So you did leave because you didn't agree with people's opinions lol?

White my man. We are OG's.

Can't imagine Noid has any actual friends/success in real life judging by how he interacts with people on TPWW.

quite a few people would fall under that category if this was true

When I go full ridiculous, it should be patently obvious, like when I said we should have random indy guys every week being Mike Kanellis, because of how forgettable he is.

But I have understood why folks do and don't work in a certain position. As far as Jinder, it works for a simple reason:

"He doesn't DESERVE the World Heavyweight Title."

To an extent, you're right. But that's kind of the point of his title reign, apart from the whole tapping into the India demographic.

You leave Mike and Maria out of this!!

I'm an ironic fan of Frank Drebin.

Might have to change my name to #1-ironic-wwf-fan

Come on, we all now white is the only way to go.

Unlike Adamle i think Noid is a good guy and likely has plenty of friends outside of tpww. I just thinl his antics in the last 6 months have been heelish.

Adamle is an ironic heel.

Noid is great and TPWW is better fr having him here, no question.

Just think the whole concept of "ironic fandom" being a "big problem" is ridiculous.

Fake news

Bushwhacker Luke woooooooo!

I did too, especially considering:

a) they did it with what was destined to be yet another generic tag team breakup angle seen the world over repeatedly in the history of tag team wrestling

b) most of this was on their own dime

c) the angle was on par with just about anything Lucha Underground had done with a similar style and an obviously lesser budget (one was a whole company with money coming into it to produce, the other was, as I just mentioned, pretty much done with Hardy assets)

d) ended up outshining most of the other shit the actual company was producing in spite of it's cheeziness and

e) even if The Company Formerly Known As TNA doesn't want to admit it, they carried the company on their massive and entertaining backs, both figuratively and at a specific point, financially, when they were at a point of internal turmoil and uncertainty.


This here last point is why *I* personally find the whole suit against them for the #BROKEN stuff shameful- that's the thanks they get for keeping eyeballs on the product up to and including their own produced "show" when the actual company didn't have a taping to air; a mishandling of contract negotiations and a lawsuit?!? The literal example of "no good deed goes unpunished".

On topic: the irony here was they were intentially presenting a "B grade" product, and it was done with a wink and a nod and a touch of Troma-Vision, but TNA was mostly presenting shit and oblivious to how shit it actually was.

Admittedly, my initial gripe with it was how much it was similar to Lucha Underground, then it started growing on me because it was striking me more like a parody than a rip-off (unlike the Wyatts/New Day nonsense).

The Jinder thing also works because they're committed to the bit.

It's weird, because they're committed to it for that second reason, but it is working because of the first. Had this been anyone else for any other reason (other than a roster-thinning dearth of injuries and retirements), WWE would have likely just scrapped it after that first PPV and chalked it up to him not being able to get over on his own.

Had, say Henning* gotten the commitment to presenting him as a big deal as Heyman had initially touted him as, I am totally certain he would be a main event talent now. If he would have kept getting wins, even "fluke" ones, to build up his newly minted credibility, that plan could have worked. Had they assembled a "crew" around Heyman, and let one of the other nobodies assembled around him be the ass end of the jokes and beatdowns, Axel could have continued to slowly work his way up the card. Instead, he just became a jobbing meatshield, like when he was essentially the ONLY buffer between CM Punk and Brock and/or Heyman and was constantly getting his ass kicked on every show, the "mystique" had been eroded away in a matter of weeks.

Had the company just rolled with making Roman a heel and committed to that, they would be well into reaping the rewards they desperately wanted for forever of a face turn by now instead of trying to even still present him like Cena with the "a face who doesn't let boos bother him".

Even odder because in the whole thing between Braun and Roman, it is obvious Reigns is supposed to be the face and Strowman is supposed to be the heel. However, other circumstances, such as the obvious shoehorning of Reigns as a face, Brawn's rampages being somewhat "a breath of fresh air" (as they don't have him laying down for people every week) giving him a slow build of credibility. His mic work needs help, but who gives a shit? He toppling ambulances and slamming Big Show around like nothing and isn't giving diatribes every week or forced to say "sufferin' succotash" for the kids.

They are dead set on the hotshotting with Jinder. The fact that they didn't go in a different direction is why it works, and the only way they can fuck this up is if they try to turn him face in the immediate future.

I miss CSL

I don't get your analogy. I see the value in pop-music. It's successful and appeals to a large amount of people. Are you saying I should like shit stuff? Pass.

No.

Sure. I imagine you trapping prostitutes in holes you've dug into your basement lowering lotion to them via a pulley-system. What a baseless observation.

You're a bit smarter than adamle though. Sure, you can think of them as heelish. It did start as a character, but I sincerely do believe that the current product is absolute horse-shit, and I don't mind calling out stuff I find to be dross as a fan now. If people enjoy it, whatever. I stayed out of the Jinder Mahal Appreciation Thread until I saw it was basically all ironic stuff anyway. It provided me a good chance to rant about my disdain for the Mahal push.

For what it's worth, I think you're a great poster. I think we're just debating the semantics of "big problem." I think you've taken it to be in the tone of "BIG problem," whereas I simply meant it as a dry "big problem."

CSL is a god.

We all like shit stuff. This is a wrestling forum after all.

Heh. Fair point.

My biggest problem is how processed and homogenized WWE feels. Once in a while we get something that has genuine emotion and great booking, like the Cena/Styles feud, or the current Joe/Lesnar program, but they're few and far between. Meanwhile everything else just seems so plastic, and void of passion.

I honestly look at wwe as I used to look at TNA. I watch ppvs because they have great talent putting on great matches, but I don't invest myself in the booking or storylines, because I know I'll probably just end up disappointed.

I love New Japan not just for the in ring product, but for the booking as well. Gedo has as much to do with New Japans success as the great talent. They don't use intricate, drama filled storylines. They tell their stories through interactions in multi man tags, and pay off spots from previous bouts in rematches. They keep it simple. But simple executed well is always superior to elaborate executed poorly.

Its like WWE is Mcdonalds. Global reach, and great production with their digital menu, and 150 flavor soda machine. But the food itself is processed garbage. People eat it up anyway, because its accessible, and frankly, they're just used to it.

Meanwhile New Japan is like the local burger joint. They don't have the reach, or the bells and whistles of mcdonalds, but GOD DAMN if they don't serve the best burger you've ever tasted.

No. I'm saying you went from "Val Venis/Paul London/Doug Basham are amazing and should be pushed well beyond their abilities/connection to the crowd, ratings and 'believability' be damned" to "It's a joke that people think Alexa Bliss/Jinder Mahal is amazing and deserve the push she/he's getting well beyond her/his abilities/connection for the crowd, it's not 'believable', look at the ratings" with no middle ground.

I love you to bits, man, and think you're one of the best contributors this forum has ever had, but you're coming off as quite superior. And the constant derailing of threads - whether intentional or not - is starting to remind me of Kane Knight.

#MellowOut

Whatever vision the WWE has, it feels like a vision that wrestling fans don't really want to subscribe to. A "Roman Reigns era" akin to the Cenazoic Period isn't exactly compelling stuff, even for those who don't completely hate Reigns. Unfortunately there's no competition to force Vince's hand into giving people something more palatable with taste. He can force-feed whatever he wants to.

On a smaller scale, you can't really have vision for anyone else, because if you have an idea for AJ Styles vs. Shinsuke Nakamura, for example, then it goes to the next person at the creative meeting, who says "Oh yeah, Styles vs. Nakamura for the title would be great, but you know what I had in mind? Putting the belt on Jinder Mahal," and then someone else says "Yeah, and I thought that instead of pushing a Japanese wrestler you could push a Chinese wrestler." And instead of Styles vs. Nakamura you get Mahal vs. Tian Bing. And I'm sure if it doesn't work out, you get the blame for the initial idea, even though it doesn't resemble what you pitched in the first place.

Honestly, some of the stuff from modern WWE feels like the stuff that was being predicted for WCW in 1998/1999. The plan was for Nash to beat Goldberg and end the streak for a long time before it ever happened, and although no one really wanted to see it happen, lo and behold, that's the direction they go. They've got their idea in their mind, it's just not of consequence as to whether or not people want to see it.

Okay, well I disagree with your assessment there, I'm sorry to say. Thanks for putting the time in, but I honestly feel very balanced in my opinion. You may not see it as having middle ground, and that's cool, that's your call.

I've always been a tangential thinker, and it's something I'm very aware of an have been for a long time, so I'd wager a bet that the "derailing" of threads is not new. I've always found it hard to stick to A, B and C without introducing D. It's something I've worked very hard on consciously that I don't really bring to something as silly as an online forum, but I'm aware I do it, and say you're just noticing it now.

Also, not aiming this at you, but one of my pet peeves is when people on the internet try and tell you how you're feeling. It's just so presumptuous. I am a very mellow cat, haha -- too mellow -- it's another thing I work on, because there are downsides to it, as anyone who is too mellow could tell you.

I speak bluntly on this forum because, frankly, who gives a fuck? It's a forum. People fuck around and have their things. If I genuinely upset anyone, which isn't my intent, I apologize, but honestly, please stop trying to tell me that I am "angry" or "butthurt" about things. I'm underwhelmed by a product that I used to be a fan of and now have a hole in my TV viewing schedule. That's it.

I find myself fairly reasonable and easy to talk to when people actually want to engage in any sort of substantive conversation. If not, I do apologize. And if you want to have a more hollow and subjective fandom, go ahead. Don't engage with me, whatever -- I'm not going to get annoyed if people say things like "I enjoy Broken Matt Hardy," like #1-wwf-fan did earlier. There was another occasion in Better Wrestler recently where someone said they were voting for Cena over Andre because they had a better connection to him. That's fine. I don't give a shit about that. It's when people try to pass their taste off as fact that I'm like "hang on, is there something to that?"

You can think I am high and mighty because of that, again, that's your call. I think it's more high and mighty to defer to that as a perspective consensus, honestly. I also think it's more high and mighty to stick to points you can't intellectually defend, but I've always been a logical person outside my crazy fantasy booking kink. Some people do genuinely have more problem setting apart their favorite something from the best something. Whatever. Conversation with those sorts of people will only go so far for me. And that's ultimately why I left for a bit, because a lot of the people I were interacting couldn't tell the difference between something they liked and something that stands up to critical analysis, and were starting to to get really salty when it couldn't.

If it tips that way again, I'll leave again. Thankfully there are sections like Better Wrestler, where people talk about why something works, or why it doesn't, and conversation can go a bit deeper than the purely subjective. Of course there's always going to be room for subjectivity and opinion when it comes to taste, and there isn't always "right" and "wrong." Please don't misconstrue me as saying that. But I like to step outside my own opinions sometimes and see just how well they hold up against shared metrics, of which we do have some. That's a much more fun discussion for me than "Alexa Bliss is really great!" "Yeah, she really is!"

By the way, I loved being proven wrong about Val Venis. Through the SCG Radio podcast (of which I am more a fan right now than the current wrestling product, and I hope I don't spread anyone's sour of me onto them), I learnt that he was a pretty big failure during the Attitude era. Using that information, I can feel a bit sorry for poor Sean Morley and his shitty gimmick, but I can accept that I was wrong. I still like underappreciated-Heat-enhancement-talent-now-resembles-an-actual-penis Val Venis, but I'm not going to make the legitimate case that he should be the WWE Champion.

Although he probably should have been over Jinder Mahal. Just saying.

I can definitely take it as well as dish it, so bring your facts and figures and let's actually discuss wrestling on a wrestling forum, bitches.

I just don't see it being a problem at all, honestly. It isn't like anyone's fandom is changing what is actually put on the shows. That was my point. Ironic fandom, or fandom of ANY sort, simply doesn't matter at this time. "They" don't listen nor care what fans think.

Winner of a dining experience consisting of at least one portion of chicken.

Nailed it. But man sometimes wrestling can actually just be good.

Plus you may as well enjoy it. Unlike Roman or Borton being champ- Mahals run offers the fish out of water novelty we dont often get to see. Its not ideal but its easy to get a kick out of.

There's a point that I can actually engage with. See, I think we let them get away with it. We continue to keep our subscriptions, go to shows, watch the television, etc. This extends beyond Mahal, mind you. And honestly, it extends towards other promotions too. Things like The Young Bucks and the slow-motion comedy stuff. It's not my cup of tea, but the ironic "Ha, it's fake wrestling, look at how fake it is" tone does spread and does change the psychology of performers over time, which does change product over time.

I do agree that they don't care about what fans think. They've found what they perceive to be their bottom and will literally try everything now that they've found it. All that are left are the people they don't need to try for. Still, they do try to give enough lip service in terms of randomly pushing Kevin Owens to a faux World Title for a few months, despite it not being how fans would have envisioned. WWE is in a really weird place, if you stop and think about it for a while. And that's part of what I mean by "ironic fandom," because as the product gets less engaging, in a general consensussy sort of way, people pretend to be more engaged with aspects that aren't working. It just creates more of a foundation for more of it to be built upon. If you're not a fan of WWE programming right now, I'd suggest withdrawing your vote of financial support, if you do put money into them in any way. But do what you want, it's your money -- I just don't think change is coming until consumers force it, because competition ain't coming.

If you get a kick out of Mahal, that's fine. I don't fault KIRA or you for enjoying it. Whatever. I, personally, forced myself to watch one of his segments and could barely get through (legit -- I'm not just being cynical). It's not for me and is just one thing too many for me.

What I will say is that your position does sound a little defeatist. "You may as well enjoy it." There's a part of me that admires your optimism and resourcefulness with that. Sincerely. But there's another part of me that doesn't get why you'd subject yourself to something you clearly don't enjoy -- not trying to twist your words. I'm not saying that as a slam, because I look back over the years of wrestling I have consumed, and think about the high points and it makes me shudder to think how long it may have actually been since I enjoyed the WWE product for a sustained period of time -- I can relate more than anything -- but seeing the point made, I do think there is a perfectly sane "But why?" response to what you just said.

I don't watch weekly programming anymore and haven't for a little over 2 years now. I am still a fan of wrestling, in general, so I tend to watch the PPV's. Since doing so, I find myself enjoying what I actually do watch tons more. Maybe it is the over-saturation of the brand or something, I dunno.

I mean I don't watch much. But Jinder as champ is better than Orton or Reigns as champ. It's not great, but sadly enough, it's an improvement.

Remember how over Elsworth was?

Fucking dude still has a job. Good for him.

I think he got over because people missed real jobbers though. It'd been so long since the day of true enhancement talent, and Elsworth really fit the bill as a total throwback to a forgotten time.