Is Meltzer Nuts?
D.E. Prazak
While I have yet to see the PPV, reaction to this week's WON where the
Meltz man gave Bret vs. Owen FIVE STARS has people wondering... exactly what
kind of drug is Dave on this week? <G>
Dave
(anyone out there agree with his rating of the cage match?? anyone??)
--
Dave Prazak - Post Office Box 4005 - Lisle, Illinois 60532
dp4...@ripco.com / dp4...@aol.com / dbs...@prodigy.com
"Please jump down my throat."
--Tammy Fytch
Herb Kunze
> While I have yet to see the PPV, reaction to this week's WON where the
>Meltz man gave Bret vs. Owen FIVE STARS has people wondering... exactly what
>kind of drug is Dave on this week? <G>
I didn't see the match, so I can't comment on the match rating.
It may well be deserved.
What struck me as strange was that Dave made the point several
times that they did the best that they could with the given
restrictions (no blood, escape means win so no exciting pinfall
attempts, etc.). I guess the Undertaker does pretty well too
considering the restrictions he operates under, so we should
rate his matches highly. Egad.
Herb...
Scott Lacy
In a previous article, dp4...@ripco.com (D.E. Prazak) says:
>
> While I have yet to see the PPV, reaction to this week's WON where the
>Meltz man gave Bret vs. Owen FIVE STARS has people wondering... exactly what
>kind of drug is Dave on this week? <G>
I thought it was pretty good match, too. Not 5 stars worth, but I gave
it ****1/2. That and Bull vs. Ducie were the only two matches I really
liked, though Michaels-Ramon was okay.
--
Scott Lacy Mercer University, Macon GA
lac...@falcon.mercer.peachnet.edu or lac...@compsc.mercer.peachnet.edu
Parts Unknown High School: State Wrestling Champs 1970,1971,1972,....
Jeffrey Cohen
Robert Strauss
Herb Kunze <hek...@jeeves.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>In article <Cvqsr...@rci.ripco.com>, D.E. Prazak <dp4...@ripco.com> wrote:
>> While I have yet to see the PPV, reaction to this week's WON where the
>>Meltz man gave Bret vs. Owen FIVE STARS has people wondering... exactly what
>>kind of drug is Dave on this week? <G>
>
> I didn't see the match, so I can't comment on the match rating.
> It may well be deserved.
I thought the match was boring as hell. It barely deserved three
stars. The WWF concept of cage matches is such that guys have to
climb the cage in literal slow motion, until their nearly-unconscious
opponent develops the presence of mind to leap up from the mat
at lightning speed in order to grab an arm or a handful of hair.
It's ridiculous, and virtually impossible to suspend disbelief while
watching this kind of crap. There's no logic to it at all.
I actually erased my SummerSlam tape. I taped Sesame Street for
my kid over it. And you know what? I was more entertained by that.
--
Robert Strauss | "I got vision and the rest of the
Burbank, CA | world wears bifocals."
rstr...@netcom.com | -- Butch Cassidy
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Scherer
On Wed, 7 Sep 1994, D.E. Prazak wrote:
>
> While I have yet to see the PPV, reaction to this week's WON where the
> Meltz man gave Bret vs. Owen FIVE STARS has people wondering... exactly what
> kind of drug is Dave on this week? <G>
RSPW's old pal, Tim Whitehead, called me on Tuesday and said that Meltzer
rated that match 5 stars which Tim said, "was a little high." If you
know Tim, that would translate into, in ECW vernacular, "he's friggin'
crazy." While i have the tape, I have yet to watch it.
I talked to Dave last week and he said that at first he hated the match,
and then when he thought about it, he liked it.
I have said this a hundred times. Match ratings, like the Torch, should
be printed on toilet paper, because all they are good for is wiping your ass.
If he thought it was 5 stars, God bless him. I did notice that he added
a star or so to one match just for the BOOKING.
It's funny how we had a thread questioning match ratings about a week ago.
* "ECW: This Sure as Hell ain't Chess!" Iron Mike Palij, 7\16\94 *
* "Rob is Cheap!" Many, many mutants, 8\13\94 *
* "FLAIR IS DEAD!" Damn near the entire ECW Arena 8\27\94 *
Rick Scaia
In a previous article, dp4...@ripco.com (D.E. Prazak) says:
>
> While I have yet to see the PPV, reaction to this week's WON where the
>Meltz man gave Bret vs. Owen FIVE STARS has people wondering... exactly what
>kind of drug is Dave on this week? <G>
Well, I've yet to scrape up the cash to re-up my WON, but from comments
from Dave and Herb, it sounds like there *were* some qualifiers
added to Meltzer's rating. I do agree that within the limitations
of a WWF style cage match, both Harts pulled out all the stops and
did some phenomenal teases over the top and through the door.
But for all the drama, this match had approximately half (maybe less)
the wrestling Hart/Hart at WM had. And that kinda brings it down
a bit. Then again, I liked the way the angle at the end played
out, so being the kind of guy I am, I can't help but tweak my
rating back up a bit (even if all that stuff happened after the
final bell). All in all, it was a very good match, one I will
probably slap into the VCR a couple times (if I ever get a damn tape
of the show), but still a notch or three below the WM match which
I probably put around the ****1/2 mark.
Then again, like Dave said, we might as well use all of the
match ratings around here to wipe our asses with... they're
only good if fans of similar tastes use them. And it's no
different with Meltzer. He's still a fan with unique
tastes, not an omnipotent guru.
Or maybe he's just nuts afterall.
Later...
--
Rick Scaia | "I am a lost soul;
Thank You, Drive Through | I shoot myself with Rock 'n' Roll...
ag...@freenet.carleton.ca | Nothing else can set me free." -GBV
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jozef wiencis
Robert Strauss <rstr...@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <CvrEC...@watdragon.uwaterloo.ca>,
>Herb Kunze <hek...@jeeves.uwaterloo.ca> wrote:
>>In article <Cvqsr...@rci.ripco.com>, D.E. Prazak <dp4...@ripco.com> wrote:
>>> While I have yet to see the PPV, reaction to this week's WON where the
>>>Meltz man gave Bret vs. Owen FIVE STARS has people wondering... exactly what
>>>kind of drug is Dave on this week? <G>
>>
>> I didn't see the match, so I can't comment on the match rating.
>> It may well be deserved.
>
>I thought the match was boring as hell. It barely deserved three
>stars. The WWF concept of cage matches is such that guys have to
>climb the cage in literal slow motion, until their nearly-unconscious
>opponent develops the presence of mind to leap up from the mat
>at lightning speed in order to grab an arm or a handful of hair.
>It's ridiculous, and virtually impossible to suspend disbelief while
>watching this kind of crap. There's no logic to it at all.
>
>I actually erased my SummerSlam tape. I taped Sesame Street for
>my kid over it. And you know what? I was more entertained by that.
>
my own WWF. The Winona Watching Federation. >:)
- joe
Ken Doucet
: In article <rstraussC...@netcom.com>,
: - joe
I agree that Meltzer seemed a bit more enthused about the cage match than
I did, but of course I got flamed already for daring to call it a
four-star plus match. But his even comparing it to their WMX match
doesn't sit too well with me either.
Shywhopper
little too long... His rationalization of his rating of the cage match
made no sense... just as when he compared the hogan injury (a hit in the
knee) to the Sting injury two years ago, rather than to harding-kerrigan.
Hell, 90 percent of the nerds watching this show had never heard of
the sting injury angle two years before... but 99 percent of them knew all
about the kerrigan knee blow. That's what made the angle so idiotic and
cartoonlike -- a suspension of reality. A monumental cliche. An insult.
When the masked guy came out and hacked hogan, everyone watching at my
place just groaned out loud, as if, "Oh gawd, they're really not going to
pull this crap, are they?"
When they pull something like this, what always crosses my mind is
that question on dave's annual poll, the one about the wrestler you're
most embarrassed about. An angle like this plays out and I feel
embarrassed _ like, geez, are wrestling fans THIS dumb???? Why am i
watching this?
Sometimes i think "experts" get so deep into the woods that they no
longer see the trees. Dave is so into all this that he forgets the average
fan isn't into it... And i think WCW really screwed up the hogan injury
angle in that it was too hokey -- for marks or smarts. At least the ones
I've talked to. It came off as even more cartoonlike than the WWF. Those
fans watched this show, for free, and won't be back.So, please, let's give
all this talk about tv ratings a rest.
Dave Scherer
> Sometimes i think "experts" get so deep into the woods that they no
>longer see the trees. Dave is so into all this that he forgets the average
>fan isn't into it... And i think WCW really screwed up the hogan injury
>angle in that it was too hokey -- for marks or smarts. At least the ones
>I've talked to. It came off as even more cartoonlike than the WWF. Those
>fans watched this show, for free, and won't be back.So, please, let's give
>all this talk about tv ratings a rest.
Hey Skywhopper, if you, Joe P., and Rob Hoffman keep on posting, the AOL
stigma may finally break.
You are 100% on the money with you above analysis, and really your whole
post. Meltzer, and also the Meltzerites, have lost touch with the the
common fan. They really have. And I have told him that before, and he
never really replies.
--
Jeffrey Cohen
been inevitable, but depressing.Early issues have Dave raving about
stuff just like the present ECW fans. If he got into something, he
put his heart into his opinions.
Along the way, he got the weekly column in the National. That was
pretty much the turning point for the Observer. Now instead of
being news, some commentary, and letters, it became the watchdog of
the industry. Dave took the "New York Times of Wrestling" monicker
too much to heart. The fanboy and gossip stuff stopped virtually
overnight. Letters got toned down. Sheet feuds were strongly dissed.
In short, the Observer became essential reading, yet predictable
and in some ways, dull.
With the absence of letters now most weeks, it is evenmoreso one man's
voice. The alternate views are practically non-existent. Say what
you will about the Torch, but at least Wade prints other people
s views, even if they are slightly edited.
t the business than
almost anyone, inside or out.
Does he produce an accurate and gripping newsletter? Yes. But as
hisworldview has increased, his tastes have polarized. Almost too
often, foreign equals good and US style equals bad. And when there
is something US to like (Bret vs. Owen in a cage) he feels he
has to bend over backwards to show that he can enjoy the WWF on
occasion as well as the next guy.
Except, of course, if the next guy also likes Hulk Hogan matches.
Herb Kunze
Dave Scherer <dsch...@acy1.digex.net> wrote:
>You are 100% on the money with you above analysis, and really your whole
>post. Meltzer, and also the Meltzerites, have lost touch with the the
>common fan. They really have. And I have told him that before, and he
>never really replies.
In talking about thw WCW-Hogan deal, in particular the recent Clash,
Shywhopper said that the "average fan isn't into it." He thinks that
WCW screwed up the Hogan injury angle because it was "cartoonlike"
and that any fans that watched that show for free won't be back.
Hence, we needn't talk about the ratings of that show.
Dave agrees above.
I don't get it. Who's the common (or "average") fan, Dave? WCW
wasn't getting a lot of fans to watch their stuff before the Hogan
deal. They probably had lots of choices to try to see if they
could win more fans, but they have tried many things over the
years with limited success. Bringing in Hogan was just another
thing to try, in the hopes of reaching more fans. Guess what,
the ratings for the Clash and the buy rate for the previous PPV
were *way* up. So, WCW certainly reached a lot more people. Are
none of those people "average" or "common" fans?
This discussion has nothing to do with work quality; it has only
to do with WCW's direction appealing to the "average" fan. I don't
see how you can say it doesn't from what we've seen. I don't see
how even if the angle with Hogan was cartoonlike that that rules
out appealing to the "average" fan - look at the WWF over the years,
or did they not have "average" fans either?
Whether the extra fans at the free Clash will return for future
PPVs is really unknown right now, isn't it?
Herb...
Dave Scherer
On Sun, 11 Sep 1994, Herb Kunze wrote:
> In article <dscherer.779222626@acy1>,
> Dave Scherer <dsch...@acy1.digex.net> wrote:
> >You are 100% on the money with you above analysis, and really your whole
> >post. Meltzer, and also the Meltzerites, have lost touch with the the
> >common fan. They really have. And I have told him that before, and he
> >never really replies.
>
> In talking about thw WCW-Hogan deal, in particular the recent Clash,
> Shywhopper said that the "average fan isn't into it." He thinks that
> WCW screwed up the Hogan injury angle because it was "cartoonlike"
> and that any fans that watched that show for free won't be back.
> Hence, we needn't talk about the ratings of that show.
>
> Dave agrees above.
Herb, you have to take the post in the context it is written. Sky wrote
it as a smart, rspw type fan. In that vein I agreed. But, I also don't
feel the average fan is into it. I think that the Hogan fans are into
Hogan. I think that the Dusty fans tuned in to see Dusty. What angle
they ran would have only meant something if it was creative, which Flair
just does not have in him to do.
> I don't get it. Who's the common (or "average") fan, Dave? WCW
> wasn't getting a lot of fans to watch their stuff before the Hogan
> deal. They probably had lots of choices to try to see if they
> could win more fans, but they have tried many things over the
> years with limited success. Bringing in Hogan was just another
> thing to try, in the hopes of reaching more fans. Guess what,
> the ratings for the Clash and the buy rate for the previous PPV
> were *way* up. So, WCW certainly reached a lot more people. Are
> none of those people "average" or "common" fans?
Are they new fans to WCW? Yup. Are they gonna stay when Hogan leaves?
Nope. Why? Because the whole promotion is Hogan, and that's all they
care about anyway. I wrote a note to you yesterday asking about this and
I have not seen your reply yet.
So yes, they tried something new. And it popped more than I thought it
would. But will Hogan's next two PPV's draw .9's? And even if they do,
what will the 9\18 show draw? And what will they draw if he leaves? And
more important, if he stays, the promotion will remain the dreck it is
today. You may still hold out hope, but I have seen in ring quality and
booking go down since Hogan came. Maybe you see it otherwise. Again, if
so, you are the lucky one, as you will get more of what you like.
> This discussion has nothing to do with work quality; it has only
> to do with WCW's direction appealing to the "average" fan. I don't
C'mon Herb, *every* discussion you get involved in deals with work
quality. The question here is, when Hogan leaves will the fans who have
come go with him? I say yes, because he is all that they are there fore
to begin with. And if these new fans leave, it will be uglier for WCW
than it was before.
Andy Patrizio
>Along the way, he got the weekly column in the National. That was
>pretty much the turning point for the Observer. Now instead of
>being news, some commentary, and letters, it became the watchdog of
>the industry. Dave took the "New York Times of Wrestling" monicker
>too much to heart. The fanboy and gossip stuff stopped virtually
>overnight. Letters got toned down. Sheet feuds were strongly dissed.
>In short, the Observer became essential reading, yet predictable
>and in some ways, dull.
My God, lucidity from Delphi and AOL users? What's the world coming to? :-)
You know, I wonder if he has any sense of pride at all... I wouldn't
dream of handing in work to my editor looking like the Observer, let
alone try to sell it and depend on paying the mortgage with it. I keep my
subscription because there really isn't an alternative, simple as that.
I suspect he's become so immersed in what he does, Dave just doesn't
enjoy it any more like he used to. So he keeps doing it, but not with the
love he once had for the sport. I'm probably wrong, but it's just MOFO.
-Andy
marv bloom
D(> While I have yet to see the PPV, reaction to this week's WON where the
>Meltz man gave Bret vs. Owen FIVE STARS has people wondering... exactly what
>kind of drug is Dave on this week? <G>
IMHO: I'm tired of the sibling rivalry and Vince has been working this
angle far too long. He brought the Hart Family in (again) and
added Anvil and Davey but it was still lame.
Honestly, if said angle was only a few months old, it would of
worked. All of the WWF Cage Matches are an "almost there scenario". A
scant few inches from getting out of the gate and touching the floor
or over the top and on to Victory and natch the combatants trade
near victorious attempts.
Both Wrestlers and Brothers worked their collective asses off,
unfortunately the WWF "Brother against Brother Scenario", went stale
many moons ago. Vince has lost the shock factor (where he outguesses
everyone) and the intro of Anvil and DBS showed that this would
continue (read as BH keeps the Gold).
Meltzer is correct, it had all the ingredients and the action was
there. I found it boring, since I knew what the outcome would be
(being a smart mark can ruin a decent match...;-) ).
Marv
*
---
RoseReader 2.10 P001256 Entered at [ROSE]
RoseMail 2.60 : RoseNet<=>Usenet Gateway : Rose Media 416-733-2285
Shywhopper
charisma and magnetism. He drew great numbers for WCW in this one show, in
the middle of a baseball strike. But I seriously doubt that very many
people ("average" people, not the ones like us who suck up every PPV
shoved down our throats) liked what they saw. But it didn't cost anything
to check in on him and none of those local major-league baseball teams was
playing a game at that time on cable, so why not?
Hogan was pretty much dried up by the time he left the WWF... and I
think part of the reason is that he's protected himself as a superman so
much that he's boring. He's not human, therefore, not all that much fun.
There's no mystery. He's never going to lose. And now that he's not
shooting juice, his post-match posedowns are a joke.
The best thing Big Terry could have done on this card was lose.
Become more human. But his ego wouldn't allow that and we were left with
this stupid injury thing -- a ridiculous scenario that people laughed at
as absurd WHEN IT ACTUALLY HAPPENED TO A REAL-LIFE OLYMPIAN!!
Then when Hogan takes the Shane Standt blow to the knee, he doesn't
even have the decency -- or perhaps the talent -- to properly sell the
injury. Hell, half the time he acted as if he forgot about it.
And sorry, Herb, but Dave -- and actually, i love the guy -- was
way off base in not just ripping this angle for what it was: a weak-ass,
poor excuse for something better because nobody could think of anything
else to do during the 15 minutes before the show they seemingly allot for
planning.
Shywhopper
(And yes, you're right. We really don't know yet about Hogan, long-term.
Right. But we do know we'll be seeing more and more of jimmy fart, brutis
shortcake and the rest of the Hogan mafia. Now there's a recipe for
saving a company.)
Herb Kunze
Dave Scherer <dsch...@acy1.digex.net> wrote:
>On Sun, 11 Sep 1994, Herb Kunze wrote:
>> In talking about thw WCW-Hogan deal, in particular the recent Clash,
>> Shywhopper said that the "average fan isn't into it." He thinks that
>> WCW screwed up the Hogan injury angle because it was "cartoonlike"
>> and that any fans that watched that show for free won't be back.
>> Hence, we needn't talk about the ratings of that show.
>>
>> Dave agrees above.
>
>
>
>Are they new fans to WCW? Yup. Are they gonna stay when Hogan leaves?
>Nope. Why? Because the whole promotion is Hogan, and that's all they
>care about anyway. I wrote a note to you yesterday asking about this and
>I have not seen your reply yet.
Somehow, the fans that have jumped on the WCW bandwagon with the
arrival of Hogan are not "average" or "common" fans. And somehow
it's clear to you that they won't develop an interest in anything
or anyone else in WCW. That's certainly possible, but I don't
see why that's so clear to you.
>> This discussion has nothing to do with work quality; it has only
>> to do with WCW's direction appealing to the "average" fan. I don't
>C'mon Herb, *every* discussion you get involved in deals with work
>quality. The question here is, when Hogan leaves will the fans who have
>come go with him? I say yes, because he is all that they are there fore
>to begin with. And if these new fans leave, it will be uglier for WCW
>than it was before.
Work and workrate are important to me so I often bring them into
discussions. This particular thread was started by Shywhopper and
his sentiment is parphrased above. *It* has nothing to do with
workrate. It has a lot to do with his feelings and assumptions
and nothing to do with known fact. It's possible that he's right,
but I don't see it as clear.
Herb...
Dave Scherer
On Mon, 12 Sep 1994, Herb Kunze wrote:
> Somehow, the fans that have jumped on the WCW bandwagon with the
> arrival of Hogan are not "average" or "common" fans. And somehow
> it's clear to you that they won't develop an interest in anything
> or anyone else in WCW. That's certainly possible, but I don't
> see why that's so clear to you.
Because WCW is not giving them anything else. Because when they loved
Hogan in Titan, they did not care about anything but him. They were
exposed to a great Steamboat match at the the last PPV. I have not heard
of Steamboat getting huge pops from his new fans. Looks pretty clear to me.
> Work and workrate are important to me so I often bring them into
> discussions. This particular thread was started by Shywhopper and
> his sentiment is parphrased above. *It* has nothing to do with
> workrate. It has a lot to do with his feelings and assumptions
> and nothing to do with known fact. It's possible that he's right,
> but I don't see it as clear.
Known fact? So we can only discuss things that have happened now?
People can't use their knowledge of the business to speculate on trends
and outcomes down the line?
When did someone make this a fascist newsgroup Herb?
Herb Kunze
Dave Scherer <dsch...@acy1.digex.net> wrote:
> I have not heard of Steamboat getting huge pops from his new fans.
> Looks pretty clear to me.
I guess I think that the buy rates and ratings are more important
than whether fans cheer. Will they plummet to the same levels (or
lower, as you predict) when Hogan leaves? I can't say.
>> Work and workrate are important to me so I often bring them into
>> discussions. This particular thread was started by Shywhopper and
>> his sentiment is parphrased above. *It* has nothing to do with
>> workrate. It has a lot to do with his feelings and assumptions
>> and nothing to do with known fact. It's possible that he's right,
>> but I don't see it as clear.
>Known fact? So we can only discuss things that have happened now?
>People can't use their knowledge of the business to speculate on trends
>and outcomes down the line?
Where did this come from? You agreed with his opinion and both of
you think it's a clear-cut certainty that this opinion is correct.
All I said was that it is an opinion and not fact and that it is
impossible to know at this exact moment whether it will prove
itself to be correct.
Similarly, you stated as fact that Hogan would not draw for WCW.
You did this over and over again and I kept asking you why this
opinion was so clear to you. In the end, Hogan drew well. Now
you and others say that that was curiousity and the ratings will
go down from that first show. That's possible, sure, but it's
not a certainty, is it?
Herb...
Dave Scherer
On Tue, 13 Sep 1994, Herb Kunze wrote:
> In article <Pine.SUN.3.90.94091...@acy1.digex.net>,
> Dave Scherer <dsch...@acy1.digex.net> wrote:
> > I have not heard of Steamboat getting huge pops from his new fans.
> > Looks pretty clear to me.
>
> I guess I think that the buy rates and ratings are more important
> than whether fans cheer. Will they plummet to the same levels (or
> lower, as you predict) when Hogan leaves? I can't say.
Well circle the wagons partner, because we have come to a new beginning.
You were the one who stated that the new fans Hogan brings in would be
exposed to the "beter" WCW style of wrestling. Well, about all they have
seen so far is Steamboat vs Austin. And neither has become a fan favorite.
THAT is what I am asking YOU about.
When will these people become the converts you thought they would?
> >> Work and workrate are important to me so I often bring them into
> >> discussions. This particular thread was started by Shywhopper and
> >> his sentiment is parphrased above. *It* has nothing to do with
> >> workrate. It has a lot to do with his feelings and assumptions
> >> and nothing to do with known fact. It's possible that he's right,
> >> but I don't see it as clear.
> >Known fact? So we can only discuss things that have happened now?
> >People can't use their knowledge of the business to speculate on trends
> >and outcomes down the line?
>
> Where did this come from? You agreed with his opinion and both of
> you think it's a clear-cut certainty that this opinion is correct.
> All I said was that it is an opinion and not fact and that it is
> impossible to know at this exact moment whether it will prove
> itself to be correct.
It came from the fact that this group is based on discussion about
possibilities. We are semi experts and we often use our knowledge here
to predict the future. Anyone making a prediction KNOW it is "not fact"
and does not need that pointed out.
> Similarly, you stated as fact that Hogan would not draw for WCW.
> You did this over and over again and I kept asking you why this
> opinion was so clear to you. In the end, Hogan drew well. Now
I NEVER said he would not draw. I said he would not justify the
enourmous financial outlay. Has he? Well, they had a good PPV, a good
Clash, and a bad Clash. If he draws big enough numbers at his last two
PPV's, on this contract, I was wrong about that. But the second part,
and by far the most important part of my argument, was also the effect that
he would have long term. I see his decrepit friends. I see the whole
company being worked around him. I see NO fans becoming the WCW converts
you said they would be.
I see a company that is riding a wave that crash them when it runs it's
course.
Tell me what they have set up for the future, that will make them money,
that I have missed here?
> you and others say that that was curiousity and the ratings will
> go down from that first show. That's possible, sure, but it's
> not a certainty, is it?
Are you going to wake up tomorrow? It's possible, but it's not a
certainty. That argument is a useless crock of bullshit Herb. We are
friggin' speculating here.
Eric Chmiel
In a previous article, dsch...@acy1.digex.net (Dave Scherer) says:
>Meltzer, and also the Meltzerites, have lost touch with the the
>common fan. They really have. And I have told him that before, and he
>never really replies.
This is right on the money. Although Meltzer is much more in touch
with wrestling fans than, say, Vince McMahon or Eric Bischoff or Ric
Flair or Hulk Hogan or Pat Patterson, he has still failed to realize that 90%
of what he (and sheetreaders) thinks makes a wrestling show good never
even enters into the minds of 90% of the people who watch. You think
fans in general worry about Hulk Hogan's workrate? I also loved the Torch's
recent poll of readers that found that the Torch's subscribers think
the WWF isn't in good shape in the ring. While they are correct, it
means nothing. What did you think they were gonna say? They're sheetreaders,
for God's sake.
Perhaps some one out there has seen the camcorder footage of Lord
Steven Regal talking to fans at Slam Meet in May. He says sheetreaders
are such a minority in wrestling, it's useless to even target them when
marketing the product. I have newfound respect for the guy after seeing him
say things like this and many other things he mentioned.
EMC
--
Evan Schlesinger
Eric Chmiel <aa...@freenet.buffalo.edu> wrote:
>
>In a previous article, dsch...@acy1.digex.net (Dave Scherer) says:
>
>>Meltzer, and also the Meltzerites, have lost touch with the the
>>common fan. They really have. And I have told him that before, and he
>>never really replies.
>
> This is right on the money. Although Meltzer is much more in touch
>with wrestling fans than, say, Vince McMahon or Eric Bischoff or Ric
>Flair or Hulk Hogan or Pat Patterson, he has still failed to realize that 90%
>of what he (and sheetreaders) thinks makes a wrestling show good never
>even enters into the minds of 90% of the people who watch. You think
>fans in general worry about Hulk Hogan's workrate?
Depends on the fan. There are of course those people who watch Hogan because
he's Hogan, and not because he's a wrestler. People paid to see Andre the
Giant cause he was a freak, not because he was a good wrestler by any stretch
of the imagination.
> I also loved the Torch's
>recent poll of readers that found that the Torch's subscribers think
>the WWF isn't in good shape in the ring. While they are correct, it
>means nothing. What did you think they were gonna say? They're sheetreaders,
>for God's sake.
>
And they are correct, so why does this become a point of contention?
> Perhaps some one out there has seen the camcorder footage of Lord
>Steven Regal talking to fans at Slam Meet in May. He says sheetreaders
>are such a minority in wrestling, it's useless to even target them when
>marketing the product. I have newfound respect for the guy after seeing him
>say things like this and many other things he mentioned.
No doubt that sheetreaders are a minority, but on the same note, the normal
fan wants to see a great match just as much as the hardcore fan.
If it's so useless to target a sheetreader audience, how come SMW and ECW both
do so? SMW has Fan Week, basically for sheetreaders, and they do pretty well
with it. ECW cards, while attract their fair share of scumbags, are from all
accounts, great shows. If the shows sucked (like say, the WWF house shows),
people wouldn't be coming back and back and back.
Titan's top arena in the country, (or what used to be), the Nassau Coliseum,
which 2 years ago, was consistently drawing at least 6,000, is not even
drawing half of that anymore.
EVAN
No taglines necessary
marv bloom
<deleting Herb's response to Dave>
Briefly, am commenting on the WCW bringing Hogan and Hacksaw and
other ex-WWF Wrestlers into the Fed. Turner has been loosing money
since he invested in this Wrestling Federation.
He has been $old on the idea that signing HH and other WWF Wrestlers
will finally show a profit. The WCW haven't made any money with their
captive market, so the gamble was worth it (their PPV's and CoC had a
higher buy/viewership since the "new generation WCW" came into being.
Turner is attempting to erode the WWF Fanbase by introducing
Wrestlers that this Market is familar with and lure them over. It
started with the signing of Jesse Ventura, Vince did a tit for tat and
signed Jimbo Ross, then Mean Gene/Heenan went South and the rest is
history.
Ted wasn't making any money with the regular customers and frankly if
one resides in Armpit, Tnn., where else can they go?
The cancellation of Major League Baseball is a boon to the WCW, here's
one example.
In Toronto, the main and only affordable venue is Maple Leaf Gardens
(the WCW did a tour a few years ago and worked a small 3rd rate venue
in town) but this is a WWF leased facility. The SKYDOME has lost
millions of dollars on account of the baseball strike, so these
premises could be rented for a pittance and ahem, the WCW now has a
major market and a world class facility to stage their show in.
Let's look at the NYC area, MSG is WWF but the Meadowlands is a
subway ride away. As much as I dislike Bischoff, the current
circumstances have made him look "good".
As the WCW expands it's horizons and offers freebie Syndies to the
local TV Stations in Vince Territory, they are positioned to "take
it".
Forget the squeals from purists and long term NWA/WCW Fans, the
potential is 10X greater than that. Alas, Bischoff is looking very
clever right now to Turner.
Marv
* BlueJays, still the World Champions!
Dave Scherer
On 15 Sep 1994, Evan Schlesinger wrote:
> In article <Cw6wF...@freenet.buffalo.edu>,
> Eric Chmiel <aa...@freenet.buffalo.edu> wrote:
> >
> >In a previous article, dsch...@acy1.digex.net (Dave Scherer) says:
> >
> >>Meltzer, and also the Meltzerites, have lost touch with the the
> >>common fan. They really have. And I have told him that before, and he
> >>never really replies.
> >
> > This is right on the money. Although Meltzer is much more in touch
> >with wrestling fans than, say, Vince McMahon or Eric Bischoff or Ric
> >Flair or Hulk Hogan or Pat Patterson, he has still failed to realize that 90%
> >of what he (and sheetreaders) thinks makes a wrestling show good never
> >even enters into the minds of 90% of the people who watch. You think
> >fans in general worry about Hulk Hogan's workrate?
>
> Depends on the fan. There are of course those people who watch Hogan because
> he's Hogan, and not because he's a wrestler. People paid to see Andre the
> Giant cause he was a freak, not because he was a good wrestler by any stretch
> of the imagination.
Ev, it figures that you come back and in your first point, completely
miss the point.
Your statement validates what Eric said. It doesn't matter what a fan
watches for, be it Hogan or Andre or whatever. The fact that they watch
and are a fan increases the number of non Meltzer type fans, and that was
Eric's point.
> > Perhaps some one out there has seen the camcorder footage of Lord
> >Steven Regal talking to fans at Slam Meet in May. He says sheetreaders
> >are such a minority in wrestling, it's useless to even target them when
> >marketing the product. I have newfound respect for the guy after seeing him
> >say things like this and many other things he mentioned.
>
> No doubt that sheetreaders are a minority, but on the same note, the normal
> fan wants to see a great match just as much as the hardcore fan.
I wholeheartedly disagree, at least if you are dfining "great match" by
some rspw hardcore standard. A lot of fans love watching a fifteen
minute match with littel work as long as the face wins, and especially if
that face is Hogan.
> If it's so useless to target a sheetreader audience, how come SMW and ECW both
> do so? SMW has Fan Week, basically for sheetreaders, and they do pretty well
> with it.
Get real. SMW makes crap off of sheetsters. 50 odd people paid 325 for
Fan week. Look at their regular crowd, as people I know who go to their
shows do. they don't know, and don't care, about sheets.
Where ECW is concerned, don't confues hardcore with sheet readers. Most
of the people who sit in the bleachers are not sheet readers. they are
hardcore fans.
> Titan's top arena in the country, (or what used to be), the Nassau Coliseum,
> which 2 years ago, was consistently drawing at least 6,000, is not even
> drawing half of that anymore.
And that is not because of match quality, it's because there are no
issues and no one, or no angle or feud, is particularly over.
Mark Carlton
> While I have yet to see the PPV, reaction to this week's WON where the
>Meltz man gave Bret vs. Owen FIVE STARS has people wondering... exactly what
>kind of drug is Dave on this week? <G>
>Dave
>(anyone out there agree with his rating of the cage match?? anyone??)
What was also real strange about his rating was that he was taking into
account the new polical-correctness in wrasslin' like no violence and
no blood. What good is a cage match if the boys don't get thrown into
the cage and juice a little? I guess I'm forgetting the "cages"
now are more bars and not the cyclone fence cages ala War Games 87,
Flair-Race 83, or Bruiser & Crusher vs Heenan's Blackjacks 70?.
Now those were cage matches!
Another disagreement I had with Dave M. was that he gave the Clash
a mild thumbs up! I watched in about 5 minutes on FF and felt ripped
off. Was there any wreslting other than Steamboat-Austin? His rating
was based on the fact of the Hogan injury angle.
How can people watch this shit(WCW)?
Evan Schlesinger
>
>>
>> No doubt that sheetreaders are a minority, but on the same note, the normal
>> fan wants to see a great match just as much as the hardcore fan.
>
>I wholeheartedly disagree, at least if you are dfining "great match" by
>some rspw hardcore standard. A lot of fans love watching a fifteen
>minute match with littel work as long as the face wins, and especially if
>that face is Hogan.
You'll always notice that the few truly great matches that we get in this
country on a national basis, are the same ones that usually end up as PWI
match of the year.
Even the WWF has been touting the Razor vs Michaels ladder match from WMX as
the greatest match in WWF history (or at least WrestleMania history. Whatever)
Point is, every fan coming away from that show, hardcore, mark, whatever, was
not about to say that Bret Hart vs Yokozuna was the better match.
>
>> If it's so useless to target a sheetreader audience, how come SMW and ECW both
>> do so? SMW has Fan Week, basically for sheetreaders, and they do pretty well
>> with it.
>
>Get real. SMW makes crap off of sheetsters. 50 odd people paid 325 for
>Fan week. Look at their regular crowd, as people I know who go to their
>shows do. they don't know, and don't care, about sheets.
But they do cater especially to them during that once a year time. Most
sheetreaders probably don't live in that area to begin with. If they do,
they're the ones that end up going. Along with the rest of the locals.
>
>Where ECW is concerned, don't confues hardcore with sheet readers. Most
>of the people who sit in the bleachers are not sheet readers. they are
>hardcore fans.
>
Would you say that hardcore fans have an extremely different set of standards
that determine what a great match is, from that of sheetreaders?
>> Titan's top arena in the country, (or what used to be), the Nassau Coliseum,
>> which 2 years ago, was consistently drawing at least 6,000, is not even
>> drawing half of that anymore.
>
>And that is not because of match quality, it's because there are no
>issues and no one, or no angle or feud, is particularly over.
Probably a combinatino of lots of things. match quality included.
It certainly doesn't help that the WWF is running MSG, Meadowlands and Nassau
in a row.
EVAN
No taglines necessary.
Evan Schlesinger
Mark Carlton <car...@ornews.intel.com> wrote:
>dp4...@ripco.com (D.E. Prazak) writes:
>
>
>> While I have yet to see the PPV, reaction to this week's WON where the
>>Meltz man gave Bret vs. Owen FIVE STARS has people wondering... exactly what
>>kind of drug is Dave on this week? <G>
>
>>Dave
>
>>(anyone out there agree with his rating of the cage match?? anyone??)
Yipes. I must agree with you Dave. 5-stars was hardly even justifiable. I gave
it four and I thought that might be high.
>
>What was also real strange about his rating was that he was taking into
>account the new polical-correctness in wrasslin' like no violence and
>no blood. What good is a cage match if the boys don't get thrown into
>the cage and juice a little? I guess I'm forgetting the "cages"
>now are more bars and not the cyclone fence cages ala War Games 87,
>Flair-Race 83, or Bruiser & Crusher vs Heenan's Blackjacks 70?.
>Now those were cage matches!
True, but sinece no one was really thrown into the cage walls all too often,
you can't really expect blood.
Besides, they threw in some damn nice highspots to make up for lack of juice.
EVAN
No taglines necessary.
Dave Scherer
On 18 Sep 1994, Evan Schlesinger wrote:
> You'll always notice that the few truly great matches that we get in this
> country on a national basis, are the same ones that usually end up as PWI
> match of the year.
>
> Even the WWF has been touting the Razor vs Michaels ladder match from WMX as
> the greatest match in WWF history (or at least WrestleMania history. Whatever)
> Point is, every fan coming away from that show, hardcore, mark, whatever, was
> not about to say that Bret Hart vs Yokozuna was the better match.
And those same people said the same things about Andre vs Hogan, and even
your favorite, Hogan vs The Anabolic Warrior.
That they like a *good* match is accidental because the majority of fans
don't watch wrestling for moves, workrate, and highspots. If they did,
don't you think we would have a major "move. workrate, and highspot" Fed?
> >Where ECW is concerned, don't confues hardcore with sheet readers. Most
> >of the people who sit in the bleachers are not sheet readers. they are
> >hardcore fans.
> >
> Would you say that hardcore fans have an extremely different set of standards
> that determine what a great match is, from that of sheetreaders?
Honestly, yes I would. Most Meltzerites like New Japan Style highspots
and All Japan style matches the best. Hardcore fans, like in Philly,
like any and all all of the above, plus they also like well booked and
psychotically brutal matches.
Herb is a perfect example of the difference. He likes the former, but
not the latter. In Philly we like both. Hell, we loved seeing 911 trash
Doink simply because of the what the booking symbolized. that's why I
get a kick out of people, like Herb, generalizing Philly fans as
Cro-Magnon men when they are, in all actuality, mostly very intelligent.
> >And that is not because of match quality, it's because there are no
> >issues and no one, or no angle or feud, is particularly over.
>
> Probably a combinatino of lots of things. match quality included.
> It certainly doesn't help that the WWF is running MSG, Meadowlands and Nassau
> in a row.
And what are the issues? Hell, if it was a few years back and Hogan was
on top against DiBiase, they would have averaged 10K at those shows, and
not for match quality.
Evan Schlesinger
Dave Scherer <dsch...@acy1.digex.net> wrote:
>
>On 18 Sep 1994, Evan Schlesinger wrote:
>
>> You'll always notice that the few truly great matches that we get in this
>> country on a national basis, are the same ones that usually end up as PWI
>> match of the year.
>>
>> Even the WWF has been touting the Razor vs Michaels ladder match from WMX as
>> the greatest match in WWF history (or at least WrestleMania history. Whatever)
>> Point is, every fan coming away from that show, hardcore, mark, whatever, was
>> not about to say that Bret Hart vs Yokozuna was the better match.
>
>And those same people said the same things about Andre vs Hogan, and even
>your favorite, Hogan vs The Anabolic Warrior.
Actually, the WWF was praising Steamboat vs Savage as the greatest match in
WWF history after WM3 had occurred. Andre vs Hogan was a big event as far as
they were concerned (and by drawing 90,000+ to the Silverdome, rightfully so)
As far as Hogan vs Warrior, hey Dave, I guess they knew what they were talking
bout.
>
>That they like a *good* match is accidental because the majority of fans
>don't watch wrestling for moves, workrate, and highspots. If they did,
>don't you think we would have a major "move. workrate, and highspot" Fed?
Closest thing I can think of is ECW. True, more of a brawling-style, but it
still makes for super matches. How much name power did Jimmy Snuka really have
in that territory? Did anyone give a crap about him?
>
>> >Where ECW is concerned, don't confues hardcore with sheet readers. Most
>> >of the people who sit in the bleachers are not sheet readers. they are
>> >hardcore fans.
>> >
>> Would you say that hardcore fans have an extremely different set of standards
>> that determine what a great match is, from that of sheetreaders?
>
>Honestly, yes I would. Most Meltzerites like New Japan Style highspots
>and All Japan style matches the best. Hardcore fans, like in Philly,
>like any and all all of the above, plus they also like well booked and
>psychotically brutal matches.
So the ECW crowd has been hating Too Cold Scorpio coming in? If Sabu
moonsaults, do they boo?
>
>Herb is a perfect example of the difference. He likes the former, but
>not the latter. In Philly we like both. Hell, we loved seeing 911 trash
>Doink simply because of the what the booking symbolized. that's why I
>get a kick out of people, like Herb, generalizing Philly fans as
>Cro-Magnon men when they are, in all actuality, mostly very intelligent.
From one extreme there to the other.
Yeeeeeesh.
>
>> >And that is not because of match quality, it's because there are no
>> >issues and no one, or no angle or feud, is particularly over.
>>
>> Probably a combinatino of lots of things. match quality included.
>> It certainly doesn't help that the WWF is running MSG, Meadowlands and Nassau
>> in a row.
>
>And what are the issues? Hell, if it was a few years back and Hogan was
>on top against DiBiase, they would have averaged 10K at those shows, and
>not for match quality.
At the same time, they didn't have that brilliant idea of running all 3 arenas
in 3 days that market. I remember seeing a Hogan vs Hennig match from MSG in
December, and then attending a house show the month after at Nassau. The match
was of course, the same. But no one would've gone to see that same match again
the very next night after.
I would bet that if the Owen vs Bret series had lived up to its potential
matchwise at house shows, crowds would've been a bit better.
EVAN
No taglines necessary.
Dave Scherer
On 19 Sep 1994, Evan Schlesinger wrote:
> >And those same people said the same things about Andre vs Hogan, and even
> >your favorite, Hogan vs The Anabolic Warrior.
>
> As far as Hogan vs Warrior, hey Dave, I guess they knew what they were talking
> bout.
So you keep telling me.
> >That they like a *good* match is accidental because the majority of fans
> >don't watch wrestling for moves, workrate, and highspots. If they did,
> >don't you think we would have a major "move. workrate, and highspot" Fed?
>
> Closest thing I can think of is ECW. True, more of a brawling-style, but it
> still makes for super matches. How much name power did Jimmy Snuka really have
> in that territory? Did anyone give a crap about him?
Not really. And that is the point, really. ECW would have drawn even
you down from NYC if a hardcore, work first promotion would succeed.
They didn't even get you down.
> >Honestly, yes I would. Most Meltzerites like New Japan Style highspots
> >and All Japan style matches the best. Hardcore fans, like in Philly,
> >like any and all all of the above, plus they also like well booked and
> >psychotically brutal matches.
>
> So the ECW crowd has been hating Too Cold Scorpio coming in? If Sabu
> moonsaults, do they boo?
Reread what I wrote. I said in Philly all kinds of well worked matches
get over. Scorpio and Benoit got a standing O. But the Meltzerites in
the crowd look for the figure skating formula to rating matches.
> >Herb is a perfect example of the difference. He likes the former, but
> >not the latter. In Philly we like both. Hell, we loved seeing 911 trash
> >Doink simply because of the what the booking symbolized. that's why I
> >get a kick out of people, like Herb, generalizing Philly fans as
> >Cro-Magnon men when they are, in all actuality, mostly very intelligent.
>
> From one extreme there to the other.
> Yeeeeeesh.
Well, you have been to Philly!
Dave Scherer
On 20 Sep 1994, Evan Schlesinger wrote:
> In article <Pine.SUN.3.90.940919...@acy1.digex.net>,
> Of course they won't draw me there. I will not travel such ridiculous
> distances for pro wrestling anymore. Let me know if ECW runs a show in NY
> where they can sort of actually advertise where the card is being held to the
> people in NY.
Lots of people come down from NY, and say it's worthwhile. Whether you
do is up to you.
> >> >Honestly, yes I would. Most Meltzerites like New Japan Style highspots
> >> >and All Japan style matches the best. Hardcore fans, like in Philly,
> >> >like any and all all of the above, plus they also like well booked and
> >> >psychotically brutal matches.
> >>
> >> So the ECW crowd has been hating Too Cold Scorpio coming in? If Sabu
> >> moonsaults, do they boo?
> >
> >Reread what I wrote. I said in Philly all kinds of well worked matches
> >get over. Scorpio and Benoit got a standing O. But the Meltzerites in
> >the crowd look for the figure skating formula to rating matches.
>
> Now I'm confused. Figure skating formula. Does that only apply to a high-spot
> type of match or are wild brawls included as well?
Actually, it was a reference to a thread I am done talking about.
> >> >Herb is a perfect example of the difference. He likes the former, but
> >> >not the latter. In Philly we like both. Hell, we loved seeing 911 trash
> >> >Doink simply because of the what the booking symbolized. that's why I
> >> >get a kick out of people, like Herb, generalizing Philly fans as
> >> >Cro-Magnon men when they are, in all actuality, mostly very intelligent.
> >>
> >> From one extreme there to the other.
> >> Yeeeeeesh.
> >
> >Well, you have been to Philly!
>
> And you're gonna tell me that the Philly fans are "mostly very
> intelligent"????? Have you flipped completely?
Don't confuse a book with it's contents.
Evan Schlesinger
Dave Scherer <dsch...@acy1.digex.net> wrote:
>
>On 19 Sep 1994, Evan Schlesinger wrote:
>
>> >That they like a *good* match is accidental because the majority of fans
>> >don't watch wrestling for moves, workrate, and highspots. If they did,
>> >don't you think we would have a major "move. workrate, and highspot" Fed?
>>
>> Closest thing I can think of is ECW. True, more of a brawling-style, but it
>> still makes for super matches. How much name power did Jimmy Snuka really have
>> in that territory? Did anyone give a crap about him?
>
>Not really. And that is the point, really. ECW would have drawn even
>you down from NYC if a hardcore, work first promotion would succeed.
>They didn't even get you down.
Of course they won't draw me there. I will not travel such ridiculous
distances for pro wrestling anymore. Let me know if ECW runs a show in NY
where they can sort of actually advertise where the card is being held to the
people in NY.
>
>> >Honestly, yes I would. Most Meltzerites like New Japan Style highspots
>> >and All Japan style matches the best. Hardcore fans, like in Philly,
>> >like any and all all of the above, plus they also like well booked and
>> >psychotically brutal matches.
>>
>> So the ECW crowd has been hating Too Cold Scorpio coming in? If Sabu
>> moonsaults, do they boo?
>
>Reread what I wrote. I said in Philly all kinds of well worked matches
>get over. Scorpio and Benoit got a standing O. But the Meltzerites in
>the crowd look for the figure skating formula to rating matches.
Now I'm confused. Figure skating formula. Does that only apply to a high-spot
type of match or are wild brawls included as well?
>
>> >Herb is a perfect example of the difference. He likes the former, but
>> >not the latter. In Philly we like both. Hell, we loved seeing 911 trash
>> >Doink simply because of the what the booking symbolized. that's why I
>> >get a kick out of people, like Herb, generalizing Philly fans as
>> >Cro-Magnon men when they are, in all actuality, mostly very intelligent.
>>
>> From one extreme there to the other.
>> Yeeeeeesh.
>
>Well, you have been to Philly!
And you're gonna tell me that the Philly fans are "mostly very
intelligent"????? Have you flipped completely?
EVAN
No taglines necessary.
Jamie LaBrash
In a previous article, dsch...@acy1.digex.net (Dave Scherer) says:
>
>On 20 Sep 1994, Evan Schlesinger wrote:
>
>> In article <Pine.SUN.3.90.940919...@acy1.digex.net>,
>
>> Of course they won't draw me there. I will not travel such ridiculous
>> distances for pro wrestling anymore. Let me know if ECW runs a show in NY
>> where they can sort of actually advertise where the card is being held to the
>> people in NY.
>
>Lots of people come down from NY, and say it's worthwhile. Whether you
>do is up to you.
And some are trying to come down from North of the Border (don't know when
Dave but hopefully soon!) Of course there is no alternative to ECW nearby
other than useless WWF house shows!
--
! "Flair is Dead!!!!" - the ECW mutant contigent (i.e. the whole arena!) !
! "If you hate something.......don't you do it too!" - E. Vedder !
! "Dirty deeds are COOL!" - Butt-Head !
! ba...@freenet.carleton.ca_________________________jlabrash@chat.carleton.ca!
Evan Schlesinger
Dave Scherer <dsch...@acy1.digex.net> wrote:
>
>On 20 Sep 1994, Evan Schlesinger wrote:
>
>> In article <Pine.SUN.3.90.940919...@acy1.digex.net>,
>
>> Of course they won't draw me there. I will not travel such ridiculous
>> distances for pro wrestling anymore. Let me know if ECW runs a show in NY
>> where they can sort of actually advertise where the card is being held to the
>> people in NY.
>
>Lots of people come down from NY, and say it's worthwhile. Whether you
>do is up to you.
Good for them. I've lost interest in pro wrestling as a whole.
>> >> >get a kick out of people, like Herb, generalizing Philly fans as
>> >> >Cro-Magnon men when they are, in all actuality, mostly very intelligent.
>> >>
>> >> From one extreme there to the other.
>> >> Yeeeeeesh.
>> >
>> >Well, you have been to Philly!
>>
>> And you're gonna tell me that the Philly fans are "mostly very
>> intelligent"????? Have you flipped completely?
>
>Don't confuse a book with it's contents.
I don't think I am. Saying that the Philly fans are smarter than Cro-magnons,
would in itself, be quite hard to prove.
EVAN
No taglines necessary.
Dave Scherer
In a previous article, esc...@merle.acns.nwu.edu (Evan Schlesinger) says:
>>Lots of people come down from NY, and say it's worthwhile. Whether you
>>do is up to you.
>
>Good for them. I've lost interest in pro wrestling as a whole.
Then why do you read and post here? And why did you place an "ad" asking
for tapes? That seems like a lot of unnecessary trouble to go to for
something that doesn't interest you.
Evan Schlesinger
I should've said that better. I meant to say that my interest level in pro
wrestling is not what the same as it was two years ago.
It has decreased.
EVAN
No taglines necessary.