Jump to content


Photo

Ridiculous quotes from WO.com columnists


  • Please log in to reply
2031 replies to this topic

#21 CodySave

CodySave
  • Members
  • 273 posts

Posted 26 July 2007 - 09:52 PM

Dan Wahlers fine work today:

The company has been able to withstand all
of the injuries to this point, though the injury to
Edge resulted in the abomination that is Great Khali
winning the World Heavyweight Title on last week’s
Smackdown. My stomach gets queasy just thinking about
it. I have no idea why they did it. I realize the
Smackdown roster is thin, which is of their own doing,
after they stripped it bare in the draft so HHH could
have a fresh roster of heels to bury err….feud with.


God damnit, Triple H hasn't done anything you could remotely claim as "a burial" in what, three years? Funny thing is, so many net fans think Triple H is awful, but from talking to a number of indy wrestlers, his wrestling is pretty well respected, at least among the wrestlers that know what they're doing in the ring and not simply throwing at their "Fighting Spirit" puro moves at meaningless times.

I mean, seriously, was John Cena buried when he submitted Triple H at Wrestlemania? How about Benoit tapping him at Wrestlemania 20? Hell, he lost cleanly to Shelton Benjamin on RAW. Granted, I still think he should have put Booker T over at Mania.

By Triple H "burial standards," John Cena is a worst offender than Triple H ever has been. Not that I think Cena's buried anyone.

#22 maxpower

maxpower
  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 26 July 2007 - 10:10 PM

The way your quote looked I thought it was going to be a shitty poem.:) Instead it was a shitty net talking point. HHH hasn't even been in the position to bury talent since he put over Batista 2 and a half years ago. The only people he's "buried" (if you really want to stretch it) would be Eugene, The Spirit Squad, and the McMahons. All are waaay below him on the card or part-timers. All should be handily destroyed by a main eventer. Cena beat Cade and Murdoch by himself on Monday night and Wahlers doesn't seem to bat an eyelash about that. And when he does come back he will beat King Booker. He should! It's his comeback feud as a face after a long layoff. They always win their comeback feuds. And if he gets the title soon I'm cool with that as well since it's been a long time since he's even been in the main event.

#23 Loss

Loss
  • Admins
  • 44074 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2007 - 05:46 AM

The only thing he's really done since 2005 or so that I think has been worth complaining about was telling John Cena he couldn't wrestle. But admittedly, that promo ended up launching his face turn, which was the first time HHH had a successful face turn after a few aborted attempts in previous years. Credit Cena's insane heat for that, but it also didn't hurt Cena, really, although the heel not taking the babyface seriously (something we've seen many times with HHH) isn't really the type of build for a show like Wrestlemania that you would think would work. I doubt we'll see HHH as a heel again to be honest, but if we ever do, it would be nice if he changed his promo approach from "You're a horrible joke who has accomplished nothing and everyone knows it" to "You may be great, but no one is better than me". The line about Cena not being able to wrestle wasn't really the problem in that feud, as much as it was that it really needed a promo later with him admitting he was wrong. As far as the draft, HHH wanted more heels on RAW because he wanted more available programs. There's nothing evil or deceptive about that.

#24 tomk

tomk
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 1365 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 27 July 2007 - 01:53 PM

Wahlers is dumb as box of rocks, and there is a bunch of embarrasing stuff in that column. I'm not sure how he defines burial but pointing out that not much difference between feuding with HHH and being burried by him seems pretty accurate. I doubt he actually understands what that means, but it's not something to criticize.

How about Benoit tapping him at Wrestlemania 20? Hell, he lost cleanly to Shelton Benjamin on RAW.


Does anyone actually believe that HHH put either of those guys over in those programs?
NAsh lost ot Mysterio too.

One of the things that's neat about Cena is despite him winning his programs, his opponents leave them more over then they were when they entered the program.

Wins don't equal burial of opponent.
Losses don't equal putting opponent over.

It's the work and the booking around wins and losses.

God damnit, Triple H hasn't done anything you could remotely claim as "a burial" in what, three years?


Bullet Points:

1)The idea that HHH stopped building the show around himself after the Mania loss to Cena is ridiculous.

2)Reason Edge/Orton weren't credible heels to face Cena at last Mania=DX.

As far as the draft, HHH wanted more heels on RAW because he wanted more available programs.


HHH needs heel fodder but didn't think top babyface star should have credible heel fodder.

3)When Edge was walking around stoked that he was going to be going to Smackdown, supposedly HHH was one ogf guys behind having him job to Michaels on way out.

Not wanting top Smackdown heel to be credible top heel=the credibility of faces who will be loosing to top Smackdown heel will also be hurt.

4) WON has been pretty explixit that RAW is show built around HHH, regardless of how much money Cena makes...and that Booker has mixed emotions over moving to RAW because everyone knows the score.

#25 jdw

jdw
  • Members
  • 8040 posts

Posted 27 July 2007 - 04:48 PM

As for Ridiculous quotes, Should I just post the whole series of "Todd Martin reviews Raw"?


NOOOOOOO!!!!

#26 kjh

kjh
  • Members
  • 3122 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sheffield, England

Posted 28 July 2007 - 12:43 PM

I doubt we'll see HHH as a heel again to be honest


Really? I see him as being very similar to Ric Flair in this regard, someone who is a lot more comfortable as a heel and will eventually want to turn for that reason even though he has probably built up enough respect by this point that it will be difficult to get the fans to vociferously boo him. This gels with Dave Meltzer's reports several weeks ago that Hunter wants to turn heel after his comeback program with Randy Orton.

HHH needs heel fodder but didn't think top babyface star should have credible heel fodder.


I don't buy that HHH believes that. I think that the lack of credible heels on Raw is more indicative that his DX nostalgia inspired babyface run was always supposed to be fairly short lived and that he didn't want anyone gaining traction as a top heel in the meantime. That's why I believe Edge was jobbed out when he left Raw for Smackdown - he didn't want the long term Smackdown heel champion to be credible, because that's the role he was planning to take on Raw. He doesn't need credible heel fodder because he isn't staying face long. Booker and Orton are going to be squashed to guarantee that he's the only credible heel in the promotion.

#27 tomk

tomk
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 1365 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 July 2007 - 05:31 PM

I don't buy that HHH believes that. I think that the lack of credible heels on Raw is more indicative that his DX nostalgia inspired babyface run was always supposed to be fairly short lived and that he didn't want anyone gaining traction as a top heel in the meantime. That's why I believe Edge was jobbed out when he left Raw for Smackdown - he didn't want the long term Smackdown heel champion to be credible, because that's the role he was planning to take on Raw. He doesn't need credible heel fodder because he isn't staying face long. Booker and Orton are going to be squashed to guarantee that he's the only credible heel in the promotion.


Since Mania was supposed to be Cena v HHH I assume that sets up good guess as to how long the DX babyface run was supposed to be. And both me and Booker are making the same assumptions you make in this paragraph. Another reason to think that Dan Wahlers says lots of stupid stuff but the burial comment wasn't an example of it.

#28 Strummer

Strummer
  • Members
  • 4413 posts

Posted 02 August 2007 - 09:28 PM

http://www.wrestling...t.asp?aID=20345

Can *anyone* make sense of this?

#29 Bix

Bix
  • DVDVR 80s Project
  • 6361 posts

Posted 02 August 2007 - 09:35 PM

Do I want to try?

#30 Johnny Sorrow

Johnny Sorrow
  • Members
  • 4765 posts

Posted 02 August 2007 - 10:10 PM

http://www.wrestling...t.asp?aID=20345

Can *anyone* make sense of this?


Oy vey, that made my eyes and head hurt.

#31 sek69

sek69

    Winnipeg Arena's gonna be on fire

  • Members
  • 11169 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 02 August 2007 - 10:23 PM

The funny thing about Wahlers is the way he writes in such short, abrupt paragraphs makes all his columns look like haiku for the mentally challenged.

#32 Jingus

Jingus
  • Banned
  • 2583 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 August 2007 - 11:18 PM

Yeah, I was going to ask if his columns looked like this to everyone else, too?

#33 CodySave

CodySave
  • Members
  • 273 posts

Posted 03 August 2007 - 12:05 AM

http://www.wrestling...t.asp?aID=20345

Can *anyone* make sense of this?


I wonder how the poor bastard feels now that he's written an uneccessarily long column about WWE approaching doomsday based on a TV rating that has been revealed to have been a Nielsen error.

#34 Loss

Loss
  • Admins
  • 44074 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 August 2007 - 06:40 AM

And besides that, anyone who thinks any recent decline in popularity can be attributed to anything EXCEPT wrestling's reputation as a result of the Benoit tragedy is so caught up in the wrestling bubble that they're hopeless.

#35 Cox

Cox
  • Members
  • 1795 posts

Posted 03 August 2007 - 09:27 AM

I wish I had the definitive answer for you. I’ve been
e-mailed by a lot of people over the last 48 hours
wanting to know why I think the ratings for Raw
dropped so sharply.


This boggles my mind. Who E-Mails Dan Wahlers looking for his insight on this? What kind of person turns to Dan Wahlers for intelligent wrestling analysis on a bad WWE rating? I can't wrap my head around this.

#36 smkelly

smkelly
  • Members
  • 1154 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere between here and over there
  • Interests:Zombies, writing, professional wrestling, writing about zombies, German Shepherds, and Internet message boards.

Posted 03 August 2007 - 09:49 AM

I liked the HHH promo with Edge. Edge was bragging about beating Foley at WM, and HHH responds with "I retired his ass SIX YEARS AGO!"

#37 Strummer

Strummer
  • Members
  • 4413 posts

Posted 11 August 2007 - 04:12 PM

BTW, what does everyone think of Linden Walker? His MSG reviews are okay but with the constant shots at Monsoon, JYD and to a lesser degree Backlund you can tell he is desperately trying to pander to Dave.

#38 Jingus

Jingus
  • Banned
  • 2583 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 11 August 2007 - 09:41 PM

Am I the only one who actually misses the days of guys like Hyatte and Keith? Yeah, they were biased, but at least they were their own biases. All the new reviewers these days always sound like they're either trying to imitate someone else's style, or writing specifically to impress other people.

What does Dave have against Backlund, anyway? Is it some kind of "he wasn't as good as Bruno" crap?

#39 sek69

sek69

    Winnipeg Arena's gonna be on fire

  • Members
  • 11169 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, PA

Posted 11 August 2007 - 11:17 PM

I think it's partly that Backlund is an acquired taste. Dave's been pretty consistent in his general dislike of the vanilla babyface and Bob was pretty much the archetype of that. Also there was a weird comment in the Gotch obit on how Backlund giving up weight training for cardio at Gotch's suggestion "ruined his career" since he was a lot leaner and no longer had the same look. I thought turning down Vince's suggestion to turn heel was what ruined his career if anything, but what do I know. It's almost like Dave held some sort of weird weightlifter grudge or something.

#40 Indikator

Indikator
  • Members
  • 482 posts

Posted 12 August 2007 - 06:07 AM

That comment came from an WO interview with Karl Gotch from 1990.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users