I just want to talk about Dolph Ziggler for a bit.

[XL]

Doesn't like Ziggler. Doesn't like Rhodes. Who does captaincharismark like?

[Tom Guycott]

I've already professed my love for Kingston/Ziggler matches.

With that said, I don't see him competing for Flair's or even Cena's number of world title reigns, but I can see them letting him bear the company flag for awhile.

[Anybody Thrilla]

Originally Posted by captaincharismark Am I seriously the only fan here that thinks Dolph Ziggler isn't anything special? I admit his in ring work is good enough, but for the most part his matches haven't been exciting. It could be him and Kofi have been fueding for a year or so now, but his matches bore me. It seems like the guy is more of a mark for himself than the fans are. I dare someone to follow that??? As far as that goes, the Cena/Mysterio match that same night was far better. And his mic skills aren't even vaguely interesting. In his fued with Edge, he had a chance to step up and prove himself, but again failed to impress. It's a pretty good indication of how much confidence WWE has in him when Vickie Guerrero is his manager. I mean, she gets heat b/c ppl hate her being annoying, but she doesn't scream personality. To me, him having her as a manager makes him look weak. I thought the night Austin was GM, we might see the end of that, but they totally overlooked that stipulation. So much for him being solo to see if he can develop better mic skills. Overall, I haven't see that much in Ziggler. He's not a phenominal worker or entertainer, and hasn't even been improving on a consistent level. And what an abomination of a name. Of course, I never thought the guy would amount to much in the Spirit Squad, and even now doesn't convince me...

What I like about Ziggler's matches is that his offense almost always makes sense. He seems like he goes in with a strategy, and he adjusts that strategy according to how things pan out. His name is hokey, but his execution certainly is not.

I would agree that his mic work has been sub-par barring a few occasions, and I think that might even lend to why I like the "FOLLOW THAT!" line. It's two simple words that are hard to jumble and pretty easy to deliver...kinda like another catch phrase that used to be accompanied by a crotch chop.

Originally Posted by Kane Knight I'd be more surprised if you ever didn't like the direction Ziggles was going in. I'm pretty sure he could OD and be found bloated and naked in his bathtub and you'd post "I like where this is going."

What would be even more surprising than THAT would be if you actually added anything to this discussion without making a stupid, non-comical attempt at a personal attack, but that's probably just me too.

Originally Posted by captaincharismark If ppl here like him, sing his praises, but I disagree. I'm not gonna call a mediocre at best wrestler great. At this point in his career, he hasn't shown anything special. The fact that Vickie Guerrero is his manager means he sucks as an entertainer. He hasn't used her in any apparent way to get over as a big time heel. Asking someone to follow your match is laughable too if you aren't having a 5 star classic. It sure as hell isn't a standard to judge other matches with...

I know that I never personally used the word "great" in this thread until this very sentence, but from a wrestling standpoint, Ziggler is definitely one of the best in the WWE right now. I've explained why I enjoy his matches in this very post, so I won't reiterate just yet.

Also, I was unaware that having Vickie Guerrero as a manager automatically meant that you sucked as an entertainer. Edge would like to have a word with you.

As far as the "FOLLOW THAT!" line being laughable, you may be forgetting that professional wrestling has heels and faces, and in the role of an arrogant heel (as Dolph Ziggler is portraying right now), it is not uncommon to make ridiculous claims to paint oneself in a superior light. It's the simple dynamics of pro wrestling, bud. If Ziggler was a FACE yelling that, it would be a little silly. He's not, though.

Originally Posted by Tom Guycott With that said, I don't see him competing for Flair's or even Cena's number of world title reigns, but I can see them letting him bear the company flag for awhile.

I don't see Ziggler approaching Flair or Cena's numbers either, and I just feel I should state that quite clearly now before anyone tries to put any words in my mouth. What I will say is that Ziggler's new found intensity has him more poised for kayfabe success than ever before in today's WWE.

[Corporate CockSnogger]

Originally Posted by captaincharismark Maybe it was the fact I was only guy here would didn't like Ziggler. That and his lame attempt to make fun of my "RAW is headed in the right direction" thread. Seems to narrow things down...

Did you even read Kane Knights post that you replied to? Go back and read it again, see if you still think it's aimed at you.

[Innovator]

Ziggler is good, can be great, but if I see another Kofi match I'm gonna pull my hair out.

[Rock Bottom]

I liked Ziggler and Kofi's matches because you could tell they cared about them being logical. The announcers did a pretty good job of pointing that out also.

[wwe2222]

Dolph is one of the few guys Ill watch now. Cant change the name now either. I know its silly but its different enough to separate him from generic wrestling names.

[Stickman]

Originally Posted by Anybody Thrilla What if you just took an old friend's word for it and checked the match out on YouTube or something?

I think this ol' chap is somebody I can trust. I will give Mr. Ziggler a try on Monday.

[captaincharismark]

Originally Posted by XL Doesn't like Ziggler. Doesn't like Rhodes. Who does captaincharismark like?

It sure wouldn't be the bland and mediocre guys like Ziggler and Rhodes. Just b/c liking them is popular opinion doesn't mean I have to jump on the bandwagon. I see nothing that makes either guy stand out, other than bad promos and less than stellar matches...

[CSL]

Originally Posted by Lock Jaw Don't know why everyone is acting like him saying "Follow That" is a "thing" when he has only said it once. If he starts saying it some more, then it becomes a "thing".

he's posted it multiple times on Twitter after his matches, I'd say the fact he's started saying it on TV now (and went out of his way to do so) now makes it "a thing"

[CSL]

Originally Posted by captaincharismark It sure wouldn't be the bland and mediocre guys like Ziggler and Rhodes. Just b/c liking them is popular opinion doesn't mean I have to jump on the bandwagon. I see nothing that makes either guy stand out, other than bad promos and less than stellar matches...

you rebel you

[Kal-El]

Keep the name, get rid of Vicky, and continue to improve on the wrestling matches. Now that's heading in the right direction for his character.

[captaincharismark]

Originally Posted by Anybody Thrilla What I like about Ziggler's matches is that his offense almost always makes sense. He seems like he goes in with a strategy, and he adjusts that strategy according to how things pan out. His name is hokey, but his execution certainly is not.

While I do agree he seems to use strategy in his matches, I think that makes it more bland and boring. When was the last time a great wrestler needed a strategy to get a match over? Plus, I've always admired the wrestlers that can improv their work and be innovative. Being creative in the ring shouldn't be over analyzed. It does add some structure to the matches, but in the end I can pretend they aren't boring. His name is another example of WWE creative not having a clue, as they have never come up with a decent name. Not his fault there.

I would agree that his mic work has been sub-par barring a few occasions, and I think that might even lend to why I like the "FOLLOW THAT!" line. It's two simple words that are hard to jumble and pretty easy to deliver...kinda like another catch phrase that used to be accompanied by a crotch chop.

Yeah, but it's also a clever attempt on WWE's part to hide his flaws on the mic. Using two words accomplishes that. However, it's a very cheesy way of doing it. I do like that phrase, cause it draws more heat for him and gives him an attitude. Seems to me though that he could be more comfortable on the mic. Even the worst guys on the mic could deliver two words. To be considered a top guy you have to deliver big time on the mic and have the ability to keep up anyone. All I'm saying is he tends to rely on Vickie too much to draw heat for him.

What would be even more surprising than THAT would be if you actually added anything to this discussion without making a stupid, non-comical attempt at a personal attack, but that's probably just me too.

Glad I'm not the only one who's noticed that fact. KK tends to enter a discussion like this and try and personally attack someone. Ok if you want to be a smartass, but not great if you don't add one insight into the topic. How lame is it that he feels the need to take personal shots over actual conversation?

I know that I never personally used the word "great" in this thread until this very sentence, but from a wrestling standpoint, Ziggler is definitely one of the best in the WWE right now. I've explained why I enjoy his matches in this very post, so I won't reiterate just yet. Also, I was unaware that having Vickie Guerrero as a manager automatically meant that you sucked as an entertainer. Edge would like to have a word with you.

I can understand ppl liking him using some strategy as a form of psychology. but it bores me. Rather than making his matches better, to me they are less watchable. I find myself doing anything but paying attention after the first few minutes he's in the ring. To some extent, I think that's why some ppl don't like him. Short attention spans(like mine)and over thought matches equals disaster. You have to be aware of the fans when you plan a match. It can be logical without being boring to the point of turning the fans away.

In Edge's case, he was the "ultimate opportunist" so him using Vickie when she was SD and RAW GM made sense for his character. In Ziggler's case, he has Vickie as a way of getting him over on the mic. Not exactly a proper comparison, though I can see why you might make that analogy.

As far as the "FOLLOW THAT!" line being laughable, you may be forgetting that professional wrestling has heels and faces, and in the role of an arrogant heel (as Dolph Ziggler is portraying right now), it is not uncommon to make ridiculous claims to paint oneself in a superior light. It's the simple dynamics of pro wrestling, bud. If Ziggler was a FACE yelling that, it would be a little silly. He's not, though.

I've never forgotten wrestling has heels and faces. Always interesting when someone accuses me of not knowing wrestling b/c of a different opinion. I realize saying, "Follow That" is a way of getting him over as an arrogant heel. Although it accomplishes that, it's a cheesy way of doing so. And certainly doesn't improve his character any. In the end, if he doesn't improve, he'll be yet another bland guy stuck in the mid card...

I don't see Ziggler approaching Flair or Cena's numbers either, and I just feel I should state that quite clearly now before anyone tries to put any words in my mouth. What I will say is that Ziggler's new found intensity has him more poised for kayfabe success than ever before in today's WWE.

There's a reason you don't see Ziggler approaching Cena or Flair. That's b/c both Cena and Flair understand what it takes to entertain ppl more properly. Until Ziggler can fully understand how to evolve his character and not be repetitive, he'll always be one dimensional. Can he successful? Yes, but only if he can adapt. If not, I could easily see him being released somewhere down the line.

[captaincharismark]

Originally Posted by CSL you rebel you

Tough job, but somebody has to do it.

[XL]

Originally Posted by captaincharismark It sure wouldn't be the bland and mediocre guys like Ziggler and Rhodes. Just b/c liking them is popular opinion doesn't mean I have to jump on the bandwagon. I see nothing that makes either guy stand out, other than bad promos and less than stellar matches...

Hey, I'm all for being a "hipster" (much for Bieber) but you didn't actually tell us who you do like...

[captaincharismark]

Originally Posted by XL Hey, I'm all for being a "hipster" (much for Bieber) but you didn't actually tell us who you do like...

It depends on which show you're talking about....

RAW
CM Punk
John Cena
Rey Mysterio
The Miz
HHH(I think his new role will freshen his career up)

SD
Sheamus(very awesome, talented big guy)
Christian
Randy Orton
Kane

[XL]

Thanks.

[Corporate CockSnogger]

What mid or upper midcarders do you like Captain Charismark? Just so we know who to avoid praising if we don't want to be considered sheep.

[Anybody Thrilla]

Originally Posted by captaincharismark While I do agree he seems to use strategy in his matches, I think that makes it more bland and boring. When was the last time a great wrestler needed a strategy to get a match over? Plus, I've always admired the wrestlers that can improv their work and be innovative. Being creative in the ring shouldn't be over analyzed. It does add some structure to the matches, but in the end I can pretend they aren't boring. His name is another example of WWE creative not having a clue, as they have never come up with a decent name. Not his fault there.

Are you saying you would prefer the matches to be over-the-top and nonsensical? I'm not asking that to be a dick, but just trying to gauge your interest. One of the biggest critiques of wrestling over the years is that it's obviously predetermined and often cheesy. Ziggler matches always seem more 'legitimate' to me, and he makes it easier to suspend disbelief. I also find it difficult to buy that Ziggler isn't innovative. He's constantly doing things that I haven't seen before or adding a new twist on old traditions.

His name is pretty much a moot point. It doesn't detract from what he does in the ring. Honestly, the cheesy nature of his name seems like it would be right up your alley, seeing as to how you apparently aren't a fan of making things seem too real.

Yeah, but it's also a clever attempt on WWE's part to hide his flaws on the mic. Using two words accomplishes that. However, it's a very cheesy way of doing it. I do like that phrase, cause it draws more heat for him and gives him an attitude. Seems to me though that he could be more comfortable on the mic. Even the worst guys on the mic could deliver two words. To be considered a top guy you have to deliver big time on the mic and have the ability to keep up anyone. All I'm saying is he tends to rely on Vickie too much to draw heat for him.

What's wrong with hiding flaws? They're letting him showcase what he's GOOD at and not forcing his weaknesses down our throats. It's a pretty sound strategy, and we should honestly be thankful they are employing it. This tactic was what made Paul Heyman a wrestling deity.

You don't NEED to be great on the mic to be a top guy (read: Goldberg, Brock Lesnar, The Undertaker, Lex Luger, Yokozuna, Bret Hart, Rey Mysterio, etc.), even though it would definitely help. It's not necessary, though. There's no reason to pretend he's great when he's not. Just let him go on and continue putting on wrestling clinics, like he has been doing. He's perfectly capable of being a top guy in TODAY'S WWE.

As far as Vickie, she didn't do a single thing this past Monday besides stand at ringside. Sure they were using her heat at first, but Dolph seems to really be coming into his own as of late. Just because Shawn Michaels used Sherri's heat at first doesn't mean he was a shitty entertainer.

I can understand ppl liking him using some strategy as a form of psychology. but it bores me. Rather than making his matches better, to me they are less watchable. I find myself doing anything but paying attention after the first few minutes he's in the ring. To some extent, I think that's why some ppl don't like him. Short attention spans(like mine)and over thought matches equals disaster. You have to be aware of the fans when you plan a match. It can be logical without being boring to the point of turning the fans away.

I guess I would have to ask you what some of your favorite matches of all time are. Before you even answer, I'm willing to bet that they were longer than most matches and pretty well thought out.

In Edge's case, he was the "ultimate opportunist" so him using Vickie when she was SD and RAW GM made sense for his character. In Ziggler's case, he has Vickie as a way of getting him over on the mic. Not exactly a proper comparison, though I can see why you might make that analogy.

You said that having Vickie as a manager meant that you weren't a good entertainer. That's simply not true. It's not like Edge was some extreme outlier. The only other person to compare anything Vickie-related to is Eric Escobar, and I'm kinda furious that I've just been reminded of his existence.

I've never forgotten wrestling has heels and faces. Always interesting when someone accuses me of not knowing wrestling b/c of a different opinion. I realize saying, "Follow That" is a way of getting him over as an arrogant heel. Although it accomplishes that, it's a cheesy way of doing so. And certainly doesn't improve his character any. In the end, if he doesn't improve, he'll be yet another bland guy stuck in the mid card...

I wasn't actually accusing you of not knowing wrestling, you dork. I was ribbing you a bit and making a point. I feel I've earned that right by now, since this definitely isn't the first go-round we've had on the boards. I swear, not everything is a personal attack.

Again, the word 'cheesy' comes up. From what you've been saying, you seem to prefer 'cheesy' to 'sensical', so I feel you're going to have to elaborate on your actual wrestling taste here.

As far as Ziggler being stuck in the mid card, he's already been a World Heavyweight champion, so somebody (that mattered) somewhere at least saw a little something in him. He's clearly being groomed for the future.

There's a reason you don't see Ziggler approaching Cena or Flair. That's b/c both Cena and Flair understand what it takes to entertain ppl more properly. Until Ziggler can fully understand how to evolve his character and not be repetitive, he'll always be one dimensional. Can he successful? Yes, but only if he can adapt. If not, I could easily see him being released somewhere down the line.

Why does it always seem to come back to the all-time greats with you? I was even more careful with my wording of this thread title as to not get you up in arms about it (you're welcome).

Here's the bottom line: Ziggler is very good in the ring. While in the past he was presented as a bit of a joke, the character seems to be coming to the point now where he can be taken as a serious threat, and he can easily become a top player in today's WWE landscape. The only part of that you seem to disagree with is that he is very good in the ring, and to me, that's laughable.

[XL]

"Well that's your opinion and you're entitled to it but I'm not gonna like some no-talent, charisma-free nobody just because everybody else does."

[Anybody Thrilla]

I wonder if the new breed of hipster smarks ever crush two cans of PBR together like Steve Austin.

[Innovator]

They only do it ironically.

[Mr. Nerfect]

My booking of a Ziggler/Riley feud:

* Dolph Ziggler beats Alex Riley on RAW next week to retain the US Title after Vickie Guerrero pulls a leg of Riley, or something, which allows Ziggler to capitalise with the Zig Zag.

* Riley confronts Triple H and tells him that he wants Ziggler again. "You've got it, pal." Ziggler vs. Riley for the US Title at SummerSlam -- but it'll be Riley's last shot at the title.

* Riley brings up Shaul Guerrero as his valet to cancel-out the Vickie factor. This really messes with Vickie's head, and at SummerSlam, Riley manages to hit his Hit the Showers for the three count to become the new United States Champion.

* Dolph and Vickie are upset. Ziggler wants his rematch, and will get it at Night of Champions. Prior to that, you Riley & Shaul going over Dolph & Vickie, and Shaul beating Vickie. The matches won't be pretty, but they will be over.

* Riley beats Ziggler at Night of Champions to retain the US Title with his TKO. The story here is that Ziggler has the Implant DDT scouted, but Riley manages to use a back-up finishing move to put Ziggler down for the three. It shows that Ziggler is savvy, while putting over Riley clean.

* They can blow-off their feud on RAW in a 2/3 Falls Match. Ziggler gets the first fall, which is a good way to make Ziggler look good moving on from this, but Riley gets the next two and goes over quite strong in his feud with Ziggler. Depending on what sort of stories they have going on elsewhere at this time, this could take place at one of the October PPVs. Or perhaps a match where Ziggler manages to secure the stipulation of his choosing. He chooses a Submission Match, which forces Riley to show off a different side to his game.

[captaincharismark]

Originally Posted by Anybody Thrilla Are you saying you would prefer the matches to be over-the-top and nonsensical? I'm not asking that to be a dick, but just trying to gauge your interest. One of the biggest critiques of wrestling over the years is that it's obviously predetermined and often cheesy. Ziggler matches always seem more 'legitimate' to me, and he makes it easier to suspend disbelief. I also find it difficult to buy that Ziggler isn't innovative. He's constantly doing things that I haven't seen before or adding a new twist on old traditions.

Actually, I don't prefer the matches to be over the top or nonsensical. Being predetermined has nothing to do with it either. I've always valued the art of wrestling and the stories it tells. Judging it for being predetermined would be ignorant if you've been watching for any length of time. Obviously calling it "fake" would be a dismissive way of ignoring what wrestling is. Ziggler's matches are sound from a psychological standpoint, but they aren't watchable to me. As far as him being innovative, he does a few moves I haven't seen, but otherwise shouldn't be considered an innovator. I'll admit he's got a unique style, but he's not a very exciting wrestler or character.

His name is pretty much a moot point. It doesn't detract from what he does in the ring. Honestly, the cheesy nature of his name seems like it would be right up your alley, seeing as to how you apparently aren't a fan of making things seem too real.

I was actually agreeing with you there. WWE creative is a joke as far as naming wrestlers. It has nothing to do with seeming real. You assuming b/c I don't like Ziggler I'm not a fan of realism is a far stretch. The fact is I do like realistic wrestling, but being bland and boring in the ring is where my problem with him comes in. There's a difference between "suspending disbelief" and putting the crowd to sleep. As far as that goes, "suspending disbelief" and being realistic are polor opposites, so it's one or the other. He's either over the top or he portrays realism. Ziggler sure isn't over the top, so I agree it is more realistic, but in a very boring kinda way.

What's wrong with hiding flaws? They're letting him showcase what he's GOOD at and not forcing his weaknesses down our throats. It's a pretty sound strategy, and we should honestly be thankful they are employing it. This tactic was what made Paul Heyman a wrestling deity.

The main issue with hiding flaws is it's ignoring the problems he has. To limit him on the mic to two words isn't gonna help him improve. He hasn't really had much mic time, so to limit him already is a bad move. Most of his career, someone else has done his talking. For all we know, he might eventually be a good mic worker. If they hide his flaws, they also take a shortcut and ensure he'll never be any better than he is now...

You don't NEED to be great on the mic to be a top guy (read: Goldberg, Brock Lesnar, The Undertaker, Lex Luger, Yokozuna, Bret Hart, Rey Mysterio, etc.), even though it would definitely help. It's not necessary, though. There's no reason to pretend he's great when he's not. Just let him go on and continue putting on wrestling clinics, like he has been doing. He's perfectly capable of being a top guy in TODAY'S WWE.

It's not necessarily mandatory to have great mic skills, but it helps. However, it is mandatory to be good enough to get your storyline over. Ziggler has to rely on two words, Vickie Guerrero, or his opponent to carry him on the mic. I'll grant you WWE is partly to blame there, but Ziggler has to step up and not be complacent.

As far as Vickie, she didn't do a single thing this past Monday besides stand at ringside. Sure they were using her heat at first, but Dolph seems to really be coming into his own as of late. Just because Shawn Michaels used Sherri's heat at first doesn't mean he was a shitty entertainer.

She didn't do much Monday, but she sure has been doing most all of his talking for him. Using her heat should be an advantage, for Ziggler though it hasn't benefited him. Which is a shame since he's a pretty decent heel. Shawn Michaels may have capitalized on Sherri's heat, but he evolved on the mic and became a good mic worker. Something thus far Ziggler has not and it the difference between being great and only decent...

I guess I would have to ask you what some of your favorite matches of all time are. Before you even answer, I'm willing to bet that they were longer than most matches and pretty well thought out.

My favorites are ones that are entertaining while doing a good job of wrestling. And yeah, some are longer although the ones I like don't put me to sleep. Being a great match doesn't mean having a strategy. You think guys like Bret Hart, Austin, The Rock, Angle, Undertaker, Benoit, Guerrero and HBK had to use that to get over??? I admired all those guys more b/c they didn't have to plan the match down to every detail. They pretty much went out and did it on the fly. You can tell with Ziggler his matches are meticulously planned, with only makes his matches more boring.

You said that having Vickie as a manager meant that you weren't a good entertainer. That's simply not true. It's not like Edge was some extreme outlier. The only other person to compare anything Vickie-related to is Eric Escobar, and I'm kinda furious that I've just been reminded of his existence.

When she does most all of your talking it's not a good thing. And yeah, it does say to me that you aren't a good entertainer if she talks 90% of the time for you. At least Edge did all his own talking for himself and was entertaining enough to stand on his own. It's clear using Vickie as a mouthpiece was the intention WWE had to hide Ziggler's inability on the mic. As for Eric Escobar, I was also hoping to never hear that name again. He's another good example though of someone WWE paired with Vickie to talk for him...

I wasn't actually accusing you of not knowing wrestling, you dork. I was ribbing you a bit and making a point. I feel I've earned that right by now, since this definitely isn't the first go-round we've had on the boards. I swear, not everything is a personal attack.

It sure sounded like you said I didn't know wrestling. I've actually been watching close to 20 years, so I think I have some insight on wrestling. Ribbing me b/c you think it's your right proves nothing. All that does is make you look more immature and attempting to make it personal. I could care less if you think I'm a dork, as I call it like I see it. I'm sure this won't be the last time we don't see eye to eye, but I always try to be objective rather than focusing on winning an argument...

As far as Ziggler being stuck in the mid card, he's already been a World Heavyweight champion, so somebody (that mattered) somewhere at least saw a little something in him. He's clearly being groomed for the future.

He was champion for what, 5 minutes??? You can't really count that fluke win as WWE thinking he's the future. He may be groomed for the future, but that doesn't mean he's ready for it. And if he impressed someone that mattered, more power to them. That will hardly change his progress so far lacking or my current opinion of him. Just b/c WWE pushes someone as the future doesn't mean I like them. They earn my respect when they can be something more than one dimensional...

Why does it always seem to come back to the all-time greats with you? I was even more careful with my wording of this thread title as to not get you up in arms about it (you're welcome).

The reason I do that is to gauge how well a superstar is progressing. While I realize he needs more time to be considered in that league, his evolution(or lack thereof)hasn't been too fast. If you felt you had to censor your wording b/c of me, I feel sorry for you. Having discussions on topics is the only way to objectively view things. Too often ppl on here let their bias toward a wrestler bind them from discussing something objectively. I'm more than willing to say why I do or don't support someone or something. I can understand you not agreeing with me, but trying to avoid an actual discussion is detrimental to the topic...

Here's the bottom line: Ziggler is very good in the ring. While in the past he was presented as a bit of a joke, the character seems to be coming to the point now where he can be taken as a serious threat, and he can easily become a top player in today's WWE landscape. The only part of that you seem to disagree with is that he is very good in the ring, and to me, that's laughable.

To me the bottom line is Ziggler is nowhere near ready for the ME. He pretty much hasn't evolved any as a character or much as a wrestler. While WWE may use him eventually, IMO he needs vast improvement in order to advance from mid card to main eventer. His in ring work is solid, but not very watchable. I honestly have never paid much attention to anything Dolph Ziggler related, and I think that is telling about how bland and boring he is...

[Corporate CockSnogger]

Speaking of being bland and boring...

[Anybody Thrilla]

A few things:

*I've been discussing the fuck out of this topic with you. What would make you say I'm avoiding an actual discussion?

*Will you please cite some particular examples of matches you really enjoy? Just trying to see where you're coming from.

*When I say that Ziggler has a "strategy", I'm talking from a kayfabe point of view. His character has a gameplan in which to win the match, and that has happened in matches with all of those greats that you listed. I don't think every single move is planned out, and there's really no one here than can tell either of us how much of it is on the fly.

[XL]

It makes me sad that you has to explain that last part.

[captaincharismark]

Originally Posted by Anybody Thrilla A few things:

*I've been discussing the fuck out of this topic with you. What would make you say I'm avoiding an actual discussion?

You do discuss topics with me, although it seems like to some extent you try to avoid it. Things you say like you properly worded this topic in order to keep me from responding in detail. Can't really have a balanced look at an issue without both sides of a debate. I realize it's long and drawn out to respond point by point, but there's really no other way I see of talking topics out. Alot of times seeing both sides of a topic will give you some new perspective when viewing someone(or something in particular).

*Will you please cite some particular examples of matches you really enjoy? Just trying to see where you're coming from.

The matches I like are guys who can have great matches while keeping the fans attention. Guys like Bret Hart, HBK, HHH, Austin, Rock, Jericho, Angle, or Taker. Any big match or fued those guys had made me a fan on the true art of wrestling. Of course, guys like Brock Lesnar, Goldberg, Nash, Hall and Hogan also had watchable matches, though not all were wrestling clinics.

*When I say that Ziggler has a "strategy", I'm talking from a kayfabe point of view. His character has a gameplan in which to win the match, and that has happened in matches with all of those greats that you listed. I don't think every single move is planned out, and there's really no one here than can tell either of us how much of it is on the fly.

I understand kayfabe, though it's a word I detest. And yeah, the greats had the same happening in their matches, but they presented it in a more exciting and watchable way. Obviously, there's no way to tell which matches are planned meticulously definitively, but it's more an educated guess. Ziggler's matches seem to lack that certain element of excitement that bigger matches have. You can always tell when something special is happening, and for me, Ziggler just doesn't do that.

If ppl can blindly mark for a wrestler, surely the reasons I listed could be considered valid for not liking Ziggler. You might not agree with my logic/reasons, but the fact remains I did attempt to explain my opinion.

[CSL]

please tell me why you 'detest' the word kayfabe

[captaincharismark]

Originally Posted by CSL please tell me why you 'detest' the word kayfabe

B/c it's a word that gets thrown around alot by wrestling fans. Fans often talk like they have some insider knowledge on wrestling, when really all we do is speculate with the info we have.

[Kal-El]

"I know Kay Fabian".

[Volare]

[CSL]

Originally Posted by captaincharismark B/c it's a word that gets thrown around alot by wrestling fans. Fans often talk like they have some insider knowledge on wrestling, when really all we do is speculate with the info we have.

But you yourself have spoken about 'psychology' and guys that can 'improv' and 'being innovative' in previous posts in this very thread.

[mike adamle]

Haven't read all of this thread so this may or may not have already been said, but I kind of think they're turning Dolph into an Edge/Jericho like character. Not Rated R Superstar-wise, but just the way that they could always be put in a main event and have it treated like a main event. It took them a while to get to that, but it happened. I feel like Dolph is in the beginning stages of a career like them.

[4 knuckles up]

I've always enjoyed DZ.



What's not to like about hs in-ring ability?

[Anybody Thrilla]

Originally Posted by mike adamle Haven't read all of this thread so this may or may not have already been said, but I kind of think they're turning Dolph into an Edge/Jericho like character. Not Rated R Superstar-wise, but just the way that they could always be put in a main event and have it treated like a main event. It took them a while to get to that, but it happened. I feel like Dolph is in the beginning stages of a career like them.

Sounds about right.

[captaincharismark]

Originally Posted by CSL But you yourself have spoken about 'psychology' and guys that can 'improv' and 'being innovative' in previous posts in this very thread.

Yeah, I have, but I don't try to state my knowledge on wrestling as a fact. Basically, the info I've heard from the wrestlers themselves is what I use when discussing topics. Often here, ppl think they know more than actual wrestling insiders, which is laughable to me. Especially when saying something seems "legitimate" or in kayfabe. Personally, it's serves as an irritation to me....

[XL]

Seems like an odd gripe.

It's not even as much an insider term as shoot, work, face, heel for example. The scenario that bugs you (people coming off like they know more than actual insiders) doesn't even apply to kayfabe IMO.

To say Undertaker and Kane are kayfabe brothers is undisputable fact. Where as relaying backstage gossip as fact is totally different.

[Jordan]

Dude I am the quintessential wrestling fan, for instance I just spent 50 bucks yesterday on WWE DVD's instead of streaming them. So you better fucking take my word when I say that Dolph Ziggler's name is the shit and so is his in ring ability.

Dolph is the perfect fusion of Curt Henning and Billy Gunn, it's going to make money motha fuckaaaaa, I just wonder where they will work him in.

I personally think Dolph/Orton or Dolph/Punk or Dolph/Cena or Dolph/Del Rio in a main event scenario would be match of the year candidates more than likely.

[Jordan]

Originally Posted by captaincharismark Yeah, I have, but I don't try to state my knowledge on wrestling as a fact. Basically, the info I've heard from the wrestlers themselves is what I use when discussing topics. Often here, ppl think they know more than actual wrestling insiders, which is laughable to me. Especially when saying something seems "legitimate" or in kayfabe. Personally, it's serves as an irritation to me....

There are facts dude, FACT Hogan and Flair ruled in the 80's and were awesome.

Tell me that's not a fact and I swear we got a fisticuffs match on our hands