andrew8798
FANatic
on 24/7 this month
Posts: 106,235 
|
Post by andrew8798 on Apr 11, 2008 0:48:22 GMT -5
In case you were wondering
ECW Battle Royal *
JBL/Finlay **1/4
MITB ***1/4
BATISTA/UMAGA *1/4
KANE/CHAVO N/R
FLAIR/MICHAELS ***1/2
BUNNYMANIA 1/4*
ORTON/HHH/CENA ***1/2
EDGE/UNDERTAKER ****1/4
|
|
|
|
Post by Bobby Womack on Apr 11, 2008 0:50:36 GMT -5
ive never cared less about meltzers ratings and i dont see why anyone would, but how he rated taker/edge higher than hbk/flair ill never know
|
|
Max
Hank Scorpio
Played Radar on M*A*S*H
im smokin skunk and poppin the truck to make me feel good
Posts: 5,374
|
Post by Max on Apr 11, 2008 0:50:52 GMT -5
3 1/2? it deservs 5 for michaels-flair
|
|
|
|
Post by Just "Dan" is Fine, Thank You on Apr 11, 2008 0:52:11 GMT -5
I think Meltzer's ratings are finally, mercifully, irrelevant in the eyes of internet wrestling fans.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Summer of Muskrat XVII on Apr 11, 2008 0:52:31 GMT -5
3 1/2? it deservs 5 for michaels-flair Agreed, between story, in ring action, and historical impact that match is easily a 5* match |
|
Corporate H
Grimlock
He Buries Them Alive
Posts: 13,829
|
Post by Corporate H on Apr 11, 2008 1:00:24 GMT -5
3 1/2? it deservs 5 for michaels-flair Agreed, between story, in ring action, and historical impact that match is easily a 5* match I wouldn't go that far, but I definitely would have put it over 'Taker/Edge. |
|
BxB
Unicron
Only the shift key stands between him and copyright infringement.
Posts: 2,849
|
Post by BxB on Apr 11, 2008 1:03:44 GMT -5
There's no way the triple threat should be rated the same as HBK-Flair. HBK-Flair is going to go down as a classic.
|
|
|
|
Post by macdaddysquid on Apr 11, 2008 1:03:45 GMT -5
ive never cared less about meltzers ratings and i dont see why anyone would, but how he rated taker/edge higher than hbk/flair ill never know It was better. For a second it looked like Taker was losing. Flairs losing was very obvious |
|
|
|
Post by Gopher Mod on Apr 11, 2008 1:05:50 GMT -5
ive never cared less about meltzers ratings and i dont see why anyone would, but how he rated taker/edge higher than hbk/flair ill never know It was better. For a second it looked like Taker was losing. Flairs losing was very obvious In fact, if it wasn't for that, I would say that Flair/Michaels would've been at least half a star higher in Meltzer's book. |
|
JMA
Hank Scorpio
Down With Capitalism!
Posts: 6,880
|
Post by JMA on Apr 11, 2008 1:11:59 GMT -5
I think Meltzer's ratings are finally, mercifully, irrelevant in the eyes of internet wrestling fans. Not really. Mainstream wrestling just sucks right now so Internet fans aren't that interested in reading anyone's match ratings. A few years ago, all the wrestling sites and boards would've had star ratings. Now. not so much. Mediocrity doesn't create excitement. However, Internet fans DO seem to care about Meltzer's ratings for indy wrestling, though. But I don't think that's too important to Meltzer anyways, especially since he seems more into MMA now. Which is kind of depressing, actually. It shows how bad wrestling is at the moment when the guy ALL smarks (whether they like him or not) get their information from, in one way or another, is more interested in MMA. |
|
|
|
Post by Bobby Womack on Apr 11, 2008 1:15:20 GMT -5
ive never cared less about meltzers ratings and i dont see why anyone would, but how he rated taker/edge higher than hbk/flair ill never know It was better. For a second it looked like Taker was losing. Flairs losing was very obvious im not sure if you mean the real life situations made it obvious or the match itself, if you meant real life id say both of the outcomes were equally predictable, but if you meant during the match i think that when it eventually became obvious that ric couldnt win it added to the storytelling of the match and made it better |
|
|
|
Post by Just "Dan" is Fine, Thank You on Apr 11, 2008 1:19:15 GMT -5
I think Meltzer's ratings are finally, mercifully, irrelevant in the eyes of internet wrestling fans. Which is kind of depressing, actually. It shows how bad wrestling is at the moment when the guy ALL smarks (whether they like him or not) get their information from, in one way or another, is more interested in MMA. This is true. It's a very ominous sign for the business. |
|
|
|
Post by tonyexile on Apr 11, 2008 1:26:14 GMT -5
I really wasn't that impressed with Taker/Edge, but I think I'm biased because of how it ended...as I hate him using that move as a finisher.
Just my two cents.
|
|
|
|
Post by macdaddysquid on Apr 11, 2008 1:26:43 GMT -5
It was better. For a second it looked like Taker was losing. Flairs losing was very obvious im not sure if you mean the real life situations made it obvious or the match itself, if you meant real life id say both of the outcomes were equally predictable, but if you meant during the match i think that when it eventually became obvious that ric couldnt win it added to the storytelling of the match and made it better Flair didnt even appear to come close to winning. Edge had so many near falls and had to be beaten with a surprise submission. Im sorry I love you just doesnt cut it for me |
|
|
|
Post by skiller on Apr 11, 2008 3:58:44 GMT -5
I personally liked Taker/Edge more, but that's just me.
Flair/Michaels is a very close second.
|
|
Marvelously Mediocre
Fry's dog Seymour
Beggin' for a little SWAGGAH!
Haha. What a story Mark.
Posts: 21,224
|
Post by Marvelously Mediocre on Apr 11, 2008 4:09:28 GMT -5
piss off Meltzer. no one cares about you anymore
|
|
|
|
Post by Tea & Crumpets on Apr 11, 2008 7:01:15 GMT -5
3 1/2? it deservs 5 for michaels-flair Agreed. If ever a match was 5 *, that was it. Flair's ring work was stepped up way higher than it had been in years, HBK bumped like mad, the emotion and psychology were incredible, and I don't think there's ever been a better finish than that. |
|
Kae
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 3,610
|
Post by Kae on Apr 11, 2008 7:57:28 GMT -5
In terms of the in-ring work, Undertaker and Edge had the better match. In terms of the actual storytelling, psychology, and emotion, Flair and HBK were undoubtedly the match of the night. If Meltzer's interested in MMA now, it's no wonder he's privileging work over storytelling. I personally do not.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Daddy Bad Booking on Apr 11, 2008 9:33:00 GMT -5
I'm probably the only one who agrees on the rating for Michaels/Flair. The one thing that really knocked it down for me was how HBK took one too many risks, and it made me pissed at him, that Flair deserved a little better. The end of the match was top-notch, no doubt, but the beginning/Michaels flying was not so great and it took away from the match for me.
*people start booing at me*
|
|
Pushed to the Moon
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Tony Schiavone in Disguise
Working myself into a shoot
Posts: 15,819
|
Post by Pushed to the Moon on Apr 11, 2008 9:36:57 GMT -5
Can someone tell me who Dave Meltzer is and why people care? I mean I know he's a wrestling critic/writer or whatever but is he an ex-promoter or wrestler or something?
|
|
