Thread: "100,001" Replies (Wrestling Forum)
View Single Post
Old 10-16-2017, 07:41 AM   #37241
Mr. Nerfect
 
Posts: 60,919
Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by screech View Post
My question is absolutely pertinent. You said the segment was great on TV but looked average on paper, which is a ridiculous statement. I asked why that matters, but for whatever reason you continue to deflect with essays.

I was not asking about Jimmy Jacobs. I don't care if you like him or not. I was, and still am, asking why a segment that you enjoyed can't be seen as good because it "looked average on paper." It is completely relevant as it was a direct response to one of your posts.

I realize that I'm not talking about what everyone else is, but I asked you a direct question. It's really not a hard question by any means. Though you've proven lately that you're a moron (or just an asshole), so I guess it is for you.
Because we are talking about how it would look on paper. I don't really know how to make it any clearer, dude -- I'm sorry. We're talking about how good a dude is at scripting television and you're like "Well, why does that matter to your enjoyment of television?" But the enjoyment of it is besides the point, because we're talking about the scripting. Of course great performance can elevate shitty material. That's completely in line with what I've been saying. You're like agreeing with me, but then arguing with me about something that isn't even in the conservation? I don't think I am a moron, but I am confused as to where you're coming from.

The smart criticism of my position would be "Ah, but by providing Jericho the platform to steal the show, does he deserve the credit?". That would at least be about what it is about. I mean, it's silly anyway, because we don't know what Jacobs did and didn't come up with. It's scuttlebutt. But I was responding to the automatic assumption that he would be a great writer, because I was wondering if evidence of that was out there. Even if he had good ideas, they were probably nixed anyway. I'm sure he can do brilliant work. I'm just saying it's not like the dude is Heyman with this proven streak of brilliance that can actually, for example, help SmackDown outdraw RAW.
Mr. Nerfect is offline   Reply With Quote