lolOriginally Posted by chatty
lol
I think those that follow Meltzer's cult feel validated by his rankings for the Okada matches. I don't listen to this guy, the shit I hear is from posters on message boards and social media and it's always "no shit Sherlock" moments. He was just the first back in the 50's.
My opinion of Omega is that he is no doubt a crisp wrestler, very entertaining to watch in the ring. People like Jim Cornette tend to shit on the guy so hard because they know deep down if they're blowing Lance Storm as a great talent they have to admit Kenny is in the same conversation. But since he's young and he does weird shit as a person/character they use it to water him down. Oh the blow up doll, the young girl....Dude I was so into the 80's and early 90's comic book wrestling that Jim Cornette had a hand in that I don't care. And that's not me shitting on my guy JC that's just pointing out that it's a ridiculous hatred.
I'm with you about his mic work, whatever his character is supposed to be....I hope to God people like Arn, Tully, Goldust, Jericho, I hope they're really giving him solid advice because I think they could help him truly be what he is trying to be. I don't think Omega knows how to get to that next level, he's out there with a fucking broomstick still. That "Cleaner" moniker could be awesome but he makes it cheesedick because he spent all that time in DDT-land of Hero and the guy with the boxing glove on one hand and the Heavy Metal Chicken Wing Ultimate Fuckboy Championship lol.
He's a guy who if you put him in WWE and they were able to polish him up could be a top tier player. Not saying The Rock, but if people jerk off to Roman and Seth, Kenny could be in that category without question.
He’s not overrated as he’s a very good fine wrestler. Maybe overrated to the Meltzer that’s about it.
Kenny's good, but not great. I like Kenny mostly.
End of.
One thing about Meltzer's ratings is that a match he would normally give 4.5 can suddenly become a 5 if the final minutes elevate it. I remember an Okada v Ishii match during the G1 years ago that fell into this category. He explained his rational for grading it, and when I watched it, I could see what he meant. Most of the match was very good, but not something I would give 5 stars. Then the last 3 minutes went to a whole new level and I could see why Meltzer gave it the 5. I personally wouldn't have gone as far as him, but at least I understood his reasons.
This is how I felt about Omega v Fenix. Most of it was a very good match, but the last 5 minutes reached that next level and Fenix was absolutely on fire that I can see why Meltzer would go the full 5. I'd still probably give it 4.5, but to each their own.
lol
Correct me if I'm wrong, he's never given Kurt Angle a 5 star rating. If that's the case, and you look at Meltzer for what is considered a 5 star match, pull your penis through your eye sockets.
Yeah I just looked, fuck that guy. 4.75 stars for HBK v. Angle @ Mania 21. LOL.
The ONLY REASON I can think of as to why he would never give Angle a 5 star rating is because the one thing pro wrestling can't say is that it's real. Yes, the action is "real" just like a stuntman is doing real shit that could potentially get him hurt/killed. But Kurt Angle didn't know going into the 1996 Olympics with a broken fuckin neck knowing he was going to win.
So Dave and his weak frail mentality has probably always felt threatened by real wrestlers in the business because he knows his fuckboys like Matt Jackson and Tiger Mask 9 would get killed by Angle.
Last edited by Nash Diesel; January 12th, 2021 at 11:27 PM.
Daniel Bryan too. Lars Sullivan has one though.
meltzer's star ratings never fail to get a rise out of people.
love it.
He was just stingy on them back then but isn’t now. There are dozens of matches from the 2000s that would obviously get five stars if they happened move for move today
the star ratings being broken by the omega/okada six-star match really made dave loosen up his idea of what a five-star match is. Same as the five-star scale breaking what was originally the four-star scale.
He's given out like 7 or 8 five stars to WWE in the last 5 years, where hadnt given one to wwe in like 15 years before that.
edit: just looked it up and he gave wwe no 5star ratings between 97 and 2011 and then he's given out 8 since 2018.
Well, let's be honest. The majority of those 5 stars weren't for WWE matches, they were for NXT matches.
this waiting room segment is probably the worst thing that has ever been on dynamite
darby allin's the best wrestler in the world
edit wrong thred
Nothing negative was meant in my post, ND. At all. It was a throwaway comment. I've come across the subject quite a bit in my personal life recently, so asking must stem from that.
On the subject of Meltzer, I like him in small doses. How seriously people take his star ratings is kinda sad, to me. I paid them quite a bit of attention at one point, but at that point I was 14 years old.
I'm currently reading his 1997 Yearbook that I got for Christmas from Mrs M. Really enjoying it so far. My favourite year in wrestling.
Me and you are going to fall out.
Dave Meltzer and rat poison are a lot alike. They're never good, but they're okay in small doses.
Ha, I can't be dealing with him on Twitter etc, but reading his reviews and stories from 1997 etc, I'm ok with. But then I'm a big fan of the subject matter, so.
Ha fair enough.
I don't live and die but what he says but anyone who denies that he's never contributed something of value are just being ridiculous. Take the editorial aspect out of his newsletter. His opinion is his opinion. But he has given us plenty of information, not gossip, but educating us on underground talent, international talent. No different than fuckin Siskel & Ebert. I'm sure in the horror movie community there's all these weird groups based on certain horror genres that hate what Troma does and loves what Miramax did in the 80's more than the 90's. Meltzer is the Joe Bob Briggs of pro wrestling lol.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
