Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

FEB 2020 WRESTLING DISCUSSION


RIPPA

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, paintedbynumbers said:

please elaborate?  I read his book too, I know a lot of people hate him and I'm sure there's a ton to it but I'm interested in hearing more. 

It's all here:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, paintedbynumbers said:

please elaborate?  I read his book too, I know a lot of people hate him and I'm sure there's a ton to it but I'm interested in hearing more. 

Wait, you read his book and need further elaboration about why he's a psychopath?!?!?!?!  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In terms of Brock's non-sociability, there's a danger that people conflate introversion with misanthropy, and they're two completely separate things. An introvert is someone who finds social interactions stressful or exhausting and would rather spend time alone (the opposite end of that spectrum being an extrovert, who comes alive in social situations and sometimes finds solitude uncomfortable). Whereas a Misanthrope is someone who dislikes the entire human race. The classic "I'm not racist/ sexist because I hate white people/ women too" argument. The opposite of that being a philanthrope (which has somehow shifted into philanthropist meaning a wealthy person who ostentatiously makes a great show of their charitable works, so everyone talks about how great they are), which is just someone who loves humanity.

Not all misanthropes are introverted, and some are very extrovert. Not all philanthropes are extroverted either. It's all a couple of spectrums anyway.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, so I'm bored again and I was thinking about whether or not Mick Foley is the elite of the elite, and what does that actually mean.  In baseball, the elite of the elite talents get described as 5-Tool players.  That thought made me ask, what would the 5-tools be for wrestling?  Once we figure that out, who are the 5 tool players?

Here are my 5 Tools

  1. Star Power - Hard to define, but we all know it when we see it.  This is what separates the Hulk Hogan/Ric Flair/Steve Austin/The Rock's of the world from the John Cena/Shawn Michaels/Bret Hart/Roman Reign's of the world.  All of them are stars, but the first group has something intangible that makes them shine a little bit brighter than the second group.
  2. Character Work - This is related to both #1 and #3, but is it's own category for a reason.  Think about someone like Ted Dibiase (why is he fresh on my mind I wonder?).  I haven't seen much of his Mid-South work that most people seem to think is his in-ring peak.  I've watched pretty much his entire WWF run in the 80s-90s, and don't really remember any of his matches as being anything great.  I do remember his character work.  I remember him challenging the kid to dribble the basketball and then kicking it before he had to give up any money.  I remember him cackling like a crazy person while calling everyone broke.  I remember the beard, the goofy suits, and all of that shit.  He played that character as well as anyone has played a wrestling character in my life.  He was a good to great worker, but he was a masterful character.
  3. Mic Work - Wrestling is still the carnival, and nothing gets asses in seats more than a guy who can cut a killer promo.  "Austin 3:16 says I just whipped your ass" sold way more T-shirts than Steve Austin's wrestling did.  You might get the hardcore fans to tune in with a great match, but a great promo can get people who would never think about watching a wrestling match.
  4. Psychology - I know people probably think this should be included in #5, but hear me out.  Psychology is not just what you do, but why you do it.  What if Steve Austin all of a sudden decided he was going to do a cartwheel out of the curtain when the glass broke?  That wouldn't make any damn sense, because there is nothing Stone Cold about cartwheels.  Psychology is the thing that ties everything else together to make them work.  I don't care how good the character is or how good the matches are, no one is going to get over if they don't come together to connect with the crowd.  
  5. Ring Work - The least important of the five tools is ring work.  If you are an average worker with all the other tools, you'll probably be fine.  Hulk Hogan's biggest run happened despite being pretty average in the ring.  Hulk Hogan was a star, with a character who caught fire, who could talk you into the building, and make you believe that saying your prayers and eating your vitamins could take you to the WWF Championship.  He didn't have to be a great worker, everything else could carry him as long as he didn't embarrass himself in the ring.  

So, who are my 5 tool wrestlers?  Give me Ric Flair, Randy Savage, Steve Austin, and Daniel Bryan (He's the only person since Austin/Rock who I think could have started a boom...then his head went boom).

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, supremebve said:

OK, so I'm bored again and I was thinking about whether or not Mick Foley is the elite of the elite, and what does that actually mean.  In baseball, the elite of the elite talents get described as 5-Tool players.  That thought made me ask, what would the 5-tools be for wrestling?  Once we figure that out, who are the 5 tool players?

I'd say the five tools in wrestling are:

1. In-ring ability. Goes without saying.

2. Look. Should go without saying- but it's a much more varied thing than just the traditional view of having the look seemed like there. 

3. Physical charisma 

4. Mic work. These two are basically separating the charisma factor into two pieces- because it's entirely possible to have one without the other (for example: Jeff Hardy is clearly charismatic, but he can't really cut a promo...and on the opposite side, someone can cut some funny lines on the mic, but they're not particularly charismatic in the ring.) 

5. Connection. The other four tools are things that are obvious in a vacuum, but this is the one tool you can't know someone has until they get out to the ring and people actually see them. It's also possibly the most important one- over the last decade we've seen a number of people (Alberto Del Rio, Sheamus as two good examples) who seemed like they were five-tool players on paper, except in practice the fans just weren't buying what they were selling. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other EC match for who will challenge for the SDL men's title

The people advertised locally are clearly just place holders - and it doesnt really matter since Roman is winning

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you never wondered why Finn Balor's new finish is called 1916 (clue: The Easter Rising)? Never read (or watched) Preacher, specifically the bit about Cassidy's backstory? Because Ireland was under English/ British rule for a very long time*. Conquered in the 12th Century, and not formally an independent country again until 1949... except for Northern Ireland, which is still a part of the United Kingdom (until Brexit fucks everything up).

And generally,  when Britain conquers other countries, they are not exactly nice to their new subjects. Not that anyone who learned their history from the British school curriculum would be aware of that. The official story is that we went, we civilised and educated, built infrastructure and taught them sports, and then left voluntarily. All the torture and murder and created famines and slavery, we aren't taught how our ancestor's rulers did that. Lots of English people refuse to believe it actually happened. Largely because those most guilty are the people who wrote our history.

* England conquered Ireland before there was a United Kingdom. There hadn't actually been an England that long either, in the scheme of things.

Edited by AxB
Norn Iron is in the UK, not Great Britain. GB is just England, Wales and Scotland. The landmass.
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, AxB said:

Have you never wondered why Finn Balor's new finish is called 1916 (clue: The Easter Rising)? Never read (or watched) Preacher, specifically the bit about Cassidy's backstory? Because Ireland was under British rule for a very long time. Conquered in the 12th Century, and not formally an independent country again until 1949... except for Northern Ireland, which is still a part of Britain (until Brexit fucks everything up).

And generally,  when Britain conquers other countries, they are not exactly nice to their new subjects. Not that anyone who learned their history from the British school curriculum would be aware of that. The official story is that we went, we civilised and educated, built infrastructure and taught them sports, and then left voluntarily. All the torture and murder and created famines and slavery, we aren't taught how our ancestor's rulers did that. Lots of English people refuse to believe it actually happened. Largely because those most guilty are the people who wrote our history.

Nobody in America knows this except for people of Irish descent. This does not get taught in school. UK history, when taught, is very England-centric. 

I didn't really know much about the U.S. actually doing something useful in foreign policy by brokering the Good Friday Agreement until two years ago, maybe, because of following all the Brexit news, and that happened in my lifetime when I should have been cognizant of it. 

But if anyone wants to learn more, I have some good book suggestions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AxB said:

Have you never wondered why Finn Balor's new finish is called 1916 (clue: The Easter Rising)? Never read (or watched) Preacher, specifically the bit about Cassidy's backstory? Because Ireland was under British rule for a very long time. Conquered in the 12th Century, and not formally an independent country again until 1949... except for Northern Ireland, which is still a part of Britain (until Brexit fucks everything up).

And generally,  when Britain conquers other countries, they are not exactly nice to their new subjects. Not that anyone who learned their history from the British school curriculum would be aware of that. The official story is that we went, we civilised and educated, built infrastructure and taught them sports, and then left voluntarily. All the torture and murder and created famines and slavery, we aren't taught how our ancestor's rulers did that. Lots of English people refuse to believe it actually happened. Largely because those most guilty are the people who wrote our history.

This isn't surprising, but I never knew the details. Preacher was actually one of the few things I recall seeing that showed anything from it, and I had no idea what Finn's finisher was reference to.

2 hours ago, Smelly McUgly said:

Nobody in America knows this except for people of Irish descent. This does not get taught in school. UK history, when taught, is very England-centric. 

Basically we were taught the British were shitty to everyone, but they only going into some details that relates to the US, typically the American Revolution.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, odessasteps said:

Depending on your political leanings, there are also the two  90s films of Jim Sheridan, In the Name of the Father (starring daniel day-lewis) and michael Collins (starring Liam neeson). 

There's also Bloody Sunday(2002) by Paul Greengrass about the 1972 Bloody Sunday shooting in Derry, Northern Ireland and Hunger(2008) by Steve McQueen about Bobby Sands and the 1981 Hunger Strike, both are really depressing but great. There's also a pretty decent documentary on Netflix called The Miami Showband Massacre which gets into the ties between the Loyalist Paramilitaries, Police and British Military, it's really depressing too.

Besides the history between the Republic of Ireland and United Kingdom and the ongoing issue in Northern Ireland, calling it UK Takeover Dublin is just moronic and it would be similar to doing Mexico NXT Takeover Dallas or France NXT Takeover Naples.

Edited by happjack
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, happjack said:

 calling it UK Takeover Dublin is just moronic and it would be similar to doing Mexico NXT Takeover Dallas or France NXT Takeover Naples.

Or USA Takeover Hiroshima.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, odessasteps said:

Depending on your political leanings, there are also the two  90s films of Jim Sheridan, In the Name of the Father (starring daniel day-lewis) and Michael Collins (starring Liam neeson). 

Tangentially. If you ever wonder why Finn Balor's brainbuster is named "1916"... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...