Blake Trask Posted June 1, 2011 Posted June 1, 2011 - Just to clarify before I start this off. It isn't intended to be a rant or declaration that there is a gigantic flaw in the game or a demand this be changed. I'm certainly not saying that I think Adam is wrong about his own game's stats, lol. This is an observation and maybe a topic for discussion. This might be a bit specific for an entire topic and I apologise if this is retreading old ground, but I... well, I just can't seem to get over how terrible a worker Matty Faith is. I mean, I understand that not every new worker is a KC Glenn or a Tommy Cornell Jr or even a Jared Johnson, (or every second generation worker a Matt Keith, Greg Gauge, Lucy Stone-McFly or Gino Montero) but his skills just seem... terrible for who he is. I know he's a juicer and I can understand not being massively athletic or having high stamina or having epic charisma - I know that Christian Faith at his debut would not have been nearly as good a performance wrestler and that Faith's own top rows aren't exactly awesome. But, well... basics of 28? That's worse than some of the workers that went straight into wrestling from pole-dancing or backyard wrestling - it literally puts him amongst the worst workers in the game. Not only that, but if he's the "Spitting image of his dad" (and indeed his render looks very similar), how has that worked out as having star quality 64 points lower than Christian? It was always my understanding that star quality was 'the look' and if literally nothing else, it seems he should at least have that. What do others think? Should I not assume that second-generation = any talent whatsoever? Or is there a point somewhere that maybe Matty sucks... inordinately so?
20LEgend Posted June 1, 2011 Posted June 1, 2011 I particularly agree with the star quality stat being too low imo
Eidenhoek Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 He makes up fro Casey Valentine being...midcarder-ish. I also remarked in my 50 years ahead game that Matt Faith sucked hard (and I don't know why he was hired). Wait a second. Are you saying Matty Faith is worse than Big Smack Scott? *looks up* *headpotatopeeler* And BSS isn't that bad in the ring, apparently.
D-Lyrium Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 See Flair, David. As soon as I saw the topic title, before I even knew what the topic was going to say, this exact post entered into my mind.
JackKnifed72 Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 See Flair, David. Kelly Kiniski, Scott Putski, David Sammartino....Ted Dibiase Jr is drifting into this territory as well
ampulator Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 Kelly Kiniski, Scott Putski, David Sammartino....Ted Dibiase Jr is drifting into this territory as well I think comparing Ted Dibiase Jr. to David Flair is unfair to Dibiase Jr., and this is coming from a guy that thinks he lacks the necessary tools that his father had. But back on topic, Matty Faith is a David Flair. When was the last time you remember a successful son of a wrestler in wrestling? I'm not even talking about the same level of success. Te Von Erichs is the last time this happened, and I really don't think any of us what a repeat of von Erich incidents.
Gigas Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 I think comparing Ted Dibiase Jr. to David Flair is unfair to Dibiase Jr., and this is coming from a guy that thinks he lacks the necessary tools that his father had. But back on topic, Matty Faith is a David Flair. When was the last time you remember a successful son of a wrestler in wrestling? I'm not even talking about the same level of success. Te Von Erichs is the last time this happened, and I really don't think any of us what a repeat of von Erich incidents. Randy Orton?
lazorbeak Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 I think comparing Ted Dibiase Jr. to David Flair is unfair to Dibiase Jr., and this is coming from a guy that thinks he lacks the necessary tools that his father had. But back on topic, Matty Faith is a David Flair. When was the last time you remember a successful son of a wrestler in wrestling? I'm not even talking about the same level of success. Te Von Erichs is the last time this happened, and I really don't think any of us what a repeat of von Erich incidents. Cody Rhodes? Goldust?? THE ROCK?!? Also, Matty isn't trained and he's terrible in the ring. His star quality is so low in part because he looks like Christian Faith, but slightly off. It's the same reason Gillberg or any other wrestler whose career is based on impersonation generally has awful star quality because they look like cheap knock-offs. Matty hasn't tried to develop into his own thing, he's just an awful replica of Christian Faith.
DaMegaFish Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 I think comparing Ted Dibiase Jr. to David Flair is unfair to Dibiase Jr., and this is coming from a guy that thinks he lacks the necessary tools that his father had. But back on topic, Matty Faith is a David Flair. When was the last time you remember a successful son of a wrestler in wrestling? I'm not even talking about the same level of success. Te Von Erichs is the last time this happened, and I really don't think any of us what a repeat of von Erich incidents. Harts?
ampulator Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 Randy Orton? That's correct. I forgot about him... only because I forgot about Bob Orton. Oops. Harts? Only Owen and Bret... and well, I can't bear to think of them right now. Too much pain. I think you know what I mean. Cody Rhodes? Goldust?? THE ROCK?!? Sheesh, calm down. It's not that big of a deal. Goldust is an interesting example. In the sense of finding his own success, he completely got it. But in terms of living to Dusty's legacy, I would say no. Then again, I think it would have extremely hard, if not impossible, for him to do so. As for cody Rhodes, I like him, and I think he can be a bigger success... but the jury is still out on him. It's not that I WANT the jury to be still out on him, I'd rather it not be, but it is. As for the Rock, yes, you are correct.. but he never really depended on the legacy, as much e created his own. But again, you are correct. But please don't TYPE IN ALL CAPS. It's not that big of a deal. Besides, there as much as much as, probably more, examples of offspring not panning out.
lazorbeak Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 That's correct. I forgot about him... only because I forgot about Bob Orton. OOps. Sheesh, calm down. It's not that big of a deal. But please don't TYPE IN ALL CAPS. It's not that big of a deal. Besides, there as much as much as, probably more, examples of offspring not panning out. It's a rhetorical device designed to highlight the absurdity of what you said. In no way does it reflect anything else. Please learn to read context. More examples: BG James/Road Dogg, Brian Christopher, Alberto Del Rio, Mr. Perfect Curt Hennig, Dean Malenko, Jeff Jarrett, and the list goes on. Yes, maybe there's more examples of kids who weren't big success stories, but the ratio of 2nd generation successes is far greater than the average success rate. Even failures like David Flair and Erik Watts appeared on national TV and had far more opportunities than most.
Genadi Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 Anyone who's read the books Freakonomics and Super Freakonomics will probably find this thread amusing. The chapter about second generation baseball players covers alot of the discussion taking place here. If you haven't read them I highly recommend them. Also, no reason to start fighting. Don't make my next post.... "In before lock".
ampulator Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 Anyone who's read the books Freakonomics and Super Freakonomics will probably find this thread amusing. The chapter about second generation baseball players covers alot of the discussion taking place here. If you haven't read them I highly recommend them. Also, no reason to start fighting. Don't make my next post.... "In before lock". I've read both, and I can say this: Professional Wrestling isn't Pure Sports. Baseball is. Poor comparison. It's a rhetorical device designed to highlight the absurdity of what you said. In no way does it reflect anything else. Please learn to read context. Uh-huh sure. I forgot that it's impossible to underline, bold, or italicize text, because there is absolutely no way to do that.
Genadi Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 I've read both, and I can say this: Professional Wrestling isn't Pure Sports. Baseball is. Poor comparison. Baseball being a sport has very little to do with the chapter Amp, it focuses far more on the opportunities given and that open up for second gens. It definitely has relevance to wrestling and is a perfect comparison imo.
lazorbeak Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 Uh-huh sure. I forgot that it's impossible to underline, bold, or italicize text, because there is absolutely no way to do that. The point is, nobody's super excited and needs to calm down over this discussion, you just said something hilariously absurd and I chose to call attention to it.
ampulator Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 Baseball being a sport has very little to do with the chapter Amp, it focuses far more on the opportunities given and that open up for second gens. It definitely has relevance to wrestling and is a perfect comparison imo. I understand what you mean, but those opportunities don't necessarily apply to second generation offspring of wrestlers. The point is, nobody's super excited and needs to calm down over this discussion, you just said something hilariously absurd and I chose to call attention to it. Absurd? Maybe, maybe not. Hilarious? No. Hilariously absurd? Not really. You may be able to defend "absurd" but I can't see how "hilarious" it was.
Eidenhoek Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 Anyone who's read the books Freakonomics and Super Freakonomics will probably find this thread amusing. The chapter about second generation baseball players covers alot of the discussion taking place here. If you haven't read them I highly recommend them. Also, no reason to start fighting. Don't make my next post.... "In before lock". BEST BOOKS EVER. Seriously.
lazorbeak Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 I think comparing Ted Dibiase Jr. to David Flair is unfair to Dibiase Jr., and this is coming from a guy that thinks he lacks the necessary tools that his father had. But back on topic, Matty Faith is a David Flair. When was the last time you remember a successful son of a wrestler in wrestling? I'm not even talking about the same level of success. Te Von Erichs is the last time this happened, and I really don't think any of us what a repeat of von Erich incidents. The Guerreros, Luna Vachon, Ted DiBiase, Sr., Greg Valentine, The Colons....
ampulator Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 The Guerreros, Luna Vachon, Ted DiBiase, Sr., Greg Valentine, The Colons.... I thought you already answered the question? Didn't I already implicilty conceded that? Are you so obsessed to being right?Calm down. Your obsession with being right is eccentric and weird.
ampulator Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 Jesus christ. You win, I lose. Calm the heck down. Coming from a guy that takes things seriously (many say too seriously), I think you need to lighten up.
Genadi Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 BEST BOOKS EVER. Seriously. I think I've recommended and lent them to more people than any other, maybe next to "Have A Nice Day"
pauls07 Posted June 2, 2011 Posted June 2, 2011 i actually dont mind that he sux, there is only 1 Christan Faith but i would like his star quality to be a bit higher
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.