Daniel Bryan: "I Don't Consider it Wrestling"

[Harthan]

This is a petty argument about semantics. Anyone who's willing to accept that words have differing meanings can understand exactly what Bryan's saying and not care about it in the slightest. Bryan is differentiating between entertainment and wrestling, which is a long standing difference in definition that simply refers to the difference between the soap opera side of professional wrestling from its technical, in ring component. It is perfectly reasonable to separate the terms wrestling and entertainment in this fashion. Perhaps as a simplification, perhaps as a philosophical difference, but ultimately as no more than a change in semantics, we sometimes simply describe everything in one big mixed up package and call it wrestling. Therefore a great wrestler to one person is not a great wrestler to another, but perhaps a great entertainer.

The choice of semantics is not trivial, and it's a somewhat interesting philosophical debate. But no side is more or less right than the other, and Bryan more than any of us has every right in the world to choose the definitions he pleases and work with them. He's not sabotaging the company, he's not shitting on anyone. He's just choosing a set of definitions and applying them.

In other words, nothing to see here, carry on. By any definition you choose, Daniel Bryan is the greatest wrestler in the world.

 

[Kidpolean]

I think Daniel Bryan is just frustrated because he isnt at the top of the card...saying wwe isnt wrestling is a joke and an insult to the greats that put on 5 star matches. Daniel Bryan cant out wrestle hbk, cm punk, kurt angle, samoa joe and many others but yet he says that this isnt wrestling and all they do is entertain THATS BS. I dont respect his opinion because he hasnt done anything to make me respect it. Mr. Real Wrestler aka Daniel Bryan where are your show stealing matches, where are you 5 star matches ummm...let me think you dont have any(ok maybe his two out of three falls with Sheamus). I hope Vince sees this and fires him. I hate when people try to act like chain wrestling and a bunch of reversals is something special. DB have atleast one legendary match before you try to make yourself seem better than everybody else.

 

[CripplerBenoitFan]

There's a lot of feels flying around the thread guys. I say we Hug It Out!!

I don't think there's really anything to discuss here. I hope this is not spam, I just need to follow Harthan and say this is indeed a "petty argument about semantics". I couldn't have said it better myself.

For you Harthan....

Mr. J is projecting his feelings into Daniel Bryan's statement, and then saying he's stupid. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. So yeah anyway.... hug it out.

I think Daniel Bryan is just frustrated because he isnt at the top of the card...saying wwe isnt wrestling is a joke and an insult to the greats that put on 5 star matches. Daniel Bryan cant out wrestle hbk, cm punk, kurt angle, samoa joe and many others but yet he says that this isnt wrestling and all they do is entertain THATS BS. I dont respect his opinion because he hasnt done anything to make me respect it. Mr. Real Wrestler aka Daniel Bryan where are your show stealing matches, where are you 5 star matches ummm...let me think you dont have any(ok maybe his two out of three falls with Sheamus). I hope Vince sees this and fires him. I hate when people try to act like chain wrestling and a bunch of reversals is something special. DB have atleast one legendary match before you try to make yourself seem better than everybody else.

While I'm handing out gifs I suppose...

But I love ya buddy... so you too get a

And as a proper reply to Kidpolean, Daniel Bryan steals the show any time he hits the ring. His moves are crisp, and nearly all his offense pops the crowd huge. He's consistently in the top 5 best babyface pops on any given night. If you're looking for 5 star matches, he's had many more than the one you named although I am most certainly a fan of that 2/3 falls match. I feel like I'm preaching to the choir here, but it had to be said.

 

[Con T.]

This is a petty argument about semantics. Anyone who's willing to accept that words have differing meanings can understand exactly what Bryan's saying and not care about it in the slightest. Bryan is differentiating between entertainment and wrestling, which is a long standing difference in definition that simply refers to the difference between the soap opera side of professional wrestling from its technical, in ring component. It is perfectly reasonable to separate the terms wrestling and entertainment in this fashion. Perhaps as a simplification, perhaps as a philosophical difference, but ultimately as no more than a change in semantics, we sometimes simply describe everything in one big mixed up package and call it wrestling. Therefore a great wrestler to one person is not a great wrestler to another, but perhaps a great entertainer.

The choice of semantics is not trivial, and it's a somewhat interesting philosophical debate. But no side is more or less right than the other, and Bryan more than any of us has every right in the world to choose the definitions he pleases and work with them. He's not sabotaging the company, he's not shitting on anyone. He's just choosing a set of definitions and applying them.

In other words, nothing to see here, carry on. By any definition you choose, Daniel Bryan is the greatest wrestler in the world.

I don't think it's a semantics issue, in the slightest. Daniel Bryan said he doesn't think what WWE does is wrestling. He then states that being a great wrestler isn't as important as being an entertainer.

The problem is, wrestling is entertainment, and the great wrestlers are great entertainers. They're great wrestlers and entertainers, if they can entertain people enough to plop their butts in the seats. How you get them there doesn't matter in the slightest, because every way is wrestling. Daniel Bryan isn't the greatest wrestler; he's far from it. That goes to John Cena, followed by plenty of people. Now, you could argue Bryan isn't given a chance, and I could see that point. But now? He's far from the best

Ergo, he's stupid

 

[Harthan]

I don't think it's a semantics issue, in the slightest. Daniel Bryan said he doesn't think what WWE does is wrestling. He then states that being a great wrestler isn't as important as being an entertainer.

The problem is, wrestling is entertainment, and the great wrestlers are great entertainers. They're great wrestlers and entertainers, if they can entertain people enough to plop their butts in the seats. How you get them there doesn't matter in the slightest, because every way is wrestling. Daniel Bryan isn't the greatest wrestler; he's far from it. That goes to John Cena, followed by plenty of people. Now, you could argue Bryan isn't given a chance, and I could see that point. But now? He's far from the best

Ergo, he's stupid

Statement bolded and italicized by me is an argument of semantics. To which I respond:

This is a petty argument about semantics. Anyone who's willing to accept that words have differing meanings can understand exactly what Bryan's saying and not care about it in the slightest. Bryan is differentiating between entertainment and wrestling, which is a long standing difference in definition that simply refers to the difference between the soap opera side of professional wrestling from its technical, in ring component. It is perfectly reasonable to separate the terms wrestling and entertainment in this fashion. Perhaps as a simplification, perhaps as a philosophical difference, but ultimately as no more than a change in semantics, we sometimes simply describe everything in one big mixed up package and call it wrestling. Therefore a great wrestler to one person is not a great wrestler to another, but perhaps a great entertainer.

The choice of semantics is not trivial, and it's a somewhat interesting philosophical debate. But no side is more or less right than the other, and Bryan more than any of us has every right in the world to choose the definitions he pleases and work with them. He's not sabotaging the company, he's not shitting on anyone. He's just choosing a set of definitions and applying them.

In other words, nothing to see here, carry on. By any definition you choose, Daniel Bryan is the greatest wrestler in the world.

Read it again. All you've done is made an argument of semantics, when I've already told you that you're making an argument of semantics. Bryan has chosen to define wrestling in one way, you in another. I happen to agree with Bryan's definition, but neither definition fundamentally alters the nature of the thing we're talking about. It just changes what you'd like to call it.

Now yes, we could have an argument about whether Bryan is the greatest wrestler in the world (spoiler alert: he is) but that's not really the point of this thread. The point here is that Daniel Bryan has simply chosen a set of definitions that he'd like to work with, and many people are overreacting to it.

Also, for future reference, calling someone else stupid with little to no justification is one of the easiest ways possible to make people think the same of you.

 

[jmt225]

I don't get what Bryan said here that has some of you so upset.

We don't know the tone of his voice or how he meant for that sentence to come off. You have to be reading it with some kind of bitter perception in your head because what I see is nothing to get upset about. It was a simple observation, one he did not even criticize or judge.

Bryan has wrestled for almost every company around right now, and all he's saying is that WWE is very different from the rest. Is he wrong? No, not at all. Is he saying WWE is a worse product because it's different? That's not what I've taken away from that statement, but it's obviously what some of you have taken away from it and I just don't understand why or how you could so quickly come to that conclusion.

Just imagine this exact same sentence came from John Cena... everyone would assume Cena meant it as a compliment rather than a slight against the company. Why can't we see that from Bryan as well? Because he was an indy star? Give me a break. The guy meant no harm or insult with his statement.

It's hilarious to me how snappy WWE apologists can be sometimes...

 

[ProWrestlingFan]

Daniel Bryan is right. WWE is a "Sports-Entertainment" company which focuses too much on gimmicks,storylines,long promos and comedy skits instead of focusing on having good "wrestling" matches and putting on a good wrestling product.

In WWE being a good entertainer is more important than being a good wrestler, see..Lance Storm, Shelton Benjamin, etc.

 

[Con T.]

Bryan has chosen to define wrestling in one way

For the record, I don't view wrestling as one way; it's a meshing of hundreds of different ways. What makes the WWE so successful, and what I think Daniel Bryan may not see, is that wrestling is a mesh of more than just his view, which is the technical aspect of it. But wrestling is much more than that; what makes the WWE so effective is that they have something to entertain everyone. Don't like John Cena? Great, CM Punk is there, and maybe you'll enjoy his schtick. Don't like Punk? Then Daniel Bryan and Dolph are sure to give you what you want. If that don't work for you, there's gonna be Brodus and Tensai, or whatever comedy is there (which is often geared for kids, but that's the point). Wrestling is more than how Bryan; it is a variety of things, whatever will make people pay. If wrestling was just as Bryan sees it, ROH would be far more successful; and that isn't to say ROH isn't wrestling, because it is.

But so is WWE.

Which is why Bryan's stupid

 

[CripplerBenoitFan]

And the circle continues on and on reaching no conclusion.


I'm tapping out on this one.

*snore*

 

[Con T.]

Daniel Bryan is right. WWE is a "Sports-Entertainment" company which focuses too much on gimmicks,storylines,long promos and comedy skits instead of focusing on having good "wrestling" matches and putting on a good wrestling product.

In WWE being a good entertainer is more important than being a good wrestler, see..Lance Storm, Shelton Benjamin, etc.

Yeah; pretty good reason neither of those guys made it to the main event scene, and was seen as a viable money maker.

Sports entertainment is wrestling. They are one and the same

 

[Harthan]

For the record, I don't view wrestling as one way; it's a meshing of hundreds of different ways. What makes the WWE so successful, and what I think Daniel Bryan may not see, is that wrestling is a mesh of more than just his view, which is the technical aspect of it. But wrestling is much more than that; what makes the WWE so effective is that they have something to entertain everyone. Don't like John Cena? Great, CM Punk is there, and maybe you'll enjoy his schtick. Don't like Punk? Then Daniel Bryan and Dolph are sure to give you what you want. If that don't work for you, there's gonna be Brodus and Tensai, or whatever comedy is there (which is often geared for kids, but that's the point). Wrestling is more than how Bryan; it is a variety of things, whatever will make people pay. If wrestling was just as Bryan sees it, ROH would be far more successful; and that isn't to say ROH isn't wrestling, because it is.

But so is WWE.

Which is why Bryan's stupid

You do understand that defining wrestling as "a meshing of a hundred different ways" is, in fact, just another definition, don't you? I really do hope you can understand that much. Because if you can't, my next point will be entirely lost on you. The simple point that I'm trying to make here is that wrestling is not an objective art, but a subjective one - it is one that inclines itself deeply to the interpretation of the audience. Wrestling uniquely rarely attempts to insert theme into its own work, but the audience is wholly capable of producing their own, and many will result. All that Bryan has attempted to do is separate the entertainment quality of wrestling from the in-ring component of wrestling. There is obvious and bountiful overlap between these two components, such that one can in fact have great difficulty separating them. Separating them may not be necessary. But it is certainly possible to make these definitions, and anyone with sufficient knowledge and understanding of wrestling understands the definitions that are being made. Whether or not they agree with them is a wholly different matter, but again, the choice of definitions does not alter the nature of the thing we're discussing, only the specific lens through which it is viewed. Bryan's lens is ever so slightly different than yours; that's a difference of opinion, not a difference of objective fact. It is therefore a gross overreaction to attribute any particular significance to Bryan's words, when he is merely discussing how he has chosen to apply his definitions. And finally, it is the height of misunderstanding of the context here that leads to the altogether uninspiring and insipid conclusion that Bryan is "dumb".

You may rest easy in knowing I have little or no intent to comment further on this thread, and if you so desire to reassert your point once more and demonstrate a final unwillingness to consider a difference of opinion, you may do so, and barring an Earth shattering revelation, I expect I will wash my hands of it.

 

[rocknblues81]

WWE has little to do with wrestling. It's about gimmicks, silly angles and money. Vince never cared that much for the wrestling part. Vince is a businessman and Pro Wrestling was his gateway to getting rich.

 

[sTyLnK]

This isn't the first time he has said this and it won't be the last. But, he speaks the truth. He's an amazing wrestler, but that alone won't get you anywhere. What has made him in the WWE isn't just his wrestling, it's his catch phrase and the fact that he actually is "entertaining" when he's not wrestling.

Now, being only a good wrestler doesn't mean you can't succeed in the WWE. When it comes down to it, you still need to "bring it" when it matters. Such as WM. But it really is more about the character, how you do on the mic and most importantly, how you connect with the fans and the crowd. Because if you can't, you're not going to make it and be either pushed to the back of the line or eventually let go.

A character and gimmick (usually) makes or breaks you in the WWE. There are exceptions, sure, such as wrestlers who were never very good at talking or interacting with the crowd, and their wrestling pushed them onto the higher platform. Such as Bret Hart. But that is a rarity.

Bryan is 100% right. I remember in another interview quite a while ago where he pretty much said the same thing. He talked about coming to the WWE and his wrestling, and the fact that people liked it, but outside of that, he realized it was all about the character and interacting with the crowd. It's probably why he does in fact do just that more than anyone in the company now. IE always yelling his catch phrase multiple times during a match to get the crowd into it.

 

[Kidpolean]

There's a lot of feels flying around the thread guys. I say we Hug It Out!!

I don't think there's really anything to discuss here. I hope this is not spam, I just need to follow Harthan and say this is indeed a "petty argument about semantics". I couldn't have said it better myself.

For you Harthan....

Mr. J is projecting his feelings into Daniel Bryan's statement, and then saying he's stupid. It doesn't make a lot of sense to me. So yeah anyway.... hug it out.

While I'm handing out gifs I suppose...

But I love ya buddy... so you too get a

And as a proper reply to Kidpolean, Daniel Bryan steals the show any time he hits the ring. His moves are crisp, and nearly all his offense pops the crowd huge. He's consistently in the top 5 best babyface pops on any given night. If you're looking for 5 star matches, he's had many more than the one you named although I am most certainly a fan of that 2/3 falls match. I feel like I'm preaching to the choir here, but it had to be said.

His moves get pops because he is entertaining...not cuz he is a good wrestler even tho he is. I honestly cant remember a time where DB had the best match on a card even his 2/3 falls match wasnt the best on that card. My point is that if DB wants real wrestling lol he can go back to ROH and have hour long matches in front of a couple hundred people for way less money while destroying his body mush faster.

 

[Terafear]

It's probably why he does in fact do just that more than anyone in the company now. IE always yelling his catch phrase multiple times during a match to get the crowd into it.

I don't know if I'm alone but..
I paused a while and then start watching RAW and SD again
(we only got the 45min SD Version on free TV and now I switched to our PayTV distributor where I reccord RAW (live) and full SD )
So I need some time to figure out who is new, who is heel/face and feuding
(One thing haven't changed Cena was still the main horse (just aged) )

But after some time , the matches where all the same.
The SuperStars run to the Stage, doing thier FanStuff
like yelling phraes,
doing signature moves
and try to end with thier finshing moves.

Sometimes it's boring...
(Like Khali doing his Slaps,
Orton and his come back tripple with his clap,
Sheamus and his 10-Count)

Ok they want some reactions..
but it could be a bit less obvious

Oh and did i mentioned the Big Shows women slap called KO-Punch?
(How often is the camera in a wrong ankle so every one could see his opening Hand?)

So Bryan is some kinda right.
It's more entertaining then wrestling,
but sometimes I wish it would be more authentic/believable.


Tera

 

[Con T.]

You do understand that defining wrestling as "a meshing of a hundred different ways" is, in fact, just another definition, don't you? I really do hope you can understand that much. Because if you can't, my next point will be entirely lost on you. The simple point that I'm trying to make here is that wrestling is not an objective art, but a subjective one - it is one that inclines itself deeply to the interpretation of the audience. Wrestling uniquely rarely attempts to insert theme into its own work, but the audience is wholly capable of producing their own, and many will result. All that Bryan has attempted to do is separate the entertainment quality of wrestling from the in-ring component of wrestling. There is obvious and bountiful overlap between these two components, such that one can in fact have great difficulty separating them. Separating them may not be necessary. But it is certainly possible to make these definitions, and anyone with sufficient knowledge and understanding of wrestling understands the definitions that are being made. Whether or not they agree with them is a wholly different matter, but again, the choice of definitions does not alter the nature of the thing we're discussing, only the specific lens through which it is viewed. Bryan's lens is ever so slightly different than yours; that's a difference of opinion, not a difference of objective fact. It is therefore a gross overreaction to attribute any particular significance to Bryan's words, when he is merely discussing how he has chosen to apply his definitions. And finally, it is the height of misunderstanding of the context here that leads to the altogether uninspiring and insipid conclusion that Bryan is "dumb".

You may rest easy in knowing I have little or no intent to comment further on this thread, and if you so desire to reassert your point once more and demonstrate a final unwillingness to consider a difference of opinion, you may do so, and barring an Earth shattering revelation, I expect I will wash my hands of it.

It's not nearly as subjective as you think; we do have an objective unit of measurement, and that's the dollars and cents you put into the program.

You keep calling it this art; it's a business. And granted, there's an art form in it. But, that art form is all about the business of entertaining. His opinion is one that doesn't seem to get the business aspect.

 

[H33LTurn]

If people wanted to watch quality in ring competition, they'd be better suit tuning into ROH, Japan, hell even TNA. WWE is not the place where in ring competition trumps mic skills or gimmicks, that has been eveident long before Daniel Bryan joined the business. I really dont know what guys like him expect when they sign a WWE contract. They act as if they are unfamiliar with the content. Wrestling varies from promotion to promotion and from country to country. Its what sells. WWE sells a certain type of product and ROH sells another. I find it idiotic that after decades of WWE style programming that guys like Bryan sign a contract, get paid millions to play a shit character, and then have the gall to complain that their contract signing didn't automatically change dozens of years of entertainment over wrestling style programming.

 

[SinCityBlitz]

If people wanted to watch quality in ring competition, they'd be better suit tuning into ROH, Japan, hell even TNA. WWE is not the place where in ring competition trumps mic skills or gimmicks, that has been eveident long before Daniel Bryan joined the business. I really dont know what guys like him expect when they sign a WWE contract. They act as if they are unfamiliar with the content. Wrestling varies from promotion to promotion and from country to country. Its what sells. WWE sells a certain type of product and ROH sells another. I find it idiotic that after decades of WWE style programming that guys like Bryan sign a contract, get paid millions to play a shit character, and then have the gall to complain that their contract signing didn't automatically change dozens of years of entertainment over wrestling style programming.

LOL, he never complained. He just explained that the WWE does things differently and some people fly off the handle like he killed children. The WWE is all about the entertainment because that is what sells. Great matches don't put asses in seats in the long term.

Pro-wrestling is not wrestling period. Not ROH, Japan, TNA or WWE. Never has been never will be. If you want to see real wrestling go to a local high school or college.

WWE has little to do with wrestling. It's about gimmicks, silly angles and money. Vince never cared that much for the wrestling part. Vince is a businessman and Pro Wrestling was his gateway to getting rich.

It's not just Vince but any fed in the US that wants to get over. WCW realized the same thing. You can perform in front of 100 people or 10,000. The smart person is always going to take the 10,000. Now that doesn't mean that I don't miss the old NWA and UWF mind you.

 

[CripplerBenoitFan]

I just have to speak on one particular point. Whether the focus in WWE is on promos or characters over matches, it's incredibly naive to say that the wrestling doesn't matter at all.

One just has to look at the increasing quality in the in-ring product over the past 5 years to see that is false. WWE is actively seeking out the guys that are widely regarded by hardcore fans as the best wrestlers. CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, Antonio Cesaro, etc etc. These guys are all prominent. I'm sure someone will argue well Cesaro lost matches the last few months, jobbed out etc. Maybe so, but he's still a now former 200+ day US champion and he has great matches win lose or draw.

Cesaro and Sandow have established themselves as go-to guys to have highly competitive matches with top stars in the company. Even if that's a losing effort and they take the pin, they're still in highly competitive matches with top stars. Continued efforts like that are how you yourself become one of the top stars. Everyone starts somewhere. Cesaro has basically been US Champion for almost his entire run. I wanted to see him on WrestleMania like everyone else, but it doesn't make me feel like The H's is pissing in my coffee when Cesaro is excluded from this year's card. It's tough to fit everyone in, and sometimes tough decisions have to be made.

The Swiss Superman can only go up from here. That guy has $$$ written all over him. He's a guy that will put asses in the seats for years to come.


I went off on a bit of a tangent here, but I just don't see how you could look at say Attitude Era shit like Crash Holly defending the Hardcore title in a theme park, and then look at Kofi vs Cesaro this week and say that the in-ring product hasn't improved or doesn't matter at all.

The finishes to the matches are so much hotter now on free TV than I remember them being growing up. Maybe I'm just older and I have seen it evolve more than some younger posters? Possibly. I don't know. But wrestling does matter. It's just that the characters are what lead people to get interested in the matches, as opposed to the matches leading people to the characters.

 

[Headman]

These comments are being overblown. DB was not bashing the WWE. I don't even think he said the wrestling part doesn't matter. He was basically saying there are things more important than wrestling to get over in the WWE as opposed to places like Ring of Honor or NOAH. He really didn't say anything we don't already know. But of course the wrestling media latches on to that one line and makes a mountain out of a mole hill.

 

[GrandSword]

Well I don't even see why he would be in trouble. Apparently you aren't allowed to use the word "pro-wrestler" on WWE tv, you are a superstar or a sports entertainer. So D-bry is basically being captian obvious to an interviewer trying to get a story out of him.

 

[mkay9]

This is alllllll a misunderstood.

He never complained.

Notice the part he said it's fascinating ?

He just said this to get to the part to show that WWE is fascinating.

 

[M]

I like a lot of these points about DB's comment, even though you're exaggerating it a ton, he's not insulting anything... i do believe this is the proverbial mountain made out of a molehill?

Anywho... going along with the trend and arguing whether or not he's stupid..

Spoiler

He's not

The argument that wrestling has changed is true however, it's the least unique it's ever been. Wrestling used to be a one of a kind experience, there was nothing else like it - people with different styles fighting against each other for a reason beyond just being put in a match. Now what you get is amateur actors reciting badly written scripts at each other before having a match involving 3 minutes of boring submission holds, followed by more amateur actors filling in time before the next boring holdfest starts. It's still very similar to what it used to be, but now that there's so much saturation of the the "entertainment" side of things they're losing the essential essence of what makes it so unique, and replacing it with trifle that we're supposed to be "entertained" by.

Now I know what you're gonna say: "But becoming more performance-entertainment based is what they want" well then, have i got some food for thought for you..

If we're supposed to watch wwe and treat it like performance-entertainment (Ala a play), then surely wwe is a considerably horrible form of "entertainment" right? Their shows are torrents of puke compared to the MANY other sources of performance-entertainment. Tell me, in the entire 3 hours that RAW is on the air, with the ability to fast forward, how much of that 3 hour show would you actually watch? I know I can barely get through half in total, in fact, without the ability to skip through the shit parts that make up a lot of the majority, i wouldn't watch this show at all.

You don't watch a show only to skip to the good parts, and a good show doesn't suck for half the time it's on the air.
Also, in their endeavors to become more like a play, I don't think they realize just how important the wrestling part of the show is. They're hiring too many entertainers without realizing the core truth that if they're boring in the ring, they'll eventually be perceived as boring in general and therefore not entertaining, which is quite counterproductive.

It isn't wrestling, it's a bunch of "entertainers" bumping into each other.

 

[mojmass]

Well like it or not daniel bryan spoke the truth this isn't wrestling this is a soup opera no matter how hard you want show it as wrestling.
For example the Miz can't call himself a Marine just because he played the role of one.
not all wwe performers can call themselves wrestlers just because they pull some wrestling moves in front of live audience.

 

[enviousdominous]

One of the more fucking stupid posts I've ever seen.

You ridicule Daniel Bryan's opinion of the state of wrestling like an over zealous demagogue.

He was not asked "what is more important, technical prowess or showmanship?". He was asked to share his take on the state of pro-wrestling. When he said "elsewhere", he very likely meant anywhere except the WWE. Either way, without clarification on that you look fucking stupid for drawing arguments against a conclusion you don't even know if he made.

Another pedantic sack of shit using elementary level debate tactics to ridicule someone who you'll never manage to compare to. Grow the fuck up.


Posted from Wrestlezone.com App for Android