GOT Wrestle Fest Fan Thread

[Gwladysstreetlad]

The thing is about AEW, it isn't about story telling it is about in ring action. So these throw together matches are something I don't mind, as long as they have decent matches.

Well at least you admit there's a total lack of storytelling going on mate. I actually really appreciate you not trying to convince me that there's loads of amazing storylines going on with massive depths and nuisances to them that I just can't see.

I get the idea of match's being the main focus but the problem with a lot of the in ring action in AEW is that its legitimately terrible some of the time. Its supposed to be a simulated fight, not a gymnastics competition.

 

[Sean Ashley]

Well at least you admit there's a total lack of storytelling going on mate. I actually really appreciate you not trying to convince me that there's loads of amazing storylines going on with massive depths and nuisances to them that I just can't see.

I get the idea of match's being the main focus but the problem with a lot of the in ring action in AEW is that its legitimately terrible some of the time. Its supposed to be a simulated fight, not a gymnastics competition.

They are trying to be different to WWE, it can't compete with WWE. They are just filling a space for the art of wrestling rather than WWE's stories like the bloodline.

Personally prefer the wrestling side of it. Cos the story telling now can't ever compare with Attitude era. But I do like both and won't stop me attending either when I can.

 

[Gwladysstreetlad]

They are trying to be different to WWE, it can't compete with WWE. They are just filling a space for the art of wrestling rather than WWE's stories like the bloodline.

Personally prefer the wrestling side of it. Cos the story telling now can't ever compare with Attitude era. But I do like both and won't stop me attending either when I can.

There's ways to be different to WWE that would be so much more entertaining though. They could for example do what they originally promised and have a strongly sports based presentation. They could focus on having tag team match's that don't involve the young bucks stinking out the joint every week. I prefer some of the wrestling I see on AEW too but it goes from the sublime to the ridiculous. I know we're supposed to suspend our disbelief but how on earth are we supposed to take people like the Young Bucks and Jungle Boy seriously as a credible threat. The circus style matchs look phony as hell and defeats the very idea of it being an alternative sports based presentation. I'm not expecting them to have big long sprawling storylines or anything but I think its reasonable to expect some from of logic when it comes to match making at least.

 

[njligernj]

many words to say so little. I could write pages dissecting the madness of this post but it frankly speaks for itself. Its not logical. Its the words of a fan blinded by ill judged loyalty. You're trying so hard to defend Kahn throwing away Bryan Vs Perry

LOL. This is cringe stuff. The "tl;dr" and "I could do this but I won't bother" is 20 year old internet BS that we got bored of decades ago. Astonishing someone is still trying to pass this off as a valid response in the year 2024.

Perry sucks. He's awful. I don't care about "throwing away" a program I don't think will make ANY money. Your take that I am defending Khan is ignorance. I am not defending him because I am loyal, merely pointing out that every promotion does dumb stuff all the time. I listed multiple promotions I've watched over the years -- my whole thing is I like the workers; I've never really liked any promotion/booker that much. It's hilarious you're so AEW v WWE minded that you think I'm team AEW when I'm just saying Khan isn't even close to being the craziest booker of all time if you know your history. In terms of results he's literally one of the most successful ever outside of WWF/E. You can think he sucks -- I could think he sucks -- doesn't change that from being true.

 

[Gwladysstreetlad]

A lot of what you are saying is the "traditional wisdom" of wrestling. Many agree with you. It's also a fact that every single one of those bookers who did things "the right way" (bar VKM) never drew a house like All In.

The PPV buys for the crazy PPV 13 days from another will be double the buy rate of any TNA PPV ever (in 2025 v. twenty years ago when PPV was generally stronger).

The PPV buys will be higher than WCW in 2000 when they spent/lost ~$100 million to get 50k buys per show and WWE could draw ~500k.

I understand it was a while ago but WCW was Moshiri while AEW are the Glazers. You hate both of them as fans of the clubs but one is WAY worse than the other. Nothing AEW does can surprise me having lived through WCW and TK really doesn't seem that crazy to me compared with pretty much any single week of the last 2/3 years of Nitro.

So at some point the "he's dumb and doing the wrong things" has to be balanced with "the results are the best results of any # 2 ever." So why don't the results match how terrible TK is according to some fans? I think to some people the likes of Herb Abrams and pals aren't being considered when Tony is "the craziest booker of all time" and it's the "only in AEW." Literally any Nitro from 99/00 has more completely insane and business killing activity than a full year of AEW. Listening to Vince Russo speak for one minute is worse than every single word I've heard TK say thus far (including all two hour pressers).



I guess to you the money doesn't matter, you wouldn't run the PPVs so close. But let's say you're the booker and VP and the owner/President says run the PPV. What do you book for a 13 day build for Bryan?

LOL. This is cringe stuff. The "tl;dr" and "I could do this but I won't bother" is 20 year old internet BS that we got bored of decades ago. Astonishing someone is still trying to pass this off as a valid response in the year 2024.

Perry sucks. He's awful. I don't care about "throwing away" a program I don't think will make ANY money. Your take that I am defending Khan is ignorance. I am not defending him because I am loyal, merely pointing out that every promotion does dumb stuff all the time. I listed multiple promotions I've watched over the years -- my whole thing is I like the workers; I've never really liked any promotion/booker that much. It's hilarious you're so AEW v WWE minded that you think I'm team AEW when I'm just saying Khan isn't even close to being the craziest booker of all time if you know your history. In terms of results he's literally one of the most successful ever outside of WWF/E. You can think he sucks -- I could think he sucks -- doesn't change that from being true.

You wrote a long post fella and I didn't have it in me to respond properly at the time but it really does speak for itself.

1) You say all the bookers who did things "the right way" never drew a house like All In? Thats demonstrably untrue. WCW can bost a 150k house but it didn't make their booking any good. Prior to WWE/F ruining the business company's used to draw EVERYWHERE. Did they get one 50k house? No. Just plenty of 10k houses a three or four times a week all over the territories. That collectively make way more business gain the AEW getting a single freak house here based entirely on the fact that we're starved of big time wrestling in this country.

2) If you're seriously trying to suggest that AEW doing better then TNA in terms of PPV buys is something to brag about then I truly don't know what to say. I'm absolutely floored that anyone would think that.

3) Again, you can't be serious? You're trying to claim that AEW doing better then a dying WCW in its death throws is a positive?! How are they doing tv ratings wise comparatively out of interest?

4) Your comparisons are all over the place tbh mate. I don't think there is a legitimate comparison you could make between WCW and football owners. Their story is so complicated that its ureal. Never the less it would still be around to this day and making way more money then AEW had it not been for the timeswaner/AOL merger. If you want to make comparisons for today though then WWE would be Man City, an unlikeable juggernaut that you begrudgingly have to respect for its brilliance. AEW is Everton under Bill Kenwright. Something that could and should be so much better then it is but is heald back by one mans unbelievably delusional sense of self importance and refusal to accept help from people who are vastly more qualified then him because he refuses to let go of his toy trainset. I would legitimately watch the worst Nitro and Thunder episodes over most AEW content. And that's really saying a lot.

5) I wouldn't book a PPV on 13 days at all because that would be 'kin stupid. Nobody with sense would do that at all.

6) I really didn't want to type all that out which is why I tried to end the discussion when I did. I consider these ludicrous long posts we're typing out far more "cringe" then what I originally the long drawn out posts we've done.

7) I'm glad we at least agree on Perry. He's a joke. Nevertheless a bug chunk of AEW fans (including Tony Kahn who's pushing the guy) disagree. So with that in mind, it seems a waste to use the fued on a three week build. Especially when only the other week Perry went over againt another guy eho is very popular with the AEW crowd in Derby Alen. If he's gonna push the guy then push him. 50/50 booking doesn't work.

8) I don't think Tony sucks. I'm sure he's a really nice guy but he's holding that company back badly. A competent booker would do so much better but Tony wants to keep playing with his action figures.

9) You'll probably be asleep by the time you've got past number two on this lol. I tired to cut this short mate. Hope you didn't find it to hard going lol.

 

[SuperTimCahill]

Tony fired CM Punk so he could keep his biggest rating killers the young bucks and Mowgli happy. That's the definition of being a clown as an owner of a wrestling promotion

 

[njligernj]

1) You say all the bookers who did things "the right way" never drew a house like All In? Thats demonstrably untrue. WCW can bost a 150k house but it didn't make their booking any good.

This is incredibly disingenuous. Would it be better if I'd said "paid house?"

Using the PR event of a dictator where the attendees were literally threatened to attend in order to undercut the success of All In is very silly.

The biggest non-WWE US paid house (IIRC) is Goldberg's Atlanta 40k. You have to admit, that's a far cry from ~70k ... even the ~50k of the second one is 25% more. And it's not like every other show was somewhere in the 30's ... I'm not sure WCW had more than three 30k houses. AEW will likely equal or surpass WCW's record attendances when you compare a full eight years of AEW to WCW's run after NWA before collapse. WCW will have a higher average attendance for all shows and TV ratings. AEW will have made (way) more money. Some of that is down to differences in the eras (in ways that both helps and hurts AEWs record).

Just to be clear, so we don't get the goal posts moved too much, I am drawing a clear line between the perception of booking (creative) and the business (money).

I am not (nor have I ever, nor will I ever) say Tony is a great booker from a creative standpoint.

He is, factually, the second most successful American wrestling promoter from the modern era (measured by money) and he is farther ahead of # 3 than WWE is ahead of AEW.

2) If you're seriously trying to suggest that AEW doing better then TNA in terms of PPV buys is something to brag about then I truly don't know what to say. I'm absolutely floored that anyone would think that.

You are?!?!??! Mate ... IT. IS. A. FACT. FROM. REALITY. The guy you think is so terrible is SO much more financially successful than any challenger to WWF/E in history.

I understand "duh duh TNA wasn't/isn't good" ... it was the # 2 for a decade. So I'm just pointing out that AEW is leagues above where they (or anyone else) got.

If he's such a clown why is the alternative such a joke you're offended I even mentioned them out loud? It's not like I am purposefully leaving out people who did better -- TNA is the "best" we had for years. I mean maybe spend a minute telling us what you think of the people who did worse business-wise than Tony for context. Mega-clowns? "You can't control who you play" as we say in football.

You don't like him but he's very successful. Moreso than Heyman, Cornette, Rhodes, Sapolsky, Baba, Watts et al.

Do I think he's a better *creative booker* than them? No (well, he's better than Watts who is massively overrated and failed more than he succeeded).

I'd rather watch the king's road than the road to All Out. But he's made WAY more money as the booker than anyone else in the modern era bar VKM.

4) Your comparisons are all over the place tbh mate. I don't think there is a legitimate comparison you could make between WCW and football owners. Their story is so complicated that its ureal. Never the less it would still be around to this day and making way more money then AEW had it not been for the timeswaner/AOL merger.

This is by far the funniest thing you've said. You don't believe the things Eric Bischoff says do you?

It's not that complicated. WCW lost 70 MILLION in one year ... why would you think they'd still be around?

Just FYI, this is NOT the perception of the vast majority of wrestling fans, as you can see from this thread:



Nor is it the opinion of wrestling media figures ...

Meltzer: "If they were profitable they'd still be around. Plug was pulled because they lost boatloads of money."

People in that thread are literally shocked anyone thinks differently. Years of Bischoff's podcast lies and I guess people forgot?

If you disagree with everyone that's fine but provide some backup. I've got my backup in most wrestling fans and media on the "WCW was dead before the merger" side. Why do you think differently? If it's Bischoff's lies though I think we can skip straight to blocking one another because anyone who believes a word that ultra-mega-clown says will not get along well with the likes of me.

5) I wouldn't book a PPV on 13 days at all because that would be 'kin stupid. Nobody with sense would do that at all.

You're living in a fantasy world. These companies need to make money. It makes money.

I didn't like when WWE went to 12 PPVs a year -- most wrestling fans hated the idea at the time -- billions of dollars later I'm not sure they're concerned with our input.

But yeah, if our conversation is based entirely on the version of wrestling that lives only in our respective imaginations, I didn't like 30 day builds for PPVs WAY before I *also* don't like 13 day builds. I'd prefer the old 4-5 PPVs (sorry ... christ on a cracker where are my manners ... PLE) a year. I'm not sure my feelings matter too much to *either* WWE or AEW.

8) I don't think Tony sucks. I'm sure he's a really nice guy but he's holding that company back badly. A competent booker would do so much better but Tony wants to keep playing with his action figures.

Hey look, Vince got to play with his "action figures" for a while and nobody stopped him.

9) You'll probably be asleep by the time you've got past number two on this lol. I tired to cut this short mate. Hope you didn't find it to hard going lol.

What's hard going for me is reading all these meaningless, no new information, two word posts people clog up the boards with. Someone actually trying to communicate (which you really can't do well with just two words) is appreciated even if we disagree. Cheers! (But please, I beg of you, don't listen to Bischoff.)

 

[SuperTimCahill]

Imagine comparing Tony Khan, a guy born with a silver spoon up his ass and with unlimited funds because of daddy, to the bookers of yesteryear. The guy has probably never been told 'no' in his life.

Said bookers of yesteryear had to actually think before spending (and many of them drew equal or bigger attendances than what Dynamite does these days).
Khan was literally given a bigger TV deal than any of the mentioned bookers without having to prove himself at all, simply because he's a billionaires son.

I also really struggle to see how he's making such a massive profit - with a bloated roster on high salaries, bad ratings and a really expensive video game flop (courtesy of Kenny Omega) behind him. Sure, there have been glimpses of success here and there, like Wembley and the shows they did in the very beginning when everyone was excited, but the attendances for weekly tv tapings in the US has plummeted. Empty arenas galore.

There's absolutely no way he'd ever do better than, let's say prime TNA, without daddy's cash. TNA also did over a million viewers consistently for some time, and even drew more than 2 mil. at least once or twice, while AEW has lost fans almost on a monthly basis from the beginning. They're regularly down in the 600ks now.

 

[Gwladysstreetlad]

This is incredibly disingenuous. Would it be better if I'd said "paid house?"

Using the PR event of a dictator where the attendees were literally threatened to attend in order to undercut the success of All In is very silly.

The biggest non-WWE US paid house (IIRC) is Goldberg's Atlanta 40k. You have to admit, that's a far cry from ~70k ... even the ~50k of the second one is 25% more. And it's not like every other show was somewhere in the 30's ... I'm not sure WCW had more than three 30k houses. AEW will likely equal or surpass WCW's record attendances when you compare a full eight years of AEW to WCW's run after NWA before collapse. WCW will have a higher average attendance for all shows and TV ratings. AEW will have made (way) more money. Some of that is down to differences in the eras (in ways that both helps and hurts AEWs record).

Just to be clear, so we don't get the goal posts moved too much, I am drawing a clear line between the perception of booking (creative) and the business (money).

I am not (nor have I ever, nor will I ever) say Tony is a great booker from a creative standpoint.

He is, factually, the second most successful American wrestling promoter from the modern era (measured by money) and he is farther ahead of # 3 than WWE is ahead of AEW.



You are?!?!??! Mate ... IT. IS. A. FACT. FROM. REALITY. The guy you think is so terrible is SO much more financially successful than any challenger to WWF/E in history.

I understand "duh duh TNA wasn't/isn't good" ... it was the # 2 for a decade. So I'm just pointing out that AEW is leagues above where they (or anyone else) got.

If he's such a clown why is the alternative such a joke you're offended I even mentioned them out loud? It's not like I am purposefully leaving out people who did better -- TNA is the "best" we had for years. I mean maybe spend a minute telling us what you think of the people who did worse business-wise than Tony for context. Mega-clowns? "You can't control who you play" as we say in football.

You don't like him but he's very successful. Moreso than Heyman, Cornette, Rhodes, Sapolsky, Baba, Watts et al.

Do I think he's a better *creative booker* than them? No (well, he's better than Watts who is massively overrated and failed more than he succeeded).

I'd rather watch the king's road than the road to All Out. But he's made WAY more money as the booker than anyone else in the modern era bar VKM.



This is by far the funniest thing you've said. You don't believe the things Eric Bischoff says do you?

It's not that complicated. WCW lost 70 MILLION in one year ... why would you think they'd still be around?

Just FYI, this is NOT the perception of the vast majority of wrestling fans, as you can see from this thread:



Nor is it the opinion of wrestling media figures ...

Meltzer: "If they were profitable they'd still be around. Plug was pulled because they lost boatloads of money."

People in that thread are literally shocked anyone thinks differently. Years of Bischoff's podcast lies and I guess people forgot?

If you disagree with everyone that's fine but provide some backup. I've got my backup in most wrestling fans and media on the "WCW was dead before the merger" side. Why do you think differently? If it's Bischoff's lies though I think we can skip straight to blocking one another because anyone who believes a word that ultra-mega-clown says will not get along well with the likes of me.



You're living in a fantasy world. These companies need to make money. It makes money.

I didn't like when WWE went to 12 PPVs a year -- most wrestling fans hated the idea at the time -- billions of dollars later I'm not sure they're concerned with our input.

But yeah, if our conversation is based entirely on the version of wrestling that lives only in our respective imaginations, I didn't like 30 day builds for PPVs WAY before I *also* don't like 13 day builds. I'd prefer the old 4-5 PPVs (sorry ... christ on a cracker where are my manners ... PLE) a year. I'm not sure my feelings matter too much to *either* WWE or AEW.



Hey look, Vince got to play with his "action figures" for a while and nobody stopped him.



What's hard going for me is reading all these meaningless, no new information, two word posts people clog up the boards with. Someone actually trying to communicate (which you really can't do well with just two words) is appreciated even if we disagree. Cheers! (But please, I beg of you, don't listen to Bischoff.)

I was right to ignore you in the first place. I can't take anyone seriously who cites Meltzer as a credible source of info. I'll try but 'kin hell.......

1) "paid house" wouldn't be any better because AEW is a private company and lies though its teeth about figures. Even when it comes to those who paid its dodgy. I personally got a really good seat for absolute buttons on a blue light card. How many others did to? Whatever the overall attendance was its still hella but impressive. Still though, let's not pretend that WCW couldn't have easily outdrawn that if they'd tried and booked either Halloween Havoc or Starrcade or any other ppv here. Getting one massive gate here in a nation starved of big time wrestling while struggling to get 3k fans for their weekly shows in the states is a bad trade off. They lost somthing 40% of their attending audience between the two All In shows here (which is a shame because the second was miles better than the first). If you think that's not concerning then i doubt I'll be able to make you think differently.

2) TNA never actually challenged WWE. Ever. The one time they tried is lasted ten weeks and it was an abject humiliation. AEW's version of competing with WWE was going head to head with NXT which is targeting the exact same small section of the audience. Even now without any competition they draw raitings comparable to NXT.

I haven't once said that I dislike Tony Kahn. I don't know the man. It would be weird to dislike him. I just think his booking style is akin to that of a kid with OCD and ADHD.

There where dozens of bookers who ran endless amazing shows before Vince McMahon stole all their talent, crushed them and ran them off tv. If they'd had money like Tony Kahn does they'd still be around today. Its proper disenguous to pretend otherwise. I simply can't fathom why you think I'm being daft for think having two PPVs so close together is a proper bonkers decision. I'm honestly gobsmacked that anyone would suggest otherwise. Its pure stupidity.

 

[Gwladysstreetlad]

This is by far the funniest thing you've said. You don't believe the things Eric Bischoff says do you?

It's not that complicated. WCW lost 70 MILLION in one year ... why would you think they'd still be around?

Just FYI, this is NOT the perception of the vast majority of wrestling fans, as you can see from this thread:



Nor is it the opinion of wrestling media figures ...

Meltzer: "If they were profitable they'd still be around. Plug was pulled because they lost boatloads of money."

People in that thread are literally shocked anyone thinks differently. Years of Bischoff's podcast lies and I guess people forgot?

If you disagree with everyone that's fine but provide some backup. I've got my backup in most wrestling fans and media on the "WCW was dead before the merger" side. Why do you think differently? If it's Bischoff's lies though I think we can skip straight to blocking one another because anyone who believes a word that ultra-mega-clown says will not get along well with the likes of me.



You're living in a fantasy world. These companies need to make money. It makes money.

I didn't like when WWE went to 12 PPVs a year -- most wrestling fans hated the idea at the time -- billions of dollars later I'm not sure they're concerned with our input.

But yeah, if our conversation is based entirely on the version of wrestling that lives only in our respective imaginations, I didn't like 30 day builds for PPVs WAY before I *also* don't like 13 day builds. I'd prefer the old 4-5 PPVs (sorry ... christ on a cracker where are my manners ... PLE) a year. I'm not sure my feelings matter too much to *either* WWE or AEW.



Hey look, Vince got to play with his "action figures" for a while and nobody stopped him.



What's hard going for me is reading all these meaningless, no new information, two word posts people clog up the boards with. Someone actually trying to communicate (which you really can't do well with just two words) is appreciated even if we disagree. Cheers! (But please, I beg of you, don't listen to Bischoff.)

I had to break this post into two part because it was getting daft.

I don't believe Bichoff. I believe a verity of sources that happen to back up SOME of the things he says. Guy Evens Nitro book busted so much of the myths created by the wrestling media. Its easy to point out WCW'S loses until you take into account how other departments at Tuner diverted costs to them with the specific goal of running them off the network.

I can't take this seriously if you're going to cite Dave Meltzer as a credible source. I just can't. The man is an utter fraud. He spreds more fiction then a Harry Potter novel. I don't believe 99% of what Bichoff or Pritchard say but I'll take their words over Meltzer any day. The man is a con artist.

Feel free to block me whenever you want fella. I certainly don't care enough about this nonsense to think it merrits blocking anyone but you do you.

How on earth can you not see that simply having the PPV just two weeks later would've been better for them and made even more money due to fan Interest in matchs with some actual stories. How is that controversial ffs? Its not like I'm asking them to do less PPVs. I just think they could space them out better lol.

Vince McMahon got called out for decades by people for runing loads of talentt and nobody played white knight to defend him like people do with Tony Kahn now. Its just weird at this point. Any kind of criticism is met with outrage. Because how dare anyone not be automatically positive aboht him and AEW. Its a joke.

Have a good day mate. Nice chatting even if we vehemently disagree on some things. If you chose to block me or whatever because I don't find Meltzer or Alverez and ilk credible that entirely your calI. I won't be listening to Bichoff because I don't do podcasts or anything else now. Life is busy enough without spending two hours listening to a guy talk about a ppv from 30 years ago!

 

[Blue 1]

Just got to the end of All In, great event, really enjoyed it, wish I'd gone now.

Toni Storm vs Mariah May was a good match and had the right result. Toni doesn't need that belt anymore, and it gives the feud extra legs.

Hook lashing cricket balls at Jericho made wince a bit.

Christian winning the casino gauntlet match was funny af, and it was brilliant seeing Nigel McGuinness back in the ring.

Ospreay - MJF was fantastic. Two of my favourite performers in wrestling currently.

Baker and Mone are both capable of better.

Didn't think the coffin match was all that, although it had some good bits - Darby coming out with tacks glued to his head, the skateboard spot, and it was nice to see Sting.

Danielson vs Swerve was the absolute tits, and as a huge Griselda mark Westside Gunn and Bun B playing Swerve to the ring was cool to see.

Well done, AEW.

 

[NeilMorepies]

Bird… more like significant inflatable other…

 

[The Nature Boy]

MAIN EVENT JEY USO!!!

Finally!!!

Yeet!

 

[Blue 1]

MAIN EVENT JEY USO!!!

Finally!!!

Yeet!

YEET!

 

[RomanReigns]

Vince McMahon documentary on Netflix in less than 24 hours

Can’t wait