We talk a lot about Heyman, Bischoff, McMahon, Cornette.. even Russo and what they gave to this business, whether good or bad. 

Something that got me thinking, guys like Wade Keller, Bryan Alvarez and Dave Meltzer sound off almost daily with hindsight on their side. Largely what I've heard from particularly  Bryan Alvarez and Dave Meltzer recently is really just the two of them verbalising the general consensus. If something sucks, we know it sucks, then they talk about it sucking. 

I don't know how many times, Meltzer has said " oh, they must of changed it " when one of his predictions is wrong.

Or Alvarez speaking about being in the business, when he's had one of the most insignificant careers in history. 

So in 2017, how much do you value the commentary from guys like this? 

I view Dave Meltzer and Bryan Alvarez the same way I view guys on sports talk radio or SportsCentre. They're analysts that have good enough relationships with people in the business that they can make a career out of just talking about wrestling without looking completely foolish.

I usually value their opinion because of these reasons, but really only for entertainment purposes. I like to drive to work listening to sports talk radio sometimes, and sometimes I'll listen to Meltzer's opinion on wrestling if I'm in the mood for it.

I don't really care about their predictions or insider info just like I don't really care if a sports guy on TV predicts a trade before it happens. It's like "oh good job, bud. You had more information than the general public and you got one right. We're all very proud of you."

Who's better than Dave?

Oct 15, 2017 16:19:08 GMT Big Pete said:

Who's better than Dave?

Kanyon.

I don't listen to wrestling analysts very much, but it's guaranteed good listening when a guy like Meltzer or Keller or Alvarez appears on a wrestling podcast. They always have great insights and great rapport with the podcast host. Whether their opinions should be treated as gospel or not is another matter, but they live and breathe pro-wrestling so they certainly hold more weight than that of the average fan. But wrestling is subjective, after all. It's just nice to hear such passionate fans voice their opinions.

Meltzer is on the warpath at the moment.

So on his show, he offended a bunch of fans by giving Balor/Styles a back-handed compliment. Essentially he said it was the best match on the show, but after attending the PWG show, it paled in comparison to everything he had seen on that show. This isn't anything new for Dave, for years he's been spruiking about how he has to scale matches up or down based on the company they were performed in. So a **** NJPW match to him would be a **** 1/2 star match in the WWE.

I can sort of see where Dave is coming from, but I don't put as much stock into the matches. There's more to a performance than what happens inside the ring and comparing PWG where the premise is that every match is an epic to a thrown together Balor/Styles match is like comparing apples and oranges. Two matches going for two different objectives in a company where the schedule is a lot more demanding.

While I agree with his overall argument that fans should expand their horizons and seek out other companies, what he values out of Pro Wrestling doesn't account for the artists intent. I also don't think he takes into account how much of a difference being in that atmosphere has on his perception.

While I agree with his overall argument that fans should expand their horizons and seek out other companies, what he values out of Pro Wrestling doesn't account for the artists intent. I also don't think he takes into account how much of a difference being in that atmosphere has on his perception.

That right there is beautifully stated and is akin to how I look at movie critics as well. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and interests and are going to comment on them but when critics and guys like Meltzer don't even take into consideration what the match is trying to accomplish it really irritates me. I know he's smarter than me so I know he sees the obvious - which means he's blatantly ignoring it for his own personal interest and to me that is only serving part of his fans. 

I'll still listen to him on podcasts and such because it can be interesting but I don't take his word , insights or ratings as gospel like some fanboys. 

Oct 26, 2017 2:56:39 GMT Big Pete said:

So on his show, he offended a bunch of fans by giving Balor/Styles a back-handed compliment. Essentially he said it was the best match on the show, but after attending the PWG show, it paled in comparison to everything he had seen on that show. This isn't anything new for Dave, for years he's been spruiking about how he has to scale matches up or down based on the company they were performed in. So a **** NJPW match to him would be a **** 1/2 star match in the WWE.

This puts into question Meltzer's whole rating system. I mean, I agree that NJPW right now is much better in the ring than WWE, but if a **** NJPW is a ****1/2 star WWE match, does that mean the best WWE match can never be as good as the best NJPW match? After all, a ***** WWE match would only be ****1/2 in NJPW. That's absurd to me. Everything should be on the same scale. When I assign matches star ratings, I try to capture my personal judgment. In that case, most modern WWE matches would be *** or less because I dislike the modern WWE style, whereas most big NJPW singles matches would be ***1/2 or more because I love the wrestling style. Aligning your personal preferences by modifying the scale promotion by promotion defeats the purpose. At least that's the way I see it.

Oct 26, 2017 16:00:36 GMT Emperor said:

Oct 26, 2017 2:56:39 GMT Big Pete said:

So on his show, he offended a bunch of fans by giving Balor/Styles a back-handed compliment. Essentially he said it was the best match on the show, but after attending the PWG show, it paled in comparison to everything he had seen on that show. This isn't anything new for Dave, for years he's been spruiking about how he has to scale matches up or down based on the company they were performed in. So a **** NJPW match to him would be a **** 1/2 star match in the WWE.

This puts into question Meltzer's whole rating system. I mean, I agree that NJPW right now is much better in the ring than WWE, but if a **** NJPW is a ****1/2 star WWE match, does that mean the best WWE match can never be as good as the best NJPW match? After all, a ***** WWE match would only be ****1/2 in NJPW. That's absurd to me. Everything should be on the same scale. When I assign matches star ratings, I try to capture my personal judgment. In that case, most modern WWE matches would be *** or less because I dislike the modern WWE style, whereas most big NJPW singles matches would be ***1/2 or more because I love the wrestling style. Aligning your personal preferences by modifying the scale promotion by promotion defeats the purpose. At least that's the way I see it.

So Bruce is actually onto something with his running Tokyo Dome joke on Something to Wrestle?

What joke is that?

Oct 26, 2017 19:58:02 GMT Emperor said:

What joke is that?

About how shitty matches would be rated six and a quarter stars by Dave if they'd taken place in the Tokyo Dome instead of wherever the WWF ran them.

I have no issues with Meltzer or Alvarez. Both are great at their jobs, which is to inform for the former and entertain for the latter. Their styles clash makes for fascinating radio, with Alvarez being a hyperbolic, loud jackass and Meltzer awkwardly no-selling him. It's great. The issue I have comes from fans at both ends of the spectrum. Fans that deify Meltzer and deem him infallible are just as problematic as people that view him as a false prophet/cold reader out to scam internet fans out of money. People that look for any reason to discredit insiders are the worst. They get personal gratification when these people are "called out" or "wrong." Fucking get a life, people. It's professional wrestling. It's not that serious.

Regarding Alvarez being in the business, it doesn't matter if you view it as insignificant. He still traveled the roads, took the punishment, and went through the hardships of the business like every other wrestler. The level at which he did it is irrelevant. He can still speak about what it was like and how things are supposed to work.

The comedic timing of Bryan saying something absurdly hyperbolic and Dave shooting it down almost IMMEDIATELY with a "Well, no, not really" is fuckin' spectacular.

Oct 27, 2017 7:15:04 GMT Krimzon said:

Regarding Alvarez being in the business, it doesn't matter if you view it as insignificant. He still traveled the roads, took the punishment, and went through the hardships of the business like every other wrestler. The level at which he did it is irrelevant. He can still speak about what it was like and how things are supposed to work.

A Tax Accountant can process your tax return well and good, but is he really a reliable source or could he really offer credible analysis when it comes to world economics, international trade and investment?

He might speak the lingo, and present valid opinion to a degree and if he is articulate enough, he might pass as himself off as an insightful commentator to the uninitiated, or better yet those already in agreeance or share similar ideals. Yet, when it comes to world economics, I'm sorry, no one is seriously calling this guy. 

Why, because hyper-verbalizing his insightfulness, based on limited experience or little achievement - despite the hard work - doesn't equate to credibility. It's probably the reason why WWE, TNA or ROH, etc have never called Bryan Alvarez to write, book, or work for their company - I could be wrong. 

Now, Alvarez is critiquing and analysing a level of the industry in which he has no experience. He's an articulate, intelligent man with the gift of hindsight and he's fantastic at voicing his opinion. However, when someone like Chris Jericho speaks, you listen carefully, and treat his thoughts with a much greater deal of respect, because he's excelled not only as a wrestler, in terms of his work-rate, but also as an overall performer. Alvarez, not so much. 

It's why former sporting stars often begin working as journalists or in commentary, because their opinion, analyse and insight is supported with experience at a high level and thus, credibility within their field. Alvarez, not so much - he has 59 listed matches on Cagematch.com, none of which are significant enough to consider watching.  

So, yes the level in which he worked in the industry is relevant. 

Try and discredit him all you want. He was still a professional wrestler and can speak about being a professional wrestler. Placing merit on what he says boils down to personal bias and has nothing to do with what he has or has not done. His experience level in no way disqualifies his thoughts and opinions. It's starting to remind me of that "If you haven't done it" deal. Well, he has done it. Can't keep moving the goal posts.

It may not disqualify his thoughts and opinions, but it certainly should to a degree limit his credibility.

Now, if a guy like Curtis Axel or Darren Young quit the WWE tomorrow and spent the rest of their life critiquing the WWE or NJPW, how much interest would you have in their opinion, and how much would you respect it? Both have worked for the WWE for 10+ years and have a hands down greater understanding of the inner-workings of the WWE and have a far greater understanding of the demands of working fulltime for a global organisation.

Chances are, you'd laugh at the idea of Axel or Young critiquing the work of guys like Omega, Okada, Naito, Styles, Nakamura, Balor, etc due to the fact neither were of any real significance in wrestling, nor have a catalog of great matches. Neither are great workers.

So why Alvarez or any of these guys? I listen to he and Dave talk about wrestling, yet neither are saying or suggesting anything revolutionary. Infact, most of their schtick is verbalising the general consensus of most internet wrestling fans of the day.

To be fair to Bryan, it isn't like he gloats about his past in-ring accomplishments. At times he has brought it up to explain how badly a wrestler messed up a basic spot they really should know how to perform when they get to the WWE. By the same token, just because he had in-ring experience, doesn't mean his opinions are more valid. Especially when it comes to creative or booking, he's just a journalist who's happened to make a career out of talking about wrestling and has interacted with plenty of people involved in the business.

I just thought it was an interesting comment from Meltzer and it exemplifies the culture of online Pro Wrestling. We can't be satisfied with anything we see because we have so much access to shows that we almost lose touch with the situation. Dave and 400 other fans got to see a bunch of up and comers work a really fun set of shows, meanwhile hundreds of thousands just watched a really entertaining match between two guys they really care about. I think there were issues with the match, but it really had nothing to do with it coming off PWG.

So what does everyone make about the Peyton Royce drama?

I was going to let sleeping dogs lie, but my local news affiliate just ran a Peyton Royce story. What was initially presented as a 'you'll never believe what this person does' quickly turned into a slam piece on Meltzer. Maybe it's just my imagination, but given the reaction on social media, it seems like the WWE have really gone on the offensive with this whole Meltzer thing.

As far as the story goes, it was only a matter of time before one of the silly comments blew up in the face of Dave & Bryan. For years both have made a number of comments that have been on the nose but haven't quite stepped over the mark. In this case, Dave was trying to call the WWE out on what they consider beautiful and ended up making himself the subject of controversy. It's amazing how even when he realises he's wrong, he still doesn't quite understand how he messed up and had to reassure Peyton that she's beautiful.

What Dave said was stupid and his apology wasn't much better, but it does beg a question. In such a looks based business, is it completely inappropriate for men to pass any judgement whatsoever on female talent? Is there a context where it can ever be considered appropriate or are we too far gone?

As an aside, there was an interesting example that happened in reverse. On a sports show, a female host gave her 'gutsiest' play of the week to a former Australian Test Rugby League player who put on considerable weight and led the panel to laugh at his physique. It seemed like that was going to go through to the keeper until it gained traction on Twitter and the host was forced to apologise for it a day later. With that in mind, have we entered an era where it's inappropriate to comment on Kassius Ohno's obvious weight gain?

This has quickly turned into an Off-Topic post. The silver lining in all of this is that the WWE will certainly give the Iiconics a better role on the show, which is good because they have been vastly underutilised.

Dave looked kinda bad when he commented on Kharma/Kong and her miscarriage. He might be best not to comment on the women for a while.

Oh yeah I heard him comment on that a couple of weeks back.

Something about how she was dishonest about her miscarriage and that made her look like a nutcase?

That was one instance, then there was a big tangent he went on a couple of weeks back during a SmackDown review. I can't quote him verbatim, but the gist was that despite the WWE marketing their women as being revolutionary, they constantly keep pushing the Carmella's and Alexa Bliss' of the world. He nearly went down a tangent about how the WWE don't push un-pretty women but he stopped himself on that occasion.

This is a really difficult one, and a huge part of what makes today’s climate difficult. Wrestling had always been an aesthetic-based business. When male wrestlers have a terrible physique, it’s constantly dissected and discussed. Is it bad to note when a female wrestler’s physique changes? If a woman got in phenomenal shape, can that be noted?

I’m not saying the way he addressed it wasn’t flawed - both his initial comments and apology were weird - but man, it’s hard to believe this topic should be off-limits in the business. And if it is off-limits for women only, is that truly “equality”?

One of many instances in today's climate where a potentially offensive comment is blown way out of proportion. From what I saw in reddit, Peyton Royce was sent a clip of only sentence Meltzer said, removing all the surrounding context. That's not to say the comment wouldn't been out of place, but it probably would have been more understandable with the context.

In general, though, guys like Kevin Owens and Samoa Joe are bombarded with fat/out-of-shape jokes all the time and nobody really cares. Aesthetic is important in pro-wrestling, no matter your gender, but it's still basically impossible to even think about criticising a female's appearance without getting smeared and forced to apologise. Am I missing the point here?

The comment was stupid. Dave fucked up.

He said he liked Peyton Royce better in NXT, that he found her more attractive back then, and that she was lighter.

These two are boneheads when it comes to talking about women and they should have known they were going to just dig themselves a hole by having this conversation. They also have a huge following and lots of influence, and they could have done a lot of good for the culture and fan community if they just went “hold on, we should have this discussion another time,” and brought on a woman for a few episodes to discuss appearances, what women in the industry deal with, how their experience is different from men, etc.

But no. He comments on her weight as a reason for her not being as good as she was in NXT. What a moron.

Aug 19, 2018 20:46:22 GMT RT said:

The comment was stupid. Dave fucked up.

He said he liked Peyton Royce better in NXT, that he found her more attractive back then, and that she was lighter.

These two are boneheads when it comes to talking about women and they should have known they were going to just dig themselves a hole by having this conversation. They also have a huge following and lots of influence, and they could have done a lot of good for the culture and fan community if they just went “hold on, we should have this discussion another time,” and brought on a woman for a few episodes to discuss appearances, what women in the industry deal with, how their experience is different from men, etc.

But no. He comments on her weight as a reason for her not being as good as she was in NXT. What a moron.

I think he phrased his point very poorly.

If the idea is she doesn’t standout because she’s not as physically impressive ... is that necessarily a bad comment? It’s debatable, but is it bad?

I mean, how many people slammed Ambrose for his shaggy/bald combo? And praised the change? Or his physique change? None of that actually ties to in-run skill but it all ties to in-ring presentation.

Aug 19, 2018 21:13:24 GMT KJ said:

Aug 19, 2018 20:46:22 GMT RT said:

The comment was stupid. Dave fucked up.

He said he liked Peyton Royce better in NXT, that he found her more attractive back then, and that she was lighter.

These two are boneheads when it comes to talking about women and they should have known they were going to just dig themselves a hole by having this conversation. They also have a huge following and lots of influence, and they could have done a lot of good for the culture and fan community if they just went “hold on, we should have this discussion another time,” and brought on a woman for a few episodes to discuss appearances, what women in the industry deal with, how their experience is different from men, etc.

But no. He comments on her weight as a reason for her not being as good as she was in NXT. What a moron.

I think he phrased his point very poorly.

If the idea is she doesn’t standout because she’s not as physically impressive ... is that necessarily a bad comment? It’s debatable, but is it bad?

I mean, how many people slammed Ambrose for his shaggy/bald combo? And praised the change? Or his physique change? None of that actually ties to in-run skill but it all ties to in-ring presentation.

Right, but then say that. He never tried to correct himself and even when he apologized he still seemed like he couldn’t understand why everyone was so mad at him.

Alvarez even tries to get him to clarify what he means and he just says “[in NXT] she was lighter.” Anyone with common sense could have saved that in a matter of seconds.

“She was lighter. Not to say gaining weight is bad, that’s not what I mean. I just mean that the WWE has always had certain standards for women and their bodies and if that is the reason Peyton is being held back, then there’s something wrong there and the company needs to do better.”

They could do a whole week of episodes on just the women and how the WWE portrays them, the hypocrisy of Evolution, Stephanie McMahon, Divas as an insult..invite women on their show, get input from female fans...

But no. He says something dumb, doubles down, releases a half-assed apology and then we’re all supposed to move on. I’m really disappointed in him.

His apology felt really sincere to me. I don’t know what you want him to do? Meltzer is arrogant. That’s a fact. For him to even apologize at all is a big step, but he has apologized repeatedly, including to her.

Also, yeah, we should move on. It isn’t a huge affront to the industry, and he’s apologized profusely.

The apology could have been better, but the most important thing is how Dave handles the situation moving forward. If he's more thoughtful about his criticism, then mission accomplished. Dave has a big influence on the industry and his insight is the best you'll ever come across. If he can pick his spots better, he'll only continue to get better and hopefully attract greater influence. However, if he starts sulking about it and continues to make cryptic comments and the sub-text is 'well...I have an opinion, but a white male in this day and age can't have an opinion' route then he'll lose his potential audience which would be a crying shame.

Pat Patterson is the best wrestling mind of all time.

I take Meltzer's opinion with a grain of salt. And Bryan Alvarez is to the IWC what Josh Matthews is to commentary. But whether or not I agree with them, their influence has outgrown the smarkey-mark shadows, and they do have impact in the business, much the same vain of political personalities and commentators, and need to be self-aware.

As in 'real life' - the audience has turned into such a sensitive, easily offended lot and their mistake is not recognizing this.