15 Biggest False Narratives In Wrestling History
5. Dave Meltzer Is Biased Against WWE
He really isn’t.
When Dave Meltzer heavily criticised WWE in 2019, frequently comparing it to WCW in 2000, is it not possible that WWE was indeed awful in 2019?
It’s very possible; after all, the narrative these days is that Paul Levesque saved WWE two years ago and that WWE-leaning critics and fans are immensely grateful for that. To draw on just one of many examples of this new consensus, every time WWE executes a cool production flourish - like the way in which Logan Paul was shot before putting Cody Rhodes through a table at King And Queen of the Ring - many fans express their gratitude that the Vince McMahon and Kevin Dunn regime is over.
So Dave was right, then?
Dave’s importance in this space can never go overstated, nobody would be here if he wasn’t, his best work is completely peerless. He does however, especially in recent years, approach wrestling with a weird slant that sort of makes sense but also doesn’t.
He almost dispassionately analyses pro wrestling on a volume-first basis, as if it’s not an art form but rather a fire alarm. Any noise is good, even if that noise is the performative result of what a good match is “supposed” to look like.
He is biased in favour of loud noises and numbers. For Christ’s sake, as NXT ratings improved in 2023, he encouraged his reader base to consider voting Shawn Michaels for Booker of the Year.
Michael Hickenbottom is not All Elite!
Dave enjoyed NXT under Levesque more than he did AEW for much of late 2019. He threw stars at the peak TakeOver brand like a giddy child armed with snowballs.
He thinks Paul Levesque is a better booker than Tony Khan right now as you read this!