• Welcome to "The New" Wrestling Smarks Forum!

    I see that you are not currently registered on our forum. It only takes a second, and you can even login with your Facebook! If you would like to register now, pease click here: Register

    Once registered please introduce yourself in our introduction thread which can be found here: Introduction Board


The problem with Commentary in wrestling

RLStern

Refuter of Revisionist History
The problem mostly lies in the play by play. There are glaring problems In both AEW and WWE.

1. Play by Play commentators try to document every single move.

If you watch any era prior to the modern era, they would sometimes let moves pass and talk about the story. They keep trying to hit their commentator “spots” so to speak

2.Play by Play commentators are made out to be nerdy and less wise and with WWE they’re using Mcmahons tone and cadence.

Look back at the last greatest play by play guys:

Jim Ross: Had extensive knowledge but had southern no nonsense Oklahoma sass, and coolness, he showed off his knowledge in a laid back way while appealing to mainstream

Gorilla Moonson: An actual wrestler, had extensive knowledge but with a no nonsense New York sass & coolness, he showed off his knowledge in a laid back way.

Tony Schivone: Had extensive knowledge but had a south east middle class type of sass and professionalism.

Gordon Solie: East sass, has a New York mainstream sound but bringing it to the south.

Michael Cole during the Attitude era: Mainstream news anchor sound with no nonsense, yet still innocent sounding to relate to the audience(especially when berating a heel)

The one commentator with a glaring problem pre modern era was Vince McMahon in the mid 90s, he was too focused on wrestling moves, constantly screaming what a maneuver or unbelievable, while having his pitch sound like a brute or a drunk where he exaggerates the B sound and goes too low in pitch sounding deep.

This is contrast to Vince McMahon pre mid 90s when he sounded like a typical New York type commentator, talking about stories over moves and etc

The reason I bring this up is because the problem with the commentary today is that it’s mimicking Vince’s commentating of the mid 90s, having that sloppy drunk sound, low pitch focusing on the B sound.

A notable example is Michael Cole, his pitch is completely different from the Attitude and Ruthless aggression era to way the it sounds now.

Tom Philips even more, because he further more than Cole lowers his pitch to focus on the B sound, take for example when they call Sheamus move “10 beats on bohran”, they say it in the same pitch McMahon would say it in.



So in WWE the problem is the use of Mcnahons pitch and cadence.

But back to the main point is compared to prior years, commentators today have this overeagerness where they come off try hard, whereas JR, Solie, Old school Cole, Schiavone or Gorilla would hit you with facts while sounding cool, the modern day commentators sound like super fans with a nasal libertarian tone.

Joey Styles for example was try hard and never resounded with mainstream audiences, he sounded like a super fan and it was compounded more in ECW by the fact that for the majority of his run he was doing it himself.

In conclusion, old school play by play sounded street smart, today they sound book smart. This stems from indys because local wrestling schools give a student who can’t work a shot on the show despite having zero TV experience.

The classic commentators were either successful wrestlers, sports commentators or newscasters prior to play by play.

3. Color Commentators trying to sound wise.

Jerry Lawler, Bobby Heenan, Jesse Ventura, Larry Zybysko, Taz, Don West... they tried to be funny even if they sounded stupid.

One of the biggest influencers and problems in color commentator today is Corey Graves, who tries to sound clever and wise to wink at the IWC so they could can write posts about a wink and nod at a niche.

It therefore sounds sterile, contrived and boring.

The job of a color commentator is to entertain, not wink at a niche while no one else knows what you’re talking about and boring them.
 
Last edited:

Chris

Dreams are Endless
I thought Graves was fine in NXT. I don't know what happened

I think it has a lot to do with what the OP says tbh he tries too hard to appeal to smarks but the funny thing is they don't even like him :lol he was voted worst commentator by the wrestling observer lmao so like literally no one likes the dude anymore
 

Hidden Blaze

The Wanted Man
I think it has a lot to do with what the OP says tbh he tries too hard to appeal to smarks but the funny thing is they don't even like him :lol he was voted worst commentator by the wrestling observer lmao so like literally no one likes the dude anymore

Maybe that makes him try harder.

So we should trick the guy and make him think we like him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

RLStern

Refuter of Revisionist History
I think it has a lot to do with what the OP says tbh he tries too hard to appeal to smarks but the funny thing is they don't even like him :lol he was voted worst commentator by the wrestling observer lmao so like literally no one likes the dude anymore

Thing was smarks did like him, and since WWE caters to them he got promoted.

Same thing happened with Mauro Ranallo.
 

RLStern

Refuter of Revisionist History
Mauro Ranallo is awesome

His forced excitement at the smallest of things that shouldn’t even garner a reaction and constant abuse of “mamma mia” isn’t good commentary.

This idea that’s been around since about 2002 on how by pretending or saying something is good gets it over needs to go.

The title doesn’t get someone over.

Commentators acting excited or pretending something is good doesn’t get it over.

Before this what was written and performed had to be good enough to genuinely garner a reaction from a commentator because they weren’t gonna fake excitement.

And the man makes the title.

Never ever once did the belt or beating a star get someone over.

Didn’t work with Brock in 2002, didn’t work with Del Rio in 2011, didn’t work with Benoit in 2004 and etc

You don’t get over via wins/losses or force pushes, you get over by talent.
 

Sky

TOTAL NONSTOP ACTION
The title doesn’t get someone over.

Commentators acting excited or pretending something is good doesn’t get it over.
IDK about this one.

The Ultimate Warrior wasn't good at anything but he got belts and the commentators hyped him up. And he certainly got over
 

RLStern

Refuter of Revisionist History
IDK about this one.

The Ultimate Warrior wasn't good at anything but he got belts and the commentators hyped him up. And he certainly got over

Warrior was over then got belts... he got the belt because he was over.

Compare Kurt Angle to Brock Lesnar, two a half years apart, two different eras, one was over, one wasn’t.

Kurt Angle debuts as a heel in November of 1999 following weeks of vignettes, the more promos he cuts and the more his character gets over, the more heat he gets, rivaling Triple H for heat in late 1999/early 2000 before winning any belt.

He gets so over that he gets a mini feud with with Rock in January 2000, in a promo where he insults Mario Lemieux and it gets mainstream media coverage to where Bob Costas brings it up again in 2002 with McMahon.

So now he’s rewarded and he gets the European title, then gets more over as a heel where he helps Jericho as a face and Jericho stops feuding with Chyna and starts teaming with her against Angle.

Now he’s getting more pops and heat, to the point where Kurt Angle got the biggest crowd reception at No Way Out 2000, and therefore won the IC title.

He loses both belts to get Jericho and Benoit over, then continues to get over to the point where he gets riotous heat with the crowd, more than Triple H is supposed to, as unlike Angle he is feuding with the top draw The Rock.

Angle then out draws Triple H in segments and his push to main event starts. Angle constantly gets 6.0+ratings in spring and summer of 2000, merchandise through the roof, is used for various media appearances and commercials, outdrawing Triple H, only behind Rock in drawing power.

YET despite this doesn’t win the belt until October.

Compare that with Brock Lesnar, debuts with zero character and vignettes in March of 2002, doesn’t get over and draw yet only 5 months later beats Rock for the belt.
 

Sky

TOTAL NONSTOP ACTION
You haven't answered yet: If you don't get over by anything but talent, and Warrior had no talent... why was he over?
 

Dale

Super Moderator
Graves was definitely good but he went to shit in a major way. Pretty sure during the Renee era all he did was berate the fuck out of her which was terrible to listen to, even if she was hot garbage.
 

Dale

Super Moderator
Also don't get me wrong, Mauro got annoying as fuck at times with his references and shit but his excitement would get me excited. Him and Nigel together were *chefs kiss*
 

RLStern

Refuter of Revisionist History
You haven't answered yet: If you don't get over by anything but talent, and Warrior had no talent... why was he over?

I did answer. He got over, you need talent to do that.

False premise about him having no talent. Warrior had more talent than every single wrestler today.

Ultimate Warrior was talented. There’s no way around that.
 
Top