- Boards
- Pro Wrestling: WWE
- Bring It To The Table should be called Smark Vs. Shills.
|
Seems like it's Peter Rosenberg, the smark, trying his hardest to break through the shill shells of Graves and JBL to get some honest answers.
|
|
Graves makes legit points for both sides in the ones I've seen.
Ultimately tho, the show is WWE's way of talking down to the IWC. Peter is the IWC and JBL channels Vince. |
|
JimPean posted...
Graves makes legit points for both sides in the ones I've seen. Yeah it's their way of doing it but imo it's still probably their first outlet of the iwc complaints and tropes really being discussed too
Ramses number one, he puts the people all on fire
https://imgur.com/a/S6BZ3 |
|
Agreed on Graves, but it just feels like there's a barrier between what they'll say and what they feel/the truth, it makes a lot of the topics more frustrating than anything.
Like when they brought up the "words and phrases WWE wants commentary to say/not say", they would NOT give a straight answer, even when Rosenberg played a video of them saying "structure" 64 TIMES in the Punjabi Prison match.
(edited 5 days ago)quote
|
|
EffectAndCause posted...
Agreed on Graves, but it just feels like there's a barrier between what they'll say and what they feel/the truth, it makes a lot of the topics more frustrating than anything. So they brought up the buzz words complaint this ep? That's pretty hilarious. I'll have to watch it when I get some time then. You're right about the honesty of the responses. I mean, a show like that is heavily scripted and edited. I expect JBL to be JBL but I've seen Graves stick up for some issues that a quick glance at his twitter will say otherwise. If the show ran like Talking Smack did, we'd get a lot more honest opinions from all 3 of them. Of course not all in favor for the IWC as there's still a lot of the business side of things WWE does that the IWC doesn't understand. |
|
Plus it's not like any opinion that's in favor of WWE makes them a shill, I just wish they were completely honest and spoke how they truly feel.
Like if they said "Yes, there are certain phrases we're told to use and not use and these are the reasons", that'd be fine, even if I think it's fucking dumb. |
|
Agreed. Transparency is a virtue.
Welcome to LOLFAQs, where anyone who disagrees with you is a troll.
"Hahahahahahaha" - Mara Aramov |
|
It should be called shill pretends to be a smark, but still follows the company script verses other shills.
That show is pure propaganda and it is gross. Worst thing I've ever seen WWE produce. Not an exaggeration. I hate it.
My Words Were True And Sheamus Made You Believe!
http://imgur.com/Fc39f.jpg |
|
JimPean posted...
EffectAndCause posted...Agreed on Graves, but it just feels like there's a barrier between what they'll say and what they feel/the truth, it makes a lot of the topics more frustrating than anything. JBL never gives honest answers. He's 100% Vince McMahon with his responses |
|
The show is an affront to common intelligence.
Its presented like they try to talk about hotbutton message board subjects in a non-kayfabe way, by you could still feel Vince and WWE's fingerprints all over it
LSU Tigers Baseball - 2017 SEC Champions
|
|
It's a different shade of kayfabe, some of you guys are being offended by something you really shouldn't.
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
~700 atk Roberta chain |
|
GameGodOfAll posted...
It should be called shill pretends to be a smark, but still follows the company script verses other shills. Yeah I feel like Rosenberg can't be that incompetent when it comes to articulating his points on purpose, so the first paragraph there is accurate. He makes arguments that smarks make, but capitulates so quickly and easily a lot of the time that it's just suspicious. I've pretty much thought that ever since he completely folded when he brought up the "3 hours of Raw" thing. JBL is also bad for the show because of his condescending aggression which ensures no actually intelligent discussion will ever really take place. There's an underlying disgust and dislike of smarks within the show, which is odd when surely smarks are more likely to be the audience of it. I think a big problem with that is - again - JBL, who probably hates that community with a passion. Not sure if I'd say it's the worst thing they've ever produced, but it is seriously icky and quite blatantly manipulative.
Such a lust for revenge
|
|
Dynedux posted...
It's a different shade of kayfabe, some of you guys are being offended by something you really shouldn't. There are definitely different shades of kayfabe but that doesn't detract from the message of the show. Are you saying essentially that Rosenberg being so terrible is the same as HHH saying something like "I'm going to bury Daniel Bryan" in a promo? That the show is all a deliberate work? It seems convenient, then, that the "work" would align so well with the WWE party line. It's possible that it's simultaneously a work and a propaganda piece though - it can serve both purposes.
Such a lust for revenge
|
|
XIII_rocks posted...
Dynedux posted...It's a different shade of kayfabe, some of you guys are being offended by something you really shouldn't. Did you expect something else? I'm legitimately confused by people who say this is manipulation; it's a wwe produced show with WWE contracted talent for the wwe network. What, did anyone honestly expect them to talk outside of kayfabe about real gripes the elitist nerd community has?
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
~700 atk Roberta chain |
|
So they're talking in kayfabe about stuff that's outside kayfabe while towing the party line?
I think if we take "WWE propaganda" to be part of kayfabe, we're basically agreeing. I mean, Rosenberg being so bad is probably a work, so the whole show is founded on fake arguments. But that doesn't mean it isn't manipulative or gross because of the way it is presented - with Rosenberg bringing up smark arguments and then folding.
Such a lust for revenge
(edited 4 days ago)quote
|
|
doesn't help that when corey graves did say something 100% honest,he got a talking to for it
[?]
"He must've been a very important chimp." |
|
I did laugh that the structure thing clearly proved JBL's claims wrong, so he seemed kinda tongue tied lol and he changed the subject.
Anyway, I think it's alright. What did people expect? Graves and JBL to shit on the company on a company paid for program? Just don't watch it if you don't like it. You don't need to bitch about it considering you literally have to go out of your way to see it anyway. Also, they kinda sorta not really indirectly mentioned Chris Benoit on this week's!
Not changing this sig until Sami Zayn wins a world title or gets released 5/13/17
Previous: Not changing this sig until the Undertaker retires 10/19/10-4/2/17 |
|
For the record I watched 1 and a half episodes. Tapped out after there, but I don't see the format changing.
And the real problem is not JBL or Graves. They basically represent the WWE. It's all about Rosenberg. He folds almost instantly and lets them talk all over him when he is supposed to represent the fans. You don't want a spineless bitch boy like that on this kind of show. You want someone as aggressive as the other side making points and not letting such flimsy bullshit excuses fly. And to be clear, the way it is is exactly what I expected it to be when I first saw it announced. Still doesn't make it any less gross.
My Words Were True And Sheamus Made You Believe!
http://imgur.com/Fc39f.jpg |
|
I remember the clip talking about a 3 hour Raw and why it would be better for fans to be 2 hours. JBL and Paul Heyman ripped into him and while they made good points about the business side of it they basically said fuck off to the fans perspective. The whole show is pretty much WWE's way of telling fans "No you're stupid and your ideas are dumb" without actually telling them flat out.
|
|
XIII_rocks posted...
GameGodOfAll posted...It should be called shill pretends to be a smark, but still follows the company script verses other shills. That's not just JBL, that's pretty common with a lot of wrestlers and people in the business. Anytime anyone has every brought up the IWC or or smart marks to any wrestler, be it CM Punk, Jericho, Undertaker, Big Show, Lesnar, HHH, or even just any manager or crew, they all talk mad shit about smarks. A general opinion held by everyone who works in the business seems to be that "the fans only knows as much as we let them know" and "armchair booker" comes up a lot too.
Want to watch a fat redneck do stupid crap? I do it for free. http://www.youtube.com/user/AlexTheSoutherner
|
|
matthardyrules posted...
I did laugh that the structure thing clearly proved JBL's claims wrong, so he seemed kinda tongue tied lol and he changed the subject. I think it's pretty reasonable to bitch about because it's so grotesque - it's more than just bad television. There's something insidious about it. That's not just JBL, that's pretty common with a lot of wrestlers and people in the business. True - I nearly said something about "old school" wrestlers but didn't want to get into a whole debate about that. But yeah, JBL's cold shoulder towards smarks and/or people that "don't know the business" is definitely typical.
Such a lust for revenge
|
|
MetaIhead_AIex posted...
That's not just JBL, that's pretty common with a lot of wrestlers and people in the business. Because they're carnies. That's carny 101 |
|
Mr_arizona posted...
I remember the clip talking about a 3 hour Raw and why it would be better for fans to be 2 hours. JBL and Paul Heyman ripped into him and while they made good points about the business side of it they basically said fuck off to the fans perspective. The whole show is pretty much WWE's way of telling fans "No you're stupid and your ideas are dumb" without actually telling them flat out. But they're right, though. That third hour brings them in more money than if the show was 2 hours with a 50% increase in ratings. So, yeah, all the arm chair expert fans that claim this would be better or that would be better are pretty stupid, especially since not a single one of those fans has any kind of education or working experience in that field. Like, what do you want them to say?
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
~700 atk Roberta chain |
|
Yeah the three hour thing is pretty cut and dry idk why people argue it. Yes the show would possibly be better if it were shorter but there's money where they're at. USA wants it. The two sides are basically having different conversations
Ramses number one, he puts the people all on fire
https://imgur.com/a/S6BZ3 |
|
CourtofOwls posted...
doesn't help that when corey graves did say something 100% honest,he got a talking to for it He said wasn't at all excited for the Shane vs AJ WM match, right? And Shane gave him a bollocking for it
Currently playing: FIFA 17, Civilisation VI, Europa Universalis IV, Settlers V
|
|
And, to be fair, AJ/Shane ended up being way better than it had any right to be
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
~700 atk Roberta chain |
|
I haven't actually watched this show, but I feel like, from some of the little bits and pieces I've seen, I feel like Rosenburg even tends to shit on some "IWC" stuff. Like, I remember a clip of him kind of berating the internet for being 100% on board with Roman as the undisputed top guy (which was never true at all) and then turned on him when WWE actually pushed him "just to be contrarian".
Anyway, I think what perplexes me most is, I don't get how a show like this exists when Talking Smack was apparently canned for skirting the line of kayfabe and reality too much. I mean, even if this show is very scripted and is WWE trying to force out their own propaganda, it still seems like an odd show to have and promote, especially when they just recently canned another show on the Network because Vince didn't like exposing the business in any way.
https://www.youtube.com/RatedM477
New videos every weekday at 4PM ET! |
|
MRW1215 posted...
I haven't actually watched this show, but I feel like, from some of the little bits and pieces I've seen, I feel like Rosenburg even tends to shit on some "IWC" stuff. Like, I remember a clip of him kind of berating the internet for being 100% on board with Roman as the undisputed top guy (which was never true at all) and then turned on him when WWE actually pushed him "just to be contrarian". Who says that's why Talking Smack was canceled? Bring it to the table films once every month or two, Talking Smack filmed every week after a show, keeping production people, camera Crews, etc in the arena an extra hour+ for a show that wasn't doing to well as far as viewership went. There wasn't some hidden agenda that it was exposing the business too much, jfc
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
~700 atk Roberta chain |
|
Dynedux posted...
MRW1215 posted...I haven't actually watched this show, but I feel like, from some of the little bits and pieces I've seen, I feel like Rosenburg even tends to shit on some "IWC" stuff. Like, I remember a clip of him kind of berating the internet for being 100% on board with Roman as the undisputed top guy (which was never true at all) and then turned on him when WWE actually pushed him "just to be contrarian". I mean, take the "lol dirtsheets" stance if you must, but from what we've heard, it sounds like Vince wasn't particularly keen on the content of Talking Smack. And that's pretty believable. But it's odd, then, that he'd sign off on a show that blatantly talks outside of kayfabe.
https://www.youtube.com/RatedM477
New videos every weekday at 4PM ET! |
|
MRW1215 posted...
Dynedux posted...MRW1215 posted...I haven't actually watched this show, but I feel like, from some of the little bits and pieces I've seen, I feel like Rosenburg even tends to shit on some "IWC" stuff. Like, I remember a clip of him kind of berating the internet for being 100% on board with Roman as the undisputed top guy (which was never true at all) and then turned on him when WWE actually pushed him "just to be contrarian". If that is really the case then why is the show still around? It's not a stance, it literally, factually, absolutely is loldirtsheets
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
~700 atk Roberta chain |
|
Dynedux posted...
Mr_arizona posted...I remember the clip talking about a 3 hour Raw and why it would be better for fans to be 2 hours. JBL and Paul Heyman ripped into him and while they made good points about the business side of it they basically said fuck off to the fans perspective. The whole show is pretty much WWE's way of telling fans "No you're stupid and your ideas are dumb" without actually telling them flat out. Because they rejected the notion that this makes the show worse and that if the show continues to be bad in the long run, ratings will go down. 3 hours is a drag and there aren't many who want to watch the whole thing from start to finish. The fact that Rosenberg didn't bring this up and allowed JBL's exaggerated figures (he included the SD money in his stats) to overwhelm him is exactly why people are up in arms. And there's definitely a way of saying that that doesn't necessarily trash the product - "isn't it better to leave people wanting more" or something diplomatic. Fan experience and dissatisfaction with the 3 hours is a very valid argument, it's just more intangible than the current figures. But it is valid and Rosenberg just let it go. Also your stance would be more palatable and make more people want to converse with you if you weren't so needlessly aggressive about a fanbase you're part of.
Such a lust for revenge
|
|
I think you're being entirely too sensitive about it to be honest. Who the fuck cares how they dismissed it. Are you telling me it's offensive that heel JBL acted like a heel and gave a heel answer?
And it doesn't matter if some part of the fanbase wants a two hour raw, it's not going to happen. Not because Evil Vince McMahon Leader of The 4th Reich hates his fans and wants them all to suffer, it's because it makes money. Period. Doesn't matter if it's 12 cents or 12 million, it makes money.
Noctis 906atk - 813.793.244
~700 atk Roberta chain |
|
MRW1215 posted...
I haven't actually watched this show, but I feel like, from some of the little bits and pieces I've seen, I feel like Rosenburg even tends to shit on some "IWC" stuff. Like, I remember a clip of him kind of berating the internet for being 100% on board with Roman as the undisputed top guy (which was never true at all) and then turned on him when WWE actually pushed him "just to be contrarian". WWE's repeated and unrelenting failure to understand why people turned on Roman - or their deliberately incorrect statements about it - have been pretty astounding.
Such a lust for revenge
(edited 4 days ago)quote
|
- Boards
- Pro Wrestling: WWE
- Bring It To The Table should be called Smark Vs. Shills.
No comments:
Post a Comment