Longtime reader and fan here, since maybe 20 years or whenever The Buzz on Professional Wrestling came out. Time flies and all that, hope all is well with you!
I'm writing to get your opinion, and of course the ranters opinions on something.
So Meltzer has he ever made it clear in his writing that there is a difference between what he likes in wrestling and what actually draws/makes money/gets an audience?
Because this has been bugging me the last couple of years. From Meltzer's perspective we have to be living in some sort of golden age of wrestling. I mean in the US, accordning to him, there is a new greatest match all the time. Last year he exclaimed that
the Gargano vs Cole match from NXT Takeover: Brooklyn was the greatest WWE match of all time.
This year the Young Bucks vs Omega/Hangman was the greatest tag match of all time.
Meanwhile AEW and NXT are watched by like 1.5 milion fans combined and general interest in wrestling is rock bottom and the idea of a golden age is quite hard to see. But does Meltzer ever make it clear to his audience that his opinion of great is of no interest
to a larger wrestling audience?
I've stopped reading and listening to him myself because I find him annoying, but do you or anyone reading the blog know if he makes it clear when he is is sitting in the artistic critic chair: (“This match is great, they no sold and kicked out of everything,
6 stars”) and when is doing business analysis? It seems to me that he always conflates the two when it is quite clear that “great matches” and “great business” don't really have that much to do with each other.
I kind of leads me to think that Meltzer has a negative influence on wrestling. His way of thinking about what makes wrestling great – guys having Meltzer approved “great matches” – is all over the place but the audience is shrinking by the month.
Have a good weekend!
Omega v. Okada did gigantic business in Japan. And yes, Dave is very clear about what moves numbers and what he enjoys as a fan.