Is Matt Striker immune?

[Wii M Punk]

I mark out when he makes obscure references to Indie bands like The Smiths when William Regal is wrestling. Definitely my favourite colour commentator in the business at the moment.

[Tiger Millionaire]

I think the Color guys are more immune then the play by play guys. And if he was on Raw, where Vince micromanages to death, I suspect he would have to change.

[Deleted]

But weren't both Tazz and Foley color guys?

[Chainsaw]

Feb 3, 2010 11:13:22 GMT -5 @spindoc said:

But weren't both Tazz and Foley color guys?

Yeah, and both on Smackdown. I honestly have no idea how Striker does it. Maybe he paid someone in the back to turn down his headset so he can't hear Vince screaming at him "Damnit, NO ONE KNOWS WHAT THE HELL A BROTHERHOOD OF EVIL MUTANTS IS!!!"

[Tiger Millionaire]

Feb 3, 2010 11:13:22 GMT -5 @spindoc said:

But weren't both Tazz and Foley color guys?

You are correct. Maybe he has pictures of Vince. But so was JBL, and I think JBL was pretty unfiltered.

[Deleted]

Maybe Vince just moved with the times?

[David Otunga: Eternian at Law]

Here's a thought maybe he is fed lines their just better at delivery and still toss out their own material mixed in.

[wrestlecrapcrap]

Maybe what's important to Vince isn't exactly what is said, but it's whether or not you are saying the types of things he needs. Like putting over the right guys the right way, telling the story how it should be told etc.

I'd think that as long as Striker does those things, Vince knows that there's no harm in showing you're own personality.

[PKO]

Well, Smackdown has it's commentary chopped and changed, and the commentators do additional work later in the week before SD! is aired, so Striker's intial commentary will likely sound different to what we eventually hear. His style has slightly changed since moving from ECW to SD!, for example on ECW his points could sometimes take a long time to explain while now they're more snappy. I think this is a testiment to how good a job Striker is doing, because what he is saying sounds (mostly) organic. I think it helps that he has a sort of character, so say for example, if he's given a point to say, he'll say the point and expand on it. This is what the good commentators do (JR) and it exposes the negative aspects of Cole and King because the lines sound so obviously fed to them because they don't expand on the points.

Smackdown's commentary is quite interesting when you think about the quality of the commentators: Foley's commentary (that was pretty universally praised) went through the process of getting chopped, changed and expanded and yet he hated it because he didn't get to say what he really wanted, as well as how he was treated. But what we heard was what Vince and the backstage people wanted, and most wrestling fans liked it. Additionally, most people have pointed out Michael Cole's noticeable decline in quality since moving to RAW. On SD he had the benefit of cutting the garbage and adding extra stuff, while on RAW he's live hence the pretty poor commentary.

[Jason]

I was wondering this too, I guess it fits in with his "smarter than you" persona. So Vince and the boys in the back just let him do what he does.

[rapidfire187]

Feb 3, 2010 14:00:11 GMT -5 PKO said:

Additionally, most people have pointed out Michael Cole's noticeable decline in quality since moving to RAW. On SD he had the benefit of cutting the garbage and adding extra stuff, while on RAW he's live hence the pretty poor commentary.

But Cole's commentary used to be just fine during PPV matches, which were live obviously. Maybe it was because he was working with a better partner, or because the workers in the ring were giving him more to talk about, but Cole never bothered me until he got moved to Raw.

[PKO]

Feb 3, 2010 15:46:29 GMT -5 rapidfire187 said:

Feb 3, 2010 14:00:11 GMT -5 PKO said:

Additionally, most people have pointed out Michael Cole's noticeable decline in quality since moving to RAW. On SD he had the benefit of cutting the garbage and adding extra stuff, while on RAW he's live hence the pretty poor commentary.

But Cole's commentary used to be just fine during PPV matches, which were live obviously. Maybe it was because he was working with a better partner, or because the workers in the ring were giving him more to talk about, but Cole never bothered me until he got moved to Raw.

I think the partner definately has something to do with it, although I still stick to my point for the most part. Back when Cole was on SD! he only had one day a month he had to be live (which obviously brings more pressure), and even then it wasn't for the full 2-3 hours. Now, he's live for 2 hours each week, on top of the PPV's where he now does all 2-3 hours. On PPV's the commentators generally have more focused and detailed commentary, and bring their A-game.

So, back on SD! he had one day (PPV) a month were he was live, so he could bring his A-game that day and hence sounded decent. The rest of the time his commentary was chopped, changed and added to, so sounded pretty good.

Now, he's live every week, as well as PPV's, so all his commentating goes straight to the viewer at home. More pressure= worse overall commentating.

I hope what I'm trying to say makes sense. I think the increased pressure Cole had from going live has got to him and, considering he wasn't the best commentator to begin with, he's sunk rather than swam.

Although definately the naff Cole/King partnership plays a part too.

[Supercheese]

Maybe McMahon feels Striker is a natural and doesn't need to hold his hand through it.

There is a certain Ventura like quality to his commentating that Vince may dig.

[BitterAF]

I think with color, guys are given points that they have to say rather than "you better say this word for word" and Striker may just be better at thinking on his feet on how to get those points across.

[drjayphd (feat. Pitbull)]

Feb 3, 2010 19:39:31 GMT -5 PKO said:

Although definately the naff Cole/King partnership

Oh, if only you'd reversed the names...

[taylorandborland]

Feb 3, 2010 13:16:22 GMT -5 @tagteamspecialist said:

Maybe Vince just moved with the times?

90% of Striker's references are old school/obscure

Maybe Vince is a nerd, deep down.

I hope to God that's not true.

[Jimmy]

The Cole/Lawler pairing on RAW is just such a huge fail. They never had any chemistry together on RAW or SmackDown from 1998 to 2001, yet they put them together on the flagship show away from the guys they worked best with.

[corndog]

Well obviously Vince likes him since he has added Stryker to the PPV commentary booth. So maybe he gives him more freedom. I also think the commentators are just fed major points and angles/wrestlers to talk about. It seems like their is alot more dead time on Raw with their commentating team.

[H-Fist]

Feb 3, 2010 22:35:06 GMT -5 Jimmy said:

The Cole/Lawler pairing on RAW is just such a huge fail. They never had any chemistry together on RAW or SmackDown from 1998 to 2001, yet they put them together on the flagship show away from the guys they worked best with.

This is really true. Striker seems poised to be the "A" color guy for years to come. However, I think WWE lacks the proper play-by-play/"lead" commentator to have a truly great team. Grisham improved alongside Jim Ross, but he's still bland and utterly forgettable week in and week out. Smackdown feels like a WWE compilation DVD where they edit out one commentator and leave another in to avoid a royalty check.

Wait. I take back the "they don't have one" comment. They do have one. He just works on the web side of the company. I think Styles and Striker could click, and if they did, that is one hell of a combination of names to toss out there. "Hello. Welcome to WrestleMania. This is Joey Styles alongside Matt Striker..." That is multiple levels of win right there.

[Chainsaw]

Feb 3, 2010 14:00:11 GMT -5 PKO said:

Well, Smackdown has it's commentary chopped and changed, and the commentators do additional work later in the week before SD! is aired, so Striker's intial commentary will likely sound different to what we eventually hear. His style has slightly changed since moving from ECW to SD!, for example on ECW his points could sometimes take a long time to explain while now they're more snappy. I think this is a testiment to how good a job Striker is doing, because what he is saying sounds (mostly) organic. I think it helps that he has a sort of character, so say for example, if he's given a point to say, he'll say the point and expand on it. This is what the good commentators do (JR) and it exposes the negative aspects of Cole and King because the lines sound so obviously fed to them because they don't expand on the points.

Smackdown's commentary is quite interesting when you think about the quality of the commentators: Foley's commentary (that was pretty universally praised) went through the process of getting chopped, changed and expanded and yet he hated it because he didn't get to say what he really wanted, as well as how he was treated. But what we heard was what Vince and the backstage people wanted, and most wrestling fans liked it. Additionally, most people have pointed out Michael Cole's noticeable decline in quality since moving to RAW. On SD he had the benefit of cutting the garbage and adding extra stuff, while on RAW he's live hence the pretty poor commentary.

Well said.