|
Post by benjammin on Mar 8, 2016 11:48:05 GMT -5
I just want to qualify my comments right away saying that I grew up with Dan on the fan. I first listened to him and Jeff Marek together back in the day. He always replied to emails and was great to interact with.
Over the past 3 years I've found myself disliking his LAW personality more and more, I find him not able to put up great arguments for his views and dismissing those who have different opinions without much back up. For me, he's starting to become too much of the old guy who doesn't like anything verus an unbiased observer. When I hear him complain I keep seeing an old man yell 'get off my lawn!'. As an example I've lost count of the amount of times Dan will ask Dave Meltzer why something sucked, only to have Dave say 'i like it' or 'it was good' and Dan doesn't follow up or justify his thoughts. Its like he's negative for the sake of it at this point. At least when John or Wai disagree with something, they articulate why.
I think that Dan can still be a valuable member of the staff and could be brought in for old reviews and when there's news about a legend, but his niche seems to be more old wresting now, I don't feel he's that educated or up on the new content. I get its not all perfect, but what makes the Stone Cold podcast great is he calls something great when its great, and bad when its bad and says why. With Dan, it just seems like nothing is good and it was all great 'back in the day'. Even when others like something, he complains.
Thanks for allowing me to vent and articulate, just curious if this was something that others hear/feel. I like Dan as a person when I've emailed him, hes a great guy, just not sure if he's up for being on this podcast every week, I think it be a better show with John in his chair.
|
|
|
Post by Christian Small on Mar 8, 2016 12:17:11 GMT -5
To be honest I find it hard to listen to Dan lately, mainly because I feel he's being too negative all the time. The amount of times he'll say "everyone will hate that" or "no one wants to see that" and then Jay or someone else will correct him. Like you said it's one thing to back up your point but Dan doesn't really do that. He just sticks to his view of hating something and won't listen to other points of view. I like when Dan does Review-a-Wai, he's a great personality and a lot of fun on those shows but that seems to be lacking on the LAW. I think mainly because Dan doesn't like the modern product that much. I know someone who is very similar, he loves old school wrestling and has this "as long as it's not WWE" attitude to everything, I personally think you should be more open. Just saying "It sucks" because it has WWE labelled on it is no way to be a wrestling fan.
|
|
|
Post by rinaldo on Mar 8, 2016 15:24:34 GMT -5
Dan is The Law. Suggesting he should step down is blasphemy. John will eventually be hosting alongside Jason but, as of right now, Dan is an institution and no way I'd rather have it another way.
|
|
|
Post by johnnyluv97 on Mar 8, 2016 18:28:50 GMT -5
I get where everyone is coming from with Dan. Count me in as a longtime listener who loves the show, just think it could be much better. I struggle with a lot of what Dan has said in the last year or so, just because as others have said, he suffers from 'in my time' disease.
'In my time' it use to be great, 'in my time' wrestling did this. You can almost schedule it on a PPV Sunday, Dan will hate the show and when challenged on it he won't be able to offer much of an explanation why, it's not from the 80's so it must suck.
I don't want him off the show or anything, but just wish he'd be the hip cool wrestling fan that he was back on the fan590 vs the old curmudgeon never happy about anything old guy he's become. I miss the first guy, wish he'd come back.
|
|
|
Post by RKing85 on Mar 8, 2016 23:32:49 GMT -5
I prefer John and Jason as a tandem more so than I do Dan and Jason.
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Mar 9, 2016 8:10:58 GMT -5
If I could remove one element from the show, it would be the callers. They annoy me way more then Dan ever could. I do agree that Dan's options can be polarizing, but they don't make me upset enough to need to vent.
|
|
|
Post by Christian Small on Mar 9, 2016 9:43:03 GMT -5
If I could remove one element from the show, it would be the callers. They annoy me way more then Dan ever could. I do agree that Dan's options can be polarizing, but they don't make me upset enough to need to vent. Personally I skip the callers, it makes the show shorter and I don't have to listen to some pretty bad opinions (at times)
|
|
|
Post by Brad on Mar 9, 2016 10:10:31 GMT -5
If I could remove one element from the show, it would be the callers. They annoy me way more then Dan ever could. I do agree that Dan's options can be polarizing, but they don't make me upset enough to need to vent. Personally I skip the callers, it makes the show shorter and I don't have to listen to some pretty bad opinions (at times) Same, except for a couple of regular callers that I enjoy hearing from.
|
|
|
Post by benjammin on Mar 9, 2016 10:54:12 GMT -5
I do agree that Dan's options can be polarizing, but they don't make me upset enough to need to vent. I don't think he's polarizing, I think hes grumpy and a bit out of touch. When he cares and spends the time to think things out he's still great, but he comes across as bored and jaded most times.
|
|
|
Post by benjammin on Mar 9, 2016 10:54:25 GMT -5
Personally I skip the callers, it makes the show shorter and I don't have to listen to some pretty bad opinions (at times) Same, except for a couple of regular callers that I enjoy hearing from. Agree 10000 percent. Its a waste of time, lowest common denominator stuff.
|
|
|
Post by Christian Small on Mar 9, 2016 11:22:19 GMT -5
A lot of the time with callers I find it's an idea with very little else behind it. Most recently it's "Lets turn Roman Reigns heel" and then no one comes up with a good enough reason to do it outside of them not liking him as a face. I run across enough of that online, don't need to hear more of it on the Law.
|
|
|
Post by hitmanmatt on Mar 9, 2016 11:33:30 GMT -5
Let's start with a fact check, Dan isn't negative on pro wrestling as a whole, he's negative on WWE and TNA. For the most part, he's pretty positive on Japan and RoH.
Considering how subjective wrestling is, I have no problem with Dan, or even Angry Agnew. It's a good hour forty show to get me through my work day
|
|
|
Post by benjammin on Mar 9, 2016 12:25:37 GMT -5
Let's start with a fact check, Dan isn't negative on pro wrestling as a whole, he's negative on WWE and TNA. For the most part, he's pretty positive on Japan and RoH. Considering how subjective wrestling is, I have no problem with Dan, or even Angry Agnew. It's a good hour forty show to get me through my work day Its fine to be critical like John is, but there's a significant difference in being critical and just hating. John liked things that work, Agnew likes things that work, Dan likes nothing, and generally can't offer reasons why when asked to. Its not good radio. Its not an attack on him as a person, as I said before he's very cool with me, just think that like the bad callers, we can do better.
|
|
TariQ
Mid-Carder
Posts: 307
|
Post by TariQ on Mar 9, 2016 13:10:47 GMT -5
Personally I skip the callers, it makes the show shorter and I don't have to listen to some pretty bad opinions (at times) Same, except for a couple of regular callers that I enjoy hearing from. Greg from the Peg John from Oshawa
|
|
deezy
Misawa
Posts: 2,334
|
Post by deezy on Mar 9, 2016 15:24:31 GMT -5
Do a better radio show then.
Or maybe stop listening if it bugs you this much.
But I will look to this look and laugh when Lovranski goes on the Vince McMahon is out of touch speech.
|
|