ROH Haters

Okay, before I get into this, I just want to stop and acknowledge that there are some "ROHbots" out there who will exaggerate everything Ring of Honor does to the point where it becomes ridiculous. They exist, they are annoying, I get it. However, even worse is the emerging presence of the "ROH hater."

Over at 411mania.com/wrestling, J.D. Dunn posted his top ten matches of the year. The list featured lots of John Cena and ROH, with Nigel McGuinness vs. Bryan Danielson from Driven topping the list. As expected, the usual lot of "OMG, CENA SUX!!!!!!!!!!!!1" people were there to bitch about it and do everything in their power to try and downplay what Cena accomplished this year. It was the type of "Yeah, Cena had great matches, but it doesn't counted because he was CARRIED!" So what if he was carried? Does that mean the match was less enjoyable? Others write off Cena's Royal Rumble match with Umaga because it was a gimmick match. Sometimes, gimmicks elevate a match or feud, so why should that hurt the credibility of the bout? Should I be thinking "I've decided that I didn't enjoy Cena/Umaga because it was a gimmick match, therefore it wasn't worth my time and I must of been confused to enjoy it." Some people made up their minds in 2005 that John Cena sucked and would always suck and will never change their minds. I don't care, I'm not exactly a huge Cena fan myself, but I'm always willing to give credit where it is due and Cena had an outstanding 2007 before his injury and is surely the wrestler of the year.

But then there's the ROH haters. This is a new breed of IWC peeps that has emerged due to ROH hitting pay-per-view. There are complaints at Dunn's list (411 has enabled comments to articles now, not sure if that's such a good idea...) as well as other boards I've seen. The argument is that "Nothing from ROH should be in consideration for year-end awards because only 2,000 people watch it." Wait, what? How is this a logical basis for one's opinion?

For starters, ROH is more popular than a lot of people have given it credit for. It is still an indy company, but one that draws consistent crowds in numerous cities, has achieved higher than expected pay-per-view buys, and are internationally known. No wrestling company experienced more growth in 2007 than ROH. I would even daresay that ROH is more popular now than TNA was in 2002-2003, and they are doing something that TNA has never done: make money.

But what really kills me is that people think ROH should be discredited simpy for being less popular and mainstream. This makes no sense to me whatsoever. Anyone who suggests that Cena vs. Khali has more of a right to be considered for match of the year over Danielson vs. Morishima should just accept that it's because they don't watch the ROH product and shouldn't get all snooty when others make such claims. I think it comes down to simple jealousy. WWE/TNA fans see ROH as too difficult to get into, and due to the jealousy of hearing about all the great things coming out of it, they just find it easier to write it off due to ROH being small.

Also, this whole argument of "popular equals quality" does not exist in other fields when year end awards come up. I suppose at the Academy Awards this winter, the nominees for best picture should be Spider Man 3, Shrek the Third, Transformers, Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, and 300. I mean, they were the most popular movies of the year. Way more people saw these than No Country for Old Men or Juno, right? Of course no one brings up this argument when it comes to movies, because it just sounds completely mindless!

So, if you don't want to watch ROH because you think it's too hard to get into or you're turned off by some of the mutant fans, then that's fine. But don't make up excuses based on ignorance for why you think matches like Nigel McGuinness vs. Bryan Danielson should be shoved aside in favor of Bobby Lashley vs. John Cena. It's okay to just say "I didn't watch ROH, so there." I hardly saw any current puro this year, so I didn't include it in my end of year thoughts. But do I sit here and say "Only nerds watch puro, they think every match is *****, they're all stupid mutants." Of course I don't. I'm ignorant by how good (or dull) wrestling from Japan was this year so I'm not going to comment on it! I'm also not going to fault anyone else who does. So I'm just asking for people to stop taking this so seriously, acknowledge that everyone is going to have a different opinion, and let's please stop making stupid excuses to defend ignorant opinions.