Sunday, April 18, 2010

Smackdown Thoughts - April 16, 2010

And we're back with the 400th post here at Kick-Out!!  Sorry for the delay, I've had a really busy week at work, but it sounds like WWE has a big problem with delays right now as well.  In case you haven't heard, the Raw roster is still stuck in Europe due to the huge cloud of volcanic ash from Iceland (I'd make a Bjork joke here, but SNL beat me to it).  Should make for an interesting Raw tomorrow night, but that's tomorrow, let's talk about two days ago!

Smackdown started like every WWE show should, with Chris Jericho!  The former World Heavyweight Champion was not pleased that Randy Orton has been named the #1 contender (that makes two of us) and called Teddy Long an incompetent general manager.  Cue Edge to talk about spearing people, then Teddy Long to blame both men for getting themselves disqualified last week and handing over the opportunity to Randy Orton.  T-Lo set up a triple threat match for the World Championship - Jack Swagger vs. Edge vs. Chris Jericho!  Huge main event.

Drew McIntyre vs. Kane was our opening contest and it was about exciting as it sounds.  We've seen these two square off in the past and while it's never outright bad, it's not going to be making it on anyone's best of DVD.  McIntyre tried to get himself counted out, but Matt Hardy rushed to the ring and tossed him back into the ring, causing a disqualification.  A Hardy/McIntyre feud makes sense considering the last few weeks, but Kane wiped them both out after the match, which seems a little self-defeating in terms of story building.

Dolph Ziggler was ordered to issue a public apology for putting Josh Matthews in a sleeper hold last week, but the only apology he should have to issue is that it was on Smackdown instead of NXT and he took out Josh Matthews instead of Michael Cole.  R-Truth was Ziggler's opponent for the night, and I dug this match. It was too short, but it did what it needed to do, which is reestablish Dolph Ziggler as a threat and get his sleeper over as a devastating finisher.  Huge win for Ziggy, he's needed that for months.

Michelle McCool vs. Mickie James was up next... yeah, I was hoping to never type that ever again.  I have to say though, this match was not your typical WWE Divas romp, this wasn't a Divas match, this was a wrestling match between two competitors that happen to be female.  While I never enjoy being forced to watch a Michelle McCool match, this was a solid outing.  Loved The Glamazon appearance after the match as well, it's been too long since she's had gold around her waist, let's make that happen, WWE!

CM Punk, Luke Gallows & Darren Young vs. Rey Mysterio & The Hart Dynasty in six-man tag team action?  I don't know how much I've made my love of the six-man tag known, but I was very excited for this match, especially considering five of the six participants (sorry Darren).  The Miz was at ringside for commentary as well, just making this match even better before the bell even rang.  I'll tell you what, I hope one day that we have The Miz and Chris Jericho on commentary together, these guys kill it every time they're on guest commentary.  I'm sitting here writing about commentary though when the true source of entertainment was this very fun six-man tag.  The Harts and Rey Rey worked well together, I'd like to see them team up more often, maybe even something like The Harts, Mysterio and Matt Hardy vs. ShowMiz, Punk and Drew McIntyre in an eight-man tag next week?  Lots of stories being told here, lots of fun back and forth action, and DH Smith picking up a huge win for his team, pinning CM Punk after a 619 and a running powerslam.  Good stuff.

JTG vs. Caylen Croft was up next and what was up with JTG's Katt Williams' hairdo?  Weird.  Shad made his presence felt during and after the match, but JTG finally got the upperhand. If we're intent on splitting up Cryme Tyme, I can't wait until we get through this so JTG can really dive into his singles run.

So, I had no idea that Chris Jericho, Kane, MVP, Mark Henry, Big Show and The Great Khali were in MacGruber, how did that news pass me by?

Main Event time! Jack Swagger vs. Edge vs. Chris Jericho with the World Heavyweight Championship on the line!  This was one hell of a main event and much like Raw, showed that WWE likes to pull out all the stops when they go overseas.  The action was fast-paced and engaging, the crowd was into it, and Swagger got that high-profile win he needed, beating both Edge and Jericho.  I thought for sure we'd be due for some shenanigans, perhaps even setting up a Fatal Four Way at Extreme Rules, but it looks like Orton vs. Swagger is on and Jericho vs. Edge will have another WrestleMania rematch.  And upon further inspection to, that is the case, the two will be squaring off in a Steel Cage match.

Good Smackdown, though I don't feel like there's a lot going on with the Blue Brand right now, especially related to Extreme Rules.  They do have 2.5 matches scheduled for the PPV, and I'm sure they'll get increased attention since they'll likely be the only roster available for tomorrow night's Raw, but aside from the World Title situation and Punk/Mysterio, what else is going on?  The budding feud between McIntyre and Hardy took a backseat to Kane this week, JTG vs. Shad isn't a PPV-caliber match and The Hart Dynasty vs. ShowMiz has been playing out more on Raw than Smackdown.  I'm sure this will all get adjusted after the Draft, and it didn't hurt the quality of this individual show, but it is noticeable in the big picture.


  1. Sites like this annoy me, to be honest.

    It's nothing personal on you, Razor, but I don't understand what gives you the authority to "review" a match when you, yourself, have never actually competed in one, nor I doubt ever stepped into a wrestling ring period.

    Would you go to the hospital, with no medical experience, and tell the surgeon what makes a good surgeon? No. So why are you telling these people who have been doing this job for years whether they've had a good or a bad match with no experience in the field yourself?

    Sorry, and again it's not a personal attack, just an observation.

  2. And that's why someone who's never acted can't have an opinion on a movie, or why someone that's never played an instrument can't have an opinion on music, or why someone without programming experience can't have an opinion on a video game, or why someone who's never written can't have an opinion on a novel.

    I take great effort to never outright attack a wrestler's abilities inside the ring, because you're right in that sense, I don't have the authority to comment on whether or not they're doing something "right." It's part of the reason why I don't use a numerical rating system and it's why I never suggest that anyone should be released. My reviews are based solely on what does and doesn't entertain me. I respect everyone who gets in the ring, but not everyone captures my attention to the same degree, that's just the nature of entertainment. Using your logic, I can't even have a preferred wrestler, because what gives me the authority to enjoy Chris Jericho over Tyler Reks? What you're suggesting is that no one is allowed to have an opinion on anything unless they do it themselves, which is flat-out absurd.

  3. Don't get hot, it was just an observation.

    Listen, I'm not saying that you can't comment on anything if you haven't done it yourself. If WWE's show overall doesn't entertain you, as a paying customer, you have every right to tell them.

    But telling WWE if they had a bad show is different to telling a wrestler that they had a bad match. Shows like wrestling are judged on whether you wanted more of it, instead of less. That's the same with any entertainment property - such as a movie which you suggested.

    I'll tell a movie maker whether their movie was entertaining or not, but I won't tell the actor in the movie how to act. One is a subjective opinion, the other is something which you can't comment on because you don't know how to do it yourself.

    That's the difference.

    Would you give Johnny Depp acting advice? No, of course not. That sounds ridiculous. Could you tell Tim Burton whether his film was entertaining? Absolutely.

    So if you won't give an actor tips on acting, how can you give a wrestler an opinion on their match?

  4. No one's getting "hot," don't get defensive when someone disputes your flawed logic.

    I'm not giving wrestlers "advice." Do you see me saying, "Hey Kane, try to throw your punches a little harder" or "Hey R-Truth, you need a little more force in your Irish whips!" No, that's not what I do here, but if a match doesn't do it for me, I'm going to say it.

    I'm not giving wrestlers an opinion of their match, I'm giving my opinion of the match they gave me. Again, using your logic, you can't say that Shawn Michaels vs. The Undertaker was better than The Undertaker vs. Giant Gonzalez. What knowledge does an outsider have to offer that kind of verdict? Same goes for movies, I wouldn't tell an actor how to act, but I can tell you if their performance in a movie entertained me. I'd rather watch Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter than Robert Pattinson as Edward the vampire, but according to you, expressing that opinion would be "annoying."

    My opinion is not official, my vision of a great match might be terrible to one guy and mediocre to the next and vice versa. I don't claim to be an authority, I don't claim to have any inside knowledge, nothing makes my opinion more valuable, I'm just saying what I do and don't like and basing it on 20+ years of watching wrestling.

  5. "Flawed logic" - Ouch, you really know how to kick a guy, don't you. I assume that's because it doesn't agree with Razor and your, I presume, flawless logic, right?

    Man, I thought you were after discussions about opinions, not just completely disgarding someone's opinion as "flawed" simply because you don't agree with them. I never told you your logic was 'flawed' or 'flat-out absurd' but I guess that's just because I'm up for a discussion, you're up for making me wrong and you right.

    This can't be a debate or discussion - which I'd hoped for - because you've already decided that you're right and I'm wrong no matter what. So I see no need to continue this conversation.

    Call me 'defensive' or a 'smark' or whatever, tell your buddies on Twitter, I couldn't really care less.

    Peace out, take care and good luck with the site. Hope it continues being as successful as it is.


  6. Darren says "So if you won't give an actor tips on acting, how can you give a wrestler an opinion on their match?" Darren: Tips and opinions are two entirely different things.

    I love the idea that people can't have an opinion on something (or even give advice about something, for that matter) unless they themselves have done it before. The internet would cease to exist if this were true.

    I've never been a professional chef, so I guess if I eat at a restaurant that employs one I can't complain about my food? Riiight.

  7. Your logic was called flawed and absurd and then I demonstrated the flaws and absurdity. Sorry if that gets you "hot" or makes you feel "kicked," but you came to my site and opened with "your work annoys me," so let's not get in a pissing match over who's the big bad bully here.

    I'm more than happy to have a discussion or a debate with you, but you're going to need to actually refute my points before we can move forward with that. Instead, you got an idea in your head and wanted to make a point, but when faced with a counterpoint, you played the victim card.

    I'm not going to call you a "smark" or resort to any name-calling, but when you present a point based on flawed logic, I'm going to tell you. You've yet to present any sort of argument that would make me reconsider the way I do business. Your accusation was simply wrong and I explained, in detail, why.

  8. Aw shit, I have never been a politician, I can't have a view on politics and criticise my nation's leaders....
    Oh wait, I can, because I can objectively view the events from the out side.... Darren stop being a douche

  9. I said "sites like this" I never said "Razor and his site annoys me". Plus the words "it's not a personal attack on you" - I thought that was made obvious. Problem was, you were the one I was speaking to when making my points so I used the word 'you'.

    You're not the only one who does it, and you're not the only one I've brought this point up to. But you do do it.

    You made this about movies and music and novels. I was talking about wrestling, about giving an opinion on a wrestling match. I've watched wrestling for 35 years, but I don't tell Chris Jericho that his match wasn't as good as Dolph Ziggler's match because I feel I have no right to do that and I feel that no-one else, except fellow wrestler's, has the right to do that.

    I can cut a promo, probably a very bad one. I can make a film quite easily, probably a very bad one. I can sing a song, probably quite badly. I can write or tell a story, but not a bestseller, I can cook, and since I haven't poisoned my better half yet, I can't be too bad. All of those things I can do, so I have some experience in that field.

    However, I know for a fact that I cannot wrestle a match at all. I know for a fact that I can't, like you, be a radio personality, because I have absolutely no clue what goes into those things or how to do them.

    Therefore, what right do I have to tell someone else that what they did was bad or not entertaining. I don't.

    Oh, and anon, stop being a coward and use your real name to insult someone else. Appreciated.

  10. Darren better have a blog of his own. If not he shouldn't in here criticising Razor and telling him how to blog.

  11. Personally, I like to refer to this quote:

    “A yawn may not be polite, but at least it is an honest opinion”

    If a match is on and I'm yawning, then it's obviously a bad match, in my eyes that doesn't mean I consider myself an authority on wrestling matches.

  12. But how are novels, movies and music different in this debate? It's all entertainment carried out by professionals getting paid to write, act, perform, etc. If you can't offer an opinion of Jack Swagger vs. Randy Orton, then you can't offer an opinion of Kick-Ass. What makes it okay to critique WWE or a movie as a whole, as you earlier suggested, but not the performances within?

    I'm not telling Chris Jericho that his match was better than Dolph Ziggler's. Perhaps indirectly, if I call Jericho's match the "Match of the Night," instead of Ziggler's and if Chris Jericho happens to be reading at the time. I'm not writing to wrestlers, if they are reading, that would be awesome, but I highly doubt they are, I'm writing my opinions of what I'm watching. Not telling anyone how to do their job, and not to sound like a broken record, I'm just talking about what entertains me.

    And that's not a "oh well it's my opinion and everyone has a right to their opinion so deal with it" argument. I'm sure many people disagree with my opinions and I'm know that many of my opinions have been wrong in the past, but that's all I'm doing here is writing my thoughts for those who wish to read them.

    You're insinuating that I think I know more about working a wrestling match than wrestlers, and that's just plain false. All I know is what I like and what I don't like and that's what I write about here. I don't see how you're continuing to miss this point.

  13. Darren stop being a douche and piss off like the igonorant little troll you are...

    Have a nice day.

  14. Moving along... any thoughts on Smackdown?

  15. Hahahaha!

    that was a funny little interchange :)


    smackdown was excellent :D