Seven Things: 7 Dumb Things Wrestling Fans Say

[cero2k]

I found this article, found it pretty interesting, I know I've fallen in several of these points every other time.


Source: wrestlingonearth

Welcome to Seven Things, a list that will run weekly and consist of very eclectic topics. These are of my opinions and doesn’t express the views of others on WrestlingOnEarth.

On my Twitter, I will sometimes get the questions asking what percentage of things I say are my true opinions and what opinions do I play up with my “typicalROHfan” moniker. Hopefully, this debut list will give an insight into some of my views of the wrestling world.

This will be a weekly list. Most will be about more specific or silly wrestling topics but this one tackles the wrestling fan community. I’ve been reading and chatting about pro wrestling online via social media since 2006, and these are some of the things I’ve never been able to wrap my mind around. It’s not stemmed from one specific person or any specific people at all but rather mindsets and ideologies I’ve found become more common as time goes on.

7. This Should Be One Hour Less

With RAW adding a third hour, it has led to MANY complaints and numerous people upset about it. This is basically the equivalent to ordering a medium sized pizza but getting a large for the same price. If you’re completely full, why eat the extra slices? And if you eat the extra slices, can you blame the pizza parlor?

It’s such a simple solution. Watch 2 hours! Or however much your ideal number is. Add portion control to your wrestling viewing. I have personally been bored with RAW the last few weeks. I decided to not watch the entire show this week. I did other things for most of the night and when segments I was interested started, I switched to it and I enjoyed it. Don’t get me wrong. Wanting a better product is perfectly acceptable and should be vocalized but complaining there’s too many hours of programming is just silly when you’re not being forced to watch it.

6. Why Is This Match On Free TV? Ugh! Damn It, Idiots!

Try explaining to a non diehard wrestling fan that you’re upset about getting the matches you want to see for free instead of on PPV at a listed price of $60. To draw another comparison to show the mind boggling logic, imagine crossing a street before the street light says WALK, spotting a cop, going up to him/her and TELLING THEM: “Hey, I just jaywalked. Do you want to fine me?” It’s so ass backwards.

Maybe some people have invested in WWE stock? I understand caring about a company but there is no substantial way to determine what will or won’t make money in the long run. A positive to both topics listed so far is that WWE RAW has produced many fantastic matches in 2013 and is responsible for arguably the best WWE matches in general this year. If you buy the PPVs and this upsets you, just don’t buy the PPVs and do a celebration dance that you’re saving $70 a month.

5. Injuries = Bad Wrestlers

It’s become more and more prevalent lately with the Mike Bennett/BJ Whitmer spot and recently again during a PWG match between Tomasso Ciampa and Brian Cage but fans equating an injury with being a bad wrestler is ridiculous and quite frankly, very lame. This goes for just about any respectable wrestler but Bennett and Ciampa are good wrestlers who have been doing it for a while. They aren’t guys two matches into a career just being reckless. The fact that one of the all-time in ring greats Owen Hart had a move go wrong with Steve Austin leading to his severe neck injuries shows just how quickly and simple an injury can happen in wrestling. Seriously blaming a capable wrestler for a moment like that is one of the lowest moves a fan can pull.

On the flip sides, I’ve seen guys like Christian Cage and a few others get flack for getting injured. Recently on Twitter and other internet outlets, there have been some remarks about Christian getting a concussion to “screw it up” for himself. Once again, injuries can happen at any time in a business like wrestling so to fault someone for getting hurt is also very low. There’s no rational way to go about passing blame on these unless someone is being careless about his or his opponent’s well being. And that is very hard to spot from watching behind a television or laptop screen.

4. Heels Should Do This And Faces Should Do That

Many fail to realize the reason WWE loves John Cena and are in no rush to put performers above him is because he blurred the lines (No relation to Alan Thicke‘s douchebag son.) between face and heel. Any match Cena is in, he’s usually the most loved or the most hated on the show to at least 80% of the audience. That’s become more of a staple in today’s wrestling culture than a “face” vs. a “heel” world. It gives WWE a character that’s both loved and hated enough to face anyone at all and get a crowd emotionally invested in both ways.

I bring this up due to recent points I’ve seen made by people saying the current Randy Orton vs. Daniel Bryan feud is going on “the right way” because the heel is beating up the face until the face prevails and they didn’t enjoy similar things with Cena because the face getting the upper hand on the heel all the time is “the wrong way.” I think that’s a very outdated and close minded approach to wrestling. If you dislike the execution, that’s more than fine but to like or dislike something based off a format rather than the content, I’ll never understand.

Saying things “should be” that way because the story has followed that routine for most of wrestling’s lifetime is no different than someone saying CM Punk and Daniel Bryan shouldn’t be in the upper card because of their size and wrestling being about the giants and monsters for decades. It’s a point of view that’s fair to have but it simplifies wrestling to a routine. Something I feel is a problem in the current climate of pro wresting is the following of routine and basically just imitating what you’ve seen. Many performers, promotions and fans not straying the per-formatted line of wrestling’s past routine.

3. They Are Burning Money

In terms of my pet peeves, this one bugs me the most. The specific time it hit me just how idiotic this mentality is, was Extreme Rules 2012 featuring John Cena vs. Brock Lesnar. The overall opinion was that the match was excellent, a rare dynamic of entertainment to pro wrestling and overall fun. But the finish was a terrible business decision. I remember a quote being along the lines of “That was one of the most enjoyable matches in a while but I have to lower the star rating because they just threw away so much money.”

The next day, Bryan Alvarez added a photo of money burning in flames to his website. Do I personally think Lesnar winning would have been the best decision? Yes, but who am I to determine that? Who’s to say more kids were so happy of their hero coming out on top that they had their parents order more Cena merch than there were adults saying “that was dumb. I don’t believe in Brock. I don’t want to pay to see him again.” I’m sure in the 90s there were people questioning Steve Austin’s victories and success “burying” Kane or Mick Foley.

The only somewhat logical way to determine financial success is buyrates and every PPV Brock Lesnar has appeared on since then has done very good numbers. So in that scenario, there’s really less than zero proof that it lost money and even if it did, who cares? Unless you’re an investor or a WWE employee, you really have no stake in caring about their financial success.

2. That Match Was Enjoyable ***3/4

The categories of matches you enjoy and “good” wrestling matches should not be too far apart in the venn diagram of wrestling. The example I will pull out is Davey Richards. In regards to this topic, he is a very polarizing wrestler. I recall his Final Battle 2011 match with Eddie “Eddie Edwards” Edwards being generally disliked on the internet. Many referred to it as “boring” and “pointless” but a surprising number of those same folks would rate the match “***3/4″ on the star ratings scale. While I put zero significance on star ratings, that’s a highly positive reaction in that spectrum of fan reaction. People strongly disliked a match but still felt an obligation to say it was “very good” because of another “routine” of “good wrestling” that doesn’t even exist outside of our own minds.

On the flip side with Richards, I also recall a match with Tyler Black that some loved but felt they had to point out it wasn’t technically a “great” wrestling match because of the lack of selling. I view wrestling being an art form as the best thing about it and the beauty of art is how it varies and is subjective. Pigeon-holing it via a one-track mind really cheapens the art and just creates bland ideologies. Imagine every painting being a page of squares, every single exhibit at every single museum. That’s the image I get when I see folks defining wrestling in either of these ways.

1. It Makes Sense

This is basically a combination of many of the prior points. It blows my mind how often I read or hear this term. Usually meant to justify something a fan doesn’t like but wants to defend, the “it makes sense” comment is thrown out frequently. Much like matches or assumed financial success, an example would be “God, I hate Khali! I change the channel every time he’s on. But….. he’s a 7 foot 5 giant so IT MAKES SENSE! Good job, WWE creative.” I’m well aware no one has ever used this mentality to defend the Great Khali but it “makes more sense” with him than most of the wrestlers it’s used with, so hopefully this shows just how foolish of a statement that is.

Fantasy booking has affected the way people watch wrestling today but unlike sports where “fantasy” is a defined structure, there’s no way to determine any of these things in wrestling. Fans who chase the fictitious “rights and wrongs” are biting off their noses to spider faces, in the words of the great Michael Gary Scott. It’s like we’re going to a (WWE) Universe where everyone turns into a Ro(h)bot.

Enjoying what you enjoy because you as an individual thinking it’s entertaining should be all you need to validate something. Not what you think makes money for people you have zero personal attachment to, not what guys in the 80s said wrestling was, not what guys in any time period says wrestling is, not what ANYONE says wrestling is, not doing x amount of moves, not promotions following a story book guideline. It’s art. The only structure you should follow is your entertainment. That’s what most “makes sense” to me.

Thanks for reading and come back next week. I’m sure it will be a more lighthearted list.

- Jonas Wakefield

[Big Red Machine]

7. I kind of get this complaint, but I can't really call a wrestling show good if I get bored two thirds of the way through, and Raw definitely used to be that way. A good show leaves you wanting more, not wishing it was over sooner.

6. If you care about a company, you want it to make money. It's that simple.
Wrestling fans appreciate that wrestling is a business and get frustrated when they see a company that they love wasting opportunities. That being said, "they should save this for PPV" is a complaint that is really only heard when a company seems to be focusing on the TV more than the PPVs, as in TNA's case. I honestly don't remember anyone complaining about the Punk vs. Cena match from February or The Shield's first loss or the Davey vs. Elgin rematch or the awesome Kyle vs. Davey match from April being on free TV.

4. Wrong. Just wrong. WWE hasn't done that with Cena at all. The fans did! WWE would have pushed Cena the same amount if he had been getting 100% cheers.
The Cena dynamic has become a wrestling staple, but not because of Cena or WWE. It is because of smarky fans. There were times when Kevin Steen could have set a baby kitten on fire in the middle of the ring for no reason whatsoever and the smarks would have cheered for his heel antics because they want to cheer heels. Look at the Dynamic Dudes vs. Midnight Express match from Halloween Havoc 89. The fans thought Shane & Johnny were dorks and thought that the Midnights were good workers, so they cheered for the Midnights.
It is clear to me that this guy really doesn't seem to realize that wrestling is a business. There is a set way that things "should" go because the point of the story is to build up to a payoff (usually on PPV, where the company makes money... hence "pay"off.) Dragon is going to keep getting screwed or getting his ass kicked because it makes us want to see him get his revenge so much so that we are willing to pay WWE money for the privilege of seeing it. As we get closer to the PPV, they will start to give Dragon some big victories like he got at the end of Raw

Hidden text.

culminating with Dragon making Orton tap in the center of the ring on the go-home Smackdown

to make us think that he has a good chance of winning the title and getting his revenge on PPV so that we will pay to see it. If the babyface beats the heel up the whole time during the buildup, why should I pay to see him beat the heel up again?
About Cena: fans nowadays know that wrestling is scripted, and a major issue that that creates for promotions is that they need to do their best to create the feeling that anyone could win. That was the problem with Cena. WWE never put anyone over him, so no one ever thought he would lose.

One thing that he didn't cover (though I thought he would, given the header of this section) is the actions of the characters that make them babyfaces or heels. Quite simply, the babyface is the good guy and the heel is the bad guy. If the babyface cheats or is mean to people for no reason is an arrogant jackass, he really isn't a babyface. If you want me to cheer for someone, you need to give me a reason to like him. If you want me to boo someone, you need to give me a reason to dislike him. Having babyfaces do things that make me dislike them makes me not want to cheer for them, and thus makes them not someone I will pay to see get their revenge/win a big match.

3. Once again, this guy is missing the point. You can't bring someone in as an ass-kicking monster and have them lose their first match out (and having them lose their first match out to the guy that people are tired of seeing win is an even worse idea).
This line in particular bothers me:

Unless you’re an investor or a WWE employee, you really have no stake in caring about their financial success.

YES! You care if you are a fan! While obviously WWE isn't going any time soon, other companies (TNA and ROH in particular) need to be making tons of money so they can put on more product and attract more fans. If ROH makes more money, perhaps they will mark down their DVDs, allowing me to buy more of them, or maybe they will run shows in my area more often, so I can go to more shows. If they make more money, they can maybe sign someone like AJ Styles or Alex Shelley, and I will be able to see those guys in ROH (or in TNA's case, keep them around, and I won't have to suffer through my favorite wrestlers not being on TV anymore because they were released due to budget cuts).

2. Okay... for Davey and Eddie in particular, it wasn't the match that was pointless. It was going 40 minutes that people were calling "pointless" because it felt like they went 40 minutes just for the sake of going 40 minutes. The match was enjoyable and told a good story, but there were parts of it that were kind of boring. It was an enjoyable ***3/4. It wasn't an awesome **** star match, but it was definitely an enjoyable ***3/4 match.
Oh, and as for this guy saying that he puts "zero significance on star ratings"... he clearly does not grasp the basic concept here. A rating of any sort is an expression of how much you enjoyed the match, for both its fun-factor and artistic quality. ***1/2 is to "enjoyable" as ***3/4 is to "very enjoyable" and **** is to "awesome." It is just a scale that allows you to compare matches to other matches to see which ones you liked better, or to look at someone else's ratings and see which matches you might like.

On the flip side with Richards, I also recall a match with Tyler Black that some loved but felt they had to point out it wasn’t technically a “great” wrestling match because of the lack of selling. I view wrestling being an art form as the best thing about it and the beauty of art is how it varies and is subjective. Pigeon-holing it via a one-track mind really cheapens the art and just creates bland ideologies. Imagine every painting being a page of squares, every single exhibit at every single museum. That’s the image I get when I see folks defining wrestling in either of these ways

Okay... this paragraph really pissed me off. I F*CKING HATE people who say things like this. How can you say that "the beauty of art is how subjective it is" and then piss on someone for having their own set of criteria with which they evaluate it?

1. Okay... I'm not even quite sure what he is trying to say here, but he is clearly a f*cking idiot because of this particular comment:

biting off their noses to spider faces

It's "biting of their noses to spite their faces! Maybe this was an auto-correct f*ck-up, but don't lecture me on ANYTHING and then use a metaphor that clearly makes no sense.
Does this idiot even have a coherent point here?
Oh. And the random shot at ROH fans for no reason at all? That was nice.

Fantasy booking has affected the way people watch wrestling today but unlike sports where “fantasy” is a defined structure, there’s no way to determine any of these things in wrestling. Fans who chase the fictitious “rights and wrongs” are biting off their noses to spider faces,

Fantasy booking has affected the way we watch wrestling today by opening up our minds. Fantasy booking is saying, "oh. Okay. They did that. But what would have happened if they did this instead of that?" It is opening up your mind and letting the creative juices flow. It's your own alternate universe fanfic. It's your own vision of this art of wrestling.
As for there being "rights and wrongs" in fantasy booking... it is your own art. Unless there is some sort of competition going on, you are fantasy booking mainly for an audience of one: yourself. Your only constraints are those that you set upon yourself. When I fantasy book, my goal is to make it as realistic as possible because I want to feel like I am actually booking a real product because I want that same creative satisfaction. I won't deny that I also book realistically because I think that is what others find most interesting to read, but the majority of my desire to book realistically is because that is what satisfies me creatively.
When I was younger I had a fantasy booking project going (that I absolutely shudder when I look back on, now) where I did all sots of outrageous things like kidnappings... but I can see how that could be creatively satisfying for someone, providing the type of product that CHIKARA or HUSTLE puts on. It has less constraints, and if that's what you want to book, then go for it.
There is a guy who comes on here to do a fantasy booking thread that he has set thirteen years in the future. That's crazy! I've never seen that before. But it is creatively satisfying to him, so more power to him for it.

Enjoying what you enjoy because you as an individual thinking it’s entertaining should be all you need to validate something. Not what you think makes money for people you have zero personal attachment to, not what guys in the 80s said wrestling was, not what guys in any time period says wrestling is, not what ANYONE says wrestling is, not doing x amount of moves, not promotions following a story book guideline. It’s art. The only structure you should follow is your entertainment. That’s what most “makes sense” to me.

This is the only part of this that I could make any sense of, so here goes:

Enjoying what you enjoy because you as an individual thinking it’s entertaining should be all you need to validate something.

Fair enough. Obviously everything is subjective in the end.

Not what you think makes money for people you have zero personal attachment to

Zero personal attachment to? If you have no personal attachment to the characters (or even the promotion), then you are missing the point. I shelled out FIFTY DOLLARS (I work part time, so that is more than I make in a day!) to WWE last month to see Daniel Bryan win the WWE Title because I have a personal attachment to him. I think he is an extremely entertaining character, and I think he puts on amazing matches, and through my exploration of old ROH shows, I have watched him grow and develop. I want to see WWE give Dragon his due, and I wanted to be there to experience that joy when he won the belt. That sense of triumph that we share with our heroes. I have never played a game of ice hockey in my life, but when the Rangers win the Stanley Cup again, I will go bat sh*t insane with happiness... because I am a fan. Having a personal attachment is what being a fan is all about.
And even on a promotional level: If I know that something is going to lose ROH a ton of money (like, say, bringing in Hogan), I am not going to enjoy it because I want ROH to make money. I have a personal attachment to ROH because they put on a product that entertains me. As a result I want them to make money so they can put out more of this product that entertains me. I don't want them to lose money because if they lose too much money, they won't be able to provide me with their entertaining product anymore.

not what guys in the 80s said wrestling was, not what guys in any time period says wrestling is, not what ANYONE says wrestling is, not doing x amount of moves, not promotions following a story book guideline. It’s art. The only structure you should follow is your entertainment. That’s what most “makes sense” to me.

Okay, everyone has their own tastes, but a promotion needs to make money. If I don't enjoy a product I certainly won't pay for it, but I might well still watch it, because while I don't get enjoyment from the product on it's own merits, I get enjoyment out of discussing it with others.

Anyway, this guy is an idiot. Cero, where to you keep digging this sh*t up from?