Updated 1/5/2001 Most recent posts are in redBob Ryder's readers say -
Responses to Zenk vs Ryder/WCW
from markmadden.com; 1wrestling.con and a1wrestling.com
Reproduced below - some of the debate sparked by Tom Zenk's remarks on the WCW sale on the LAW (23/12) and Bob Ryder's subsequent personal attack on Zenk.
As Creachman (below) notes - "Zenk has been critical of the proposed sale of WCW to Bischoff. Bob is a smart little toad [or chimp? - ed.]. He knows that EB will soon be back, so why not curry favor with him. Either that or he doesn't want Zenk's legitimate questions re the propriety of the WCW sale to gain momentum."
Hear Tom Zenk on prowrestlingradio this Saturday for more on the WCW sale, the future of wrestling on TBS and why Siegel would be insane to sign a non-compete clause.....
Tom Zenk is on the money
By Dave Hauser (Majormet)
Mark Madden.Com Message Board: Wrestling Discussion: Tuesday, December 26, 2000I read the latest Tom Zenk minutes from a 12/23 audio conversation and feel that he is on the pulse of a lot of what should be going on in wrestling and I do feel the current booking team in WCW is right there with him.
At Christmas yesterday I was at an extended family gathering where there were about 8 kids between 10-14 and of course my son who will be 6 and was astonished to see their need and wanton for heroes. It seems that the new upcoming generation of sports entertainment fans want to cheer the good guys again.
WCW has done a great job setting that up as they have the evil
undestructable heel champion in Steiner, they can probably give Shane Douglas the US Title and that would strengthen the babyface roster. The days of the bad-a$$ heel babyface are over and the sooner that WCW recognizes the quicker they will overtake WWF.These newer kids that were 4-6 years old during the ascent of WWF are not enchanted with the product and the WWF brand name is considered taboo to them so their parents have them watch WCW instead, of course the WCW product has been lackluster for most of the year so these kids are probably turning into Monday Night Football's first half instead but if Turner can hold onto the product for another 6 months I can see the product turning around and the ratings have been slowly going up and the
buyrates will eventually go up.Zenk pretty much cut up the older wrestlers who won't put anyone over and he also mentioned that WWF is losing touch with the up and coming fan base.
--------------------------------------
A firesale to the arsonist
The Bad Guy (Razorramon187) on Tuesday, December 26, 2000 - 12:06 pm:Mark Madden.Com Message Board: Wrestling Discussion:
Topm Zenk says -"Is it OK to sell WCW at a depressed price to the guy who made WCW unprofitable in the first place? A 'firesale to the arsonist'?"
You have to see that there is a very valid point there.
----------------------------------
Subject: Zenk responds to Ryder
Date: 12/29/2000
Author: Bob Barnett <bobbarnett@home.com>[Vampiro's former manager]Hurry-before Ryder threatens to shut it down-
----------------------------
Subject: Re: Zenk responds to Ryder
Date: 12/29/2000
Author: Stoneco864 <stoneco864@aol.com>>http://www.oocities.org/Colosseum/Arena/9893/bobslug.htm
lol zenk rules
----------------------------------
By Vince Russo Sux (Jason16rules) on Thursday, December 28, 2000 - 03:53 pm:Mark Madden.Com Message Board
..... anyone who ever wrestled has more credibility than Ryder.
-----------------------------------
"Ryder's ridiculous diatribe on Zenk."from a1wrestling.comhttp://www.1wrestlingtalk.com/1wres/smarts/8460.html
"Ryder's ridiculous "diatribe" on Zenk."
Posted by Mark2375 on Dec-27-00 at 05:01 PM (EDT)Quothe Bob Ryder -
"If he was such a great wrestler, why didn't he ever have a run as a main event star? Zenk will say it was because of jealousy and because the established stars held him back. That's a convenient excuse after the fact...but the truth of the matter is that while he was an active wrestler he was only successful when he latched on to more talented performers who carried him along for the ride."That's what Bob Ryder had to say about Tom Zenk and his so-called bitter diatribes as of late. First of all, what makes RYDER so bitter about Zenk's alleged "bitterness"? Why would he, a man who essentially makes his living criticizing wrestling and voicing his opinions on said subject, begrudge Zenk that same right?
Because Bob Ryder, for all he wants to be, is a mark if he considers "main event push" a hallmark of how good a wrestler is. Why didn't Zenk have a run at the top? Was it a lack of talent? No, Zenk had the goods in the ring. His recent interviews prove he has the oratory skills. Why was he never given the chance to show it by WCW? As far as that comment about latching on to a more talented star being the only way he ever achieved success, that seems a little revisionist. Zenk had his strongest run in WCW as a singles star during his TV title run. Now tell me he only got over becuase of Arn's hard work at putting him over.
Sure, he was a hot commodity as part of the Zenk/ Pillman duo, but he did achieve on his own to the degree he was allowed to by the company.Ryder, you should know that there is jealousy in wrestling and sometimes the more talented performer gets held back because he's seen as a threat to an established performer. If you think the most talented guys are always the ones who get the push, explain how great, deserving, and better than Zenk Dustin Rhodes was at that point. Or how about Erik Watts a few years later?
I just wonder why Ryder feels so strongly about this that he would trash the man the way he did. Maybe because Zenk has made his statements on the competitions web sites and internet shows. Maybe because of the supposedly unbiased journalist's ties to WCW.
----------------------------------
Taylor was the real victim ...
Posted by wrestlinghistorian on Dec-27-00 at 06:12 PM (EDT)
He's right! Whether you like it or not, and I have mixed feelings about it, he's right. I don't know about Bob other than what he writes in NFB, and I don't exactly disect that column the way others do. So I can't really recall what he actually printed before, like others can and then call him a liar or something. Anyways, when DID Zenk do anything besides that week long Title run? Who HASN'T Flair make look good? Zenk can't blame Flair. Zenk was pretty good, but he was never around long enough
to make a squat. I personally don't care to hear his garbage on shows either......if you want a good interview go read the Terry Taylor interview out front. Taylor was really a victim, in part, of what Zenk claims to be a victim of.About Bob...if he's angry I understand. With all the idiots like
Goldberg and Steiner and PlAyBoY printing and talking garbage, we don't need Zenks' two cents. Who cares what he has to say? We get enough "shoots" and stuff that screw things up. We don't needs Z-mans' help.--------------------------
Zenk could have received World title push
Posted by Titantron on Dec-27-00 at 07:19 PM (EDT)I always thought Zenk was a great athlete and a great wrestler.
In early WCW particularly he did recieve a substantial push. Going into the nineties he was on an undefeated streak from what I can remember until he became injured.He shouldn't have too much to complain about because he was on the same level as the likes of Santana, Martel, Taylor and even Bobby Eaton - all guys who could have received a World Title push at one time.
I don't believe Zenk is justified in his claims that he was held back by Flair - you only have to look at Barry Windham and Arn Anderson and the likes to see how hard it was to come by the World Title in early WCW.
---------------------
Why the powers that be despise a man like Zenk speaking his mind.
Posted by Mark2375 on Dec-28-00 at 11:13 AM (EDT)If you're going to comment on something, not to sound rude here, but be informed about it first. Zenk's main beef has always been with Ole Anderson and Dusty Rhodes, the guys running WCW during his stay there, not Ric Flair. In fact, Zenk always seems to give Flair credit for being the consumate wrestler and a credit to wrestling every time he does an interview. He only said Flair should step aside because, frankly, he is too old to be in a featured in-ring role these days (which it seems Flair is gradually accepting). I was never a Zenk fan, but the guy's got a point. He was talented, he did have abilities that were never showcased, and he was never given an opportunity because the people in charge at the time were too busy pushing their friends and realitives over people who had the potential to become bigger stars than them. Look what they did to Pillman, a guy you all will concede had talent and abilities. Once he became too popular they took him out of the spotlight and had him do a LONG string
of consecutive jobs on high profile television matches and took him out of all storylines and angles for a considerable period of time.The bottom line is, the only difference between Zenk's story and lots of other guys of that era is that Zenk is vocal about it. You wouldn't believe the politics involved in wrestling. Take what you read on the internet and in your dirt sheets and magnify it about 100 times. As long as you tow the line and keep your mouth shut, you're fine. Become outspoken and reveal what really goes on behind closed doors and you're public enemy number one. It's been the way the established power has kept itself on top for generations and that's why they despise a man like Zenk speaking his mind.
------------------------
Bob is trying to obscure questions over WCW's sale...
Posted by creachman on Dec-28-00 at 01:24 PM (EDT)Zenk has been critical of the proposed sale of WCW to Bischoff.
Bob is a smart little toad. He knows that EB will soon be back in
charge, so why not curry favor with him. Either that or he doesn't want Zenk's legitimate questions re the propriety of the sale to gain momemtum.Either way, Bob has once again shown himself to be a shill. If Zenk has not commented on the sale of WCW to Bischoff I suspect Bob would not have written that column.
----------------------
Bob on mediocrity
Posted by BRyder on Dec-28-00 at 01:42 PM (EDT)My comments about Zenk had nothing at all to do with what he said about the proposed sale of WCW. He's been equally outspoken about darn near everything else involving
the wrestling business, including comments he made about Vince McMahon and Pat Patterson.My comments were made because I'm sick of hearing a washed up has-been mouth off about a business he did nothing to improve while he was in it.
He's a jealous and bitter EX-wrestler who is sitting on the sidelines taking shots at people who are doing their best to do their jobs.
Ask yourself one question. Did anyone give a damn about Zenk a year ago? If you listen to his continued self-promotion, you'd think he was the greatest wrestler in the history of the business and would have been a 20 time champion if he hadn't been held back. The sad truth is he was mediocre at best, and never did a good interview until he started cutting promos on internet shows.
I have no respect for someone that is that ego driven, and that's what prompted my column.
Bob Ryder
-----------------------
Why is Ryder so bitter?
Posted by Mark2375 on Dec-28-00 at 07:16 PM (EDT)Everything that has ever been done in wrestling has been ego driven. These aren't members of the clegy we're dealing with. Everything a person does has an agenda. I still don't quite understand the bitterness with which you refer to Zenk as a "washed-up has been". I continue to believe it's because his ranting has helped your competitors and the WCW affiliations here have kept him from coming here to do the same for you.
As far as him being a mediocre wrestler "at best", I have to disagree. From a technical standpoint and from the standpoint of being able to tell a story through the match, Zenk was pretty darn credible. I watched the TV title match on Saturday Night against Arn Anderson with a couple of my non-fan friends at the time and even they were getting excited about that match (especially the finish). Now before you say it was all because of Arn, I contend that no "mediocre at best" wrestler could've done that or they would've been as excited about the rest of the show full of truly mediocre talent, and they weren't.
Also, this direct quote from your reply:
"If you listen to his continued self-promotion, you'd think he was the greatest wrestler in the history of the business and would have been a 20 time champion if he hadn't been held back."So you're still holding title belts as the hallmark of a great wrestler? By that token David Arquette is a great wrestler and Roddy Piper (who never held the world belt)is not. Vince Russo is a legend and Owen Hart (who never got the world belt) was mediocre.
And the interview quote also holds no water with me since Zenk was never given the time to do one. And when the odd chance would occur, he was told what to say and to play the "golly gee, my opponent sure is tough but I'll do my best" role by the guys in charge. Unlike these days in WCW, it was a sure way to get fired by going against the wishes of the bookers and cutting an unauthorized promo and you know it.
-------------------------------
How many titles has Ryder held?
Posted by Titantron on Dec-28-00 at 10:06 PM (EDT)I don't believe one has to be a former champion or ever a first class performer to be a wrestling pundit. How many titles have you held Mr Ryder?
While I don't percieve Tom Zenk to be a legend in the industry I value his opinions because he has been there and has seen not only the way he was treated but many others too.
That in itself obviously reflects the fact that his opinions have been valued and he has been given a platform to exhibit them.
Thank you.
------------------
Zenk raises legitimate questions over the sale of WCW
Posted by creachman on Dec-29-00 at 02:32 PM (EDT)I'll admit that neither I nor anyone else cared one whit about the
opinion of Tom Zenk as early as six months ago. I never thought much of his work in the ring. His interviews were less than stellar. There is nothing in his background to suggest that he should be viewed as some sort of visionary by today's fans.Having said that, I'd like you to ask yourself one question. Shouldn't the shareholders of AOL/Time-Warner be concerned that the company is about to be sold to a man whose management efforts obstensibly drove the company into the ground?
Isn't this situation akin to my taking a baseball bat to your car and
then asking you to sell it to me at a reduced price because it's
damaged?-----------------------
Ryder - it's not about WCW sale
Posted by BRyder on Dec-29-00 at 02:43 PM (EDT)I don't think there is anybody in the Time Warner organization that doesn't wish WCW was in the position they were in last August before Eric Bischoff was released. The projected losses were minimal, and managable. It's easy to blame Eric for this year's losses, but it's not fair to do so. He's the only man who ever managed the company to a profit, and there is a good probability that WCW wouldn't be looking at these kinds
of losses had he been allowed an opportunity to do the things he wanted to do last year.Say what you want about Eric Bischoff, but he is the only person ever to beat Vince McMahon...and he made money for the company while he was doing it. If you add up the balance sheet for profits and losses while Eric Bischoff was in charge of the company, you'll find a positive number.
As far as Tom Zenk goes....as I said earlier, my criticism of him has nothing to do with his comments about WCW. He's slammed virtually everyone involved with wrestling, including Arnold Skoaland.
My problem with Zenk is he appears to be an ego-maniac who was never a success while he was in the business and is trying to rewrite history by appearing on countless internet and radio shows.
Bob Ryder
-----------------------
WCW sale raises legitimate questions
Posted by creachman on Dec-29-00 at 06:46 PM (EDT)[The losses ] faced by WCW didn't magically appear after Bischoff left. Many of them were already in existence, it took the further mismanagement of Russo, Seigel and Russo to exacerbate them. Bischoff let the product get stale,
Bischoff was the one who put the focus on non-entities like Master P rather than building the mid-carders into top drawer talent. Bischoff didn't beat VKM. He was ahead of him for awhile, but he didn't beat him.Actually, I agree with you that Zenk is nothing more than a self serving loudmouth. However, I think he's raised a legitmate question re the proposed sale of the company to Bischoff.
----------------------
WCW, was at its highest point ever when Zenk wrestled there
Posted by wrestlinghistorian on Dec-29-00 at 10:03 PM (EDT)Someone above said Pillman was never pushed. What? His final days were complicated anyways, and I personally don't think anyone knows that full story. Young guys were a big part of those days in WCW anyways, like Sting, Steiners, Luger...plus veterans in their prime like Flair, Muta and Arn were still going full speed. Think back, this, being when Zenk wrestled in WCW, was the highest point WCW had ever been at. It all went downhill into the nineties, but before then WCW or NWA was at its highest point, no thanks to Zenk. Now IF Zenk really is so good, I guess 1wrestling had better go after people like Barry Horowitz, Scott Armstrong, and Rocky King and everyone else misused so we can get their superior opinions. According to Zenk, he and them should've been champs, right? Too bad, all that talent
wasted...Zenk was right.---------------
Ryder fails to refute Zenk's main points
Posted by JohnPetrucci on Dec-30-00 at 04:22 AM (EDT)
Funny how your quick to take shots at Zenk but you don't bother to refute any of the points Tom Zenk makes.
Let me ask you something Bob, what makes you so qualified to write a "Raw is Porn" column?
This is just another example of a paid shill trying to discredit the views of a guy who has paid his dues working in this business.
----------------------
Ryder replies - I am not a paid shill....
Posted by BRyder on Dec-30-00 at 12:51 PM (EDT)What makes me qualified to write about wrestling? That's one of the dumber questions anyone has asked in recent memory...but I'll give you the answer. I'm no more qualified than any other fan who has watched the business evolve since the mid 1960's. I'm no more qualified than the sports reporter for the New York Post that never played baseball but covers the Yankees. I'm no more qualified than a sportscaster who never played football but covers the Rams.
I'm also no less qualified than Dave Meltzer, Wade Keller, or anyone else that covers the business.
My qualifications are that I watch and observe and comment on what I see. If that's not good enough for you, I hope you apply the same standard to everyone else that covers a sport or business they have never participated in.
As far as the paid shill comment...if you are implying that my taking up for Vince McMahon and the WWF because of Zenk's repeated comments about them means that I'm paid by them...I'm not.
Bob Ryder
-------------------
Ryder contradicts himself
Posted by JohnPetrucci on Dec-30-00 at 02:12 PM (EDT)"It would easier to respect what [Zenk] says if he had any kind of a track record to prove that he's qualified to say the things he says." - Bob Ryder
"My qualifications are that I watch and observe and comment on what I see. If that's not good enough for you, I hope you apply the same standard to everyone else that covers a sport or business they have never participated in." - Bob Ryder
Well then Tom Zenk's qualifications are that he watches and observes and comments on what he says. If that no good enough for you Bob, I hope you apply the same standard to everyone else that covers a sport or business they *have* participated in.
---------------------
Ryder backtracks - Zenk 'entitled to his opinion'
Posted by BRyder on Dec-30-00 at 03:26 PM (EDT)Perhaps the wording of that sentence could have been better.
Having said that, I believe it would be easier to tolerate Zenk's
comments if they came across as sincere and constructive criticism. My observations have been that he has taken every opportunity to blast the entire business and almost everyone in it. By doing that, he comes across as bitter and jealous of the success that eluded him during his career.He's entitled to his opinion, and I'm entitled to criticize him for it.
Zenk does make some good points about some of the things he says. In fact, you'll find we agree on a lot of things he says. I also agree with some of the things that Phil Mushnick says...but I think he comes across as obsessive and bitter with his constant attacks on McMahon and the WWF. Zenk comes across the same way with his comments that he makes again and again and again and again and again.
Bob Ryder
---------------------------
Practice what you preach, Bob
Posted by BrokenTable on Jan-01-01 at 04:24 PM (EDT)"Perhaps the wording of that sentence could have been better. Having said that, I believe it would be easier to tolerate Zenk's comments if they came across as sincere and constructive criticism."
Having said that, Bob, wouldn't it stand to reason that we should take some of YOUR comments over the past year with a grain of salt?
For example, you've had a few columns this year where you really layed into Dave Meltzer of Wrestling Observer.com. His web-site is a clear competitor to yours. Wouldn't it stand to reason that you are not in a position to be "sincere and constructive" in your comments about him?
And you also are employed by WCW. Wouldn't it also stand to reason that your comments about the WWF are not always from the heart?
My point is, we all come to our criticism with a certain amount of bias. Zenk is no more innocent or guilty than you, I or anyone.
----------------
Look in the mirror Bob!
Posted by IraZimmerman on Dec-31-00 at 12:07 PM (EDT)
The business is totally perverted. Just look in the mirror.
Where is your defense of Madden's firing-and the obvious double standard that lets DDMe and Nash continually bring up Hall-and walk out of tapings-without any punishment at all?---------------------------
"Madden" was expendable
Posted by BRyder on Dec-31-00 at 01:17 PM (EDT)I consider Mark to be a friend. I hate to see anyone lose their job, especially a friend. I believe he made several errors in judgement in recent months that led to what ended up happening. I wish it hadn't happened, and wish things had been handled differently by everyone concerned...especially Mark.
The fact of the matter is, some people are more expendable than others. That may not be fair, but's it the way things work sometimes. You can't equate a Kevin Nash or a Scott Steiner or a Diamond Dallas Page to a Mark Madden.
I wish Mark was still with WCW. I also wish he had thicker skin and could take criticism better, and I wish he had responded better to instructions from management. We wouldn't even be having a discussion about the situation had he gotten the message management tried to deliver with the suspension he completed only a couple of weeks before his termination.
I hope things work out for Mark. I think he is very talented, and potentiall a very good color commentator. I wish him nothing but the best in the future.
Bob Ryder
------------------
Ryder is using Zenk-like arguments
Posted by dumi on Jan-02-01 at 07:46 AM (EDT)
"The fact of the matter is, some people are more expendable than others. That may not be fair, but's it the way things work sometimes. You can't equate a Kevin Nash or a Scott Steiner
or a Diamond Dallas Page to a Mark Madden."Sadly, this is probably a pretty accurate statement.
It's also a bit ironic though, because here you seem to be agreeing with the Zenk-like criticisms that the business really isn't about "fairness" or "equal treatment" -- it's about who you are (or who you know).
I know that Zenk's criticisms of the business differ in the details. Zenk's main axe to grind seems to be that there was an "old boy network" where wrestlers pushed their friends and children and did not let anyone else break through the glass ceiling -- while here we are talking about established stars and a new commentator being treated differently with different rules.
Having said that, the two situations do exist side by side along the same spectrum: the wrestling business, according to most objective observers, is not simply a completely fair business where rewards and punishments are given out purely on what you DO. There are other -- often political -- factors involved.
It's also HIGHLY ironic to see the expendability argument trotted out here because it seems it has been used to different effect in other commentary on this site. In other pieces of commentary, I've read where prominent wrestlers like Bill Goldberg should not be allowed to get away with inappropriate behavior simply because he is "not expendable" . . . that you have to tow the line with a certain set of rules . . . that towing this line and building a company on a set of solid principles is the way to succeed (and not simply by cow-towing to a set of prima donnas who think they can get away with anything.) Actually, I agree with this line of thinking . . . but I would also extend it to the present discussion as well.
Regarding Zenk, I've enjoyed listening to his interviews because he is funny and because he shoots from the hip. He's certainly right on about wrestling being political. At the same time, he seems to do the same "schtick" for each and every interview he gives and so it can be tiring to listen to more than one or two of them over a short period of time.
I wouldn't necessarily use the word "bitter" to describe him, though I do think that he is very confident in himself (some might say it borderlines on a type of arrogance at times -- as when he claims he can beat any of today's wrestlers in any sport) -- and this confidence or arrogance or whatever might be making him feel that he was MORE wronged than he actually was (if that makes any sense). Perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle, as is often the case.
--------------------
"Hey Bob"
Posted by McManiac on Dec-30-00 at 11:11 AM (EDT)..... If Tom Zenk was such a nobody in the wrestling business, then why are you giving him so much coverage?
-------------------
The most "over" tag team in WCW and split up for no reason
Posted by Mark2375 on Dec-30-00 at 11:32 AM (EDT)Okay, to the guy above with the comments about Pillman and his "push",or lack thereof. Apparently your memory does not recall to a time when Pillman and Zenk got taken out of the most "over" tag team in WCW and split up for no reason to basically become over paid job guys. It continued that way for quite a long time. Pillman finally got back on track when the balance of power shifted in WCW.
As for the ridiculous comment insinuating some comparison to Rocky King and Barry Horowitz, I don't even know where to start on that one. Ridiculous is the word for it and I'll leave it at that. But to go more in depth, Zenk had ring talent, mic skills and personality he was never allowed to use, and a good physique. Horowitz had ring skills and personality, but no physique. King had a good physique, but no ring skills or personality to speak of. So maybe if you combined King and Horowitz into one man your comparison would make sense. But alas , it does not.
---------------------
Uh, I do remember ...sort of
Posted by wrestlinghistorian on Dec-31-00 at 01:14 PM (EDT)I actually do remember when they were split up. They were in the company for how many months? And they were the US tag champs, belts that were trashed months after their reign. I also remember Pillman's feud with US champ Luger, and DQ wins over Flair. Back then, DQ's over the champ meant something big unlike now.
The stuff about Rocky King was a bit sarcastic, but you were supposed to understand that of all the misused jobbers in the history in westling, why is Zenk the best?--------------------
Ryder - 'I'll try to refrain from firing the first shot in the future.'
Posted by BRyder on Dec-30-00 at 12:45 PM (EDT)Part of what we do on 1Wrestling is comment on people who make news in the wrestling business. Tom Zenk certainly has made an effort to do that in the last few months with his appearances on various internet and radio shows. Ordinarily he wouldn't warrant comment....and I don't think many people had even mentioned his name in years....but all of these appearances, coming over such a short time span and the shots taken at almost everyone in the business warranted a comment.
As far as shots at the other reporters, those are usually defensive and in response to shots taken at me. I'll try to refrain from firing the first shot in the future.
Bob Ryder
--------------------------
"Bob Ryder/Tom Zenk and people who make no sense."
Posted by docawesome on Jan-02-01 at 00:19 AM (EDT)I've heard and read many criticisms of Bob lately about his take on Tom Zenk. The main criticism I've seen is that Bob has no right to criticize because he's never been in the ring. I recall the title to a thread that asked Bob "What gives you the right?" I have a couple thoughts on this.
If Bob has no right to have an opinion on Zenk and his bitterness, and he IS bitter, just read him once in awhile, then why are any of us on a messageboard? If Bob's got no right since he didn't wrestle, what gives the Hogan bashers (and he deserves bashing often) the right to be disgusted with his refusal to job? YOU'VE never been in the ring, so how dare you say Hogan should job (see the lack of commen sense?).
Here's another question. If you've never been a journalist, what right do you have to criticize Bob Ryder. YOU'VE never written a column, so how dare you offer an opinion on Bob's ability to write? You've never been in that situation. If you want to bash Bob for offering his opinion on Zenk, then you should at least offer him the same latitude you give yourself.
I know it's cool and the in thing to bash Bob for any opinion he has because he hasn't fallen at the feet of Vinnie weeping and begging for a touch from the blessed hand, but at least use a little commen sense when doing so and leave the hypocrisy somewhere else.Bob caught in his own contradictions
Posted by BrokenTable on Jan-02-01 at 08:25 PM (EDT)It is not the fact that Bob hasn't been in the ring that many of us are criticizing him for. We are criticizing him because he has once again caught himself in a series of contradictions.
Bob claimed in last weeks NFB that Tom Zenk's diatribes are of no merit because he was never a major player in either major company. It is fine, I suppose, to hold that opinion, however, it does seem a bit disingenuous coming from a person who writes a column of opinions about the wrestling business. Why are Bob's opinions valid, but Zenk's not? That is what bothers me personally.
Bob was in the wrong this time
Posted by Blitzkrieg on Jan-03-01 at 00:40 AM (EDT)But I think it was that Bob said Mr. Zenk had no right to go on radio shows and speak his opinion in which someone ELSE replied saying that would mean Bob doesn't have the right either. So in fact I think it was Bob who said the hypocritical (a word? I don't know but it is now) statements first and you seem to be spinning it into Mr. Ryder's favor.
Now I think Bob Ryder gets ALOT of unfair criticism and he actually has remained fairly unbiased and I love his website to death and I love the fact he got Blitzkrieg on WCW live TWICE. However in this case I think Bob said something he shouldn't or maybe even just mis-worded something but he was in the wrong.
'Bob, be serious. Game's over. You lose.'
Rage Of Angels Dec-29-00, 05:15 PM (EST)First of all, it is amusing seeing Ryder somewhat backtracking on Zenk. I am still waiting for Ryder to do a point by point response which proves Zenk wrong. Then again, I'm still waiting for Ryder to do the same with Dave Meltzer.
Secondly, I will be putting up an interesting post this weekend, regarding the truth of Bischoff's successes with WCW. I need to do some research going back to some old Observers and Torches, so it may not be up until Sunday night. Let's just say that Bischoff as savior of WCW is largely a myth, and at no time consistently did WCW ever beat the WWF other than TV ratings.
I find it amusing that Ryder is so transparently hitching his cart to Bischoff. I guess everything that has been said about the guy is true. He only cares about his own self, and not about the company that pays him.
Bob, be serious. Game's over. You lose.
----------------------
Why push Erik and Dustin over Zenk and Pillman?
Dec-29-00, 03:20 PM (EST)I still am not sure I understand Bob's point. Unless one has been a hugely successful wrestler one is completely unqualified to comment on the state of the business? If that is his point, shouldn't he shut down his own message boards and cease and desist writing his NFB column?
I always hate to bash Bob in a way, simply because it is so easy and everyone does it, but I get so frustrated when he uses his "attack the messenger not the message" method in argument and debate.
For example, Zenk in his various interviews has made note that younger wrestlers during the time he spent in WCW, were often not given the pushes they deserved. I'll be honest, I remember enough about Zenk's ability to not consider him necessarily deserving of the biggest push in the world during him time there.
But having said that, it is not as if he is the first critic in the history of mankind to allege that pushes in WCW are not based on merit. Zenk made a great point when he wondered why he and Pillman never got pushed to the same degree Dustin Rhodes and Eric Watts were. Did Bob intelligently defend why those two
less talented performers received a far stronger push than Pillman and Zenk. No, he just insulted Zenk. Logic being, if I can make Zenk look bad I don't have to refute his points in an articulate mannerThe ad hominum argument is as old as time and Bob uses it frequently. Remember when he got into it again with Meltzer a few months back. Meltzer did a meticulous, point by point counterargument to Bob and in return Bob responded with the ultraintelligent "Meltzer's shut his hotline down and cut the size of
his newsletter and his website has troubles".He really insults the intelligence of his readers with the blatant arse-kissing of Eric Bischoff. Does he really have so little respect for his readership that he doesn't believe they will see through his motives? I can just wait to see if Bischoff brings Russo back, we'll have a NFB saying, "Russo brought many new
creative innovative ideas to WCW, until S & P got in the way and cut off his legs. He was the man who helped define WWF Attitude, and WWF's low ratings on TNN show how sorely RUsso is missed"The more things change... plus ca meme chose
---------------------------
Ryder vs Voltaire
Janitor Dec-29-00, 02:39 PM (EST)
Ryder - "As far as Tom Zenk goes....as I said earlier, my criticism of him has nothing to do with his comments about WCW. He's slammed virtually everyone involved with wrestling, including Arnold Skoaland."
I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" probably was never uttered from Bob Ryder. It is my opinion that Bob Ryder does not understand everyone's right to an opinion, and he thinks that only Bob Ryder can hold a valuable thought.
Ryder - "My problem with Zenk is he appears to be an ego-maniac who was never a success while he was in the business and is trying to rewrite history by appearing on countless internet and radio shows."
Zenk had more success in the ring than you had. Your only known time in the ring was a terrible display .... Tank couldn't get you in the ring properly."
-------------------
Ryder IS a shill!!
EDGECRUSHER Dec-29-00, 02:52 PM (EST)
The perpetual Bischoff ass kissing begins. I guess a deal is very close. Can't wait for Jesus vs. Satan. I wonder what Ryder will say? "For all the talk of Satan being a bad guy, just look at his record. He DID Punish Hitler, while Jesus did nothing. So IMO, Satan is the wave of the future.".
IN MY OPINION, If you look in the Dictionary under "schill", you will find a picture of Bob Ryder. It will be easy to spot, because the page is saturated in greasy fat.
--------------------------
Zenk is funny
BobbyR Dec-29-00, 02:44 PM (EST)
"give Zenk credit"
I still don't agree with all he says, but the guy is funny
http://www.oocities.org/Colosseum/Arena/9893/bobslug.htm----------------------
Ryder slinks away ...
Rage Of Angels Dec-29-00, 05:32 PM (EST)Let me just say that Tom Zenk promoting our site is awesome. I haven't been around much the last week or so, and it was a pleasant surprise to see him pimp us so strongly.
And I'm sure it's caused a certain "follically-challenged" webmaster to slink further into depression, as well.
"Like I Always Say", Onward And Upward!
---------------------------
Everyone with an IQ over 30 ....
Liquid Snake Dec-30-00, 07:06 AM (EST)
Can I use edited quotes?
"Many smart fans have migrated to the site a1wrestling.com "Bob Barnett: "I urge everyone with an IQ over 30, to go to a1wrestling.com."
---------------------------
Zenk interview on a1wrestling.com
Janitor Dec-29-00, 10:57 PM (EST)
Tom Zenk has agreed to an interview for A1wrestling. I want really good questions for Tom ... I respect what he has to say, and I look forward to this opportunity.
Please post them here ...
Onward and upward.
----------------------------------
Zenk more qualified than Bob
BobbyR Dec-27-00, 06:47 PM (EST)But I agree with some of what Bob has to say. Of course Zenk has as much right to spout off as anyone, and you're right, he's more qualified than Bob (or me for that matter). But Zenk comes off as jealous and bitter to me, and I wish he would just go away.
---------------
A barrel of laffs
Xavier_Storm Dec-27-00, 07:35 PM (EST)I don't care if he's jealous or bitter. "Them thar enterviews is a barrel of laffs"
------------------------
Zenk - entertaining, insightful, and honest
Dylan Waco Dec-27-00, 09:51 PM (EST)
I have heard a few people say that about Zenk, but I don't see it. I honestly see nothing he says as even bordering on being jealous, and he doesn't seem as bitter as he just seems disgusted. He has said multiple times, that he didn't have the heart for the business that other guys have, so it's not like he is trying to say he had all the tools and should have gotten more. He understands to some degree what is going on in the wrestling business. it's definitely a partial act on his part, but it is entertaining, insightful, and honest from what i can tell.
-----------------------
Zenk - his open letter was dead on; his comedy makes you think
Rage Of Angels Dec-28-00, 06:11 PM (EST)I don't think Zenk is bitter at all.
As Dylan said, he admitted he wasn't the best out there and didn't have all the tools and most importantly, didn't have the heart or love for the business to stick it out.
Having said that, it in no way disqualifies his opinions as invalid.
Listen, go back to WCW circa 90-94. There are dozens who found themselves in the identical situation as Zenk, many who are long forgotten.
You have to admit, that most of what he says is backed up by analysis in the Torch and Observer, so it has credibility.
The guy has made a nice success of himself away from wrestling, so he's no idiot. His "Open Letter" (damn him for stealing my gimmick) on the Observer website was dead-on.
Look at Zenk this way. He obviously loved the lifestyle of a wrestler, just didn't agree with the politics. He certainly doesn't sound bitter to me. Frankly, he should be. He never really got the chance to sink or swim.
I liken his current notoriety to when a comedian uses previous life experiences (such as a bad job or marriage) to make you laugh, and also make you think.
Related reading - The Tom Zenk Forum from rspw (moderated)
