|
|
Post by American Phenom on Apr 14, 2008 0:49:42 GMT -5
Basically, he rates each match out of 5-stars. And on this site, they take his ratings for each Wrestlemania, and find the average score. So with that said, the top 3 rated Wrestlemania's (in Dave Meltzer's opinion) are: 1.) Wrestlemania XIX 2.) Wrestlemania XXIV 3.) Wrestlemania 21 Credit: www.geocities.com/mfoy18/wmstarindex.html |
|
|
|
Post by Flava Dave on Apr 14, 2008 0:53:08 GMT -5
Anyone that calls the Gimmick Battle Royal a "dud" is a complete goof, in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
Post by James Hardy on Apr 14, 2008 0:55:31 GMT -5
Anyone that calls the Gimmick Battle Royal a "dud" is a complete goof, in my opinion. It was a dud. As far as the match goes anyway. The entrances were cool but that was it.. |
|
|
|
Post by Quanthor on Apr 14, 2008 1:14:46 GMT -5
Notice, those events had less matches, therefore they will rank higher.
|
|
|
|
Post by jjkotm on Apr 14, 2008 1:17:24 GMT -5
I hope 3 stars for Rock-Hogan was a typo...
|
|
|
|
Post by HHH316 on Apr 14, 2008 1:31:16 GMT -5
If I wasnt about to go to sleep, I'd make some comparisons about how crappy his rating system is.
|
|
|
|
Post by rkolegendkilla on Apr 14, 2008 1:32:06 GMT -5
I didn't like 21 for some reason.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ultimate Figure Collector on Apr 14, 2008 1:40:21 GMT -5
WrestleMania 21 sucked. All it had was HBK/Angle but I still say they had a better match at Vengeance. At the time I liked Orton/Taker but I watched it on 24/7 recently and it wasn't even that great.
|
|
|
|
Post by carly1988 on Apr 14, 2008 2:11:35 GMT -5
This is just more proof that Dave Meltzer is an IDIOT!!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Hollywood Asia on Apr 14, 2008 2:15:58 GMT -5
He's an idiot because you don't agree with his OPINION?
If that's the case everyone here are idiots...
|
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Apr 14, 2008 2:17:23 GMT -5
why do you go by everything meltzer says? you do the same with the TNA ppvs Also! Are you  ing kidding me, WM21 makes the ing list? WHAT A CROCK OF crap |
|
|
|
Post by hbk4champ on Apr 14, 2008 2:21:35 GMT -5
wat. wrestlemania 21 was one of the worst wrestlemania's ever!
|
|
|
|
Post by James Hardy on Apr 14, 2008 3:01:34 GMT -5
21 had four really good matches, one of which is probably a top 3 mania match of all time, so it's a decent show..
But it's not like it's meltzer's actual list of what he thought were the best shows, it's a list created by using his ranking system..
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Apr 14, 2008 5:06:26 GMT -5
I agree except WM 23 is third IMO.
|
|
Johnny Lawrence - Cobra Kai
Main Eventer
Promotional consideration paid for by the following
Joined on: Jul 25, 2005 17:12:49 GMT -5
Posts: 3,209
|
Post by Johnny Lawrence - Cobra Kai on Apr 14, 2008 6:24:39 GMT -5
This is just more proof that Dave Meltzer is an IDIOT!!!! Dave Meltzer's farts contain more pro wrestling knowledge than the minds of most current fans combined. That said, his opinions are just that. And when you're ranking every match of every WrestleMania, it's almost impossible not to come up with an unpopular opinion here and there. Such is the nature of opinion writing. Also, keep in mind that Meltzer published these star ratings the week after each WrestleMania. Which means he ranked WrestleMania II by the standards of what a good match was in 1986, III by 1987 standards, X by 1994 standards, etc. When Meltzer gave WM III the ratings he did, he had never seen a Kurt Angle match, or a Shawn Michaels singles main event, or the Flair vs. Steamboat 1989 series, etc. because they hadn't happened yet (and thus, the bar was lower). It's not like he sat down after WrestleMania 24 and ranked every match in history judging by 2008 criteria. My guess is if he did that, A LOT of the older matches would get different ratings (some higher, some lower). |
|
|
|
Post by S on Apr 14, 2008 6:43:11 GMT -5
Notice, those events had less matches, therefore they will rank higher. Not if the scores are averaged |
|
|
|
Post by carly1988 on Apr 14, 2008 6:59:42 GMT -5
This is just more proof that Dave Meltzer is an IDIOT!!!! Dave Meltzer's farts contain more pro wrestling knowledge than the minds of most current fans combined. That said, his opinions are just that. And when you're ranking every match of every WrestleMania, it's almost impossible not to come up with an unpopular opinion here and there. Such is the nature of opinion writing. Also, keep in mind that Meltzer published these star ratings the week after each WrestleMania. Which means he ranked WrestleMania II by the standards of what a good match was in 1986, III by 1987 standards, X by 1994 standards, etc. When Meltzer gave WM III the ratings he did, he had never seen a Kurt Angle match, or a Shawn Michaels singles main event, or the Flair vs. Steamboat 1989 series, etc. because they hadn't happened yet (and thus, the bar was lower). It's not like he sat down after WrestleMania 24 and ranked every match in history judging by 2008 criteria. My guess is if he did that, A LOT of the older matches would get different ratings (some higher, some lower). Its not his opinion really that bothers me. Everyone has their own opinions but you're trying to tell me from the Rock-N-Wrestling days of Hulkamania, to the "Golden Age" of wrestling in the early 90s, to the Attitude era that the top 3 wrestlemania of all time were in the past 5 years when WRESTLING HAS BEEN AT ITS LOWEST IN 15 YEARS??? I dont buy into any of the crap that any of the so called "wrestling experts" know. MANY times ive heard something from Meltzer and low and behold it never came true....Hell im still waiting for King Mabel to be Hall and Nash's mystery partner in the nWo  |
|
Johnny Lawrence - Cobra Kai
Main Eventer
Promotional consideration paid for by the following
Joined on: Jul 25, 2005 17:12:49 GMT -5
Posts: 3,209
|
Post by Johnny Lawrence - Cobra Kai on Apr 14, 2008 7:55:57 GMT -5
Dave Meltzer's farts contain more pro wrestling knowledge than the minds of most current fans combined. That said, his opinions are just that. And when you're ranking every match of every WrestleMania, it's almost impossible not to come up with an unpopular opinion here and there. Such is the nature of opinion writing. Also, keep in mind that Meltzer published these star ratings the week after each WrestleMania. Which means he ranked WrestleMania II by the standards of what a good match was in 1986, III by 1987 standards, X by 1994 standards, etc. When Meltzer gave WM III the ratings he did, he had never seen a Kurt Angle match, or a Shawn Michaels singles main event, or the Flair vs. Steamboat 1989 series, etc. because they hadn't happened yet (and thus, the bar was lower). It's not like he sat down after WrestleMania 24 and ranked every match in history judging by 2008 criteria. My guess is if he did that, A LOT of the older matches would get different ratings (some higher, some lower). MANY times ive heard something from Meltzer and low and behold it never came true....Hell im still waiting for King Mabel to be Hall and Nash's mystery partner in the nWo That's because every time some hack wrestling website posts fake news, they attribute it to Meltzer to make people believe it, even though Meltzer never reported it. If you're getting Meltzer-sourced news from anywhere other than his web site or his newsletter, then I'm sure that half (or more) of what you've read was total BS. If you read his site or the newsletter, his accuracy is closer to 80-90%... which is even more impressive when you consider that McMahon and WWE change direction every six hours, so even a legit news item could have been changed before it's reported. |
|
|
|
Post by bad guy™ on Apr 14, 2008 7:58:04 GMT -5
Umm...the only good matches at WM 21 were Angle/Michaels and Stratus/Hemme.  |
|
Eskimo Joe
Main Eventer
Signature Pharmacy
Joined on: Dec 6, 2004 16:56:12 GMT -5
Posts: 1,757
|
Post by Eskimo Joe on Apr 14, 2008 8:33:08 GMT -5
21? Really?
|
|
