Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 20 of 67 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Why do people give threads concerning them the time of day, we might as well just discuss another forum members "dream booking" it'd have the same credibility.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
386 Posts
Are we talking about what most people on here consider dirtsheets? Cut and paste sites which re-write or flat out make up stuff and attritube it to the Wrestling Observer/F4W/Torch or are we talking about the Wrestling Observer/F4W/Torch itself which apparently no one reads on here?
 

·
i ain't got no type
Joined
·
1,490 Posts
Ummm, Okayyy?

Your point is not really clear, you're basically just saying let's not talk about it even though that was 2009 news...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,063 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Are we talking about what most people on here consider dirtsheets? Cut and paste sites which re-write or flat out make up stuff and attritube it to the Wrestling Observer/F4W/Torch or are we talking about the Wrestling Observer/F4W/Torch itself which apparently no one reads on here?
Yeah, they get a few pages of replies
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,677 Posts
Why do people give threads concerning them the time of day, we might as well just discuss another forum members "dream booking" it'd have the same credibility.
This goes the same for all WWE Hall Of Fame threads too. The WWE HOF is worthless and there are no credentials to go in, which makes it a forum member's "dream booking" of who they want to go in, based on nothing unless they have read..... wait for it...... an article from a pro wrestling "news" site.

So if the "dirtsheets" are banned, so should any thread regarding "who will be in the WWE Hall of Fame" and "Should x wrestler be in the WWE Hall of Fame".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18,833 Posts
Most sites do get things right(unless it's talking about something like "____ is getting heat backstage") but that's only because it's stating the obvious.

EX-We saw Punk on Raw and was praising Bryan. Now Punk is injured. Logical thing to do, report this:
"WWE management is considering having CM Punk act as a mentor type role to Daniel Bryan until Punk is back from injury, then we'll see a Punk-Bryan feud over the US title which should happen around Wrestlemania"
 

·
Recognize
Joined
·
21,378 Posts
The only thing I tend to believe dirt sheets on is injuries because in that regard they seem to be better at getting things right. But when it comes to 'reports' and 'insider knowledge' then they can fuck off. They don't know any better than the rest of us and their sources are probably some janitor who thinks he heard or saw something when he didn't.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
386 Posts
The only thing I tend to believe dirt sheets on is injuries because in that regard they seem to be better at getting things right. But when it comes to 'reports' and 'insider knowledge' then they can fuck off. They don't know any better than the rest of us and their sources are probably some janitor who thinks he heard or saw something when he didn't.
Full of facts this post
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,438 Posts
The only thing I tend to believe dirt sheets on is injuries because in that regard they seem to be better at getting things right. But when it comes to 'reports' and 'insider knowledge' then they can fuck off. They don't know any better than the rest of us and their sources are probably some janitor who thinks he heard or saw something when he didn't.
I remember back in the day they where right on lots of things.

1. They had been reporting for a few months that Stone Cold Steve Austin was thinking about turning heel at Wrestlemania X-7 which did happen. I remember coming home from school and getting on WWE.com and hoping that did not happen and saw a huge picture of him & Vince shaking hands.

2. When Austin saved WWE before the Invasion PPV from WCW/ECW read reports the next day saying Austin would be joining WCW/ECW at that PPV.

3. Bill Goldberg's WWE debut they pretty much reported how they whole segment with the Rock would play out.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
386 Posts
And that's probably why he said it, to show that dirtsheets DO infact get some things right.
Fine

Im always amazed that Meltzer and others get blamed for Vince McMahon changing his mind.

Read any account from any creative member and they will tell you how erratic Vince is.

It makes no sense.

I remember back in the day they where right on lots of things.

1. They had been reporting for a few months that Stone Cold Steve Austin was thinking about turning heel at Wrestlemania X-7 which did happen. I remember coming home from school and getting on WWE.com and hoping that did not happen and saw a huge picture of him & Vince shaking hands.

2. When Austin saved WWE before the Invasion PPV from WCW/ECW read reports the next day saying Austin would be joining WCW/ECW at that PPV.

3. Bill Goldberg's WWE debut they pretty much reported how they whole segment with the Rock would play out.
What may come as a surprise to Starbuck is that Austin and Rock were sources of Dave :shocked:
 

·
"Ingrato De Chicago"
Joined
·
1,005 Posts
The site that I go to got the whole Royal Rumble results from every match. Including the surprise entrants in the Rumble. I think it was for last years Rumble. I bet with people at the bar and won $100.
 

·
Recognize
Joined
·
21,378 Posts
I remember back in the day they where right on lots of things.

1. They had been reporting for a few months that Stone Cold Steve Austin was thinking about turning heel at Wrestlemania X-7 which did happen. I remember coming home from school and getting on WWE.com and hoping that did not happen and saw a huge picture of him & Vince shaking hands.

2. When Austin saved WWE before the Invasion PPV from WCW/ECW read reports the next day saying Austin would be joining WCW/ECW at that PPV.

3. Bill Goldberg's WWE debut they pretty much reported how they whole segment with the Rock would play out.
I wasn't on the net back then lol. And even still, the amount of times they have got things completely wrong negates the things they have got right for me. It's enough to indicate pure guess work and speculation and I don't buy into it at all.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
386 Posts
I wasn't on the net back then lol. And even still, the amount of times they have got things completely wrong negates the things they have got right for me. It's enough to indicate pure guess work and speculation and I don't buy into it at all.
I love this "they" business like they are all the same and equally credible.
 

·
Harvester of Sorrow
Joined
·
12,323 Posts
I agree with Starbuck. A lot of the time they get things wrong, and for that I don't see it as an accurate source of information, even if they got things right it still dosen't mean they should be trusted either. If you read a book on any particular subject that ended up being only 40% right, you'd never regard it as an accurate source of information, so why believe dirtsheets or any of those type of sites that give away information that isn't legit.

If I ever read a report that tries to predict something, I'll wait and see what happens. If it's right then so be it, but in reality it would most likely be something like 1 in 10 reports that does turn out right.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
386 Posts
I agree with Starbuck. A lot of the time they get things wrong, and for that I don't see it as an accurate source of information, even if they got things right it still dosen't mean they should be trusted either. If you read a book on any particular subject that ended up being only 40% right, you'd never regard it as an accurate source of information, so why believe dirtsheets or any of those type of sites that give away information that isn't legit.
Again I love this "they" business and collectively grouping them all(incorrectly)as dirt sheets.
 

·
Harvester of Sorrow
Joined
·
12,323 Posts
Again I love this "they" business and collectively grouping them all(incorrectly)as dirt sheets.
I refer to "They" as a way of refering to untrustworthy sources that report on wrestling. Whether they be dirtsheets or not they are untrustworthy sites, and don't deserve to be taken as credible sources.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
386 Posts
I refer to "They" as a way of refering to untrustworthy sources that report on wrestling. Whether they be dirtsheets or not they are untrustworthy sites, and don't deserve to be taken as credible sources.
Who would you consider untrustworthy or dirtsheets for that matter?
 
1 - 20 of 67 Posts
Top