This is how I feel about him too. I agreed with everyone about the things that they found annoying with Mauro but I'd still take him over a lot of others bc of the things I enjoyed from him
-
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
- Thread starter RLStern
- Start date
This is how I feel about him too. I agreed with everyone about the things that they found annoying with Mauro but I'd still take him over a lot of others bc of the things I enjoyed from him
In what?
He had two moves, no fundamentals, and got winded during his entrance.
His promos were nothing but incomprehensible shouting (and not even fun incomprehensible shouting).
He can't be called a good character worker, given his insane ramblings were always just who he really was (see: any of his post-wrestling endeavours).
Literally the one thing going for him aside from the belts and commentator shilling was that he wore stuff that could be sold as merchandise, and so many had better merchandise both before and after him.
His promos were memorable and beloved, his characters was awesome, and don’t even try to bring up workrate because it’s irrelevant, you’re in a niche minority who favors workrate over storyline and character.
Warrior is one of the best professional wrestlers of all time.
Workrate is irrelevant, Benoit had that and was boring and didn't draw.
I’m being a contrarian yet you’re saying Ultimate Warrior had no talent despite being one of the biggest draws in wrestling... which is a contrarian thing to say. So for that Beaky Buzzard style trolling I’m reporting this post.
And I never said Brock Lesnar wasn’t over, I said he wasn’t over prior to UFC, which he wasn’t, he led to record lows from 2002-2004.
Warrior was the shits both as a wrestler and as a person. That is all, nothing really to comment on regarding the topic other than I really do like Mauro even if others don't. It's an opinion and it's fine to have one.
It’s an opinion that is bias and not found in reality.
Can I ask you a serious question? Do you truly believe that your opinion is the only one that’s right? If he likes Mauro you can’t tell him he’s wrong. Just like he can’t say you’re wrong.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Strawman.
No one is saying that he can’t have an opinion, he likes Mauro and that’s fine. I can then give my opinions and reasons why he isn’t a good commentary.
I’m talking about the statement that Warrior had no talent, that’s objectively wrong because Warrior was one of the most popular wrestlers ever.
Liking Mauro is possible, that’s fine, a niche do. Thus saying he is good is a valid opinion for someone to have, it is however an opinion not held by most.
Stating Warrior had no talent however is objectively false, as he was one of the biggest draws and entertained millions upon millions. a niche may dislike him, but he is objectively talented.
All I cared about was the top part, anything Warrior related I don’t care about. Thanks for answering my question. Good that you aren’t trying to tell this man he’s wrong for his opinion. Carry on.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don’t know where this idea comes from, when have I ever said a taste was wrong?
People are entitled to like whatever they want and I never condemn that.
What I do condemn and will always condemn is when that taste is niche and that person asks for their tastes to be catered to.
That’s gonna be called out because a niche should never be catered to and have zero right demanding a show be catered to.
So I make that clear that for example, if someone for example likes Chris Benoits wrestling, that’s fine but I will point out that it’s a very very niche taste/opinion and that they have zero right demanding, hijacking and protesting for the show to cater to that niche, and that Benoit shouldn’t have been anywhere near the world title.
I also condemn false statements, such as Warrior having no talent, you can dislike him, but when you state he wasn’t talented, it’s an objectively false statement and I will call it out.
Well with me, it’s because when I said to me matches are good now and I enjoy them, you kind of told me I’m wrong and they aren’t good. Which you then claimed was a fact. Sure later you used the word “objectively” or whatever. But yeah you still basically told me I was wrong. So that’s where I got the idea from. Like I’ve said, if you don’t enjoy anything about today’s product, I fully understand. I don’t care for most of the WWE today, it’s surely not what it use to be at all. But I got a few small things I like. Do I think they should Cather to me? Nah, surely not. But I love what I love.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just for fun, if you were starting a company tomorrow and could sign anyone from any sport, show, etc. to be on your commentary team (not Mauro because it's too obvious) who would you choose? Also curious for fantasy booking reasons.
I would go with Alex 'Goldenboy' Mendez, Daniel Cormier and Joe Rogan
I would go with Alex 'Goldenboy' Mendez, Daniel Cormier and Joe Rogan
No you stated their good and I pointed out that objectively they aren’t.
If you said you liked them or that is good to you, that’s something else.
A niche like today’s matches, most do not, they are objectively not good.