So, like I wanted to rant.

Ok, why is it that whenever 9 out of 10 people who watch the Indys and watch the WWE ALWAYS feel the need to go "That shit sucked, ______ at ____ WAS WAAAAYYYYY BETTER".

Let seriously? Do you guys have your head up your ass so far that you insist on making people who only watch WWE exclusively feel like shit? What? How dare Bobby Lee not shell out $20 bucks each time he wants to watch a show. Or the nerve of Cindy Lou, an AMERICAN, for not knowing of some dude in Japan.

I guess this relates to so many people who claim to know the ENTIRE history of some douche bitch and rant about "S/he is so wasted in their role". LIKE HELLO?! Wrestlers know what the hell they are getting into when they sign that contract. And for their fans to turn around and bitch and moan and piss over their booking just makes it even harder for us non-"I've seen his first match ever and I know he is much better than this shit." watchers to get into this said wrestler.

Thank you.

the blame cant all be placed on smart wrestling fans, because the marks are just as bad. its sad when they go around going "you hate wrestling because you didnt like a match that i did" or "Mickie's the best, you are a nameless asshole", but yet most of the blame is placed on the fans that actually know shit, and i wonder why that is.

the marks call the smart wrestling fans assholes 95% OF the time because the smart wrestling fans diss and shit on their opinion straight away. its just there way of responding.

and i agree with joeys post

so, its ok for a mark to rant....and bash...but its not ok for a smart fan?

your not listening to what im saying. they bash the smartasses...for acting like smartasses to their opinions. thats their way of responding...im not saying that them saying it is correct. im just saying, they wouldnt act like that, if the smartasses werent acting like smartasses with their opinions

is that a victory for me :P
jks
and

I agree. If you are gonna bash shitty wrestling, you can do so without comparing it to good wrestling.

Because someone decides to be negative about someones work, Marks tend to call it "bashing. Secondly, Let's be fair here. People who watch mainly WWE/TNA lower their standarts on what a good match should be.

This is not an opinion, this is just a fact. Compare what everyone calls a great match today and what people called a great match 6/7 years ago. The standart has been lowered and it's damn obvious. It's automic to respond when someone says the match was so amazing, while in reality it was mediocre crap.

Also, you "Marks" also automatically respond whenever something negative is said about your favorite diva. "Mickie james Suck" .....marks respond "Are you crazy. she has....." , "She's done....", She..blah blah blah" that's what all you marks do and don't deny.

Also if i am opposed to someone elses opinion i will say why and not just answer without stating why. I won't call you stupid without giving reason why. It's you marks who take things WAY WAY WAY to personally. Nuff said.

I don't see how we "lower" our standards. So what if we think a diva match or some big dude's match was great. That doesn't make it any better or worst than some match outside of the WWE.

It just means we were entertained. Not everyone cares to see 2986726874714 reverses, DDTs, backflips within 15 minutes.

When i talk "lower Standart" i'm talking about match quality. I could care less about it's entertainment. There are many Well wrestled matches that are not entertaining for one reason or another.

A Perfect example was Mickie James vs. Beth Phoenix at Armageddon. This match quality wise was way better then Mickie vs. Melina at backlash, but lacked the hype behind it. Because someone was not "entertained" by a match they tend to lower it as a less important match. While a poor quality match that was entertaining, but everyone hypes it up to be this amazing match, which in reality it wasn't.

Your allowed to call a match "entertaining", i don't hate on anyone who says a match was entertaining, despite the fact it was poor quality. But don't say it was "The Best Match I Ever Saw". Do not mix a match of "qaulity" with a a match for "entertainment"value. Those are two diffrent things.

Also i don't care about backflips and 100 reverses. I'd rather a well wrestled match that tells a story.

Also everyones standart lowers by the year. Many are raving these piss poor escuse of matches while they are such basic low quality matches. The standart of a great match has lowered drastically. Gail Kim & Kong set the bar a bit Higher, but with what we've been getting now, that match looks "Historic" while in reality it was just a really well wrestled match and not as GREAT GREAT as it seems to be. It was an AMAZING match, don't get me wrong, but that's compared to what we've been getting now, not compared to what we've been getting years ago in the WWE.

One of my favorite matches ever was The Outsiders vs The Legion of Doom at Starrcade 96. Move by move, if you read the result and compared it to some tag match that not even a 10th of the wrestling fan population saw, would it be better? Of course not. However, I refuse to believe just because I love to see some real intensity and great crowd reaction without some stupid f'n chat that I am a fucking idiot.

That is what I am getting at.

Besides, you people who criticize us who do try to find something positive about we watch (and I usually do anyway) are making it too hard on yourselves. I KNOW that Gail/Kong set the bar higher for American women's wrestling on TV. However, if I watch every Gail match going "Eh. This shit is lamed compared to her work with Kong." Of course I am going to think it sucked. However, I want to be entertained and THAT is what I watch it.

Since you want to be "entertained" continue to watch WWE my friend.

While me? I'll continue to "critize" because i want to see a great match and not about to sugar coat anything because "oh she's a rookie" or "Oh she's done better with Kong". I'm ok with good matches i don't mind them.

But i do have a problem with Meh & Ok-ish matche every week and a decent PPV match. If i'm entertained or not, i really don't care. I watch IT for the wrestling, if i wanted suspense, drama and entertainment, there is enough of that on TV as it is, which is why i do prefer SD, less drama, more wresling, which is what i want to see.

You may be entertained with Mediocre matches but i'm not, if i'm going to critize and use someone's opinion as an example, i'll do it.

Again the question, why is it ok for you to critize while we do the same but don't sugar coat anything for anyone, is seen as the bad guy? We are just being realistc for a change.