Wrestling Observer Newsletter

Hey All

Haven't written an article on 606v2 before, but I was reading through stuff on the interweb and something started to really annoy me, so I thought I would do the typical thing in this kind of situation and vent my frustration out to random strangers

The thing which really p'ed me off was Wrestling Observer Newsletter. Reading through their articles is a monotinous task at the best of times for me personally, but they weren't too terrible, it's when you reach the awards they give out that really annoys me, and their "Holier than thou" attitude. There are a few awards to show how well a wrestler or company has done, but it is mostly just an excuse for them to belittle a federation or wrestler. I mean they are picking on companies like Women of Wrestling for not having a good event. Hmm a company with little cash can't either buy in or attract athletes with good wrestling ability to come and work for them, strange that. Then they call Kane the most over-rated wrestler of 2010. He does some of the best promoing I have seen over the past decade and then puts on some pretty respectable matches with Undertaker given the age of the two, and then these guys turn around and say he is over-rated. I think if you want over-rated try someone like Rey Mysterio who the WWE still seem determined to push even now with other luchadores ready to replace him.

Then there is the absolute love affair recently with Brian Danielson (And previously UFC, though that seems to have died off somewhat recently). I can understand that Danielson could get the award for best technical wrestler (Even though Kurt Angle is still working as well as ever in TNA, but I will let that one slide). But giving him the most outstanding wrestler award for 2010 in the WWE is a little excessive if you don't mind me saying. Apart from taking the US Title off Miz before Miz could be pushed to the main event and his three match run with Dolph Ziggler, what have the WWE actually done with him to warrant him winning an award like that. Why didn't they give it to the other man mentioned Dolph Ziggler. Puts over Rey Rey in a feud and brings some prestige back to the IC Title, brinsg out the best in Danieslon then has a good match with Kofi Kingston and establish's himself as a top heel in the company with Vickie Guerrero at his side.

My final point is the double standards of some of their awards. They talk about awards for most disgusting promoitional tactic, which most storylines do deserve with the likes of Katie Vick and other similar ideas. Though they then go on to give Santino Marrela the best gimmick award for two years running for his comic stereotype of Italian Americans. So the (mildly racist) stereotype of all Italian Americans to have bad English and mono-brows is completely fine and legitimate, ok then.

Sorry if this is all complete codswallop, but it is just my opinion.

Lol i love a good rant, the Observer does like to 'smark it up' when they hand out awards, most of which are only created so they can tell ur how much they get the biz, Don't get me wrong I agree with a lot of what they say but totally get your point, good to have you on board btw

Leone - Good to have you on the board mate. I agree with your points and the idea that some publications see themselves as rather snobbish about things.

I personally don't think that it is right to take such a holier than thou attitude to things when it is, essentially, an entertainment programme.

In terms of the criticism of Kane, well it seems to be long standing and I too think unfair. Yes some of the storylines he has had have been poor or ill thought out, but that is down to the people who have booked him, not actually him. I think he is capable of having some good matches and still have a reasonable amount of athleticism for his size and age.

If you are looking for people to criticise Mysterio then you have probably come to the right place! There isn't too much love for him around here, though his obvious WWE pull is the merchandise that he sells. Also, given that he is likely to be in the final period of his WWE run I wouldn't be surprised to see WWE treat him particularly well so that they have a good reference in terms of picking up top Hispanic and Mexican talent and viewers in future.

Rey Mysterio used to be a great wrestler in WCW and ECW, especially in the Cruiserweight Division and to an extent the Tag Team Division. Even in the WWE he has had some amazing matches, with the likes of Jericho and Ziggler. So he is a good wrestler to an extent, but I just wish the WWE would stop having him go over the likes of Kane and Big Show, as no matter in what way you look at it, a guy who 5'6" and 175 lbs won't beat a guy who is 7 foot tall and weighs 300 lbs. I wouldn't mind him being treated well, and perhaps go into an IC Title feud, but just don't get him into another World Title feud, he deserved one run as World Champ for his years of work in wrestling and his abilities then, but I think now he just has to step back somewhat.

Good article mate, welcome to the board!
I am also not a fan of the WON.

I certainly think that Rey still has a role to play - he is working really well putting Cody over for example and in this I really respect him. I just think it is an easy cop out for the WWE to give him a push, after all midget botcher who is incredibly over with the kids v giving time and thought to pushing a young, credible performer... it is worrying to think that he will possible have another title shot / run in him.

Good article! Welcome to the board

Don't read wrestling observer but have experienced the same snobberish in Pro Slam magazine over the years... It's a great publication but when it listed it 100 top matches of all time (an impossible list to produce) & about 60% of the matches were from Japan I thought to myself what??

I buy PowerSlam every month but I too but when I read that list i just facepalmed

the-gaffer wrote:I buy PowerSlam every month but I too but when I read that list i just facepalmed

Do they still love HHH in PS?

I think Rey is a very good wrestler and deserving of his upper mid card place in WWE. I agree though, he should not be winning against 300 lbs monsters. If you take away the 619 (more so the way the wrestlers always fall in the middle rope rather than the move itself) and have him fued more with smaller wrestlers i don't think he would get criticised half as much.

nice article btw, I don't like reading those type of publications, far prefer the views of the fans on here

theanimal316 wrote:I think Rey is a very good wrestler and deserving of his upper mid card place in WWE. I agree though, he should not be winning against 300 lbs monsters. If you take away the 619 (more so the way the wrestlers always fall in the middle rope rather than the move itself) and have him fued more with smaller wrestlers i don't think he would get criticised half as much.

nice article btw, I don't like reading those type of publications, far prefer the views of the fans on here

If WWE had a strong cruiserweight / X-Division style competition then he could really shine. The problem is that they don't and they don't really have any other guys his size because of Vince's policy of measuring talent by the size of their biceps.

liverbnz wrote:

the-gaffer wrote:I buy PowerSlam every month but I too but when I read that list i just facepalmed

Do they still love HHH in PS?

Cena has taken over the mantle from HHH as powerslam Journalists least favourite Wrestler.... Once they wrote something like 'Cena's' punches are so poor that WWE may as well run 'THIS IS FAKE' across the screen everytime he throws one'

Which is still an understatement on ho poor his punches are

I've actually got a problem with you saying they have a "holier than thou" attitude just because they have opinions you don't agree with. That is essentially what it comes down to for me. The Observer is written by people who have watched far more wrestling and spoken to far more wrestlers and been much closer to the business and read far more about wrestling than 99% of us; why shouldn't they be entitled to their opinion?

If they'd said Rey was the most overrated wrestler and Dolph was the wrestler of the year, would you honestly feel the same way, ie that they have a holier than thou attitude? I don't think so.

I'm not an Observer reader or loyalist. In fact I'm not a big fan of the newsletter. But I'd take their opinions over most wrestling fans'.

Why is it that well-written opinions get people's backs up so much? Just because something is written with care and thought doesn't necessarily mean it was written with snobbery and a holier than thou attitude.

I remember you got a lot of stick not long ago crips for apparantly having a 'holier than thou' attitude. What was that all about again?

Crippled, I am not saying they have a holier than thou attitude for having differing opinions to me, lord knows that on Rugby, Music, Guitars and Trekking with people I know I am an arrogant swine.

I say holier than thou as all they want to do is belittle people through most of their work. Whether it be small federations like the ones I have already stated that they complain aren't holding great shows as they don't have the best talent, or guys who have put a tonne of effort into his work all year, suck as Kane or other examples include Big John Studd and Dusty Rhodes, to then just label them as "over-rated". Or my personal favourite where they do the "Indy Kid" trick where they will patronise fans in atricles after they will pick out a classic NJPW match or something similar and discuss it as something that these fans "Will not have heard of, though luckily PWO have heard of it."

I'm sorry that you disagree with my atricle Crippled, but that is what this site is here for at least, educated debate, but I don't get your point about any well educated article being getting up people's backs so much?

Mr H wrote:I remember you got a lot of stick not long ago crips for apparantly having a 'holier than thou' attitude. What was that all about again?

I did indeed. I think it's because I have strong opinions and (at the risk of sounding big-headed, which I don't mean to) they are quite intelligently written! People seem to assume that when I state an opinion I am essentially saying "this is a fact and you are wrong". I actually try my best to include phrases like "I think" and "in my opinion", but it doesn't have much effect. As Leone says, this is a forum for debate, and I enjoy that aspect when it stays on topic. However there do seem to be posters who will see a well-written opinion and get their defences up. There have been lots of times when I've written one of my trademark too-long opinion posts and the response has been "oh here he comes again telling us we're all wrong", when what I was actually doing was giving my opinion on the debate!

Re the Observer, I wasn't aware that they try to belittle people by talking about matches that were not widely viewed by their audience (Lincoln is Dave Meltzer in disguise?!). I don't agree with them doing that. As far as unfairly criticising indy show quality, I'd have to find out more about that to give an opinion. For example if they are reporting on a show in front of 16 people at West Nantucket Junior School Gymnasium and saying "this show was nowhere near as good as Wrestlemania", I think that would be unfair. If on the other hand they reported on a DGUSA or Chikara show and complained that it didn't live up to expectations considering the talent on their roster, I think that would be fair.

Leone, I think your use of Dusty Rhodes and Big John Studd as examples of wrestlers who did not deserve their negative reviews really undermines your argument. I can't think of a single great John Studd match, or even a good one. In fact the only surprise for me is that anyone rated him enough for him to be considered overrated (it's like saying Luton is overrated). As for Dusty, he is generally considered the main reason Jim Crockett Promotions went out of business in the 80s. It's also worth pointing out that I'm pretty sure the readers themselves vote on the awards, so you can't blame the newsletter for the results.

One more thing worth noting is that NJPW is the biggest wrestling promotion in Japan and has at times been the most successful in the world, so I can sort of understand wrestling obsessives being dismayed by fans who only follow the American scene, especially those who only follow WWE and/or TNA.

It is a bit like saying the best 10 footballers in the world play in the Premier League and disregarding Messi and Ronaldo.

I say this as someone who doesn't follow Japanese wrestling but then neither do I claim to be a wrestling obsessive.

Im not sure its well written opinion that gets peoples backs up crips, i think its more the over the top approach you sometimes use.

I cant remember the exact quote but i recall the whole Cena gay slur thing, and you saying you are 'totally and utterly disgusted by it' or something along those lines.

I mean, SHOCK! HORROR! CENA MADE A TONGUE IN CHEEK HOMOPHOBIC REMARK!

When you say you are 'totally and utterly disgusted' i'd expect the majority of people would say 'crips, get over it mate, lighten up, its not a big deal', and 'jesus i wonder what he'd be like if there was a real crisis'. The modern day outlook on things like this is fairly blase and socially the whole subject isnt taken very seriously but you obviously felt strongly about it. I can see why it gets people backs up because some people might think you are being too 'anal' (possibly not the right term to use) about the whole thing, but hell who is anyone to tell you that you can feel strongly about something.

By the way this isnt an attack on you, im just giving an example as to why i think you get tarred with the 'holier than thou' brush.

I think I accused certain people of being neanderthal idiots. Which I admit was unnecessary even though I thought their opinions were idiotic!

Your point is a fair one and the fact that I can speak strongly against things despite not being personally affected appears to make me different than most people on the board. I don't think that is a bad thing, personally. I can see why some people are rubbed the wrong way by it - that's always the way with anyone whose opinion is guided more by conscience than enjoyment.

Totally agree with you crips. Fact is i for one enjoy reading your posts and opinions and respect what you have to say, have done for years. Having a strong opinion about something and expressing it in the nature you do on a public forum which is probably dominated by a younger generation with, dare i say it, inferior intelligence, is a bold and brave move by you. Atleast you have the tools and decency to justify your opinions in a manner which keeps your dignity intact!

Why thank you, and my last comment wasn't aimed at you or anyone else, just a feeling I get a lot on the board in general.

I'd say people would be more annoyed at your selective conscience rather than having an opinion that is "guided more by conscience than enjoyment"

Good point about Rhodes and Studd Crippled, I myself rate Studd as a pretty good big man (especially from the time given) and Rhodes did manage to bring out some of the best in Flair especially in the NWA (Though Ricky Steamboat and Terry Funk did do a lot better against him)

To be frank though, I find all wrestling magazines are either too full of themselves or are too brainless to read. It's either them talking about how there are ten matches that you should have watched by now but you are to main streamed to have seen it, or they just talk about how this moment in CZW when Necro Butcher powerbombed some guy from the top of a ladder through 4 tables covered in barbed wire was totally mega. The best place to look up wrestling is now on internet boards, as you get a mixture of those two views and educated and collected answers.

the-gaffer wrote:I'd say people would be more annoyed at your selective conscience rather than having an opinion that is "guided more by conscience than enjoyment"

I would appreciate if you could give a few examples of when I have displayed a lack of conscience. I'm happy to be called out for being a hypocrite if you can say when this happened.

Leone, I think there are so many different perspectives in wrestling. People who write and talk about wrestling, whether in a newsletter or a magazine or a forum, speak from such different angles. You can find them anywhere.

I personally have only found one publication which I can read without getting frustrated, and that's the Torch. I think forums are just so hit and miss, and often the majority opinion is the one that makes the least sense to me. At least wrestling journalists are qualified to talk about it, whereas anyone can be on a forum.

Your conscience will see you voicefully vilify others if they show any sort of positive enthusiasm that you deem unacceptable like gay jokes and chair headshots which is fair enough but somehow that conscience wont stop you from tuning in every single week to a product that produces those things consistantly which in turn shows support for the product, if your opinion was so driven by your conscience then you wouldn't be so dedicted to watching the product - Selective Conscience

That's reasonable enough gaffer. I have defended myself on that topic before but I definitely think there is a degree of truth to what you say.

I am fascinated with the wrestling industry. I've followed it for two decades and for the majority of that time I have avidly studied as much as I can about the industry. The reason I still follow the TV shows and PPVs is almost entirely because I think it is important to be up to date with it. I don't usually watch wrestling TV shows or PPVs; if something notable happens I will track it down online but I am far from an obsessive or completist. I do read reports of the major wrestling shows, again so I can be up to date with the product.

This does not mean I'm not a wrestling "fan"; I do appreciate the fine arts of a great storyline or promo or match. But I don't think I'm a fan in the way most people on the board are. I follow wrestling with a critical eye at all times (the exact opposite of the escapist "It's only entertainment" aspect); I especially enjoy wondering/investigating why wrestlers have been moved up or down the card, why matches had certain finishes, etc. I don't need to watch every match and there is nothing at all that would interest me about the WWE magazine (except perhaps reading between the lines).

I do find it a struggle with my conscience to follow the wrestling industry. However I feel that being interested in something doesn't make me a bad person. Some people are fascinated by the first world war, to use an extreme example, without condoning the needless violence of it. I'm interested in the corruption of American politics; because I'm interested does it mean that I encourage it? Not at all.

I have every right to question things that I find immoral in wrestling. Indeed I would have to follow the industry to be aware of them! You seem to be proposing that wrestling is kept in a bubble away from anyone who asks questions about its morality; I would suggest that it is because people have asked those difficult questions that there has at least been some progress from the far too recent times when companies exploited every prejudice and stereotype imaginable, and wrestlers routinely abused cocktails of drugs and smashed each other's skulls and bodies to the point where they could not fully function in retirement. Obviously, things aren't perfect now, but they are better in that regard.

If your only criticism is that I am a hypocrite for following an industry I find to be generally lacking in ethics, it's perfectly reasonable, but personally I feel comfortable with it.