Page 36 of 53

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 5:55 am
by wac
CIMA jumped 17 points to 40%, Spyros Arion jumped 17 points to 32%, Slaughter jumped 14 points to 27%, Akiyama jumped 12 points to 45%. Crockett Sr. fell 16 points to 41% and Volk Han dropped 14 points to 38%.

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:20 am
by supersonic
Thrilled for Sting and Danielson getting their overdue credit finally, although it also feels like "well, no shit, what took them so long?"

The percentage for Mistico and CM Punk are fucking laughable. Being unfriendly cunts in their own way doesn't erase what they contributed to the business, whether it was box-office power for the former, and the shared trailblazing with Danielson for the latter. (I consider Punk and Danielson as the QB and RB captains that led the uphill end zone to end zone battle that was getting WWE to advance its primitive hiring practices in the decade or so after the War.)

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 2:54 pm
by TGD287
TGD287 wrote:Decided to cancel to see if I'd miss it (it was part of a clearing session that eliminated NJPW, Stardom, and Hulu, all canceled for the same reasons, albet not used nearly as often). Maybe I'll come crawling back, but it's the only way to know for sure.
Expired today. Between constant screencaps of the Observer, and tweets of quotes from the podcasts, I'm going to be in the loop of the bubble without really trying. Added the free feed to the phone, might start listening to WOL again (we'll see how long that lasts), and will start downloading LAW on Sunday's for Dave.

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 5:22 pm
by Jeff Hawkins
I think with Lance and Todd both gone the "critical analysis" aspect of a lot of the audio is gone. Tom Lawlor ranking fat guys isn't going to do that.

I think Les Thatcher and Karl Stern in their own ways are exhausted. Karl wants to do his own pop culture thing, and while I like Vic, Les seems to be less engaged since Doc left.

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 5:31 pm
by mlev76
Jeff Hawkins wrote:I think with Lance and Todd both gone the "critical analysis" aspect of a lot of the audio is gone. Tom Lawlor ranking fat guys isn't going to do that.

I think Les Thatcher and Karl Stern in their own ways are exhausted. Karl wants to do his own pop culture thing, and while I like Vic, Les seems to be less engaged since Doc left.
The diminishment of audio on the site is one of the main reasons I find it less valuable now than any time since I first signed up in 2008. Back when there weren't dozens of podcasts, the interview shows that Dave and Bryan did were a great add on to the Dave and Bryan shows. Bryan & Vinny was legit enjoyable and both guys didn't seem as pained to keep doing the same shit twice a week. While I wasn't always a fan, the Todd and Lance shows were also fun. I also loved Dr. Keith and subsequently DKP.

There is obviously a glut of competitors now and in terms of special guests, they'll never get the same access that Jericho or Austin will and with the non WWE guys, most are scooped up by other outlets at this point.

Really down to just the Observer newsletter for me.

F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 7:07 pm
by Wiretaup
I think a ton of issues people have with the site would go away if it were $2 cheaper.

I understand that's never happening.

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 6:21 am
by ayaashm
Yeeesh.

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 6:33 am
by Joe Lanza
People are going to focus the the reverse racism line and bash dave, but he's shredding Bix in that debate.

It basically went like this:

Bix - "Butch Reed couldn't be NWA champ because of racism"
dave - "Promoters would push anyone who they felt could make them money."
Bix - "But a lot of promoters were racists who saw blacks as interchangable. Watts tried to replace JYD with George Welles & Snowman."
dave - "That's my point"
Bix - "Watts said & did racist things."
dave - "THAT'S MY POINT"

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 6:40 am
by ayaashm
That's true but I was more disturbed with tbe Reverse Racism line than anything else tbh.

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 7:27 pm
by ODonnell
He clarified his point on the board -

Yep, quite the argument, I got asked why Butch Reed was never made NWA champion and said it was because Ric Flair was a better fit at the time.

Bix says yes, Flair was better, but if Reed was better he'd still have never been champ.

I say you don't know that.

He says Bill Watts pushed Master Gee, Snowman and some other guys AND was racist, so every single promoter was racist.

I say whatever Watts was, and he said some pretty abhorrent things in the 90s which he later himself said he was wrong in saying, he cared more about making money than anything else, and pushing blacks ahead of whites who were far better doesn't constitute being racist against blacks in how he operated his business. Personally, that's a different issue which has been debated. Watts said some really dumb things which ended up costing him his job with WCW (he said them before he worked there and it was inevitable they would bite him in the ass) and if you call him racist because of it, I won't argue, but to say he wouldn't push a wrestler who he thought was marketable due to skin color, I know well enough as a promoter, he cared first and foremost about making money and his track record of who he pushed showed if anything, he erred in the other direction.

I used the word reverse racism, probably not the best term, perhaps affirmative action would be it, but I don't believe that's the term either. The real term is he made mistakes as a promoter in quest to make the most money he could and was wrong about the marketability of some talent. Just like everyone who promotes.

Not to mention Watts wasn't even in the NWA at the time in question.

But the argument is that if there in the 80s was a black wrestler who could work like Flair, draw like Flair and promo like Flair, would he have gotten an NWA title run. Given that there was no such individual in the 80s, the answer is we don't know.

But some people need to believe everyone was a racist, including Bix who said every single promoter was racist which is such bullshit it's not even funny, as foolish as saying every promoter beat his wife, when the obvious answer I gave, we don't know, is the only answer that can be given honestly.

I talked to enough promoters then about the NWA title, and never once did anyone, when I brought up that every Butch Reed, say he couldn't be champion because he was black. In fact, one promoter brought up Reed to me and thought maybe they should make him champion because he was black, just because it had never been done with that belt before, while conceding he couldn't draw or promo like Flair and was working at the time for Watts so it wasn't going to happen.

He wasn't considered because the people in charge felt Flair was better or he wasn't working in the NWA. He wasn't given a transitional run because he was not as charismatic as Dusty nor working in the NWA, and in 1987, when Garvin got it, he wasn't in JCP so wasn't under consideration.

And the idea there was a quota that a territory could only have one black wrestler working there at a time, and I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find somewhere that's true in the 50s or 60s (and Verne Gagne never pushed African-American wrestlers except in Chicago where he did), but the heyday of Butch Reed was probably 1984-85, so that's hardly applicable. But one look at territories will show in most cases that wasn't true at all.

Without a doubt there were racist promoters in pro wrestling, but the idea every single promoter from that era was racist is ridiculous.

Then he started quoting anti-Gay stuff Watts said and claimed he was the most liberal of promoters when everyone knows Watts was a raving conservative.

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 7:34 pm
by powerfulmgp
Jeff Hawkins wrote:I think with Lance and Todd both gone the "critical analysis" aspect of a lot of the audio is gone. Tom Lawlor ranking fat guys isn't going to do that.

I think Les Thatcher and Karl Stern in their own ways are exhausted. Karl wants to do his own pop culture thing, and while I like Vic, Les seems to be less engaged since Doc left.
Outside of the three Dave shows, pretty much all that are left are wacky~! Alvarez and 'X' shows, which add nothing of value to the subscription price. The loss of Martin and now Lance without being replaced have been huge. Wrestling Weekly used to be one of my favorite shows on the site, but it has had a pretty undeniable decline as well. Basically, in order to have access to the official digital WON archive, you're stuck subsidizing a site that wouldn't be able to stay afloat on it's own. Points all beaten to the ground at this point, but still upsetting mainly because said person in charge of the site doesn't care. Contrast that to the Torch, where 30 years in, Wade is still finding ways to innovate, add more content to the site, and is more than happy to respond to questions, comments, or criticism.

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 7:35 pm
by powerfulmgp
Joe Lanza wrote:People are going to focus the the reverse racism line and bash dave, but he's shredding Bix in that debate.

It basically went like this:

Bix - "Butch Reed couldn't be NWA champ because of racism"
dave - "Promoters would push anyone who they felt could make them money."
Bix - "But a lot of promoters were racists who saw blacks as interchangable. Watts tried to replace JYD with George Welles & Snowman."
dave - "That's my point"
Bix - "Watts said & did racist things."
dave - "THAT'S MY POINT"
It's been mentioned before, but Dave does not work well when limited to 140 characters. It's just not him.

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 7:45 pm
by Joe Lanza
ODonnell wrote:He clarified his point on the board -

Yep, quite the argument, I got asked why Butch Reed was never made NWA champion and said it was because Ric Flair was a better fit at the time.

Bix says yes, Flair was better, but if Reed was better he'd still have never been champ.

I say you don't know that.

He says Bill Watts pushed Master Gee, Snowman and some other guys AND was racist, so every single promoter was racist.

I say whatever Watts was, and he said some pretty abhorrent things in the 90s which he later himself said he was wrong in saying, he cared more about making money than anything else, and pushing blacks ahead of whites who were far better doesn't constitute being racist against blacks in how he operated his business. Personally, that's a different issue which has been debated. Watts said some really dumb things which ended up costing him his job with WCW (he said them before he worked there and it was inevitable they would bite him in the ass) and if you call him racist because of it, I won't argue, but to say he wouldn't push a wrestler who he thought was marketable due to skin color, I know well enough as a promoter, he cared first and foremost about making money and his track record of who he pushed showed if anything, he erred in the other direction.

I used the word reverse racism, probably not the best term, perhaps affirmative action would be it, but I don't believe that's the term either. The real term is he made mistakes as a promoter in quest to make the most money he could and was wrong about the marketability of some talent. Just like everyone who promotes.

Not to mention Watts wasn't even in the NWA at the time in question.

But the argument is that if there in the 80s was a black wrestler who could work like Flair, draw like Flair and promo like Flair, would he have gotten an NWA title run. Given that there was no such individual in the 80s, the answer is we don't know.

But some people need to believe everyone was a racist, including Bix who said every single promoter was racist which is such bullshit it's not even funny, as foolish as saying every promoter beat his wife, when the obvious answer I gave, we don't know, is the only answer that can be given honestly.

I talked to enough promoters then about the NWA title, and never once did anyone, when I brought up that every Butch Reed, say he couldn't be champion because he was black. In fact, one promoter brought up Reed to me and thought maybe they should make him champion because he was black, just because it had never been done with that belt before, while conceding he couldn't draw or promo like Flair and was working at the time for Watts so it wasn't going to happen.

He wasn't considered because the people in charge felt Flair was better or he wasn't working in the NWA. He wasn't given a transitional run because he was not as charismatic as Dusty nor working in the NWA, and in 1987, when Garvin got it, he wasn't in JCP so wasn't under consideration.

And the idea there was a quota that a territory could only have one black wrestler working there at a time, and I'm sure if you look hard enough you'll find somewhere that's true in the 50s or 60s (and Verne Gagne never pushed African-American wrestlers except in Chicago where he did), but the heyday of Butch Reed was probably 1984-85, so that's hardly applicable. But one look at territories will show in most cases that wasn't true at all.

Without a doubt there were racist promoters in pro wrestling, but the idea every single promoter from that era was racist is ridiculous.

Then he started quoting anti-Gay stuff Watts said and claimed he was the most liberal of promoters when everyone knows Watts was a raving conservative.
I knew exactly what dave meant when he made the "reverse racism" tweet. He wasn't saying Watts was practicing reverse racism, he was saying the point Bix was making was closer to "reverse racism" than racism towards blacks.

Of course, as predicted, Twitter dot com is focusing on the "reverse racism" line, because we are in a place and time where how you say something is often just as important (or even more important) than what you're actually saying. People are going to see "reverse racism" and assume dave supports that as a theory, which was not what he was saying at all, but on Twitter you don't have the benefit of seeing the entire context of a conversation unless you go out of your way to dig for it. And even so, some people are so black/white no gray on things when it comes to verbiage and language that it doesn't matter.

Point here is, dave is poor at social media. You can't hang a line like "reverse racism" out there like that in this time and place on a medium like Twitter without the proper context so people understand what you're trying to say. You need to understand that using an antiquated term like that is basically BEGGING to be misconstrued.

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 7:48 pm
by Jeff Hawkins
dave's great on hard news. Critical commentary? your mileage may vary

See the comment today where the crowd didn't get the participation trophy gimmick on Smackdown. They were very self aware of what it was but dave thought they were legitimately cheering.

Re: F4W/Observer-Is it still worth paying for?

Posted: Thu Dec 08, 2016 9:04 pm
by ErinQuinn
I think I'm going to cancel my subscription after this month because I can't stand listening to one more "Dasha is a robot" rant

...who am i kidding, i'll keep my sub so i can read the observer and listen to DKP...

...but the robot tirades need to be put to rest