Not sure if this has already been posted, but I highly recommend the Jericho podcast with Omega from this week. Some may say it is “killing the business” but I’ll happily listen to two elite wrestlers discuss their match, or others and what goes right and wrong for hours. This stuff fascinates me. What we see on TV is one thing - what they go through to bring it to us is another. Both are awesome!
If you believe in Kayfabe, don’t listen. But they are so interesting. 5 Star episode.
Completely agree. A must listen show.
Definitely fascinating, gives me another reason to go back and watch the match. Also interesting to hear what Omega’s entrance was suppose to be and how NJ dropped the ball. I’d feel like an ass going out in that gear without the context. I can hear Cornette now “God damn exposing the business”
Yea, Cornette is definitely screaming that on his podcast which absolutely doesn’t expose the business at all 
Great TIJ episode, the Gedo impressions killed me
Really interesting, especially when they say that ‘so much went wrong’ in the match, but only they would ever know what and when.
This was one of my favorite episodes of the show in a long time, We’ve gotten Jericho’s and Callis’s take on how this all came together and now to hear Omega’s was just awesome. Obviously they didn’t want to pull back the curtain THAT much but this is one of the most open discussions on a match I’ve heard in some time.
I loved this episode. WWE network should look into exploring this more. I’d love to see a directors commentary of Hart v Austin or HBK v Taker.
I’m sure the “what went wrong” was referring to Red Shoes dropping the blade prior to the rope chair shot. Only noticed this on 2nd viewing though, didn’t takeaway from the match.i
This part had a little of that old-time “we’ve had 100 better matches than that on our house show loop back in '82” vibe. Though, as far as podcasts I’ve listened to this week, they were 1,000 times better than Brutus Beefcake on the Austin pod.
Edge and Christian did anatomy of a match with HBK and Foley…anyone still crying about kayfabe outside of its cinematic universe is just gloves on feet stupid at this point.
This is a common thing with wrestlers, they pick apart their matches and feel they never give the incredible showing they have. Some wrestlers feel they’ve only had a handful of “good” matches when they’ve actually been classics. Unless you’re Bret Hart who I’m sure feels he had tons of 5 star matches.
Every Bret Hart match was 5*…except his I Quit Match with Bob Backlund. …
Speaking of 5*…this being the official first of Jericho’s career is nothing short of insane…it shows Meltzers inherent bias towards Japanese wrestling and just reinforces that lame joke about the Tokyo dome adding extra stars.
Guess I’ll have to use my imagination…since no pics.
I hope that’s better, sweetie 
Thank you…that’s much better, I mean if you’re going to troll me…atleast put some effort into it.
Not to completely derail this thread, but I don’t get the big deal about Meltzer having a bias, perceived or actual. I agree that his ratings historically favor NJPW and that style, but I also don’t think there’s anything inherently wrong with that. “Pro wrestling” is such a broad term that it’s impossible for a single person issuing ratings for 20+ years for promotions across the world to possibly appease everyone.
I’ll admit that Meltzer has legitimacy as a guy that has seen a lot of wrestling and knows the business. I personally used his ratings when I first got the WWE Network as a guide to find great matches that I hadn’t seen. But to ultimately view his rating as anything other than the opinion of one person (even it that person is a bona fide “expert”) strikes me as just plain dumb. It’s not like the guy is giving 5 stars to shit matches or vice versa.
I agree. TBH, Opinions on Wrestling is like Opinions on music in that tastes vary and it is so subjective. In the eye of the beholder.
What I really like is seeing how MY opinions stack up against guys who cover Wrestling for a living and have seen way more than I and can put into context what I saw. Dave’s system rates matches in context to other matches in his own opinion.
It’s also one man’s opinion who has convinced alot of people that his subjective tastes is what constitutes what a great match is.
I also don’t know what his criteria is…if he explained what the story of the match that gets his highest and why it warranted such high praise like a movie critic does, I think that would be better.
Like when Bret Hart told the story of his match with Austin in kayfabe terms…he described his actions, why his character acted this way, why he was desperate enough to use this move or that move and son forth. …yeah I know he wrote the story of the match with Steve Austin but real critics can see a movie and give us the subtext of it.
I listened to it yesterday and it was a fantastic episode.