Dave: I don’t think Reigns is a big enough draw to be a part-time champion

Dave: I don’t think Reigns is a big enough draw to be a part-time champion.

Attached: 7C9573ED-0721-423A-B26D-F5611D163C6B.png (908x160, 30.04K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/p5QfYc_U4U4
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

It's great that people listen to this guy who never trained, worked, booked, scouted talent, or was involved in the business in any way.
He knows what he's talking about.

this but unironically

Why is Dave always taking shots at WWE, yet he never says anything negative about AEW?

You should never comment on any job you’ve never had. If a guy fucks up fixing your car but you’ve never been a mechanic tip him anyways. If the food sucks but you’ve never been a chef eat it anyways piggy. In fact never give opinions on this board again unless you post proof that you’re in the business. Also never comment on women as you’ll never be or get one.

well he's wrong

Nobody in wrestling is a tv draw. Literally nobody. Maybe a few hundred thousand viewers here and there but nothing substantial enough to be considered a draw.

I was pretty mad that he didn't show up for Smackdown even though it was a post-PLE episode desu

Nothing like that at all, autist.
You're up for a shot at the World Heavyweight Championship. Who do you take advice from, Mike Tyson or a guy in the audience?
You're an aspiring filmmaker, who do you take advice from, Quentin Tarantino or Roger Ebert?
Someone who has been there, done it, and knows what it takes, or someone who hasn't and doesn't?
You listen to people with experience. You listen to people who know what they're talking about.
You don't listen to morons like Dave Meltzer who haven't done a fucking thing.

Fucking mark.

A guy in the audience. Mike I wouldn’t be able to understand with that lisp. Next question.
Roger Ebert, because this example is always retarded, he’s made movies. Mid card guys are often good trainers, he doesn’t compare to Dave.

>been part time champion for upswing period of wwe
>dave: not good enough.
Nigga what? Ever since he came back. WWE has been better for it. Even before vince was send to upstate farm.

he was full time for most of it and has recently started leaning more and more into part time

And you are a moron.

SIR, DAVE DID NOT REDEEM. IT IS OKAY CALM DOWN.

Thank you for admitting defeat. Maybe watch an Ebert movie as repentance.

Here. Enjoy. youtu.be/p5QfYc_U4U4

Dave said Adam page is a draw
Last dynamite no one popped for him he got no reaction
L M A O

The best boxing trainers are often not great boxers, the best film directors are often not good actors, the best sports coaches are often not good players. Don't get me wrong, Dave Meltzer is a retard and nowhere near as important as people think he is, but the idea that you have to be good at the thing you are commenting on or coaching in is provably false.

>no one is a draw
>yeah they draw this
>but no one is a draw

Being a contrarian dork and agreeing with talentless hacks was your admission of defeat, my man. Too much of a child to admit that people like Meltzer shouldn't be listened too.

Experience is the key.
Would you let someone with no experience do surgery?
Fact is, you need to know what you're talking about. And Dave doesn't.

Performing surgery is obviously not the same as commenting on a fucking television show
You're either a shoot retard or are just arguing because you're bored

Ratings say otherwise.
No-one in AEW is a draw. They can't even hit a million viewers consistently.

Roger Ebert was a critic first and a few times tried to venture out into screenwriting not very successfully, I don't think his career as a critic would have gone a different way if he hadn't attempted to make a movie. And there are plenty of critics better than him that never made a movie

It's an example, you absolute toolbag. Like the boxing and movie making comment.
You listen to those with experience. Those who know what they're talking about.

Ebert never did anything. He was a talentless cancer who judged the work of the talented.

I'm not the other user and I jerked it "Beyond the valley of the dolls" many times but the other user kinda has a point. Meltzer hasn't done anything for Pro Wrestling other than charge people for stories you can get for free from anonymous users on the internet. I'll admit, I'm a little biased because he has an extremely punchable face and seeing him do the dumb tongue wag thing when he laughs sends me into a rage but if I set aside my personal feelings his presence could be filled by literally anyone else if he weren't there.
It's almost like wrestlers are taking advantage of him and his fans for free press and he's too dumb to realize it. Smart move on the wrestlers behalf.

You just listed two of the three examples I gave that prove that experience is clearly not the defining factor. You don't need to be good at boxing or acting to be a good boxer or director, so why would this be different from wrestling which isn't too far removed from either?
You keep saying "listen to those with experience" but you aren't saying why

I’m not even the only one in this thread trying to explain this to you at this point. And everyone doing such is admitting Dave sucks. My issues are solely with your examples. Especially Ebert.

Yeah you're much better to listen to right?

>You're an aspiring filmmaker, who do you take advice from, Quentin Tarantino or Roger Ebert?
lmfao
fucking retard, you're either absolutely clueless or this is some god tier satire
of all the fucking directors you could have chosen for this shitty analogy, my sides

He never said Roman wasn't a draw, just that he isn't big enough a draw to be a part timer.

>doesn't show up every week
>ratings are higher than they have been in a while
Fuck draw, Roman is a damn anti-draw.

Am the guy you just replied to, Dave didn’t understand Omega using the Observer in his intro was heel. I made the thread to shit on Dave, I’m not defending Dave. I just think that guy has shitty unreasonable examples.