogan would be 20 years younger, too.
"Thanks for reading my letter and understanding that just as Hogan is reaching
my retirement, perhaps so should you just so Smarks.com and 411wrestling.com
doesn't have to carry your negative vibes anymore."
Well, considering that I run TheSmarks.com, my retirement probably wouldn't benefit it too much...
To summarize this letter for those of you who made it this far "WAAAH WAAAAH SCOTT DIDN'T MARK OUT FOR ROCK-HOGAN LIKE I DID SO HE'S NOT IMPARTIAL WAAHH WAAAAH!"
It's so funny that I get tons of letters like these from people who weren't even around to remember how bad Hogan was in the 80s to begin with and have this weird romanticized notion of him from watching "Best of Wrestlemania" specials and seeing his comebacks in WCW where he was a parody of himself. When Hogan is willing to sell like a normal human being and move at a speed greater than "slug", he is fully capable of putting on very good matches (most notably with Randy Savage in the long-long-ago) without having to depend on pinpoint precision booking and weeks of rehearsal. Watch the Hogan-Rock match with the sound off and see if it's still as effective. Watch the Outsiders v. Rock-Hogan match from RAW and tell me how hard Hogan is working. As I noted at the end of the match, it was an excellently booked match and a tribute to Pat Patterson's skills for telling a story inside the ring. But it was not a great match overall just because "everyone says it was".
Sam Hinson writes...
" First let me say that I will not respond like others
by calling you an idiot or cussing you. I just wanted
to say that I do not think I have ever seen where you
have really liked a show. Of course, I have not read
every review that you have given, but if Wrestlemainia
for you was just a thumbs in the middle, I can’t wait
to see the show you give a thumbs up. "
Royal Rumble 2001, No Way Out 2001, Wrestlemania X-7, Judgment Day, No Mercy, Royal Rumble 2002, plus most of the shows in 2000, just to name a few. Oh, wait, sorry, there I go contradicting popular opinion of me with facts again. Sorry. I forgot that I'm a bitter reviewer who NEVER gives a WWF PPV a good review, until I actually do, at which point I become a brainwashed WWF lemming who is too easy on Vince McMahon. I can never keep straight which I am at any given moment.
Another AOL reader writes...
"You Suck. You really really suck. Hyatte...after being gone for five damn
months...FIVE MONTHS....pulled a better recap out of his ass. And he sucked
when he left. Hogan/Rock...no matter what the story surrounding...Hogan
worked his ass off for a chance. He moved faster than he's ever moved. That
was a great Wrestlemania. You suck. You Suck You Suck You Suck You Suck"
Chris, is that you? Sorry, you can't write for TheSmarks.
Returning insult-deliverer Colbee Riordhan writes...
"Ok, I've told you before but I guess I'll I spell it out one more time
because you don't seem to get it. Just....Stop............Watching. You
sound like a bitter idiot putting down what every other writer on this site
is calling an outstanding wrestlemania. I just don't get it....why do you
watch. You obviously hate it so put yourself out of your misery. Better
yet, just get the inevitable over with and gently put the barrel to your
head and pull the trigger. You must be a very sad, small, pitiful little
man to have to put everything down so heartily. I'm quite sure you could
find a quite fulfilling career in the postal service. But I'm sure that you
will rationalize your view by convincing yourself that all the other writers
are idiots and yours is the one true view. Perhaps Class III narcotics
would be more to your liking. Why are you wasting your time and money on
something you obviously don't enjoy? Please.....go......away."
But if I killed myself, whose recap would you read? sCOTSMAN'S? I can't let that happen, I won't let that happen, and I CAN'T let that happen!
By the way, Colbee...death threats aren't cool, as your ISP would probably tell you.
Another AOL reader writes...
"just shut up already, jesus christ, i usually agree with you when u say a match or ppv is bad, but cmon now. U can't even enjoy thr rock-hogan match for god sakes. Thye gave it all they had and it was the most entertaining thing in months from the wwf. Yeah I like angle and austin matches as much as you do, but this was much more enjoyable. The angle austin matches lost heat after the summerslam one, as no one cared about angle anymore. I admit I was excited, but did not like hogan when he was comin into the wwf again. I thought he was a egomaniac, and i think thats part of the reason u didnt like the match. If u would just for once sit and watch a show just for ur entertainment and not for ranting on it, then u would see u r wrong most of the time. It seems nothing makes u happy. Yeah supposedly u liked the angle-austin matches, but i think i remmeber u saying enough was enough after like the 1st one, so "
You're comparing apples and hand grenades with that one. I was strictly talking about the match quality, not the storyline or enjoyment level or whatever. Rock-Hogan would get tired after 3 shows in a row, too. If you go back and watch Angle-Angle from Summerslam 2001, it still holds up today as a great match, even without knowing the circumstances behind it, because it's a well-worked, high-energy match with some of the best ring psychology seen on WWF PPV for the year. As a MATCH, Rock-Hogan simply cannot compete with it.
Okay, onto my RAW feedback now, which THANKFULLY is a lot more intelligent and non-AOL related...
Gene Platt makes a very good point...
"I'm remembering when Tony pulled out the "just following orders" excuse
during his sorry commentating, saying he was pimping what he was told. I'm
wondering if the same guy was in J.R.'s ear tonight. Here's Al Snow and
Maven, of all people, actually telling a pretty decent story, in, all of
times, a 3 minute slot, during, of all settings, a hardcore match. Yes,
Maven swings trash can lids like a girl, but it's all so clearly there in
contrast to the rest of the meandering useless show, that it's just so cool
for what it is. But the announce team can't stop creaming themselves over
Hogan/Rock. I'm seeing Maven insistent in proving himself to his teacher,
with Al Snow torn, repeatedly eschewing the hardcore plunder he has
available to attempt a more traditional match fare and prevent potential
permanant injury. Then he finally realizes it's the only way, and proceeds
to beat down Maven while imploring him (in a macabe father-figure way) to
stay down. Yes, it was ultimately a throwaway segment, but the workers were
framing it as much more, and it deserved to be called for the brief amount
of quality it showed."
Actually, I think the psychology was backwards, since traditionally the student is the cocky punkass bitch and it's worked for decades, but the point stands either way.
Greg Tramel brings the negative vibes again...
"You really suck you definitely need to let someone else write your
column because you are the most miserable and negative person
I have ever read. You just need to retire and ride off into the sunset or
go to DDP school of positive thinking. Cheer up have a Fresca."
Fresca? What are you, a sado-masochist?
I'm hoping that Ryan McGovern will lighten the mood a bit with a reply to my thoughts on Hogan's political move...
"God I hope you were kidding when you said that. If you were serious, though, then you are goddamn INSANE. Seriously. Do you have any idea how retarded you sound? I like your reports, but c'mon, man. This isn't the fucking US government. It's professional wrestling.
Hogan simply lost to the Rock because they told him to. They said "do this, because it's your job. If you don't do it, we fire you." It just worked out that the crowd loved it and it came off great, which I don't think anyone expected. Maybe it was just *gasp* GOOD
BOOKING! What's so hard to understand about that? "
Well, your letter got pretty hard to follow once you changed points in the middle of it, for one thing.
For another, if Montreal has taught us nothing else, it's that Vince McMahon does not go up to people and say "do this, because it's your job". In fact, had he done so, it would have saved everyone a lot of hassle.
Jarvis Reed once again forces me to play "Ask the Rick"...
"I have a few questions and comments.
1. In one of your rants, you mentioned a one-time appearance in WCW by Owen Hart. When and what happened in this appearance?
2. Is it true that Sid crapped in his pants in a match against the Undertaker and did Andre The Giant do the same to Bad News Brown?
3. Did the woo chants after a chop from any wrestler, not just Flair, start in ECW? Also, was Shane Douglas the first wrestler to have the crowd chant woo at other than Flair, because of the way he used to berate Flair when he was in ECW?"
1. That would be in 1990, as he did a couple of squashes and a tag match with Brian Pillman before leaving for the WWF again.
2. Yes and yes.
3. They didn't start in ECW, but they were popularized there.
Finally, we end on a nicer note from Mike Phillips...
"Just wanted to e-mail you about how much I enjoy your
'Rants' feature on 411.
I work for the North Carolina based SCW as Seymour
Snott and I've been in pro-wrestling for 4 years. I
can't tell you how bad I was 'cracking-up' over your
'rant' on Angle's Mirror-Universe tights, The Black-
mailer/The Drug Dealer/The Jaywalker rant, and your
hatred for Hulkamania."
And on that note, we close up the feedbag for another week!
People *really* take Scott's ratings to heart.ReplyDelete
Wow. I think everyone writing or commenting to Scott's stuff should read this first. Gain some friggin perspective, people.ReplyDelete
Question for Scott, though... Do you read all of the negative mail? Why or why not? The hateful comments that have so much conviction in them would just piss me off so much. I don't know if: 1. I could read through the whole message. 2. Stop myself from responding with something just a tad mean-spirited
Thankfully I don't get much in the way of hate mail anymore. Most of the people who come here do so because they want to, and express their displeasure in the comments instead.ReplyDelete
I got to say Rock-Hogan 1 was one of the top WM spectacle matches ever.ReplyDelete
Getting a reaction one way or another is the name of the game. It would be a million times worse if the feedbag was empty.....ReplyDelete
...for the record, I loved Hogan/Rock I, probably due to the nostalgia factor. It was no technical masterpiece but the crowd helped them overcome the flaws. Hogan should've went over....
U LIKE ANGLE/AUSTIN THEREFORE YOU MUST LIKE WHAT ME LIKEReplyDelete
EMAILER SMASH! AAARRRGH
Where were those Hogan fans a couple of months later when Hulkamania was back to running mild? Probably jumping on the Lesnar bandwagon after he made Hogan's eyeballs pop out of his skull and wiped the blood on his chest (I mean black goo, if you've been looking at WWE.com pictures lately).ReplyDelete
I hated Wrestlemania X-8. I hated Jericho being a transitional champion to Triple H and being background noise in a Stephanie/Triple H feud, I hated the token matches like the tag team four-way and the shampoo death match, I hated the hardcore title nonsense that died with Crash Holly and most of all, I hated the nWo being plastered all over the event. One of the few good things about WCW dying was that we'd never be subjected to Kevin Nash's fun time parade of dinosaurs who think they are too sweet.
I don't know what people thought Rock vs. Hogan was going to be... it was ROCK vs. HULK HOGAN, ffs. They were two of the biggest one dimensional wrestlers in history. I knew Hogan would use the weight lifting belt, that he would Hulk-up, that Rock would Kip-up and that someone was going to job to either a leg drop or an elbow drop.
Like I said, those people were abandoning the Hogan bandwagon faster than the Hulkster could say "I'm just stopping for some gas, brother!"
The emails take me way back. You just don't see this kind of outrage, excitement and anger over booking and storyline anymore. Apathy has been the name of the game now forever, and I really have nostalgia for the old days when a lot of us really really cared about the product.ReplyDelete
On the whole, I think we are better off for the apathy.ReplyDelete
Let's liven things up again with some shoot comments! Things that we are not allowed to talk about on the Blog of Doom!ReplyDelete
The fact is, Scott Keith only got all of those book deals because he is Dave Meltzer's father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate!
That would explain the mirror universe reference to his tights at Wrestlemania.ReplyDelete
Jesse Baker is like a one man AOL e-mailer, isn't he?ReplyDelete
You don't see this kind of outrage anymore?ReplyDelete
I love his anti-Cena posts, but he's a fucking psychopath. I've seen calmer ostrich rapists.ReplyDelete
Where did you see ostrich rapists?ReplyDelete
Huh, seems like Scott was the Caliber Winfield of his day. While everyone else was seemingly The Fuj of his day.ReplyDelete
SO what does that make them?ReplyDelete
I think time has proven the world was right on this one. Unless you're in the camp of that one demented weirdo on here that claims that the five minute standing ovations that Hogan got were people being ironic.ReplyDelete
"1) The crowd decided that Hogan was going to be a babyface WAY before the bookers did. Nostalgia is a powerful thing -- witness WCW Mayhem in 1999 where the fans were cheering Curt Hennig like the #1 babyface and chanting "Razor" at Scott Hall. The Torch website had a really interesting take on things -- the fans are now actively rebelling against the booking by cheering who THEY want to see, and walking out during the main event. Not that I support Hogan rising to power again, but any time that fans take a more active role in determining the direction of the company, I think it can only be a good thing. As for switching back to the Rock, well, if I could UNDERSTAND wrestling fans as a whole, I'd start my own company."ReplyDelete
Now if we could get the crowd at the next WWE PPV to do the walkout to Cena-Ryback... nah, they'd still blame everyone else.
It's in the neighborhood of Andre/Hogan WM3:ReplyDelete
Poor match (workrate only), OUTSTANDING characters and audience lifting it well above where it would be with just any two schmucks.
It's not even close. WM3 is all crowd and drama and spectacle. Hogan/Rock is a way better actual match. It's much closer to WM6.ReplyDelete
This just goes to show you are only over when you name-drop.ReplyDelete
I remember the Hyatte WM 18 rant. Classic stuff, (although less funny now as Scott is married and presumably didn't need a baseball bat to so)ReplyDelete
I can agree with that.ReplyDelete
I don't know that that's true. I'm guessing rspwfaq is frequented by a different crowd than Scott's 2002 writing was. Take a look at the comments on 411 today and you see plenty of outrage.ReplyDelete
I really can't fathom what it is about Cena that drives him so batshit. He gets going and all semblance of reality goes out the window.ReplyDelete
His posts are fun to read, but geez, I always finish them wanting to recommend a good therapist.
The booking of the Undisputed belt with the brand split always annoyed me, Going from Jericho to Trips to Hogan to Undertaker over the course of three Pay Per Views. At least 'Taker got a win defending the belt on a big show after he won. Everyone else looked like crap.ReplyDelete
The real unanswered question here is the whereabouts of Seymour Snott.ReplyDelete
Plus then it was bounced further to Rock, Brock, Big Show and finally Angle to close out the year. I think Jericho actually got the longest title reign of 2002 given all the one-PPV wonders that followed him.ReplyDelete
The biggest mistake was giving Hogan the belt and I'm still amazed HHH agreed to it, especially when he had a friggin' title created for him within months. Hogan could have rode the same nostalgia wave without the need to put the title on him. Was there ever a plan for HHH to keep the Undisputed title then turn him heel? That would have worked so much better and you could still have built Brock as a monster by destroying an outgoing Rock - again it didn't need a title as the issue.ReplyDelete
.....that motherfucker said slapass HAHAHAHAReplyDelete
"You just don't see this kind of outrage, excitement and anger over booking and storyline anymore."ReplyDelete
Those people are leaving comments on Youtube videos now. They're sually bitching about WWE being PG and how Cena sucks and he's the anti-Christ of pro wrestling.