Let face it, we as a fandom are not perfect. In fact, we have a lot of issues. But for the most part, we're good in terms of fandom standards on discussing topics eloquently and without causing much of an argument for the most part. I've been a fan for about seven years now (I first discovered WWE from a video game back in 2009) and I've learned enough about wrestling to know that a lot of you guys are good people that can be good debaters and give out a good point. But every now and then, there's that one declaration or point that you just have to ask what their mindset was or if they can explain more on the point. Disclaimer: Out of respect for their privacy, i'm not going to reveal the names as to who made those claims. I'm not getting into any drama. With that out of the way, here are a few personal claims that continue to confuse me and maybe yourself as well: Claim I: "CM Punk killed wrestling": Remember that thread about C.M Punk and if the pipebomb ruined pro wrestling? Well, this was the quote that got me thinking about the idea. I know the person in question tried to explain why CM Punk allegedly destroyed all of wrestling, but the reasons he gave me don't really add up to me. Example: "He crossed the boundaries of reality and kayfabe" Of course he did, so did Steve Austin, Shawn Michaels, Triple H, The NWO, the list goes on and on. Everyone knows the story at this point, Vince told CM Punk that he had an open mic and told him to say whatever he wanted to say. So he did. It's 2017 and so far the wrestling business hasn't been killed yet, if anything; it's doing even better than it has been in years. Claim II: "Vince McMahon is a terrible genius" This one isn't as bad as the others for the most part, on one hand; there's actually a leg it stands on and to be fair there are some good points as to why. But the notion of Vince being a 'bad genius', to me at least is a little much. On his best days; he's a incredible promoter who had a few flaws in terms of booking and on his worst? Well...we've seen him at his worst. Basically, Vince McMahon is about as double edged as a double edged sword can get. Claim III: "Raw is 'dead'/the worst show on television" I've joked about this before, but I feel the need to talk about it again; because this one to me makes no sense. Raw is dead? In what way? Did USA cancel their contract? No. As far as I know, RAW's scheduled for tomorrow. Are they dead spiritually then? I can go on and on about the person who made this claim (i'm going to guess some of you know who i'm referring) and my personal problems with his analytical wrestling videos, but i'll save it for another time. (TL;DR: I'm not a big fan of them...his mashups are good though) For context on this, let me explain. This was just a few months into the brand split where SmackDown was beating RAW in terms of quality of shows every week and everyone was saying that the show was in the quality of NXT's hey-day. Basically, he was just another voice on their side. And a rather loud voice at that. Claim IV: "RAW today is worse than the dying days of WCW Nitro" (Rant incoming) ...No. Just no. If you are going to say at any point of it's time RAW was worse than what WCW was doing from 1999-2001, unless you give me a masterful essay on the subject, you lose all credibility with me; no discussion. I don't care if you are a professional wrestler, journalist, YouTuber, whatever. If your saying RAW or WWE in general is doing worse than WCW's dying days, you better have some damn good evidence to prove this. Even when WWE was at is lowest points ('94, '95, '02, '15, insert bad year for WWE here) it was still better than what was happening back in WCW. Now listen, am I saying that you shouldn't criticize WWE or RAW no matter what and suck it up whenever they give you something bad? No. You have as much a right to complain as anyone else, but if you're going to tell me that WWE or RAW in general is somehow worse than WCW when Vince Russo was handled things; i'm sorry, but that is just ridiculous. Claim V: "WWE needs a new competitor" This one is a bit of a paradox. I actually addressed this situation a year ago in another forum, (GreyDogSoftware, fantastic site, great people there too) but really Brian Zane explained it a lot better than I could ever dream of doing. TL;DR: The only way an actual competitor can come up is if someone decides to go head first into their audience and brings in casuals. And there aren't as many of them as there used to be. Plus, even if there WAS a competitor; it's not like they're going to be perfect either. Likely they'll have to deal with the same stuff that goes on in WWE, (Yes-men, writers, money, quality wrestlers, etc, etc) yes WWE was at it's peak when it was competition with WCW in the Monday Night Wars, but just because there's no competition; it doesn't mean WWE is bad again. (WWE goes through a lot of eras anyways, all of which have their good and bad points; at this point it's all about the ride) And finally, the last claim for me that would probably befuddle even the smartest of fans... Claim VI: "Vince McMahon is secretly a communist" Think about it for a moment, we've all heard the troubles with 50/50 booking, no character standing out, Cruiserweights and back in the day women being treated as inferior products, and so on and so forth. What if behind our backs, Vince McMahon was secretly continuing the trends that the Soviet Union once held many years ago? Shocking isn't it? Well, first off; it's not true, I made that one up. But that leads into my second point: If you're going to say something; think hard about what your going to say before actually doing so. Because if you don't, you'll end up saying something rather silly in front of an entire audience of people. And I don't think you'd want on your rep do you? But those are just a few of my personal pet peeves, you got any bizarre claims or statements you want to share?