Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

MAY 2020 WRESTLING CHAT.


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, OctopusCinema said:

Who is more popular with non-wrestling fans, John Cena or Batista? Cena is the household name, but I’m in the wrestling bubble that I could be way off. Batista has been in very successful movies. 

It's kinda weird comparing those two. I always saw them as equals in WWE when I watched, but Cena clearly took over as the number one guy. Most people I know like John Cena and know him as a wrestling guy, even if they've never watched a second of WWE. Everyone I know loves Drax and raves about Dave Bautista in other movies but a lot of them don't even know he was a top draw wrestler. As much as I love Big Dave, Cena is still the most popular guy. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Edwin said:

Sure.

2020:
1. Imperium vs. Undisputed ERA from Worlds Collide -- Barthel and Aichner show how good they are and WALTER looks like an absolute monster. TUE are fantastic as heels bumping all over the place as usual.
2. Dakota Kai vs. Tegan Nox street fight from TakeOver Portland -- not an epic wild brawl or anything like you would expect from Kudo vs. Ozaki or anything, but given their limitations they are given and the lack of blood, this is as good a female garbage match you'll get in WWE.
3. Daniel Bryan vs. Drew Gulak from Elimination Chamber -- my current pick for MOTYC. I'm sure you are familiar with Bryan, so you know what to expect from him and this will give you an idea of what a beast Gulak is.
4. Daniel Bryan vs. Drew Gulak from SmackDown this past week -- not on the level of their EC match, but still very good and they showcase some new stuff they didn't in their previous match.
5. Matt Riddle vs. Timothy Thatcher from NXT this past week -- not on par with their previous matches from the indys, but a fantastic hard hitting gritty sub 10 minute TV main event.

2019:
1. Matt Riddle vs. Kassius Ohno from TakeOver Phoenix -- I believe this was Riddle's TakeOver debut and it's again Ohno who is fantastic. These folks have had matches before in the indys and have fantastic chemistry together.
2. Aleister Black, Velveteen Dream & Ricochet vs. Johnny Gargano, Tommaso Ciampa & Adam Cole from Halftime Heat -- not an epic multiman tag by any chance, but it's a wild PWG fast paced type match in a WWE ring.
3. Women's WarGames match from TakeOver WarGames III -- pretty fantastic storytelling with a ton of weird twists and turns no one expects and some wild bumps. Again, given the limitations of no blood being allowed and what not, this match is fantastic.
4. WALTER vs. Tyler Bate from TakeOver Cardiff -- my pick for WWE MOTY. WALTER is an absolute beast and Bate does an incredible job working as a much smaller underdog. They also keep control and don't go overboard with the false finishes that seem to be the norm now.
5. Matt Riddle vs. Roderick Strong from TakeOver XXV -- both had fantastic years and this is a snug battle between the two.

I personally don't watch much WWE TV myself aside from that Bryan & Gulak vs. Artist Collective feud and NXT, so my 2019 are solely NXT recommendations.

I've seen Imperium vs. UE Wargames.  It was a risky affair and very good.   I've also seen the WALTER-Bate match which I thought was incredible.  I'm not sure I liked a match any more than that from last year.  Judging from those two I've seen this looks like a good list. 

To be clear, I''ve never been opposed to watching a recommended WWE match.  I am opposed to sitting thru one of their overlong PPV or TV shows.  And I am opposed to spending a single dime on their product.  

Edited by HarryArchieGus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Zakk_Sabbath said:

Seconding @Edwin on Strong/Riddle, I was in the building for that one and it may have been the best match on the card depending on your feelings about Gargano/Cole

Oh, I saw that too and loved it.  Yep, preferred it to the Gargano/Cole Main.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HarryArchieGus said:

Good analysis.  It reminds one that wrestling is 'to each their own'.  My viewing was indeed limited passed 2003 or 4 for sure.  I checked in for a bout here and there seeing bad haircuts/gear and cliched WWE style promos in forgettable scenarios.  He's better than that, but I believe Jericho did the best with what he was given, and had good to great WWE style matches.  His position on the card wasn't the problem.  For a guy as talented as he is he should be more than an afterthought 'he'll have a good match' kinda guy.  More so even he needed freedom to be what he excels at (a chicken shit for example), and to run his mouth without WWE's overbearing touch.  My comment about being 'badly mishandled' is not unlike seeing an actor like Robert Deniro in a one for the money bad comedy as opposed to a 'King of Comedy'.  You said it,  a production rigidly conformed to a single person's vision.  I can't imagine I'd be as much of a modern movie fan if everything was directed by a Brett Ratner or a Tyler Perry, etc.  Yeah, I do think Jericho's talents were mishandled.  Your closing line however is very true.  Which rings true of the sad state of the WWE.     

Since you've alluded to him not having creative freedom, I feel it's worth noting that pretty much all of those haircut and outfit choices were on him. The promo style and character he adopted after his heel turn in 2008 was his idea based on watching old Nick Bockwinkel stuff on an AWA DVD. The light-up jacket was Jericho. I also think the scarf thing was him, though I can't recall exactly. Shawn Michaels credits Jericho with putting in a bunch of work with creative and being great to collaborate with. Just ctrl+f-ing through some of his books right now to jog my memory, and it's abundantly clear that he's had tremendous input on a lot of his presentation over the years and takes great pride in a lot of those promos and matches you're casually dismissing. 

I also take issue with the idea that he was an "afterthought." We're talking about someone who held the top title on his show three times after you stopped watching, and challenged for it on countless other occasions. He was consistently in majors feuds and in TV and PPV main events. And while people can point to the Fandango match or a few other things, those are the exceptions rather than the norm for him. He wasn't treated like an afterthought by any stretch. 

You not liking WWE is clear, and that's fine. But it's no justification for dismissing the freedom and input Jericho has enjoyed for the bulk of his career in the WWE. I just want to make clear that the loose way you characterize his work during the period you weren't watching is not supported by the reality of those runs. 

Edited by West Newbury Bad Boy
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Ryan said:

Herb?

You know, Herb Kunze, of "Herb's Tidbits" fame.

 

I want one of these wrestling conventions to fly Herb in and do a panel where Herb is at the podium and does a move-by-move breakdown of all the "greatest matches" since he retired from wrestling fandom in 2001: Misawa-Kobashi 3/1/2003, Owens-Cena, Omega-Okada trilogy, Moxley-Omega, Amazing Red-Ospreay, etc.

 

I would fly to Starrcast just for that panel.

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

28 minutes ago, West Newbury Bad Boy said:

Since you've alluded to him not having creative freedom, I feel it's worth noting that pretty much all of those haircut and outfit choices were on him. The promo style and character he adopted after his heel turn in 2008 was his idea based on watching old Nick Bockwinkel stuff on an AWA DVD. The light-up jacket was Jericho. I also think the scarf thing was him, though I can't recall exactly. Shawn Michaels credits Jericho with putting in a bunch of work with creative and being great to collaborate with. Just ctrl+f-ing through some of his books right now to jog my memory, and it's abundantly clear that he's had tremendous input on a lot of his presentation over the years and takes great pride in a lot of those promos and matches you're casually dismissing. 

I also take issue with the idea that he was an "afterthought." We're talking about someone who held the top title on his show three times after you stopped watching, and challenged for it on countless other occasions. He was consistently in majors feuds and in TV and PPV main events. And while people can point to the Fandango match or a few other things, those are the exceptions rather than the norm for him. He wasn't treated like an afterthought by any stretch. 

You not liking WWE is clear, and that's fine. But it's no justification for dismissing the freedom and input Jericho has enjoyed for the bulk of his career in the WWE. I just want to make clear that the loose way you characterize his work during the period you weren't watching is not supported by the reality of those runs. 

My impressions of WWE Chris Jericho are based mostly on the early run.  And in the early run he did the best with what he was given.  It resulted in a shell of what he was and or capable of? I mean, to me, that's the real question.  My issue isn't really with Jericho the WWE wrestler.  He always brought a great effort and generally had strong results.  My issue is the way he spoke like a cliche when he'd proven to be such a natural star in his WCW run.  Years on, here he is with full creative freedom and the result is he's amongst the best, if not the best, promo in the business.  I understand why you would argue against this idea that he was mishandled, and you make strong points, but it still comes down to Jericho in WCW and now AEW is incredibly entertaining.  And for me, Jericho in WWE was mostly a big letdown.

Also, fair enough, Jericho was responsible for the presentation.  Makes sense.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, JohnnyJ said:

Jericho has had exactly the type of career he should've had. He's one of the rare types who every once in a while gets a hot hand and knows exactly how to run with it.

He seemed to have a hot hand being the first unified WCW/WWF Champion, but that resulted in a Wrestlemania main event that was centered around Stephanie McMahon and a forgettable match.  Again, to each their own, I think he's proving at the age of 50 that he could have done a lot more without the bad creative interference.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely think the comparative greatness of his AEW work is overstated. New outlandish outfit, new catchphrases, it's the same basic makeover he's done for two decades while still falling back to calling people jackasses or whatever. It's the same shtick with a new coat of paint. The setting is a bit looser and more playful, which people seem to enjoy. But the difference between this and his WWE work is not as great as stated. As with a lot of AEW stuff, it gets assessed more favourably because the company is new and isn't the other major outfit that's spent decades burning goodwill. 

Edited by West Newbury Bad Boy
  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ryan said:

Entries you add yourself do not count.

Herb is very much a real term. However, outside of Bomani Jones and like one or two other people, I haven't heard someone call another person a herb since the early 90s. You may as well call someone a buster if you're gonna age yourself that badly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Quote

 I'm not a fan of AEW's version of the squash when it comes to Dark or Omega matches.  I do like Kenny's attitude about his enhancement matches.  The Alan Eagles match even kinda worked for me, but I don't disagree with what you're saying here.  And yeah Sonny Kiss has no business exchanging blows with Omega.  Wait, just re-read that, maybe he does!

Again, it's the same point there for the AEW squash. Once again, Pineapple Pete is proof that AEW's squashes are broken. Pete got a traditional squash match with Jericho, but Jericho put him over on commentary for weeks going up to that and made people want to see his squash. Other AEW workers give lots of offense to their jobbers and let them get their shit in, but you barely know who they are by the end of the weak. Who REALLY did better in making their jobber look great?
 

Quote

Big mean Vince McMahon.  You mean the guy that sued the wife of an employee he allowed to die for no reason?  Or the guy who helped keep Jimmy Snuka out of jail after killing his wife?  The guy who asked Nancy Argentino to not press charges after being beaten?  Or do you mean the guy who refuses to push guys who get over on their own?  Ha, I wish the above was inaccurate or a joke, but it's not even the tip of the iceberg.  Go watch Vince on Donahue talking about the sex scandal or showing what a raving lunatic he is opposite Costas.  

All that said, no one here or anywhere is suggesting Spears or Lee for that matter deserved to be World Champion.  Just an opportunity to get over and not get your balls cut off because the guy in charge childishly wakes up and decides nah.

Spears got his chances to get over in WWE, and it didn't work simply because...well, Tye Dillinger wasn't exactly good enough to truly get over. NXT made him work as a bit of a threat, but on the main roster it was...just a guy who had a fun "10!" chant and lost its steam quickly. If the Chris Hero or Zack Ryder examples were people who'd be bad if AEW brought him in- well, Spears was probably the WORSE version of Zack Ryder, who wasn't even good enough to have a modicum of staying power. Similarly, Harper was tried as a singles monster, given the IC Title, given a lot of time to be a threat with the Wyatts. The only time that WWE really cut his legs out from under him was if you're one of the people claiming "bu-but Luke Harper really tied the Orton/Wyatt feud together, he should be in their Mania match as well!", and that was "...really. Really? REALLY? He was the lackey for the Wyatts. He may have had some okay facials during the Orton/Wyatt storyline...but are you fucking kidding me? You want to give him a WORLD TITLE MATCH, at WRESTLEMANIA, for that alone? Being in a World Title match at Wrestlemania is one of those no doubt about it, You got this thing then you are instantly a first-ballot Hall of Famer, and you want to give that to Harper for a couple nice facial expressions? If Erick Rowan was in the same position you never would have said that same claim and you know it!"

I don't really disagree, but it never seems its quite so simple as the TNA example.  As I already stated, TNA was a failure on nearly every level.  Their booking of former WWE talent was surely a problem.  Where's the problem with what AEW is doing right now?  Who do you see on their very shallow roster being misused or passed over for an opportunity?  If AEW brings in say Chris Hero or Zack Ryder or one of these guys, I would agree that shooting them to the top of the card would be a mistake, but I'm not so sure the creative team even needs to be told this.  They're handling former talent just fine.  I mean you could say well they shot Moxley to the top, but he's obviously a major draw for them.
 
Spears was literally at Ryder's level (goofy lowcard babyface with a fun catchphrase), and Brodie is literally at Hero's level (indie darling who was a non-factor in the WWE but still really, really respected as a indie superstar.)  And tell the truth, you can make the case Ryder was a better Tye Dillinger than Tye Dillinger was (Ryder had been able to reach heights far higher than Spears ever did in the role, and Ryder was able to remain an effective puppy for heels to kick for a decade and always show up to get a crowd reaction), and Chris Hero's a better Brodie Lee than Brodie Lee was (Brodie Lee wasn't bad on the indies, but he never reached the same level of indie success Chris Hero did). As far as the shallow roster...that's some of the same problem: The midcard is not getting opportunities because AEW thinks "pretty movez and get your shit in" is more important than getting fans to take notice of them...which is why you need people like that, in the midcard, getting chances to rise the ranks organically.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, West Newbury Bad Boy said:

I definitely think the comparative greatness of his AEW work is overstated. New outlandish outfit, new catchphrases, it's the same basic makeover he's done for two decades while still falling back to calling people jackasses or whatever. It's the same shtick with a new coat of paint. The setting is a bit looser and more playful, which people seem to enjoy. But the difference between this and his WWE work is not as great as stated. As with a lot of AEW stuff, it gets assessed more favourably because the company is new and isn't the other major outfit that's spent decades burning goodwill. 

I would say AEW (pre-pandemic) thus far compared to WWE is like some classic cult film (not a perfect film but a fun film) to it's weak unnecessary remake.  Or how bout like a good HBO or cable series to a run of the mill network sitcom.  AEW has had logic and purpose.  Sure they've stumbled here and there, but they've, up until the pandemic, been consistently entertaining and had logical progression.  I don't watch WWE, as mentioned, but I've seen highlights, read reviews (by the late Larry Csonka), and listened to discussion on WO Radio, etc. and it sounds to me like 'entertaining' and 'logical progression' are not part of the petri dish. 

Yeah, there's not gonna be goodwill to a longstanding monopoly that 1. pushes talent that fans clearly don't respond to (time and time again).  And 2. and more importantly, a company that purposely pulls the steam off performers who get over on their own outside of the company's plan.  I would also add that WWE is obviously a formulaic style in ring and in front of the mic and not something everybody is going to find to their liking.  Me for example.  

44 minutes ago, SorceressKnight said:

 

 

Again, it's the same point there for the AEW squash. Once again, Pineapple Pete is proof that AEW's squashes are broken. Pete got a traditional squash match with Jericho, but Jericho put him over on commentary for weeks going up to that and made people want to see his squash. Other AEW workers give lots of offense to their jobbers and let them get their shit in, but you barely know who they are by the end of the weak. Who REALLY did better in making their jobber look great?
 

Spears got his chances to get over in WWE, and it didn't work simply because...well, Tye Dillinger wasn't exactly good enough to truly get over. NXT made him work as a bit of a threat, but on the main roster it was...just a guy who had a fun "10!" chant and lost its steam quickly. If the Chris Hero or Zack Ryder examples were people who'd be bad if AEW brought him in- well, Spears was probably the WORSE version of Zack Ryder, who wasn't even good enough to have a modicum of staying power. Similarly, Harper was tried as a singles monster, given the IC Title, given a lot of time to be a threat with the Wyatts. The only time that WWE really cut his legs out from under him was if you're one of the people claiming "bu-but Luke Harper really tied the Orton/Wyatt feud together, he should be in their Mania match as well!", and that was "...really. Really? REALLY? He was the lackey for the Wyatts. He may have had some okay facials during the Orton/Wyatt storyline...but are you fucking kidding me? You want to give him a WORLD TITLE MATCH, at WRESTLEMANIA, for that alone? Being in a World Title match at Wrestlemania is one of those no doubt about it, You got this thing then you are instantly a first-ballot Hall of Famer, and you want to give that to Harper for a couple nice facial expressions? If Erick Rowan was in the same position you never would have said that same claim and you know it!"

I don't really disagree, but it never seems its quite so simple as the TNA example.  As I already stated, TNA was a failure on nearly every level.  Their booking of former WWE talent was surely a problem.  Where's the problem with what AEW is doing right now?  Who do you see on their very shallow roster being misused or passed over for an opportunity?  If AEW brings in say Chris Hero or Zack Ryder or one of these guys, I would agree that shooting them to the top of the card would be a mistake, but I'm not so sure the creative team even needs to be told this.  They're handling former talent just fine.  I mean you could say well they shot Moxley to the top, but he's obviously a major draw for them.
 
Spears was literally at Ryder's level (goofy lowcard babyface with a fun catchphrase), and Brodie is literally at Hero's level (indie darling who was a non-factor in the WWE but still really, really respected as a indie superstar.)  And tell the truth, you can make the case Ryder was a better Tye Dillinger than Tye Dillinger was (Ryder had been able to reach heights far higher than Spears ever did in the role, and Ryder was able to remain an effective puppy for heels to kick for a decade and always show up to get a crowd reaction), and Chris Hero's a better Brodie Lee than Brodie Lee was (Brodie Lee wasn't bad on the indies, but he never reached the same level of indie success Chris Hero did). As far as the shallow roster...that's some of the same problem: The midcard is not getting opportunities because AEW thinks "pretty movez and get your shit in" is more important than getting fans to take notice of them...which is why you need people like that, in the midcard, getting chances to rise the ranks organically.

Who made their job guy look better?  Brodie Lee deserving a World Title shot at Wrestlemania?  Hero and Brodie, the same?  A Spears-Ryder comparison with the point being?  I guess I'll just assume you quoted me without actually reading the post. 

Edited by HarryArchieGus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, HarryArchieGus said:

I would say AEW (pre-pandemic) thus far compared to WWE is like some classic cult film (not a perfect film but a fun film) to it's weak unnecessary remake.  Or how bout like a good HBO or cable series to a run of the mill network sitcom.  AEW has had logic and purpose.  Sure they've stumbled here and there, but they've, up until the pandemic, been consistently entertaining and had logical progression.  I don't watch WWE, as mentioned, but I've seen highlights, read reviews (by the late Larry Csonka), and listened to discussion on WO Radio, etc. and it sounds to me like 'entertaining' and 'logical progression' are not part of the petri dish. 

Yeah, there's not gonna be goodwill to a longstanding monopoly that 1. pushes talent that fans clearly don't respond to (time and time again).  And 2. and more importantly, a company that purposely pulls the steam off performers who get over on their own outside of the company's plan.  I would also add that WWE is obviously a formulaic style in ring and in front of the mic and not something everybody is going to find to their liking.  Me for example.  

I'm not taking up for WWE or their lack of "logical progression." I'm also not comparing WWE and AEW. You don't have to explain to me why WWE has a lack of goodwill among a bulk of longtime wrestling fans. I've seen their product continue to get worse over time. Be that as it may, none of this is really relevant to what I care to discuss. Your dislike for that organization is well noted. 

I'm discussing Chris Jericho's runs in both companies and what colours some of the overwhelming praise being heaped on Jericho while also attempting to offer more complete context on the bulk of Jericho's career that you missed out on. I don't know how this is a response to what I've been saying, but you're doing a fine job proving my point about people's opinions being coloured by the company in which a performance takes place. 

Edited by West Newbury Bad Boy
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anything, Jericho was one of the few constant highlights in his waning days with WWE. You couldn't tell me he deserved to be in the main events at that time, him vs KO was the same Mania as Undertaker/Reigns and Lesnar/Goldberg which were undeniably higher profile that year whether you like the men involved or not, but I wouldn't say he was misused either. The List gimmick was a lot of fun and the Festival of Friendship was a great moment. I can't offer much opinion on his career around the JeriShow era as I wasn't watching but Chris did some great work and was featured prominently on his way out. Shit, he came and left as he pleased for Fozzy tours, even got to work just house shows for a run because it was fun and then did New Japan with Vince's blessing so to say he had no freedom is a little hyperbolic too. In WWE, he may well have been capable of more but that's not what was required of him at the time. In AEW, they need him to be the star so he rose to the occasion. That's why he's a legend, he can do it all.

Edited by Godfrey
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I know about Jericho is that he had that run where he seamlessly became Shawn Michaels's primary antagonist, taking over from Batista, and then used that feud to flow into the suit-wearing, grim-faced heel character that he was at the time that everyone tried to do whether it made sense or not, and it was excellent television. 

So, I said this a few months back, but Jericho the performer is definitely one of the best of all time. Just unquestionably, particularly in his work as a heel, he's one of the greatest.

I think his heel work is actually quite distinct. I don't think that it's the same shtick. Jericho in late '90s WCW was the equivalent of a 4Chan troll. I just saw his feud with Dean Malenko, which is the most that I've ever given a shit about Malenko as a character, and that's all Jericho basically being a shitty internet troll about Malenko's dad being dead. 

Then he tweaks that character so that he's playing an Alex Jones-style conspiracist except with enough lucidity that he's able to understand how to manipulate the system to get title shots or to keep a title. 

Then he does heel work in WWE that has him portraying a technically-correct heel who nevertheless takes his retribution on the morally-vacuous WWE-style face too far. I didn't see the stuff with Kevin Owens originally, but it got meme'd enough that I saw a lot of it second-hand, and that was just really fun "I've gone Hollywood and totally lost the plot on what real people act like" work, not at Hollywood Rock level, but a level below that. Owens egging him on was the perfect pairing. 

And now in AEW, he plays the good old cocky over-the-heel vet, but with enough awareness to know that he needs help to hang on to the top, even if he'd never admit it. 

All of that stuff feels different, and I think it is different. Those are distinctly different heel characters. I think that if you want to say that most of his face stuff feels the same, sure, but heels are allowed a greater variety of character choices and tropes, and I don't think most heels ever are as diverse in portraying different types of heel characters in an exceptional manner as Jericho is. 

Yeah, he might call someone "jerky" across those character portrayals, but that's a reductive way to look at how much range Jericho has as a character. 

Edited by Smelly McUgly
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Smelly McUgly said:

Yeah, he might call someone "jerky" across those character portrayals, but that's a reductive way to look at how much range Jericho has as a character. 

Well put, and when you rattle them off one after another I can definitely see what you're saying.

The only issue is that he might call someone "jerky" across any of those portrayals. Suit-wearing, grim-faced guy would definitely call you a troglodyte! 

Edited by West Newbury Bad Boy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jericho needed to be outside of WWE for another major promotion that would allow him more creative freedom, I feel like Edge would've did awesome in AEW too if he decided to in a non Covid19 world. Honestly he still don't know how limited Edge is in the ring yet because he hasn't had a straight up match yet but he's so creative and smart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SorceressKnight said:

Being in a World Title match at Wrestlemania is one of those no doubt about it, You got this thing then you are instantly a first-ballot Hall of Famer

 

Okay, I'm not sure I can parse the grammar in all of this, but I have to pull up short here. Are you saying that anyone who wrestles for a World Title at Mania is a first-ballot Hall of Famer? Guys like Alberto del Rio? The Miz? JBL? Jack Swagger? What about guys like Slaughter or Sid?

I'm not arguing for or against Harper's relative merits, but the idea that wrestling for the world title at Mania has this much weight behind it just blows my mind.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Ziggy said:

Honestly he still don't know how limited Edge is in the ring yet because he hasn't had a straight up match yet but he's so creative and smart.

Poppycock! Why, I bet he's capable of having The Greatest Match Of All Time.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Elsalvajeloco said:

Herb is very much a real term. However, outside of Bomani Jones and like one or two other people, I haven't heard someone call another person a herb since the early 90s. You may as well call someone a buster if you're gonna age yourself that badly.

Herb ass was also used when I was in high school. 

Ex. Don't be a herb ass, let's cut next period and go smoke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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