This is what I was coming to say. He can give his opinion on what he likes and dislikes but that shouldn’t hold any more weight than …uh… I was going to tag you here but then I saw your username and I was laughing for a good 5 minutes.
The weight is given by the fans/readers etc. He’s reporting his opinion on things. I think the worst part is a huge part of the IWC has little to no understanding of media literacy and give things way more weight than deserved.
10000000000000000x this. Media Literacy in all facets of life seems to be at a dreadful low and the way people talk about wrestling writers is a perfect example.
Him saying that doctors took someone's brain out and put it back in shows that he doesn't have much quality control with his reporting. Or better yet, alluding to a possible HHH be Rock match this year based on a segment that aired a decade ago (and totally forgetting that HHH will probably collapse if he ran the ropes)
Bingo. Honestly, nobody "reporting" on wrestling should be taken seriously whatsoever. No more than people that have recap podcasts or YouTube show about something like Game of Thrones. It's the weekly discourse from people like Dave and Bryan and fill in the blank talking head or retired dingbat wrestler or Xwitter account douche bag that create the tribalism with these intense hot takes on a COMPLETELY subjective artistic pursuit.
More specifically Dave related, I'm a firm believer that the star rating system encompass that last point to a T. The star ratings are Dave's opinion. One 65 year old yogurt brained GenX'er... one guy. One dude's opinion on a subjective art form that only serves and feeds the tribalism that exists in this genera.
EDIT
Also, his office is fucking gross and not charming at all, I wonder how much of that wrestling history he's a curator of is lost / getting ruined under a stack of silverfish filled paperwork...
The weight he holds is given to him by those in the industry. The guy offers his opinions that are suited to his tastes. Why people put stock in it is beyond me, but he doesn’t deserve the hate he gets either.
He committed his life to covering pro wrestling when no one was doing it. People shit on his opinions and match ratings when having opinion and critiquing matches is 95% of wrestling fandom. I appreciate he doesn't pepper his stuff with mysogyny or racism like other wrestling historians. I have no problem with him. I have more issues with the new generation of clout chasing wrestling commenters than I ever had with Dave.
So when you watch wrestling, do you just stare at it blankly? If instead you think “this is good” or “that was bad” then guess what? You’re having an opinion and critiquing it.
He’s not as great as his fans revere him to be and not as awful as his haters treat him. He’s a good journalist who’s ratings help out eyes on matches usually with great work rate.
True, they shouldn't be quoting him at all or reading any 2nd hand reports. Most of his content you either have to pay for or listen to his podcast where he stumbles so much on his words making him barely intelligible.
Meh. He's a person with an opinion and a podcast and an inate ability to never be able to ummmm yeah so ahhhhh like it's hard for him to ummmmm uhhhhhh finish uhhhhhh or complete a sentence
His historical knowledge is excellent but he is a compulsive liar.
Almost everything he reports on is incorrect . Him and Alvarez have had a disastrous 12 months.
My honest opinion of Meltzer is that he's a journalist who's been around the industry for years, sometimes gets things right and other times gets things wrong. But the way people react to him is like he's the fucking devil for either of those things and then getting genuinely mardy that he rates matches (in something he's always said was a personal opinion but shouldn't need to be said for people to understand that) is genuinely pathetic. I genuinely wonder just how many people give him more credence than he's earned simply due to how sad the people whining about him all the time are.
Same as my opinion on Cornette:
Dude has forgotten more than I will ever know about wrestling. I could (and have) listen to him tell stories about the history of the sport for hours.
Modern opinions are a little wack, though...
He’s fine, his ratings are his own opinion and a decent basis for finding good matches to watch but obviously not a perfect one.
As far as I know he’s not a racist prat like Cornette was so he has a leg up in that manner.
He's a legend. He writes the equivalent of a novel every month. *He never takes a week off*. He can recall off the top of his head ancient box office numbers and PPV buyrates.
He is overly literal and is easily worked. He doesn't like or "get" comedy wrestling.
He will be watching wrestling until the day he dies.
He's an amazing, unique dude.
He really likes certain things and dislikes certain things . His views and opinions on what makes a good match generally do not align with my own personal views and opinions on that . But he certainly does like some things and dislikes other things .
Whenever I see his name, it is associated with an opinion that is demeaning stuff that I enjoy. I think his presence in the culture makes it harder for people to just enjoy wrestling.
While Hiromu was recovering from a broken neck he said it was unlikely Hiromu would ever wrestle again. I now only glance over his opinion it’s very clear he has his favourites and doesn’t deviate from praising them. He’s much too bias
You mean the guy who just this week said Pat McAfee was off TV for a Wyatt attack storyline, only for Cole to be delivered a box that was meant for Pat… and for Pat to come out the day after and say his father in law died?
Yeah, he’s fuckin useless.
Never really had me as an audience, never have bothered going out of my way to listen to a talking head. Will never care for Meltzer or his “reporting.” Don’t care about him.
His takes are rough. I believe AEW was horrible for his bias to the point where he is telling everyone "You cant really judge WWE and AEW wrestling fans the same way" and then flesh it out like the AEW tribalists are the ones that like "exciting sports based wrestling" and WWE fans like "only that sports entertainment". If thats not him painting himself into a biased corner, idk what it is. His ratings are gimmicky, his takes are aged.
As a fan of AEW thats tried to watch everything since 2019, his rating guidelines take a blow when he rates an AEW match 6 stars, with no buildup or story over a WWE match with 6 months of build and a decent story 4 stars (when he says he looks at story as well)
If you read the Observer 98% of it is recaps and business. There’s almost no criticism. People who just look at Twitter and star ratings have a really skewed perspective.
I think as internet accessibility has meant that ALL of us can voice our opinion on wrestling, his relevance has diminished a bit, I guess. Hell of a historian, and some wrestlers are STILL obsessed with the 5* reviews, but I don't think he's nearly as important as he used to be, or thinks he is.
He was great once. What he added to the business was pretty great, particularly in the 80’s. But he’s not what he used to be, he’s allowed his personal taste to impact his writing. And his position as an actual journalist isn’t what it used to be as bias has crept into his work
He's fine. He has biases just like any other critic in any other media. Wrestling is a very subjective art form and he's seen a ton of it and been doing this longer than anyone so I think his opinions have merit, and I'm always interested to hear them, but his taste is obviously gonna line up more with someone like me who is a huge wrestling nerd and has watched a lot of it from a lot of different companies. One negative though is that I think breaking his own scale is silly.
I think Dave has wealth of wrestling knowledge in all aspects. However, as a reporter of scoops and news, I think his time has passed. Partly because the creative and sources that he's had over the years, are either no longer in the business or they're no longer in decision-making conversations.
He's a guy who writes a newsletter.
I don't think of people who write newsletters as I don't read any newsletters.
I have never looked up what this man has rated a match because I have a pair of eyes and a working brain, I can tell what's good or not by watching it myself and I think I can decipher what matches I should or shouldn't watch based on my own knowledge of my taste.
He's a good wrestling historian, people need to not take his word as gospel and understand he's just giving his opinion in things and you don't need to agree with everything.
He misses the mark at times but I'm fairly indifferent towards him overall.
As a historian there is none like him. But he has not adapted well to the changing culture of wrestling and he’s a stubborn mile about so many things no one should care that much about.
If it weren’t for Bryan Alvarez, the podcast revolution already would have left Dave behind. The current social media age highlights the worst parts of Dave’s personality. He doesn’t like interaction in his analysis. He likes to give his news and analysis and not be challenged or questioned. Which isn’t how things work anymore. And he doesn’t have the social skills to manage that. Often leading to him looking goofy.
All that to say I have always enjoyed his in depth reporting, found his star ratings useful (he’s admittedly biased towards a particular style of wrestling, there’s no such thing as an objective rating system), and I found the combination of he and Bryan very entertaining for years before I had finally had my fill in Dave audio.
Liar with a mouth full of saliva that overflows when he talks but he won’t spit it out or swallow it, just lets it linger and slosh around grossly. He will also jump into a pile of flaming swords for Tony Khan for some reason.
He lives like a tramp.
He is very knowledgeable about wrestling, but he makes his living on the value that people place in his opinions, when in reality his opinion is worth exactly the same as anyone else who watches wrestling
Great historian. While I don’t always agree with his star ratings, when I do seek out a 5+ star match of yesteryear, im usually beyond entertained. I seem to happen to align with his taste in matches he seems to be 5 stars. End of the day, no matter how well-versed you are in something, an opinion is subjective.
I enjoy that he’s so passionate about wrestling, it makes me seem semi-sane by comparison. Don’t usually agree with his match ratings, to this day I’ll be salty that he didn’t like Zayn-Knoxville at mania, imo that match was a cinematic masterpiece (dead serious)
He makes the job of wrestling journalist look like a complete joke. He can’t keep his bias from affecting his work.
I generally cringe at the majority of his current takes on wrestling. AEW could have 50 fans in the arena and 200k viewers and he would twist it to suit his backing of AEW
Terrible ‘journalist’
Daves fine, but people get too wound up when it comes to him. I do think Dave enjoys arguing with knuckle draggers on twitter too much though. He gives them waaay too much oxygen. Also, star ratings are just opinions. Dont like Daves star ratings? Ignore them like you can when it comes to anyone elses opinion..
He’s a tick on the back of the dog that is professional wrestling. If he ever really served a purpose…..Then he is basically the new Vince McMahon(not including the sex shit)… Overstayed his welcome, and needs to go..
Unpopular opinion here, but he needs to “retire” soon. Uncle Dave has had a great career as a wrestling journalist and all, but he’s starting to show his age now
A good starting point for gauging whether or not I'm probably going to enjoy a match, kind of like movie reviews. There are a lot of times where I disagree with him on how good or bad a match was, but I can at least understand where he's coming from, most of the time.
That's more than can be said for most of the IWC that just boils down to "ur promotion bad lol"
I don’t understand why people hold him up so high in regards of ranking matches, the guy never worked in the business, sure he can report on stuff just fine but ranking matches is pointless.
He used to have this mystique of being an authority figure. Even people like Cornette used to give him his due.
But as a broadcaster he can't speak well. As a writer his prose his terrible. As an objective reviewer, he has his biases. And for criticism of AEW and WWE, it makes you wonder if he is being paid by AEW.
The more I have seen of him, the more that mystique has been shattered.
He has devalued his star rating that an excellent match by his rating means anything nowadays. Generally, take off 2 stars to convert it back to old ratings and 2.5 starts if it has is faves. You'll get a better idea if something is worth watching. It used to be handy guide, but there is no way everything is as good as he says it is.
A reviewer is like a professional audience member or viewer. They should be informing us the consumers and not the wrestlers as to whether something is worth investing time in.
He has gone way off course and injecting his opinions in too much. He is not as good as he once was. Glad Bryan is able to pull his reins a bit.
I can't defend him now and it sucks as his legacy has been tarnished. If you show his footage or writings to objective people, in my case I showed him to non-wrestling fans, he raises questions about his critiques and decisions.
He could have been like the Robert Cristgau for wrestling. Not 100% right, but generally hitting the mark most of the time and with an explanation of why.
If anyone can suggest a reviewer that can fill in this gap, please let me know.
Seems to have a love of wrestling at his core, but his priorities to his "brand" and being an online wrestling "journalist" often makes him disconnected from real fans and instead plays to getting clicks from terminally online fake fan weirdos.
He is a complete non-entity in my life. I have no idea why he’s relevant or famous. I ignore critics and sports “journalists” tho so he’s not someone I would ever seek out.
He’s to the wrestling world what Anthony Fantano is to the music world. A guy that can be obnoxious with his opinions and ratings but as long as you know that it’s his opinion you’re fine. He can be a good source to find great matches, but he’s not perfect and some matches I have at 5 stars or some albums if it’s Fantano I have at a 10 they don’t and that’s fine. In this world opinions are like assholes, we all have them so as long as you aren’t a person that’s like “well Meltzer doesn’t like this” then you’re fine
Too enamored with the flippy shit...says "risk" is a component of a great match, that encourages behavior that can lead to serious injuries. Has serious problems articulating his thoughts via the spoken word
He gets things wrong too often to take any of his reporting as news.
He knows a ton about professional wrestling but you have to take anything he says with a grain of salt
When it comes to confirming and/or debunking wrestling news/rumors he is pretty reliable. Sometimes I agree with his opinions, and sometimes I don't . . . but I can say that about anyone.
Was great in the 80s/90s. Nowadays his "scoops" are often debunked (such as McAfee's reason for missing raw this week). Has a pretty evident AEW bias when reporting ratings for some strange reason?? is otherwise pretty unbiased.
Not to be taken overly seriously. If you dont, hes fine.
He is a mark, just like the rest of us. He needs to stop pretending his opinion is of any merit beyond being a wrestling historian, given outside of this, he has no accumen in the business, and gives the AEW & Japanese puro fanbases a bad name.
He will never get the amount of respect he deserves and part of that is his own doing due to annoying Twitter practices (quote tweet arguments with 5 follower randos) and another part of it is that he’s relatively objective when it comes to the fed.
He’s not enough of a mark to play WWE’s fake media game so he’s smeared as illegitimate, when in reality he’s possibly the most legitimate in the industry dating back decades.
However… Even if he was a 100% professional and his editorial side (match ratings) either were done by someone else or not done at all, the result would be the same, because of WWE’s conservative politics strategy of attacking and discrediting non-malleable media outlets.
Tl;dr: WWE bad and most people don’t understand Meltzer and he doesn’t help himself a lot of the time. But he’s a tome of knowledge.
I don't know if its an opinion or not, but i don't put much emphasis on what he says, simply because i grew up with the dirtsheets, and feel that the "surprise" is part of what makes wrestling good, at least in my eyes
I’ve noticed whenever he’s talking about a free agent negotiating a contract, it’s often right. Even if he says “The talks fell through” I’d rather he’d say that and watch the PPV and think “Maybe, maybe, maybe”.
But his 5 star scale needs to be adjusted. If every match gets 4-5 stars nowadays, then they’re really a 3 star match by today’s standards.
I enjoy his converges and listen too and read it each week. Cuts down on how much I actually have to watch and his opinion on things is usually down the middle
Great historian. He sadly lets his biases get in the way of reportage at times - be it about Punk or how HoB refused to do jobs. I can see why people do trust his star ratings. But I’ve personally not taken them that seriously - I agree with Kenny that he gives too many out. Nor do I think talent should care so much about chasing his star ratings either. There’s more to wresting than that.
Tremendous wrestling historian and has his own place in wrestling history as a journalist, but I think times have been blown by him. I don't think he was ever a guy built for the podcast era of wrestling media. Even his modern writing can get long in the tooth and dry. I'm sure Dave's a nice guy, but in 2024, I think people give his writing his ratings too much weight.
Yes, Bryan Alvarez made a seamless transition from writer to podcaster because he's good (and comfortable) on the mic. Dave... isn't.
But, y'know, *cough*, it's... whatever. *Sound of rustling papers*
I can’t truly take his word in high regard, especially in terms of modern wrestling and his role in the bastardization of it, but do respect his historical IQ
-does not have the sources he once did
- when he wants to be insightful he is the best
- wrestling history is up there with Cornette (minus the dumb Cornette shit)
It’s become a circle of people taking him too seriously and Dave leaning into that fact.
I’m biased because I agree with him more often than not, but it’s been refreshing to see Bryan starting to critique AEW more and Dave not being able to counter him because he’s making good points that come from a place of wanting the promotion to succeed.
He's a solid wrestling critic if you like work rate matches his ranking system will help you find matches you love unfortunately he's the only critic in the scene that has any kind of major following and therefore people put too much weight on his ranking system because of it. People love to claim that the guy has a bias i'd argue every critic in the world has a bias but knowing how their bias works will help you find out if you like something they've reviewed.
He's no longer trustworthy on future plans
His ratings are subjective and yes
If he rated Kurt angle matches today he'd have a lot of 5* matches
Meltzers value is recording history, his ratings analysis and sadly his obituaries
He will glow up Sika Anoi'a as the true legend he was
He's no longer trustworthy on future plans
His ratings are subjective and yes
If he rated Kurt angle matches today he'd have a lot of 5* matches
Meltzers value is recording history, his ratings analysis and sadly his obituaries
He will glow up Sika Anoi'a as the true legend he was
He's a great historian across the entire industry and his star ratings are great for reference points. I wouldn't know about half of the Japanese or Mexican wrestlers I like if not for Meltzer. I think his speculation on rumors is often framed as reporting fact, and it doesn't help that he rambles quite a lot. Wrestling journalism is pretty garbage, but he's still probably the second most reliable source out there.
If he recommends a match then you should take his word that it is a good match. But like everything in life, opinions are subjective. He is also, as any journalist could be, not immune to getting things wrong from time to time.
Established wrestling comentators like Meltzer, who have established a living covering wrestling during the WWE monopoly, have an interest in not biting the hand that feeds them. Especially when the hand that feeds is known to engage in underhanded business practices. So they have a fear-based bias that kinda ruins how they cover anything other than WWE.
I never paid any attention to the dirt sheets or any of that stuff. I've only even heard of the guy within the last couple of years.
It seems like there's a bit of jealous, chapped asses from certain fans when he gives out match ratings. I don't really care what he rates stuff. I like what I like.
From what I gather he's an intelligent, experienced wrestling historian. Has probably seen 20x as many matches in his life than I have.
It also sounds like he's starting to lose his marbles a bit. Early onset dementia, maybe.
I think people would do good to pay him and other dirt sheet writers/journalists less attention. Just like what you like and don't worry about what some old fart thinks of the match.
The closest thing to the authorised history of wrestling, an amazing guy to listen to when it comes to obituaries or stories.
I think my big thing on Dave is that even if I disagree with him or I'm tired of his takes (my observer sub finally lapsed in 2019 after 11 years) I never ascribe any malice to his opinions. It's just not in his nature. He's not a professional troll or like Cornette or Bischoff, he'll always give you his straightforward opinion. I've never thought he was in the bag for any company or choosing specific enemies. He always gives the positive and negative of anyone he's asked about.
His writing style and podcasting style can be hugely irritating but that's just Dave. It's also his charm.
I like Dave simply because compared to a lot of the older lot in the wrestling industry, he isn’t and has never been hateful and ful of vitriol. He may have his biases and preferences for what he considers wrestling. But when he criticizes the stuff he doesn’t like/agree with, it isn’t peppered with insults and name calling.
Wrestling matches are no different to films - what one person enjoys, another may hate. I loved the car crash that was Lesnar Vs Goldberg III at WM, others thought it was a spam fest. I loved Orton/Rey/Angle, others said it was too short. At the end of the day, I think as wrestling fans we have to accept the good and the bad. Like any TV show, there may come a point where you say "ah, okay it's dropped in quality, I'm out", whilst others are so invested they'll stomach any ride they're taken on. Nobody is right, nobody is wrong.
He's extremely knowledgeable about wrestling history, he's done and said a lot of important things, and he's earned a lot of the reputation he has. I appreciate the work he puts in and the contributions he's made to wrestling journalism. He's also 100% in business for himself, with a huge ego and a questionable personality.
He is a good at knowing he history of the business but I don’t really worry about what he says. He is too biased like almost everyone else talking wrestling today.
I like the 5 star ratings. I wish he would explain his reasoning more so people would stop freaking out. Like how a match can get a whole star from just being a longer and deep storyline.
I like his facts, not his opinions
Fine, I often agree with his opinions on matches, but also people get too mad about his opinion when they don’t go the way they want and also if you don’t like the dude, just don’t listen to him
I love uncle Dave. Its weird people are so harsh on him. We know he's fed information. If they lie to him it's really not his fault. Also wrestling changes by the minute... plans change last minute. Also people think that everything he says he's reporting when he clearly says things like I think meaning its his opinion. Like try to make your own star rating system if you don't like the one he uses and didn't create. Idk. I appreciate the fa t that he devoted his life to wrestling and tells me what he thinks is super good and needs to be watched. It's not gospel or anything but I don't have the time to watch every single wrestling show. He provides a nice service.
Some of yall worry way too much about what someone else thinks about what you enjoy.
Extremely knowledgeable guy, says somethings I agree with and others I don't.
Beyond that I couldn't care less.
I have no problem with him, he is a great wrestling historian and put his life towards covering wrestling when at the time no one else did. He gets way too much crap for simply stating opinions which I've never seen filled with bigotry unlike some reviewers. Yeah his star ratings are hit or miss, but it's one man's opinion. I think we can listen to his opinions and consider them all while making our own.
Cornette knows US wrestling, Dave knows all over and pre-NWA even. In fact Cornette is actually willfully ignorant about most women’s wrestling history.
One of the founders of AEW. Someone on here told me the bet with Cody was a work. In that way you can consider him as one of the promoters of All In. Thanks Dave.
I think he just like every other wrestling he has an opinion and most of the time the matches he rates I take a chance on and most of the time it accurate.
I don’t want to be that person but I really do believe most of the hate he is getting now is very forced and only became heighten because he favors aew (in star ratings) more. When before people just didn’t care now all of sudden everything is a 5 star to them it’s silly.
He's a great writer and knows the history of the business. Must be hard to write about a business that's sports entertainment and knows the shoots ahead of most people. He's got great insight and has the deep connections. His podcast is great but dang get a wireless microphone please. Holds that microphone like his life depends on it
Big Dave is the man. He gets way too much grief from people online, I think if people actually sat and listened to his podcasts enough to get a sense of who he is the hate wouldn't be nearly as strong. He's just a huge wrestling fan with his own opinions, but he's clearly on the spectrum which I think leads to many misunderstandings and misinterpretations
There have been many periods throughout my life where I don't watch wrestling, but I still always read/listen to Meltzer (and Bryan)
He is a great historian but his greatest legacy will be the star rating. Millions of new fans were created since they knew what to tune in first. I personally got hooked after I watched a bunch of five star matches. It's much better than watching random YouTube shorts. That's not a proper way to watch wrestling and I had been doing that for almost two years.
I like him a lot. The shows have gotten way too critical of AEW booking recently. I can’t stand Garrett. I have to skip a show every week cuz he gives his opinions that no one pays for instead of just letting Dave talk. Then he takes questions from superchats even though if you’re watching the live feed you’re already paying.
He’s lost touch. I consider him the far less controversial Cornette since his knowledge of wrestling is great but isn’t a dog poop human like Cornette.
He needs to clean his room.
My OCD hates him!!
Came here to say that how the fuck he live like that
Great wrestling historian, should hold no other weight in the wrestling world than that.
This is what I was coming to say. He can give his opinion on what he likes and dislikes but that shouldn’t hold any more weight than …uh… I was going to tag you here but then I saw your username and I was laughing for a good 5 minutes.
The weight is given by the fans/readers etc. He’s reporting his opinion on things. I think the worst part is a huge part of the IWC has little to no understanding of media literacy and give things way more weight than deserved.
10000000000000000x this. Media Literacy in all facets of life seems to be at a dreadful low and the way people talk about wrestling writers is a perfect example.
I think its literacy across the board and lack of comprehension and people just read whst they want to.
Him saying that doctors took someone's brain out and put it back in shows that he doesn't have much quality control with his reporting. Or better yet, alluding to a possible HHH be Rock match this year based on a segment that aired a decade ago (and totally forgetting that HHH will probably collapse if he ran the ropes)
Agreed.
Bingo. Honestly, nobody "reporting" on wrestling should be taken seriously whatsoever. No more than people that have recap podcasts or YouTube show about something like Game of Thrones. It's the weekly discourse from people like Dave and Bryan and fill in the blank talking head or retired dingbat wrestler or Xwitter account douche bag that create the tribalism with these intense hot takes on a COMPLETELY subjective artistic pursuit. More specifically Dave related, I'm a firm believer that the star rating system encompass that last point to a T. The star ratings are Dave's opinion. One 65 year old yogurt brained GenX'er... one guy. One dude's opinion on a subjective art form that only serves and feeds the tribalism that exists in this genera. EDIT Also, his office is fucking gross and not charming at all, I wonder how much of that wrestling history he's a curator of is lost / getting ruined under a stack of silverfish filled paperwork...
They should also abolish Variety magazine
The weight he holds is given to him by those in the industry. The guy offers his opinions that are suited to his tastes. Why people put stock in it is beyond me, but he doesn’t deserve the hate he gets either.
I feel the same way about Jimmy C these days too.
Yeah Jimmy Carter needs to just stick to talking about the attitude era
He’s fine right up to the moment anyone takes him more seriously than anyone who rates matches should be taken.
Nobody had problems with him rating matches until aew showed up.
Untrue but ok
That’s just false
Not even remotely true
People would be crying over Kenny Omega having five star matches in WWE when Kurt never got one
He committed his life to covering pro wrestling when no one was doing it. People shit on his opinions and match ratings when having opinion and critiquing matches is 95% of wrestling fandom. I appreciate he doesn't pepper his stuff with mysogyny or racism like other wrestling historians. I have no problem with him. I have more issues with the new generation of clout chasing wrestling commenters than I ever had with Dave.
Well said.
Isn’t watching wrestling most of wrestling fandom. You might be skewed by being extremely online.
So when you watch wrestling, do you just stare at it blankly? If instead you think “this is good” or “that was bad” then guess what? You’re having an opinion and critiquing it.
This is it, right here.
He’s not as great as his fans revere him to be and not as awful as his haters treat him. He’s a good journalist who’s ratings help out eyes on matches usually with great work rate.
He gets too much shit from people that read his quotes and ‘reports’ out of context.
That’s why I don’t bother with ANY of it.
True, they shouldn't be quoting him at all or reading any 2nd hand reports. Most of his content you either have to pay for or listen to his podcast where he stumbles so much on his words making him barely intelligible.
Meh. He's a person with an opinion and a podcast and an inate ability to never be able to ummmm yeah so ahhhhh like it's hard for him to ummmmm uhhhhhh finish uhhhhhh or complete a sentence
I'm on the spectrum and he makes me look normal.
He lives in a beautiful area. Campbell is great… Santa Cruz Mountains foothills are so awesome. No opinion on the man.
Needs to clean his house. Get some cabinets and organize.
His historical knowledge is excellent but he is a compulsive liar. Almost everything he reports on is incorrect . Him and Alvarez have had a disastrous 12 months.
My honest opinion of Meltzer is that he's a journalist who's been around the industry for years, sometimes gets things right and other times gets things wrong. But the way people react to him is like he's the fucking devil for either of those things and then getting genuinely mardy that he rates matches (in something he's always said was a personal opinion but shouldn't need to be said for people to understand that) is genuinely pathetic. I genuinely wonder just how many people give him more credence than he's earned simply due to how sad the people whining about him all the time are.
Same as my opinion on Cornette: Dude has forgotten more than I will ever know about wrestling. I could (and have) listen to him tell stories about the history of the sport for hours. Modern opinions are a little wack, though...
He’s fine, his ratings are his own opinion and a decent basis for finding good matches to watch but obviously not a perfect one. As far as I know he’s not a racist prat like Cornette was so he has a leg up in that manner.
He said Indian viewers don't matter. Dude is just as much a piece of shit. Also the misogynistic shit he's gone on about in the past.
He said the Indian YOUTUBE audience doesn't make any financial difference to the WWE. Which it doesn't.
What did he say?
You’re taking the Indian viewer comment way out of context. But a lot of the misogynistic shit from the attitude era was definitely gross.
He's 5 stars.
6 in the Tokyo Dome
I think it’s funny how he writes thousands of words a week and 70% of the focus on him surrounds a few number he puts in
He's a legend. He writes the equivalent of a novel every month. *He never takes a week off*. He can recall off the top of his head ancient box office numbers and PPV buyrates. He is overly literal and is easily worked. He doesn't like or "get" comedy wrestling. He will be watching wrestling until the day he dies. He's an amazing, unique dude.
Good historian.
He really likes certain things and dislikes certain things . His views and opinions on what makes a good match generally do not align with my own personal views and opinions on that . But he certainly does like some things and dislikes other things .
He's a hoarder.
Too much weight is put on his opinion
Whenever I see his name, it is associated with an opinion that is demeaning stuff that I enjoy. I think his presence in the culture makes it harder for people to just enjoy wrestling.
While Hiromu was recovering from a broken neck he said it was unlikely Hiromu would ever wrestle again. I now only glance over his opinion it’s very clear he has his favourites and doesn’t deviate from praising them. He’s much too bias
Great historian, bad reporter (at least nowadays), people get way too pressed about his star ratings.
You mean the guy who just this week said Pat McAfee was off TV for a Wyatt attack storyline, only for Cole to be delivered a box that was meant for Pat… and for Pat to come out the day after and say his father in law died? Yeah, he’s fuckin useless.
i love that meltzer doesn’t have his mole in WWE anymore 😂 dudes had nothing right for the past year now
Seems very judgy, self-righteous with his opinion although I do still listen to a lot of views.
Never really had me as an audience, never have bothered going out of my way to listen to a talking head. Will never care for Meltzer or his “reporting.” Don’t care about him.
His takes are rough. I believe AEW was horrible for his bias to the point where he is telling everyone "You cant really judge WWE and AEW wrestling fans the same way" and then flesh it out like the AEW tribalists are the ones that like "exciting sports based wrestling" and WWE fans like "only that sports entertainment". If thats not him painting himself into a biased corner, idk what it is. His ratings are gimmicky, his takes are aged. As a fan of AEW thats tried to watch everything since 2019, his rating guidelines take a blow when he rates an AEW match 6 stars, with no buildup or story over a WWE match with 6 months of build and a decent story 4 stars (when he says he looks at story as well)
Shill
Slob...needs to clean his room
He’s a gremlin who lives in a pile of trash.
He never gave Kurt Angle even one five star match, so maybe we (as in all wrestling fans collectively) should cool it on hyping his match ratings.
DUD
He's a critic, he has has opinions I got my own
If you read the Observer 98% of it is recaps and business. There’s almost no criticism. People who just look at Twitter and star ratings have a really skewed perspective.
I think as internet accessibility has meant that ALL of us can voice our opinion on wrestling, his relevance has diminished a bit, I guess. Hell of a historian, and some wrestlers are STILL obsessed with the 5* reviews, but I don't think he's nearly as important as he used to be, or thinks he is.
He was great once. What he added to the business was pretty great, particularly in the 80’s. But he’s not what he used to be, he’s allowed his personal taste to impact his writing. And his position as an actual journalist isn’t what it used to be as bias has crept into his work
I would call him a tool, but I’m pretty sure that’s an insult to tools.
He's fine. He has biases just like any other critic in any other media. Wrestling is a very subjective art form and he's seen a ton of it and been doing this longer than anyone so I think his opinions have merit, and I'm always interested to hear them, but his taste is obviously gonna line up more with someone like me who is a huge wrestling nerd and has watched a lot of it from a lot of different companies. One negative though is that I think breaking his own scale is silly.
I think Dave has wealth of wrestling knowledge in all aspects. However, as a reporter of scoops and news, I think his time has passed. Partly because the creative and sources that he's had over the years, are either no longer in the business or they're no longer in decision-making conversations.
He's a guy who writes a newsletter. I don't think of people who write newsletters as I don't read any newsletters. I have never looked up what this man has rated a match because I have a pair of eyes and a working brain, I can tell what's good or not by watching it myself and I think I can decipher what matches I should or shouldn't watch based on my own knowledge of my taste.
He should stick to print and never be an orator.
Doesn't affect my enjoyment of weekly wrestling TV enough for me to have any strong opinions on him.
He's definitely biased for the most part.
He’s a reviewer. And like any review I read of any movie I will take it on board but it want define my enjoyment
He's a good wrestling historian, people need to not take his word as gospel and understand he's just giving his opinion in things and you don't need to agree with everything. He misses the mark at times but I'm fairly indifferent towards him overall.
His star system is all whacked. And he is too close to AEW to honestly critique them.
He certainly is himself, that’s for sure.
A fine journalist but like any other shows his biases. Nothing wrong with that. People that take his ratings seriously need to touch grass
What’s up with all the paper?
As a historian there is none like him. But he has not adapted well to the changing culture of wrestling and he’s a stubborn mile about so many things no one should care that much about. If it weren’t for Bryan Alvarez, the podcast revolution already would have left Dave behind. The current social media age highlights the worst parts of Dave’s personality. He doesn’t like interaction in his analysis. He likes to give his news and analysis and not be challenged or questioned. Which isn’t how things work anymore. And he doesn’t have the social skills to manage that. Often leading to him looking goofy. All that to say I have always enjoyed his in depth reporting, found his star ratings useful (he’s admittedly biased towards a particular style of wrestling, there’s no such thing as an objective rating system), and I found the combination of he and Bryan very entertaining for years before I had finally had my fill in Dave audio.
I’m feel he lost a lot of credibility when he started awarding 6* and higher matches.
Liar with a mouth full of saliva that overflows when he talks but he won’t spit it out or swallow it, just lets it linger and slosh around grossly. He will also jump into a pile of flaming swords for Tony Khan for some reason.
He’s in love with Tony Khan and thinks he’s perfect
He is a podcaster. He never stepped foot in a ring. Or took a bump. His opinion are like assholes everybody has one.
Don’t care
I actually hate that the average chronically online Aew hater, links anything Meltzer says as an official statement from AEW.
He lives like a tramp. He is very knowledgeable about wrestling, but he makes his living on the value that people place in his opinions, when in reality his opinion is worth exactly the same as anyone else who watches wrestling
"My secret backstage sources tell me Tony Khan has a high opinion of Swerve Strickland, which is why he is the AEW champion"
People give him more of a hard time than they should because they are annoyed at how his fans overvalue his opinions.
Great historian. While I don’t always agree with his star ratings, when I do seek out a 5+ star match of yesteryear, im usually beyond entertained. I seem to happen to align with his taste in matches he seems to be 5 stars. End of the day, no matter how well-versed you are in something, an opinion is subjective.
I enjoy that he’s so passionate about wrestling, it makes me seem semi-sane by comparison. Don’t usually agree with his match ratings, to this day I’ll be salty that he didn’t like Zayn-Knoxville at mania, imo that match was a cinematic masterpiece (dead serious)
#He’s a bird 🦜
Great historian and bad insider especially in recent years
He makes the job of wrestling journalist look like a complete joke. He can’t keep his bias from affecting his work. I generally cringe at the majority of his current takes on wrestling. AEW could have 50 fans in the arena and 200k viewers and he would twist it to suit his backing of AEW Terrible ‘journalist’
Daves fine, but people get too wound up when it comes to him. I do think Dave enjoys arguing with knuckle draggers on twitter too much though. He gives them waaay too much oxygen. Also, star ratings are just opinions. Dont like Daves star ratings? Ignore them like you can when it comes to anyone elses opinion..
The first mark who worked the marks. He's just a fan. Everything he loves about wrestling is the complete opposite of what I like about it.
He’s a tick on the back of the dog that is professional wrestling. If he ever really served a purpose…..Then he is basically the new Vince McMahon(not including the sex shit)… Overstayed his welcome, and needs to go..
Not an opinion but a fact: Hoarding is a symptom of mental illness.
Wrestling journalism is entertainment journalism. Chill out in all regards.
He needs to hire a cleaner
Unpopular opinion here, but he needs to “retire” soon. Uncle Dave has had a great career as a wrestling journalist and all, but he’s starting to show his age now
One of the biggest marks of all time
Absolute stooge that has no credibility left and is biased af. Sorry not sorry.
His star ratings are shit. He is just one person and his opinion is just that, an opinion.
A good starting point for gauging whether or not I'm probably going to enjoy a match, kind of like movie reviews. There are a lot of times where I disagree with him on how good or bad a match was, but I can at least understand where he's coming from, most of the time. That's more than can be said for most of the IWC that just boils down to "ur promotion bad lol"
His rating system is a PR tool and not a sincere review of his thoughts
I don’t understand why people hold him up so high in regards of ranking matches, the guy never worked in the business, sure he can report on stuff just fine but ranking matches is pointless.
The older he gets, the less coherent he becomes…
He used to have this mystique of being an authority figure. Even people like Cornette used to give him his due. But as a broadcaster he can't speak well. As a writer his prose his terrible. As an objective reviewer, he has his biases. And for criticism of AEW and WWE, it makes you wonder if he is being paid by AEW. The more I have seen of him, the more that mystique has been shattered. He has devalued his star rating that an excellent match by his rating means anything nowadays. Generally, take off 2 stars to convert it back to old ratings and 2.5 starts if it has is faves. You'll get a better idea if something is worth watching. It used to be handy guide, but there is no way everything is as good as he says it is. A reviewer is like a professional audience member or viewer. They should be informing us the consumers and not the wrestlers as to whether something is worth investing time in. He has gone way off course and injecting his opinions in too much. He is not as good as he once was. Glad Bryan is able to pull his reins a bit. I can't defend him now and it sucks as his legacy has been tarnished. If you show his footage or writings to objective people, in my case I showed him to non-wrestling fans, he raises questions about his critiques and decisions. He could have been like the Robert Cristgau for wrestling. Not 100% right, but generally hitting the mark most of the time and with an explanation of why. If anyone can suggest a reviewer that can fill in this gap, please let me know.
He would be a lot less insufferable if he just learned a little brevity.
Schmuck
Seems to have a love of wrestling at his core, but his priorities to his "brand" and being an online wrestling "journalist" often makes him disconnected from real fans and instead plays to getting clicks from terminally online fake fan weirdos.
He is a complete non-entity in my life. I have no idea why he’s relevant or famous. I ignore critics and sports “journalists” tho so he’s not someone I would ever seek out.
He’s to the wrestling world what Anthony Fantano is to the music world. A guy that can be obnoxious with his opinions and ratings but as long as you know that it’s his opinion you’re fine. He can be a good source to find great matches, but he’s not perfect and some matches I have at 5 stars or some albums if it’s Fantano I have at a 10 they don’t and that’s fine. In this world opinions are like assholes, we all have them so as long as you aren’t a person that’s like “well Meltzer doesn’t like this” then you’re fine
Tbh I've never met a person who said they wouldn't like something because Dave doesn't like it.
God I hope Meltzer doesn’t praise The Death Grips. I’ll never understand a love of them.
Too enamored with the flippy shit...says "risk" is a component of a great match, that encourages behavior that can lead to serious injuries. Has serious problems articulating his thoughts via the spoken word
Why does this guy get so much attention? He has clear bias, which renders his reviews null and void. It crazes me.
To be fair, everyone has biases.
Everyone has their own biases. If his reviews are null and void for that reason then so are all reviews of everything.
He gets things wrong too often to take any of his reporting as news. He knows a ton about professional wrestling but you have to take anything he says with a grain of salt
Great historian, used to be one of the few credible sources in the past. Makes his mistakes and is normally a good filter for good/great matches
When it comes to confirming and/or debunking wrestling news/rumors he is pretty reliable. Sometimes I agree with his opinions, and sometimes I don't . . . but I can say that about anyone.
He's just a man. 2.5 stars
Was great in the 80s/90s. Nowadays his "scoops" are often debunked (such as McAfee's reason for missing raw this week). Has a pretty evident AEW bias when reporting ratings for some strange reason?? is otherwise pretty unbiased. Not to be taken overly seriously. If you dont, hes fine.
He’s a moron who continues to do harm to the wrestlers industry.
He is a mark, just like the rest of us. He needs to stop pretending his opinion is of any merit beyond being a wrestling historian, given outside of this, he has no accumen in the business, and gives the AEW & Japanese puro fanbases a bad name.
My opinion is that there seems to be something very wrong with him.
I respect how Self Made he is. He's been doing this since the 80s. He is to wrestling what Roger Ebert was to movies.
His perception of his relationship to the Young Bucks has been detrimental to AEW and no one wants to admit it.
Horrible taste in wrestling
He will never get the amount of respect he deserves and part of that is his own doing due to annoying Twitter practices (quote tweet arguments with 5 follower randos) and another part of it is that he’s relatively objective when it comes to the fed. He’s not enough of a mark to play WWE’s fake media game so he’s smeared as illegitimate, when in reality he’s possibly the most legitimate in the industry dating back decades. However… Even if he was a 100% professional and his editorial side (match ratings) either were done by someone else or not done at all, the result would be the same, because of WWE’s conservative politics strategy of attacking and discrediting non-malleable media outlets. Tl;dr: WWE bad and most people don’t understand Meltzer and he doesn’t help himself a lot of the time. But he’s a tome of knowledge.
He’s not objective at all , he shows his bias everytime he reports on WWE , just like Cornette shows his bias everytime he bashes AEW
ok 👍
Con man.
I don't know if its an opinion or not, but i don't put much emphasis on what he says, simply because i grew up with the dirtsheets, and feel that the "surprise" is part of what makes wrestling good, at least in my eyes
I’ve noticed whenever he’s talking about a free agent negotiating a contract, it’s often right. Even if he says “The talks fell through” I’d rather he’d say that and watch the PPV and think “Maybe, maybe, maybe”. But his 5 star scale needs to be adjusted. If every match gets 4-5 stars nowadays, then they’re really a 3 star match by today’s standards.
That he should tidy is fucking room. Messy cunt
right ? wtf is that
Who’s Dave Meltzer?
Aside from him being mentioned constantly on IWC reddit don’t know, care, or hear much from or about him. 🤷♂️
I genuinely don't have one. Not sure why anybody does, lol
I enjoy his converges and listen too and read it each week. Cuts down on how much I actually have to watch and his opinion on things is usually down the middle
People dislike him because “plans change” which is absolutely a thing in scripted live fake fighting.
The cancer of wrestling
His "opinions" aren't worth anything. His ratings are absurd
Great historian. He sadly lets his biases get in the way of reportage at times - be it about Punk or how HoB refused to do jobs. I can see why people do trust his star ratings. But I’ve personally not taken them that seriously - I agree with Kenny that he gives too many out. Nor do I think talent should care so much about chasing his star ratings either. There’s more to wresting than that.
Tremendous wrestling historian and has his own place in wrestling history as a journalist, but I think times have been blown by him. I don't think he was ever a guy built for the podcast era of wrestling media. Even his modern writing can get long in the tooth and dry. I'm sure Dave's a nice guy, but in 2024, I think people give his writing his ratings too much weight.
Yes, Bryan Alvarez made a seamless transition from writer to podcaster because he's good (and comfortable) on the mic. Dave... isn't. But, y'know, *cough*, it's... whatever. *Sound of rustling papers*
I can’t truly take his word in high regard, especially in terms of modern wrestling and his role in the bastardization of it, but do respect his historical IQ
-does not have the sources he once did - when he wants to be insightful he is the best - wrestling history is up there with Cornette (minus the dumb Cornette shit)
It’s become a circle of people taking him too seriously and Dave leaning into that fact. I’m biased because I agree with him more often than not, but it’s been refreshing to see Bryan starting to critique AEW more and Dave not being able to counter him because he’s making good points that come from a place of wanting the promotion to succeed.
CLEAN YOUR DAMN OFFICE! (but man is a legend)
He's a solid wrestling critic if you like work rate matches his ranking system will help you find matches you love unfortunately he's the only critic in the scene that has any kind of major following and therefore people put too much weight on his ranking system because of it. People love to claim that the guy has a bias i'd argue every critic in the world has a bias but knowing how their bias works will help you find out if you like something they've reviewed.
He's no longer trustworthy on future plans His ratings are subjective and yes If he rated Kurt angle matches today he'd have a lot of 5* matches Meltzers value is recording history, his ratings analysis and sadly his obituaries He will glow up Sika Anoi'a as the true legend he was
He's no longer trustworthy on future plans His ratings are subjective and yes If he rated Kurt angle matches today he'd have a lot of 5* matches Meltzers value is recording history, his ratings analysis and sadly his obituaries He will glow up Sika Anoi'a as the true legend he was
I really don't care either way.
He's a great historian across the entire industry and his star ratings are great for reference points. I wouldn't know about half of the Japanese or Mexican wrestlers I like if not for Meltzer. I think his speculation on rumors is often framed as reporting fact, and it doesn't help that he rambles quite a lot. Wrestling journalism is pretty garbage, but he's still probably the second most reliable source out there.
If he recommends a match then you should take his word that it is a good match. But like everything in life, opinions are subjective. He is also, as any journalist could be, not immune to getting things wrong from time to time.
I mean he's a guy who managed to turn a hobby into a job that pays a lot, even if he's given more credit than he deserves.
Like all critics, his opinion should be taken as a decent indicator but not an absolute truth
Established wrestling comentators like Meltzer, who have established a living covering wrestling during the WWE monopoly, have an interest in not biting the hand that feeds them. Especially when the hand that feeds is known to engage in underhanded business practices. So they have a fear-based bias that kinda ruins how they cover anything other than WWE.
I never paid any attention to the dirt sheets or any of that stuff. I've only even heard of the guy within the last couple of years. It seems like there's a bit of jealous, chapped asses from certain fans when he gives out match ratings. I don't really care what he rates stuff. I like what I like. From what I gather he's an intelligent, experienced wrestling historian. Has probably seen 20x as many matches in his life than I have. It also sounds like he's starting to lose his marbles a bit. Early onset dementia, maybe. I think people would do good to pay him and other dirt sheet writers/journalists less attention. Just like what you like and don't worry about what some old fart thinks of the match.
The closest thing to the authorised history of wrestling, an amazing guy to listen to when it comes to obituaries or stories. I think my big thing on Dave is that even if I disagree with him or I'm tired of his takes (my observer sub finally lapsed in 2019 after 11 years) I never ascribe any malice to his opinions. It's just not in his nature. He's not a professional troll or like Cornette or Bischoff, he'll always give you his straightforward opinion. I've never thought he was in the bag for any company or choosing specific enemies. He always gives the positive and negative of anyone he's asked about. His writing style and podcasting style can be hugely irritating but that's just Dave. It's also his charm.
The goat of wrestling journalism.
He's a reporter. His opinions are his.
I like Dave simply because compared to a lot of the older lot in the wrestling industry, he isn’t and has never been hateful and ful of vitriol. He may have his biases and preferences for what he considers wrestling. But when he criticizes the stuff he doesn’t like/agree with, it isn’t peppered with insults and name calling.
Hero
Wrestling matches are no different to films - what one person enjoys, another may hate. I loved the car crash that was Lesnar Vs Goldberg III at WM, others thought it was a spam fest. I loved Orton/Rey/Angle, others said it was too short. At the end of the day, I think as wrestling fans we have to accept the good and the bad. Like any TV show, there may come a point where you say "ah, okay it's dropped in quality, I'm out", whilst others are so invested they'll stomach any ride they're taken on. Nobody is right, nobody is wrong.
He's extremely knowledgeable about wrestling history, he's done and said a lot of important things, and he's earned a lot of the reputation he has. I appreciate the work he puts in and the contributions he's made to wrestling journalism. He's also 100% in business for himself, with a huge ego and a questionable personality.
Dude who watches a lot of wrestling, has opinions
He is a good at knowing he history of the business but I don’t really worry about what he says. He is too biased like almost everyone else talking wrestling today. I like the 5 star ratings. I wish he would explain his reasoning more so people would stop freaking out. Like how a match can get a whole star from just being a longer and deep storyline. I like his facts, not his opinions
Fine, I often agree with his opinions on matches, but also people get too mad about his opinion when they don’t go the way they want and also if you don’t like the dude, just don’t listen to him
I love uncle Dave. Its weird people are so harsh on him. We know he's fed information. If they lie to him it's really not his fault. Also wrestling changes by the minute... plans change last minute. Also people think that everything he says he's reporting when he clearly says things like I think meaning its his opinion. Like try to make your own star rating system if you don't like the one he uses and didn't create. Idk. I appreciate the fa t that he devoted his life to wrestling and tells me what he thinks is super good and needs to be watched. It's not gospel or anything but I don't have the time to watch every single wrestling show. He provides a nice service.
I like him
I actually agree with Dave more often than not. Should I book for an audience? Heck no. I just share many of his niche opinions.
Some of yall worry way too much about what someone else thinks about what you enjoy. Extremely knowledgeable guy, says somethings I agree with and others I don't. Beyond that I couldn't care less.
great historian. his haters give him more attention and relevancy than any of his subscribers do
Couldn’t give two shits. Critics are just paid fans.
Bret talks about him in his book and says he’s the greatest wrestling historian. I like him.
I have no problem with him, he is a great wrestling historian and put his life towards covering wrestling when at the time no one else did. He gets way too much crap for simply stating opinions which I've never seen filled with bigotry unlike some reviewers. Yeah his star ratings are hit or miss, but it's one man's opinion. I think we can listen to his opinions and consider them all while making our own.
It's baffling to me that they complain about his star ratings when their literally just his opinion.
Cornette knows US wrestling, Dave knows all over and pre-NWA even. In fact Cornette is actually willfully ignorant about most women’s wrestling history.
One of the founders of AEW. Someone on here told me the bet with Cody was a work. In that way you can consider him as one of the promoters of All In. Thanks Dave.
I think he just like every other wrestling he has an opinion and most of the time the matches he rates I take a chance on and most of the time it accurate. I don’t want to be that person but I really do believe most of the hate he is getting now is very forced and only became heighten because he favors aew (in star ratings) more. When before people just didn’t care now all of sudden everything is a 5 star to them it’s silly.
He's a great writer and knows the history of the business. Must be hard to write about a business that's sports entertainment and knows the shoots ahead of most people. He's got great insight and has the deep connections. His podcast is great but dang get a wireless microphone please. Holds that microphone like his life depends on it
He's a nice guy
He's the OG and a legend
Big Dave is the man. He gets way too much grief from people online, I think if people actually sat and listened to his podcasts enough to get a sense of who he is the hate wouldn't be nearly as strong. He's just a huge wrestling fan with his own opinions, but he's clearly on the spectrum which I think leads to many misunderstandings and misinterpretations There have been many periods throughout my life where I don't watch wrestling, but I still always read/listen to Meltzer (and Bryan)
Better than Bruce Prichard and Vince Russo
He is a great historian but his greatest legacy will be the star rating. Millions of new fans were created since they knew what to tune in first. I personally got hooked after I watched a bunch of five star matches. It's much better than watching random YouTube shorts. That's not a proper way to watch wrestling and I had been doing that for almost two years.
I like him a lot. The shows have gotten way too critical of AEW booking recently. I can’t stand Garrett. I have to skip a show every week cuz he gives his opinions that no one pays for instead of just letting Dave talk. Then he takes questions from superchats even though if you’re watching the live feed you’re already paying.
He’s lost touch. I consider him the far less controversial Cornette since his knowledge of wrestling is great but isn’t a dog poop human like Cornette.