An opinion of yours about wrestling that 75% of the members of this board wouldn't share

[Psykohurricane55]

Somebody started a thread like this on another wrestling board and it at seem to be a super popular topic. So I thought it would be nice to bring this thread over to this board.


So here are the rules:

OK, lots of topics to choose from here such as your favorite wrestler is ____, your opinion that so and so (popular wrestler that most like) isn’t ‘all that’, or you dug a storyline that most didn’t, etc. etc.

Only criteria:

1. YOU actually do have that opinion.
2. You’re fairly certain that at least 75% of wrestling fans would not share that same opinion.
3. Respect those ‘other’ opinions (I suppose I’m picturing Cartman admonishing the violators of this rule).

 

[ABMorales787]

My Opinion: ROH Is A Pretty Bad Promotion

My Explanation: For years I've heard of ROH. Whether its underrated work rate or storytelling. I have seen the promotion regularly since 2015. What I see is a very conformist promotion that leans far too much on the rising popularity of NJPW (and recently of CMLL) to drive it's ticket sales rather than bothering with creating a circle of compelling characters and stories. Despite having high level acts like Jay Lethal, Dalton Castle, The Briscoes, Marty Scurll and more, we hardly ever see much range or character development regarding them. This also tends to extend to wrestling matches too. The best example being the Young Buck who have been having brilliant psychological matches in NJPW but still retain their "ironic" wrestling style in ROH. It's almost a metaphor for how the company doesn't really try to expand. It just settles for what it has. This even extends to their new (as in it's been there for 2 years but they don't bother promoting) WOH division where their wrestlers are hardly established outside of "She did this thing somewhere else".

You can point to the likes of Jay Lethal and Matt Taven as two guys who have managed to evolve, but just look at the pace. How long did it take Jay Lethal to finally regain that title and redeem himself after losing it years ago? How about Matt Taven's own evolution based on one World title match he had so long ago? You can see so many companies that offer so much more growth in much less time like PROGRESS, NJPW, even Impact now has hit it's stride with it. But ROH just settles. It is not a good promotion and it's its own fault as to why it can't go past 2,000 people unless they have NJPW and the Bullet Club.

 

[Malefic Messiah]

Guy's who offer very little in the ring but are good on the mic and have "the look" are not particularly interesting to me.

 

[FromGlasgowScotland]

I like the history of TNA, Over the past few years I have only heard negative comments about TNA. I admit it wasn't perfect but maybe 5 or 6 years ago I felt it was better than WWE. It was far from my favourite of all time but at the time I felt it was the best wrestling we had. Just looking at the WWE roster now and seeing how many TNA guys is here shows they must have been doing something right, AJ Styles for example didn't just become good in WWE he had over 10 years of great matches in TNA that gets overlooked.
also I'm a fan of Hulk Hogan who I don't think is very popular on here.

 

[JoeMallard]

Impact is superior to Monday Night Raw. Raw is Bore and it's the worst wrestling show on tv.

 

[Trance Metaphor]

Roman Reigns is good. No, I'm not just saying this out of sympathy because of his recent leukemia disclosure. I was a Roman Reigns fan since he debuted with the Shield and every match that he's had since parting ways with the Shield has been good with some duds here and there. He's not boring. He's not particularly exciting either. But, he has the look and the moves and doesn't come off as corny like John Cena. He has non-intimidated bad-ass vibes when he enters the ring and when he competes. He's decent on the mic and I usually like the content of what he says to his opponents. His matches against Daniel Bryan and AJ Styles were great. Even his matches against Randy Orton, Triple H, Undertaker and John Cena were all good. While I understand that people hate his character because he was force-fed instead of being organically developed, I don't share that reason. I think he got plenty of time to start over again and he took a lot of losses to opponents that surprised me (ex. Finn Balor, Samoa Joe, Bobby Lashley). People just never gave him a second or third chance after his initial singles run as WWE Champion. There just isn't another face wrestler of his build and attributes that just goes straight for the jugular with a no-nonsense attitude while still saying some savage truths (despite it all being a scripted show). Maybe it's just easier to relate with a dude that expresses the sentiments of how I feel about other wrestlers in the WWE. AJ Styles is probably the only other guy like that.

 

[Bookerkingston]

BROCK LESNAR
I love his repetitive SUPLEX SUPLEX SUPLEX F5 F5 F5 fight tactics. Brock doesn't try to use a dozen moves or more he just goes out to seek and destroy. However he'll lock a submission on once in a while or take the gloves off and bust your head open if he gets pissed off enough. He's a freak athlete and he's legit.

I loved his year+ long title run and I hope the one that started at Crown Jewel lasts for over another year. Whenever he does eventually drop the title again, I hope that it's not a clean loss. Yes it would be cool if he showed up a bit more often but it just makes it feel more special when he does show up. He just brings a different feeling to the show that nobody else has.

 

[Aquaman6686]

My Opinion: WWE cannot survive long-term without the Brand Extension.

The roster is simply too big, too full of people to make a one roster WWE viable. The company absolutely needs two rosters, separate championships, and more focus on separation. I think getting rid of brand-exclusive PPVs again was a HUGE mistake, just like it was the first time. The more strictly enforced the BE is, the better the product is. WWE also needs to go back to the Draft format, not the ridiculous and idiotic "Shakeup".

 

[Sammi]

PG Era is the best era in Pro Wrestling history.

The matches,the promos the feuds are much better now than it have ever been. I prefer Cena over Rock and Hogan, Punk over Austin, Bryan over Angle and Benoit, Shield over NWO. New Day over DX. Ambrose over Foley. Rollins over HBK. Reigns over Nash and Goldberg. Jericho and Kane had their best runs in the PG Era. Undertaker best matches happen late in his career. Brands like NXT,205,NXT UK. Crusierweight Classic, Mae Young. The WWE Network with all their amazing content.

 

[d_henderson1810]

I have had many opinions which have caused a lot of heat over the years, and are shared by few on this board.

- "Stone Cold" Steve Austin was wrong to walk out those times in his career, even if his reasons were justified. He let down his fans by dealing with it that way, and he has even admitted on his podcast that he was stubborn and acted wrongly in those situations. I also think that Austin should be condemned more for his treatment of women.

I also thought that Austin's heel turn in 2001 was brilliant, and refreshed his stale character.

-I felt that how the fans acted during the RR match in 2014 was disgusting. WWE never promised or promoted Daniel Bryan being in the Rumble match, yet the fans demanded it. It was especially appalling how Rey Mysterio got booed at No. 30.

I think that Vince McMahon knows what he is doing better than the fans, and that wrestling fans aren't the be-all and end-all and shouldn't always be listened and catered to.

- I feel like established guys who have paid their dues are better than flippity-flip guys who haven't proven anything.

- I think NXT is overrated. It is important to developing and showcasing new talent, but the hype all the stars get down there is over-the-top, and done just to stick it to Vince's product.

-I think Vince McMahon is a genius and visionary who saw where the business was going, and did what he had to, to capitalize on it, and that his ideas should be listened and respected by the fanbase more.

-I think critics on this board should love it or leave it. What I mean is, not that you can't have criticisms, but that only saying bad things about the product, while still watching it, is ludicrious to me. if you don't like it anymore, walk away until you do like it again.

- I think people like Shinsuke Nakamura got pushed too soon. He had a WWE Title shot three months after joining the main roster, and then again against Styles this year. I was proven right, as now Shinsuke rarely gets on TV, and is now a mid-carder, instead of building him slowly and have him climb to the top gradually.

-I prefer the Golden Era to the Attitude Era.

-I think Hulk Hogan is being unfairly vilified. He said poor things, but it was in his own home, and his conversation was illegally taped and sold. Imagine if what you said in the privacy of your own home was made publicly available.

-I think that Chris Benoit committed his crimes because of 'roid rage, not concussion. The concussion thing doesn't make sense on its own, as others have had it, and not done what he did. I think that maybe a combination of his deteriorated brain and his years of steroid abuse created a perfect and tragic storm.

I also still hold that, while it is most likely Benoit killed his family, I still think that the Atlanta police botched the investigation, that they should have interrogated Kevin Sullivan, and that there is a possibility, even a .0000000001 percent chance that the case will be reopened due to new evidence, and Benoit may be exonerated.

Also, I see a distinction between Benoit the wrestler and Benoit the killer, and am not the least bit phased still watching his matches on the Network.

-I think John Cena and Roman Reigns have been unfairly treated by the fans over the years, for simply accepting positions on the card that Vince put them in. Since not one critic has ever accused Cena or Reigns of "politicking" or refusing to do the job or refusing to fight certain people and putting them over, then they are unfairly blamed for the decisions that others made for them.

- I think Jim Cornette needs to shut his mouth forever, and crawl back into the irrelevant hole he crawled out of.

-I think that C.M. Punk and Bret Hart are ungrateful, and should get over themselves and their entitlement. They would be nothing if Vince hadn't pushed them as stars.

I'll post more when I think of more.

 

[therockiswwf]

I think that Chris Benoit committed his crimes because of 'roid rage, not concussion. The concussion thing doesn't make sense on its own, as others have had it, and not done what he did. I think that maybe a combination of his deteriorated brain and his years of steroid abuse created a perfect and tragic storm.

I also still hold that, while it is most likely Benoit killed his family, I still think that the Atlanta police botched the investigation, that they should have interrogated Kevin Sullivan, and that there is a possibility, even a .0000000001 percent chance that the case will be reopened due to new evidence, and Benoit may be exonerated.

This isn't an opinion. You can argue whether you find John Cena entertaining or not. That's an opinion. This is you literally being wrong. Like saying others have had concussions and not done what he did. That's a lie. Chris Nowinski said that Benoit's actions were consistent with other people who had multiple, severe concussions. He talked about a football player that killed his wife (just one example he gave). Had brain damage like Benoit. You and I are not smarter than Nowinski.

Roid rage does not last long and certainly does not last over a weekend. Doctors aren't even 100% sure it's a thing.

Not all concussions are the same and different things will happen depending on the concussion. Aaron Hernandez showed serious behavioral problems and killed someone/himself due to concussions. Junior Seau killed himself due to concussions. Mick Foley stated he has had some problems due to his concussions. CM Punk has had multiple yet not publicly stated any damage from his concussions. It differs but there is one obvious thing. Someone with severe repeated concussions would have brain damage. That would cause irregular behavior and actions.

Chris Benoit 100% did it. 100% concussion related. There is no new evidence. Stop it. I don't get why it is so hard for you to accept that Benoit did it and concussions perfectly explain why.

 

[Joseph718YaHurd]

Opinion - Eddie Guerrero mastered the Art of Wrestling. That man could hold the crowd in the palm of his hands and could turn it up at a moment's notice. He could be the Beloved baby face that everyone loved and adored, or he could play a sadistic , narcissistic heel on the verge of insanity , it was very convincing ... I have never seen anyone emulate such a character since ... Maybe only Chris Jericho Post Shawn Michael's attack. Eddie Guerrero was my favorite of all time and when he turned Heel , he actually kinda creeped me out with his facial expressions alone ... I legit thought he was going through something in life which is crazy to think when it comes to wrestling.

And , it is also in my opinion, had he not passed away , Chris Benoit would have never killed his family , and there would be no Wellness Policy because tbh, I don't think the WWE cared for their employees ( or should I say " contractors " ) up until that point . Also , The wellness policy is a sham and Brock Lesnar is Juiced to the Gills !! He can barely move in the ring at times it's really hard to watch .

 

[jpickens]

The attitude era when looking back wasn't all that great sure you had some good matches between the profanity laced promos and interviews, short matches that ended in free for alls, storylines and segments that borderlines softcore porn.

 

[Dave]

Dean Ambrose is not a good wrestler...

I've said this for a long time but I do feel as though it's time to go over it again. Dean Ambrose is not a good wrestler, in the technical term anyway. He seems to have a massive following in wrestling and people really appreciate him for the role he plays. But when you put him in the ring with grapples who know how to wrestle, he looks like an amateur.

And I get that he is a striker more than anything but when was the last time you seen him put someone in a Submission? Genuinely, his matches are made up of strikes, more strikes and then a DDT to finish - it's appalling. Moreover, it bores the hell out of me.

 

[d_henderson1810]

This isn't an opinion. You can argue whether you find John Cena entertaining or not. That's an opinion. This is you literally being wrong. Like saying others have had concussions and not done what he did. That's a lie. Chris Nowinski said that Benoit's actions were consistent with other people who had multiple, severe concussions. He talked about a football player that killed his wife (just one example he gave). Had brain damage like Benoit. You and I are not smarter than Nowinski.

Roid rage does not last long and certainly does not last over a weekend. Doctors aren't even 100% sure it's a thing.

Not all concussions are the same and different things will happen depending on the concussion. Aaron Hernandez showed serious behavioral problems and killed someone/himself due to concussions. Junior Seau killed himself due to concussions. Mick Foley stated he has had some problems due to his concussions. CM Punk has had multiple yet not publicly stated any damage from his concussions. It differs but there is one obvious thing. Someone with severe repeated concussions would have brain damage. That would cause irregular behavior and actions.

Chris Benoit 100% did it. 100% concussion related. There is no new evidence. Stop it. I don't get why it is so hard for you to accept that Benoit did it and concussions perfectly explain why.

Actually, it IS opinion.

No-one, and I mean NO-ONE can say for certain what happened at that house that weekend, except one person, and he took that to his grave.

Chris Nowinski is making a SCIENTIFIC opinion. A lot of what he says he can test, but it still is not 100% proof, because of what we don't know about the incident.

Benoit did have a stuffed brain, but how do we know that it was his stuffed brain that caused him to kill Nancy and Daniel? It might be a totally different reason, and his brain had little to do with it.

We don't know what Benoit's motivation was, or what was going through his mind at the time. Only he did(and even then, he might not know why he did it). Our best guess is concussion, but you can't be 100% sure.

Also, as to Benoit's guilt, the people who determined this was the Atlanta police. Now, there were no witnesses, no-one who is alive who can say what happened, and everyone involved in the murder is dead. Someone is innocent until PROVEN guilty in a court of law. The police have to make a determination so that they can close the case, and they are probably right, but no-one can say 100% for sure what happened.

If Benoit had lived, he would be tried before a court. The police could put forward their evidence, Benoit's defense would test it. In the end, the court would decide Benoit's guilt or not. Since he is dead, the police have made the determination, but if police were the final arbitors, then how do you explain when there are cases where they have charged someone, that person went to jail, and years later they are then acquitted when new evidence emerged. The police didn't even find Benoit's diary until after already deciding that he did it.

Due to lack of any other evidence, what you are going by are Chris Nowinski's scientific OPINION, and the Atlanta police's OPINION of who committed the crime. Someone has to determine these things, because we don't have the person who would best know alive to tell us, and these people are probably better placed to do it than most of us. But in the end, it is all speculation and opinion. What the facts were died in that house when Chris Benoit killed himself.

So, in the end, this is all still opinion. You hold to the popular view, I refuted it (which is what this thread is about, "an opinion of yours that 75% of people don't share"). You put all your faith in science and police work, and that is your right. But it is arrogant to say that it is 100% fact unless you actually saw Chris Benoit actually murder Nancy and Daniel.

 

[d_henderson1810]

The attitude era when looking back wasn't all that great sure you had some good matches between the profanity laced promos and interviews, short matches that ended in free for alls, storylines and segments that borderlines softcore porn.

 

[d_henderson1810]

I agree!

During the Attitude Era, we had Mark Henry father a hand, and a lot of silly segments.

It had some of the most useless factions in wrestling history (e.g. the Truth Commission, Los Boricous, Disciples Of Apocalypse etc. Even NOD got stupid once they added a white Owen Hart to the faction).

Also, aside from the top-tier guys (Austin, Rock, Triple H) most of the talent in the ring was poor, and the undercard was forgettable.

I also hated the Ministry angle, and found it religiously offensive. More than that though, the Undertaker was clearly in pain, and had his worst matches in the ring during this period (apparently. Taker hated doing the angle, because he was getting weirdos bothering him all the time).

 

[therockiswwf]

Actually, it IS opinion.

Nope. It is not an opinion. You said no one else had done what Benoit did with concussions. Which is factually wrong. So it's a lie.

No-one, and I mean NO-ONE can say for certain what happened at that house that weekend, except one person, and he took that to his grave.

If this is what you need for proof, then no one would ever be convicted of anything.

Chris Nowinski is making a SCIENTIFIC opinion. A lot of what he says he can test, but it still is not 100% proof, because of what we don't know about the incident.

Oh yeah, just a complete coincidence his brain was damaged and 100% acted like the other people who had it as bad as he did. Again, Nowinski is smarter than you and I.

Benoit did have a stuffed brain, but how do we know that it was his stuffed brain that caused him to kill Nancy and Daniel? It might be a totally different reason, and his brain had little to do with it.

Did...did you just say Benoit's brain, which controls everything he does, had little to do with it? So he tied up Nancy and killed her during a brain fart? Are you insane?

We don't know what Benoit's motivation was, or what was going through his mind at the time. Only he did(and even then, he might not know why he did it). Our best guess is concussion, but you can't be 100% sure.

His motivation was his brain was going haywire. We know that it was.

Also, as to Benoit's guilt, the people who determined this was the Atlanta police. Now, there were no witnesses, no-one who is alive who can say what happened, and everyone involved in the murder is dead. Someone is innocent until PROVEN guilty in a court of law. The police have to make a determination so that they can close the case, and they are probably right, but no-one can say 100% for sure what happened.

Yeah sure and OJ is innocent. Just ignore all the evidence and you'll find there's no evidence.

If Benoit had lived, he would be tried before a court. The police could put forward their evidence, Benoit's defense would test it. In the end, the court would decide Benoit's guilt or not. Since he is dead, the police have made the determination, but if police were the final arbiters, then how do you explain when there are cases where they have charged someone, that person went to jail, and years later they are then acquitted when new evidence emerged. The police didn't even find Benoit's diary until after already deciding that he did it.

Wow, so the police decided Benoit did it. Then found a diary...which didn't change their mind. Great. OJ was found not guilty. It is a fact he did it. Everyone knows it. You cannot have an opinion he didn't because he did. Opinions can be factually wrong. You said no one else acted like Benoit. That was wrong. 100% wrong.

Those cases that are overturned are usually via DNA tests that weren't available at the time. We had DNA tests in 2007.

Due to lack of any other evidence, what you are going by are Chris Nowinski's scientific OPINION, and the Atlanta police's OPINION of who committed the crime. Someone has to determine these things, because we don't have the person who would best know alive to tell us, and these people are probably better placed to do it than most of us. But in the end, it is all speculation and opinion. What the facts were died in that house when Chris Benoit killed himself.

Nowinski graduated from Harvard. He's an expert on concussions. He is smarter than us. It isn't an opinion. Benoit walked like a duck and quacked like a duck.

So, in the end, this is all still opinion. You hold to the popular view, I refuted it (which is what this thread is about, "an opinion of yours that 75% of people don't share"). You put all your faith in science and police work, and that is your right. But it is arrogant to say that it is 100% fact unless you actually saw Chris Benoit actually murder Nancy and Daniel.

I saw you put that you are religious. How? You can't see god. So by your logic, you are arrogant to believe in god. Why stop there? You can't see air. How do we know air is real? Can't see wind either. We don't need to see Benoit murder people to know he did. We know the reason. We know it's consistent with how people with major concussions behaved. Nancy's sister talked about how Chris' personality slowly changed from rational to paranoid. He would lash out more. Had behavioral issues.

I trust science because science is real.

Benoit 100% did it. I don't know why you desperately try to cling that he didn't. It's weird.

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

It's hard to gauge what the consensus is on a certain opinion but I guess this is a very safe one.

Trish Stratus isn't an all team great female superstar.

Now don't get me wrong I think she's good but she was only in the WWE for 6 years.
Almost 2 years she was a basically made into a sex object, when she started wrestling in late 2001 she was actually ok in the ring nothing special but her mic work wasn't good. I think she started figured out her mic work by 2004 and her in ring skills improved tremendously a year later. I think if she stuck around another 3 to 5 more years she would be considered an all time great. Problem was we only got 1 to 2 years of Trish at her best so it wasn't really a large enough sample size to cement her legacy as one of the great.

 

[TheLoneCharles]

I’ve been a fan since late 1991 and have some controversial opinions that easily fit this bill.

1) Diesel’s 1995 title run was masterful including how he eventually lost it. He was good enough in the ring and I enjoyed his matches.

2) Vanilla midgets killed wrestling. I’m a small guy myself, I want to see larger than life personalities that look like they can beat you up in a fight. Not a guy that looks like someone even I think I could win a fight against. That’s why there are no draws.

3) If poor writing and overpushing 1 or 2 guys is the iceberg that is sinking the WWE, the fans are the icy waters that finish off the survivors. The constant fan whining is a huge downer and entitled to have an entire 3 hour show catered to their every want.

4) Until Becky caught fire, women’s matches are still my bathroom break and couldn’t care less about them.

5) Vince Russo had crazy ideas but deserves a place in wrestling. Why does every promotion have to take themselves so seriously? I wouldn’t mind an alternative where the main event is a Judy bagwell on a pole match.

 

[d_henderson1810]

Nope. It is not an opinion. You said no one else had done what Benoit did with concussions. Which is factually wrong. So it's a lie.



If this is what you need for proof, then no one would ever be convicted of anything.



Oh yeah, just a complete coincidence his brain was damaged and 100% acted like the other people who had it as bad as he did. Again, Nowinski is smarter than you and I.



Did...did you just say Benoit's brain, which controls everything he does, had little to do with it? So he tied up Nancy and killed her during a brain fart? Are you insane?



His motivation was his brain was going haywire. We know that it was.



Yeah sure and OJ is innocent. Just ignore all the evidence and you'll find there's no evidence.



Wow, so the police decided Benoit did it. Then found a diary...which didn't change their mind. Great. OJ was found not guilty. It is a fact he did it. Everyone knows it. You cannot have an opinion he didn't because he did. Opinions can be factually wrong. You said no one else acted like Benoit. That was wrong. 100% wrong.

Those cases that are overturned are usually via DNA tests that weren't available at the time. We had DNA tests in 2007.



Nowinski graduated from Harvard. He's an expert on concussions. He is smarter than us. It isn't an opinion. Benoit walked like a duck and quacked like a duck.



I saw you put that you are religious. How? You can't see god. So by your logic, you are arrogant to believe in god. Why stop there? You can't see air. How do we know air is real? Can't see wind either. We don't need to see Benoit murder people to know he did. We know the reason. We know it's consistent with how people with major concussions behaved. Nancy's sister talked about how Chris' personality slowly changed from rational to paranoid. He would lash out more. Had behavioral issues.

I trust science because science is real.

Benoit 100% did it. I don't know why you desperately try to cling that he didn't. It's weird.

Here are some things that ARE facts:-

-Others may have done what Benoit did with concussions, but it is also fact that others haven't. Just because you have had multiple concussions doesn't mean that you will ever murder anyone, otherwise Mick Foley's wife and children should be worried.

Also, his brain was described like that of someone with "dementia". Fact- there are plenty of people with dementia who don't kill people.

So, can you say for sure that it was the condition of his brain (and NOTHING ELSE) which caused him to act out? Can you say that there couldn't be other factors involved as well, which wouldn't have come up in a scientific investigation.

Here's a question. What was Benoit's motive? Why did he do it when he did it to who he did it too. I think there must be more to it than his brain, otherwise he would have done it some other time.

Also, if his brain was SO bad, then how come a week before the murders, he was still wrestling matches, and there was little noticeable difference in his ringwork. Someone with a stuffed brain couldn't function, feed themselves, even walk, yet he could wrestle matches. No-one said that there was something "off" about Benoit when he was around people who saw him every day (as in, his fellow wrestlers in WWE). He spent more time with them than anyone, and even his closest friends were surprised that he did it. He wasn't in a wheelchair and drooling.

Someone with such a stuffed brain wouldn't be capable of doing basic, everyday tasks, let alone murder two people and then fashion a pulley on his exercise machine in such a fashion that it would pull him up and kill him (which involves a knowledge of physics, something I doubt that someone who could barely remember his name (which is what happens with dementia) would be capable of.

You say that his brain had gone haywire, yet you also claim he tied up Nancy. Wouldn't his brain make it LESS likely that he could carry out two murders in such a callous, cruel way, rather than more? An act like that smacks of hatred rather than someone who can't control themselves.

And on that, by saying that concussion did it, you are making excuses for his actions. You are saying that he isn't at fault for what he did, because he couldn't help it. This is a defense lawyers use all the time to get their client off, by claiming mental illness and not holding the person to account for their own choices and actions.

I believe that the Atlanta police themselves said it was "roid rage".

Do you know who benefits most from it being "concussion"- Vince McMahon. The media said it was roid rage, and so did the police, and Vince denied this, as it would mean that his Wellness policy is a joke. Benoit failed Wellness three times, but was given a new contract by WWE, because TNA wanted to sign Benoit the moment he came out of contract. If it was roid rage, as per the original reason, then Vince is in trouble, considering that he almost went to jail in the 90's for his involvement in WWE's drug culture at the time. Vince would prefer it to be concussion, as roid rage would then make him negligent as well.

"Benoit walked like a duck, and quacked like a duck".

So, you knew that Benoit had this in him early on, did you? Do you mean that you weren't surprised when it happened?

Most others were shocked and didn't pick it. Benoit talked glowingly of his son many times. Even his closest friends didn't believe it at the time, yet you saw it in him. If that isn't what you meant, explain.

Fact- Scientists have been wrong in the past. Some scientists once thought that the earth was flat, until Christopher Columbus proved otherwise. Scientists change and learn new things all the time, and sometimes, even they can get it wrong.

A court of law found O.J. "not guilty". I think O.J. did do it as well, but it doesn't matter, because it is the courts that decide these things. Otherwise, you will end up having things like the Salem trials for witches, where the people just burn others at the stake, without proof. The courts are meant to be the final arbitor, and if you don't accept their verdict (even if you don't agree with it) then public opinion will be the decider, and that won't be a good thing.

Court cases presents FACTS in the case. Benoit didn't have a trial, because he was dead. So, he didn't officially get tried and convicted in a court of law.

If the police were the final arbitors, then what about times where people have been wrongly arrested and convicted? Some people have been given the death penalty, only for years later, advancements in science (which you believe in so vehemently) like DNA are used, and the person is found to be innocent instead. It isn't the police's job to determine the final verdict, just to build a case, arrest someone, and then present their case to a jury.

I have read mountains of material on the case, both when it happened and now, and there are still a lot of unanswered questions, a lot of pieces missing to the puzzle, and only one person who witnessed the whole thing, Chris Benoit, and we will never know from him.

The only other way we could have got all the answers is if Benoit stood trial. We would hear from the police, Nowinski, and Benoit's defence. We would get a better picture from that weekend.

But you keep believing what you want to believe. You keep thinking that fallable scientists and police can never get it wrong.

In the end, I stated what was MY opinion. I can't say facts, because no-one knows all the facts, except that Chris, Nancy and Daniel Benoit are dead. Anything else is speculation. Also, if I am stating an opinion, I think you saying that you KNOW what happened when you weren't there, and didn't witness it, or the evidence hasn't been tested, makes you an arrogant turd.

 

[therockiswwf]

Here are some things that ARE facts:-

-Others may have done what Benoit did with concussions, but it is also fact that others haven't. Just because you have had multiple concussions doesn't mean that you will ever murder anyone, otherwise Mick Foley's wife and children should be worried.

Fact: Not all concussions are the same. Different areas of the brain will be damaged. Causes different reactions. But there are consistencies across multiple, severe concussions.

Also, his brain was described like that of someone with "dementia". Fact- there are plenty of people with dementia who don't kill people.

Fact: Like dementia doesn't mean dementia. It meant his brain had severe damage. Dementia also causes brain damage. So it's like dementia. Keyword being LIKE.

So, can you say for sure that it was the condition of his brain (and NOTHING ELSE) which caused him to act out? Can you say that there couldn't be other factors involved as well, which wouldn't have come up in a scientific investigation.

Yes.

Here's a question. What was Benoit's motive? Why did he do it when he did it to who he did it too. I think there must be more to it than his brain, otherwise he would have done it some other time.

His brain went haywire. That's why. He didn't have actual motivation, he was nuts due to his brain.

Some other time? So you're saying if Benoit was insane, he would have murdered at a more rational time? What?

Also, if his brain was SO bad, then how come a week before the murders, he was still wrestling matches, and there was little noticeable difference in his ringwork. Someone with a stuffed brain couldn't function, feed themselves, even walk, yet he could wrestle matches. No-one said that there was something "off" about Benoit when he was around people who saw him every day (as in, his fellow wrestlers in WWE). He spent more time with them than anyone, and even his closest friends were surprised that he did it. He wasn't in a wheelchair and drooling.

Aaron Hernandez had severe damage. Still was able to play football. Still went nuts. You seem to think brain damage means instant mental handicap. Nope. You need to grasp this.

Now to use your logic. Benoit's closes friends/coworkers/family (Chavo, Jericho, Angle, Regal, JR, Nancy's sister, Malenko) all said he did it. So to you, that should mean he 100% did it.

Someone with such a stuffed brain wouldn't be capable of doing basic, everyday tasks, let alone murder two people and then fashion a pulley on his exercise machine in such a fashion that it would pull him up and kill him (which involves a knowledge of physics, something I doubt that someone who could barely remember his name (which is what happens with dementia) would be capable of.

Benoit didn't have dementia. Not all brain damage is the same buddy. Also, you don't need knowledge of physics to do that.

You say that his brain had gone haywire, yet you also claim he tied up Nancy. Wouldn't his brain make it LESS likely that he could carry out two murders in such a callous, cruel way, rather than more? An act like that smacks of hatred rather than someone who can't control themselves.

Nope. Just because his brain was damaged doesn't mean he can't think. It just means he will think thoughts that he wouldn't normally think. Not sure why this isn't obvious to you.

And on that, by saying that concussion did it, you are making excuses for his actions. You are saying that he isn't at fault for what he did, because he couldn't help it. This is a defense lawyers use all the time to get their client off, by claiming mental illness and not holding the person to account for their own choices and actions.

Yeah my dad is a judge. You have no idea what the insanity defense is. If your brain is damaged, you're going to do shit you wouldn't normally do. You can't just fling it out. Doesn't work like that.

If roid rage is real, for some reason lasted a long time and was the reason why he did it, that would mean he was under temporary insanity. So stop making excuses for him.

I believe that the Atlanta police themselves said it was "roid rage".

We didn't know a lot about concussions back then. We do now. Now all of a sudden, you think police are always right.

Do you know who benefits most from it being "concussion"- Vince McMahon. The media said it was roid rage, and so did the police, and Vince denied this, as it would mean that his Wellness policy is a joke. Benoit failed Wellness three times, but was given a new contract by WWE, because TNA wanted to sign Benoit the moment he came out of contract. If it was roid rage, as per the original reason, then Vince is in trouble, considering that he almost went to jail in the 90's for his involvement in WWE's drug culture at the time. Vince would prefer it to be concussion, as roid rage would then make him negligent as well.

Lol no. Roid rage wouldn't make Vince negligent. Do you even know what the steroid trial was about? Doesn't seem like you do.

"Benoit walked like a duck, and quacked like a duck".

So, you knew that Benoit had this in him early on, did you? Do you mean that you weren't surprised when it happened?

Um, what?

Most others were shocked and didn't pick it. Benoit talked glowingly of his son many times. Even his closest friends didn't believe it at the time, yet you saw it in him. If that isn't what you meant, explain.

When did I ever say I knew he had it the whole time? I meant Nowinski said his brain had severe damage and Nancy's sister talked about Benoit's change in behavior over time. Changes that were 100% consistent with brain damage.

Fact- Scientists have been wrong in the past. Some scientists once thought that the earth was flat, until Christopher Columbus proved otherwise. Scientists change and learn new things all the time, and sometimes, even they can get it wrong.

Okay but I'm pretty sure everyone knows brain + damage = bad.

And here's something fun. Christopher Columbus did NOT discover the world wasn't flat. By the time he was alive, it was common knowledge the earth wasn't flat. But hey who cares about a fact like that right?

A court of law found O.J. "not guilty". I think O.J. did do it as well, but it doesn't matter, because it is the courts that decide these things. Otherwise, you will end up having things like the Salem trials for witches, where the people just burn others at the stake, without proof. The courts are meant to be the final arbitor, and if you don't accept their verdict (even if you don't agree with it) then public opinion will be the decider, and that won't be a good thing.

Being found not guilty in a court doesn't mean you didn't do it. A trial doesn't change facts.

Court cases presents FACTS in the case. Benoit didn't have a trial, because he was dead. So, he didn't officially get tried and convicted in a court of law.

Great. This disproves concussions how?

If the police were the final arbitors, then what about times where people have been wrongly arrested and convicted? Some people have been given the death penalty, only for years later, advancements in science (which you believe in so vehemently) like DNA are used, and the person is found to be innocent instead. It isn't the police's job to determine the final verdict, just to build a case, arrest someone, and then present their case to a jury.

I believe in facts. Weird thing to attack me on.

I have read mountains of material on the case, both when it happened and now, and there are still a lot of unanswered questions, a lot of pieces missing to the puzzle, and only one person who witnessed the whole thing, Chris Benoit, and we will never know from him.

Like? Layout every single missing piece.

The only other way we could have got all the answers is if Benoit stood trial. We would hear from the police, Nowinski, and Benoit's defence. We would get a better picture from that weekend.

We don't need a trial to know OJ is guilty.

But you keep believing what you want to believe. You keep thinking that fallable scientists and police can never get it wrong.

You are pathetically clinging to the hope that Benoit didn't do it. I have no idea why. Maybe you're not mature enough to accept people you watch on a TV can do bad things. Maybe you aren't smart enough to understand concussions. It's weird.

In the end, I stated what was MY opinion. I can't say facts, because no-one knows all the facts, except that Chris, Nancy and Daniel Benoit are dead. Anything else is speculation. Also, if I am stating an opinion, I think you saying that you KNOW what happened when you weren't there, and didn't witness it, or the evidence hasn't been tested, makes you an arrogant turd.

Your opinion is a lie.

Again, using your logic. How can you be religious if you can't see god? How can you believe in air if we can't see it?