Controversial wrestling opinions

krudler

right lets get some debate going, share an opinion no matter how out there, then defend it:D

Shawn Michaels is the greatest wrestler of all time

The Sparrow

krudler wrote: »

right lets get some debate going, share an opinion no matter how out there, then defend it:D

Shawn Michaels is the greatest wrestler of all time

Shouldn`t you defend that viewpoint? Not that I necessarily disagree but if you start a thread to get some debate going then you should probably give some justification for your viewpoint!

Although I do think that this forum has been a bit dead lately so something to debate is a good idea.

ShawnRaven

woooo232 wrote: »

Although I do think that this forum has been a bit dead lately so something to debate is a good idea.

I think it's been a lot more lively in the last six more than anything personally.
VR!

Vince135792003

In hindsight the old ECW was not as "cool" as I thought it was. I'm half temepted to even say the negatives long term outweighed the positives although I think it's a complicated deal.

It did an awful lot of good in that it broke much needed new ground in wrestling and gave ultra talented guys a a chance to get recognised and progress in their careers. There was also an energy about the company and the fans that you couldn't but love.

However, out of the 3 or 4 old ppvs that I have of ECW, I can't sit through them anymore. Watching two guys beat the crap out of each other with a chair just doesn't seem as cool as it used to after the brain scan of Benoit came out or when Mike Awesome died.

I'd even make the same point about Mick Foley. 7 years ago, I don't think you could meet a bigger fan of him than me and I still immensely respect him. But I can't enjoy his matches in the way I could before. Was the style that he adopted and so many people (who were way less successful than him) copied good for wrestling long term?


Back to ECW, often when you watch an old WWE ppv, it feels eerie because some of them wrestling on the show had passed away. Well I watched the ECW "Rise and Fall" documentary a while ago and it's a whole lot worse. Every second guy seemed to be either dead or fallen on hard times. It's hard to think ECW was "cool" after watching it.

I guess my general point is that my view of things has changed over the year.

Although I do think that this forum has been a bit dead lately so something to debate is a good idea.

I agree. I think it's just the state of wrestling in 2007. There are positives of course but its been a pretty bleak year and after a while you get sick of talking about bad things.

ShawnRaven

Vince135792003 wrote: »

In hindsight the old ECW was not as "cool" as I thought it was. I'm half temepted to even say the negatives long term outweighed the positives although I think it's a complicated deal.

ECW to me was always glorified backyard/garbage wrestling. It spent most of it's time living off the one glory year it had when it had talented wrestlers! The rest was utter bollox. I had so many people throw ECW DVDs at me begging me to check them out, all i was was dimly lit, grungy, filthy arenas, glorified backyarders, a boring one man commentator and the worst of the lot, Joel Gertner!

It did an awful lot of good in that it broke much needed new ground in wrestling and gave ultra talented guys a a chance to get recognised and progress in their careers.

I don't really know about that, the likes of Benoit, Jericho and Guerrero already had made their mark in Japan. I'm pretty sure had ECW not been around, WCW would have gotten em eventually as they were always scouting in Japan anyway.

Back to ECW, often when you watch an old WWE ppv, it feels eerie because some of them wrestling on the show had passed away. Well I watched the ECW "Rise and Fall" documentary a while ago and it's a whole lot worse. Every second guy seemed to be either dead or fallen on hard times. It's hard to think ECW was "cool" after watching it.

I hear what you're saying here, Wrestlemania V is one depressing PPV to watch now, as at least 1 person in nearly match is dead. Even the celebrities are dead (Morton Downey Jr, and half of Run DMC).

VR!

Vince135792003

Your not hearing what I'm saying completely. I'm saying the ECW one is way worse especially if you haven't watched it in a while given this year in particular. Watching it in 2007 is a completely different experience to watching it in 2004.

I really don't want to sound like I'm bashing ECW completely. It did have a lot of cool things about it and it did give guys an oppurtunity when nobody else did.

In hindsight though, I just look at it and think for everyone involved "Was it worth it?"

Bounty Hunter

krudler wrote: »

right lets get some debate going, share an opinion no matter how out there, then defend it:D

defend it after someone decides to take up the debate i assume seing as you havent backed up your statement....

Shawn Michaels is the greatest wrestler of all time

I disagree, HBK, the Showstopper, undoubtley is one of the greats but not the greatest. He is really good at everything but not the greatest at anything.

Greatest On The Mic: The Rock
Greatest technical Wrestler: Kurt Angle, Chris Benoit or Bret Hart (def not HBK)
Greatest reaction from the crowd: Taker, Hogan, SCSA or The Rock
Title reigns: Hogan, Flair, HHH, The Rock

where exactley does Shaun Micheals fit into the mix then?

Vince135792003

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

where exactley does Shaun Micheals fit into the mix then?

As a guy who you can make the argument for being the best performer in the ring of all time.

Bounty Hunter

Vince135792003 wrote: »

As a guy who you can make the argument for being the best performer in the ring of all time.

wasnt Krudler looking for someone to debate with about, to start with ,if HBK was the greatest of all time? i was trying to argue that he wasnt not that someone else was. but if you think he is make your case

Although if you want me to suggest an alternative i would go for SCSA although he might not exactley fit "the best performer in the ring" as that sounds like the best technical wrestler list i did above. Instead i suggest SCSA because of the numrous great feuds he had notably vs The Rock, HHH and Mr McMahon a feud which literally changed the WWF. His many title reigns inc 6 wwe title reigns. His great Mic Skills and the great response he got from the crowd to name a few reasons for my choice

Vince135792003

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

wasnt Krudler looking for someone to debate with about, to start with ,if HBK was the greatest of all time? i was trying to argue that he wasnt not that someone else was.

I'm looking to debate with anybody! I was just making the point that I would argue that he is one of the best performers in the ring of all time and thats where he'll stand as far as his legacy goes.

I don't think he's the best wrestler of all time. My criteria for that (and this is just my criteria) is the one that draws the most money.

Back on Michaels, I just think he's unbelievable in the ring. I think his case stacks up just as good .as Angle or Bret Hart or Ric Flair or anybody really. Very briefly:

1. Longevity- He's had almost 2 careers. One pre-1998 and one post-2002 and they are both loaded with unbelievable matches.

2. Adaptability- This is his greatest strength to me. They put him in a ladder match (new concept at the time). He made it work. They put him in Hell in a Cell. He made it work. He had a match with Triple H at Taboo Tuesday a couple of years ago where he could barely move due to a leg injury. He made it work.

More generally, as he has gotten older he's adapted his style but done it in a way that doesn't diminish how great he is in the ring.

3. Consistency- When he's in a big match, every fan pretty knows he'll deliver 99 times out of 100 and has done for such a long time.

Bounty Hunter

honestly i agree with you on virtually everything youve said. i dont think hes the greatest of all time but is a legend of wrestling, just wanted to give Krudler what he wanted but it seems he left after suggesting a debate.

krudler wrote: »

right lets get some debate going, share an opinion no matter how out there, then defend it:D

a couple of years ago i used to frequent a wrestling site where one guy started running a thread with the Around The Horn theme. for those not used to ATH, its an american show on ESPN where a number of panelists/experts make arguments an a certain topic. The host awards points for each response depending on how well argued their point is, not neccesarily if he agrees with their point but how well they back up their argument. Obviously the winner is the person with the highest number of points. I think this format could actually work quite well here if anyone was interested.

krudler

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

defend it after someone decides to take up the debate i assume seing as you havent backed up your statement....


I disagree, HBK, the Showstopper, undoubtley is one of the greats but not the greatest. He is really good at everything but not the greatest at anything.

Greatest On The Mic: The Rock
Greatest technical Wrestler: Kurt Angle, Chris Benoit or Bret Hart (def not HBK)
Greatest reaction from the crowd: Taker, Hogan, SCSA or The Rock
Title reigns: Hogan, Flair, HHH, The Rock

where exactley does Shaun Micheals fit into the mix then?

but HBK is great at ALL those things, in fairness have you ever seen a bad performance from michaels? now i dont mean a below par off night or something i mean an actual bad match, granted the dx stuff last year was **** but he was still the best thing in it, and this years royal rumble was made by michaels and takers last 10 minutes in it, all the others have had pleny of **** matches no matter how good they were in their respective roles, but as the best all round performer ever, yeah its gotta be michaels

krudler

validreasoning! wrote: »

ECW to me was always glorified backyard/garbage wrestling. It spent most of it's time living off the one glory year it had when it had talented wrestlers! The rest was utter bollox. I had so many people throw ECW DVDs at me begging me to check them out, all i was was dimly lit, grungy, filthy arenas, glorified backyarders, a boring one man commentator and the worst of the lot, Joel Gertner!

VR!

ecw was great at what it did,yeah it had some godawful gimmicks and stoylines (and new jack:mad:) but if it wasnt for ecw there would never have been an attitude era

Vince135792003

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

. The host awards points for each response depending on how well argued their point is, not neccesarily if he agrees with their point but how well they back up their argument. I think this format could actually work quite well here if anyone was interested.

As long as I get a zillion points for my last few posts and krudler gets minus points for never using capitals I'm fine with this idea

Seriously, it might be worth a go I guess.

Bounty Hunter

krudler wrote: »

but HBK is great at ALL those things, in fairness have you ever seen a bad performance from michaels? now i dont mean a below par off night or something i mean an actual bad match, granted the dx stuff last year was **** but he was still the best thing in it, and this years royal rumble was made by michaels and takers last 10 minutes in it, all the others have had pleny of **** matches no matter how good they were in their respective roles, but as the best all round performer ever, yeah its gotta be michaels

HBK is great constantley but greatest i think not is my main point although i do believe there is a decent arguement that his standard is higher than others. however i dont think he will be remembered in the same light as Hulk Hogan, The Rock, Rick Flair or SCSA although he wont be too far behind them.

krudler

But Hogan,Flair and SCSA are all living their careers off past glorys, Michaels is out there every night busting his arse and never phones it in, not to take anything away from the other guys they all made the business what it is, look at his match with HHH at Summerslam 2002, he'd been away from the ring for 5 years and didnt miss a beat once the whole way through the match you'd swear hed never left

Bounty Hunter

krudler wrote: »

But Hogan,Flair and SCSA are all living their careers off past glorys, Michaels is out there every night busting his arse and never phones it in, not to take anything away from the other guys they all made the business what it is, look at his match with HHH at Summerslam 2002, he'd been away from the ring for 5 years and didnt miss a beat once the whole way through the match you'd swear hed never left

were talking about greatest ever not present day so past glories most certainly count and like you said the people ive mentioned made the business what it is and hense will prob be rememberd as the greatest ever.

Witcher

lads, wrestling is fake!

calm down your like a group of old women bickering! jesus

watch cage fighting-now there's realism!


:cool::cool::cool:

ShawnRaven

krudler wrote: »

ecw was great at what it did,yeah it had some godawful gimmicks and stoylines (and new jack:mad:) but if it wasnt for ecw there would never have been an attitude era

I'll agree, but Vince made it into that whereas Heyman couldn't
And if you want to see a bad ECW gimmick? Check out Sandman in 1993! Complete with Surfboard and wetsuit!

VR!

flahavaj

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

Greatest technical Wrestler: Kurt Angle,

I don't have time for in depth analysis of this, except to say that it is one of the greatest mistruths I've ever heard and yet i hear it all the time. Kurt Angle wasn't even the best technical wrestler in WWE in his best year, never mind of all time. There are countless greater purely technical workers.

Double C

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

i dont think he will be remembered in the same light as Hulk Hogan, The Rock, Rick Flair or SCSA although he wont be too far behind them.

I really don't agree on rating the Rock and Austin over Michaels. The Rock and Austin had personality in abundance, probably moreso than Michaels, but in terms of the overall best, Flair is number 1, and Michaels isn't too far behind him.

Muff_Daddy

Okay....here's a few more.

Santino Marella has the potential to be as good on the mic as The Rock. He is that funny.

HHH would not be an 11 times world champion if he wasn't married to Steph.

Val Venis is criminally under-pushed. He deserves to be in the IC division.

I can honestly say I have never enjoyed any of Lashley's work.

Candice Michelle is the most improved wrestler in 2007.

TNA is a complete joke right now, and needs to be sorted out now, or it will never compete.

John Cena has been the WWE's best performer this year.

Kennedy is rubbish on the mic.

Chris Benoit should never be inducted into the HOF.

Double C

krudler wrote: »

But Hogan,Flair and SCSA are all living their careers off past glorys, Michaels is out there every night busting his arse and never phones it in.

I agree totally on Michaels, he's as good now as he ever was. To say Flair is living off glory days is wrong considering he is nearly 60 and has been on top of his game for 20 years, going back to the 70's. OK his latter day stuff tarnishes his legacy a bit but he broke more ground in the wrestling business than anyone. HBK for example wouldn't be half the wrestler had it not been for Flair. Hogan was the biggest draw and best babyface ever, Flair was the best heel. Simple as.

flahavaj

^^^^^^^^
Problem is, none of these are particularly controversial!:D

Muff Daddy's that is!

Bounty Hunter

flahavaj wrote: »

I don't have time for in depth analysis of this, except to say that it is one of the greatest mistruths I've ever heard and yet i hear it all the time. Kurt Angle wasn't even the best technical wrestler in WWE in his best year, never mind of all time. There are countless greater purely technical workers.

well he was mentioned alongside Benoit and Bret Hart and considering he is an olympic champion i though that technically when it comes to real wrestling he might be a good one to mention

Bounty Hunter

Double C wrote: »

I really don't agree on rating the Rock and Austin over Michaels. The Rock and Austin had personality in abundance, probably moreso than Michaels, but in terms of the overall best, Flair is number 1, and Michaels isn't too far behind him.

i dont honestly rate them higher but do think as said they will be rememberd in a slighly and only slightly better light than him just because of the impact they had on the industry which is argueably second only to Hogan (who is clearly not the greatest wrestler).

flahavaj

Bounty Hunter wrote: »

well he was mentioned alongside Benoit and Bret Hart and considering he is an olympic champion i though that technically when it comes to real wrestling he might be a good one to mention

Hmmm. I just don't rate the chap as a great hold for hold technical wrestler in the mould of a Benoit (who granted you mentioned) Regal or many others. If anything Angle was a guy who relied on big spots to get him over (not that there's a whole lot wrong with this,see Foley, Mick, bjt it doesn't make him a great technical wrestler) such as the cage moonsault or endless finishing sequences where finishing holds are reversed ad nauseum. Apart from RR03 Vs Benoit he has rarely participaterd in what i'd term as a technical masterpiece.

The Sparrow

Vince135792003 wrote: »

I'm looking to debate with anybody!

You need to get out more dude!:D

Muff_Daddy

flahavaj wrote: »

^^^^^^^^
Problem is, none of these are particularly controversial!:D

Muff Daddy's that is!

I thought there would be people here who'd disagree...I guess not

flahavaj

Muff_Daddy wrote: »

I thought there would be people here who'd disagree...I guess not

I'd say you're spot on with most of them to be honest, a little hyperbole aside!

estebancambias

TNA puts out the best wrestling product...*sarcasm*

Morishima is a fat tub of goo, who bores every wrestling fan to tears, but he gets credit because people feel he should.

Being serious, Morishima to me is completely boring, I think I liked one match of all the times I have seen him, and that was on the Wrestling Channel for Noah(I think)

You see the youtubers glorifying Morishima as some sort of Demi-God. I think it's a load of balloney(yeah I said balloney), nobody in such terrible physical condition should be permitted to step one foot inside a wrestling ring.

Double C

Muff Daddy, I disagree slightly on Santino, but only for the fact that his promos are written for them. The Rock is just a funny bastard. Santino's main asset is his delivery and if he continues to get good material written for him we'll all be laughing! "Try to make me watch the Condemned, I say no, no, no"

Double C

estebancambias wrote: »

nobody in such terrible physical condition should be permitted to step one foot inside a wrestling ring.

I agree with everything except this line. Are you kidding? Samoa Joe? Physical appearance should count for jack sh*t. Morishima is overrated but decent none the less. His title reign worked because he was booked to be a monster. The best matches he had are the last two I saw from the Death Before Dishonor weekend against Claudio and Albright.

On a sidenote, the DBD weekend was just savage. Briscoes vs Steenerico in a streetfight was definitely the best match of it's type I've ever seen.

estebancambias

Sorry fair enough. Stupid comment.

Mr.Nice Guy

flahavaj wrote: »

I don't have time for in depth analysis of this, except to say that it is one of the greatest mistruths I've ever heard and yet i hear it all the time. Kurt Angle wasn't even the best technical wrestler in WWE in his best year, never mind of all time. There are countless greater purely technical workers.

If there are countless greater purely technical wrestlers than Kurt Angle I'd really like you to name them!

Controversial wrestling opinions? Well I guess these would be considered controversial...

- Ring of Honor is bereft of wrestling psychology and more often than not descends into the territory of farce through the lack of selling and unbelievably drawn out finishes.

- On a similar token to the above point, the Briscoe Brothers are unbelievably overrated. I listened to Chris Jericho on Figure Four's Dr Keith show make the point that they need to understand the psychology of the wrestling business and stop trying to cram in so many things to their matches. He is right.

- Bryan Danielson is boring!

- Triple H is a good, occasionally great wrestler but nothing more. His best period in my opinion was from 2000-02. I regard him as someone who is extremely insecure about his position in the wrestling business and someone intent on acquiring more world title reigns than anyone. If he achieves this I would look upon it as a crying shame.

- Jerry 'The King' Lawler has become stale. It pains me to say that as I loved the guy when I first got into wrestling but I think his standards have dropped in recent years. I actually think JBL brings more to the table now (no pun intended).

- TNA is doomed as long as Russo and co. remain in charge of booking. While WWE can go through periods of crappiness I tend to feel confident that they can turn things around. I have no confidence in TNA managing to do this under their present arrangements.

- John Cena will go down as one of the greatest WWE champions of all time. He will accomplish this by continuing to improve in the ring, continuing to exemplify professionalism in spite of criticism and by becoming a true locker room leader.

- Undertaker needs to re-invent himself once again. He's had his current character since 2004 and we're nearly in 2008. I don't see fans rejecting him but a change would do him good. I'd prefer to see him return to his Ministry of Darkness persona and turn heel though it's probably unlikely.

- JBL was one of the worst WWE champions in history. Great talker but a poor wrestler who was thoroughly undeserving of his spot and in my opinion derived most of his heat because of that.

- Angle vs Michaels at WM21 is overrated. It was a great feud and a great match but shouldn't be regarded as one of the best matches of all time in my view. I've always preferred Y2J vs Michaels at WM19 and Angle vs Guerrero at WM20 to the WM21 match.

fatal

blay1 wrote: »

lads, wrestling is fake!

calm down your like a group of old women bickering! jesus

watch cage fighting-now there's realism!


:cool::cool::cool:

as opposed to the whole Tito VS Shamrock "feud" which was 100% legit:rolleyes:

Cage fighting???????????Shows how much you know about the sport anyway.Let me guess,you read a tabloid and decided to go a Cage rage show because it sounded like "deadly buzz!"

orestes

A couple of posts up it mentions the Michaels -vs- Y2J Mania match, one of the best matches I have ever seen. Just thought it deserved another mention.

Michaels has been there for literally my entire life (I'm 23) and he has been busting his ass and putting on great matches the whole time. Granted, STSA or the Rock are better on the mic, and Benoit or Angle is a better technical wrestler, but they have all come and gone. Michaels has been a constant the whole time, and he has made great matches the whole way through. Overall, he deserves to be spoken about when we talk about the greatest of all time, even if he isn't gonna win the honour.

gimmick

Cant disagree much with anything thats been said so far, but one thing I feel needs to be said is that WWE is slowly killing wrestling as a mainstream sport or entertainment. Reason being is their pushing policys, that no hopers like Batista, Lashley and Cena can top the card. Honestly, Cena is decent on the mic, but his comedy act with his consta penis and gay jokes are ridiculous. And yes, i will admit that thats the reason he is automatic turn off TV for me. He might be okay in the ring - i just cant stomach to watch him.

Add this the post Benoit tragedy which WWE turned into farce with some of their official statements, and the appearnces made by various talent, most notably Kennedy, Finlay, Cena and most hilariously of all Vince Mcmahon himself. Fact of the matter is, is that WWE not only isn't against steroid and enhancements, it actively fúcking promotes it. As long as this is the case, more and more people will not bother caring about it anymore.

TNA are as big culprits for this, or indeed would be if more than a handful of people even knew they existed.

Another opinion, and that is Russo isn't the sole problem with TNA. It was **** before him, and its **** now. Dutch Mantel and Jarrett are bigger culprits for ingeniously outrageous booking.

dlofnep

krudler wrote: »

right lets get some debate going, share an opinion no matter how out there, then defend it:D

Shawn Michaels is the greatest wrestler of all time

Out of all the technical wrestler, Kurt Angle is probably the greatest of all time active in pro wrestling. Other notable mentions are Gary Albright, Kazushi Sakuraba, Tazz and Kiyoshi Tamura.

The greatest "wrestler" of all time was Aleksander Karelin. Dan Gable is also up there.

ShawnRaven

blay1 wrote: »

lads, wrestling is fake!

calm down your like a group of old women bickering! jesus

watch cage fighting-now there's realism!


:cool::cool::cool:

You don't like what you're reading? Simple solution. F*ck off over to the SD and MA forum.
:cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool:

VR!

krudler

validreasoning! wrote: »

You don't like what you're reading? Simple solution. F*ck off over to the SD and MA forum.
:cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool:

VR!

well said that man

Tricity Bendix

Muff_Daddy wrote: »

Santino Marella has the potential to be as good on the mic as The Rock. He is that funny.

I'd like to see him ad lib something before declaring a position on what his potential could be. I cannot base an opinion on someone's mic potential on material that has been written for them. Plus, he was terrible as a face, whereas Rock could pull of both face and heel with equal perfection.

HHH would not be an 11 times world champion if he wasn't married to Steph.

Very true. Although I think he has proved he has the ability to be a champion, the number of title runs is sickening when you think of all the guys who could have carried the strap instead. And even if Trips was willing to put someone over these days, defeating an 11-time champ isn't going to give a significantly bigger rub than defeating a 10-time champ.

Val Venis is criminally under-pushed. He deserves to be in the IC division.

Venis could have main-evented in his prime, in my opinion. His title match against the Rock proved that he can expand his game to suit longer, high stakes matches. However, his role at the moment is to help new talent improve. This is also a very important role, and not one the WWE could do without.

Candice Michelle is the most improved wrestler in 2007.

But seeing as how she started from such a low base I would still consider her unworthy of her title run. Most improved wrestler of 2007 would have to be Orton or Cena.

TNA is a complete joke right now, and needs to be sorted out now, or it will never compete.

Not a complete joke. They still manage to put on very decent wrestling matches from time to time. But I do not believe they will ever compete with the WWE.

Chris Benoit should never be inducted into the HOF.

I agree. The HOF has nothing to do with wrestling ability or input in to the industry. The HOF dosn't deserve having a master of the sport like Benoit in its ranks. I never thought Hart should have accepted the award, either.

ShawnRaven

b.ie polar wrote: »

Very true. Although I think he has proved he has the ability to be a champion, the number of title runs is sickening when you think of all the guys who could have carried the strap instead. And even if Trips was willing to put someone over these days, defeating an 11-time champ isn't going to give a significantly bigger rub than defeating a 10-time champ.

Like who exactly? Other than Cena, Orton and Michaels, that's about it. And they've all had their day in the sun. So you're looking at a pretty thin list to be honest. And quite honestly, I'd rather see an 11-14 time HHH champion than another 1 year run of Cena as champion.

VR!

flahavaj

Mr.Nice Guy wrote: »

If there are countless greater purely technical wrestlers than Kurt Angle I'd really like you to name them!

- Ring of Honor is bereft of wrestling psychology and more often than not descends into the territory of farce through the lack of selling and unbelievably drawn out finishes.

Your comment on ROH actually pretty much sums up my opinion of Angle.

As for superior technical wrestlers, just off the top of my head: (bear in mind I'm not saying they are a better all round package or achieved more in their careers but as in ring technicians they are in my opinion far superior)

Benoit
Regal
Malenko
Flair
Dory Funk
Danielson
Mil Mascaras
Antoni Inoki
Fit Finlay
Eddie Guerrero
Kurt Hennig
Steamboat
Toishiaki Kawada
Giant Baba
The Destroyer

Hell, someone like Val Venis is probably a better mat based chain wrestler than Angle and I'm not joking.


If you really want to see technical wrestling watch some All Japan from the 70's such as the Giant Baba/Destroyer feud. When guys are working each others FINGERS and selling them throughout an entire 1 hour match you know your watching a technical masterpiece. It really puts paid to the myth that Angle is the greatest technical wrestler of all time.

In return I'd like you to name some of the technical mat based classics he's had that don't involve silly bumps and highspots and in which he actually manages to consistently sell a body part properly.(and I've named RR03 vs Benoit already.) Surely the greatest technical wrestler ever will have countless examples. Bear in mind I'm not bashing Angles work as such, just bursting the myth that he's some kind of master in-ring technician.

ShawnRaven

Funny you mention that, because out of anyone better than Angle, Benoit was first on my list too. You missed Owen and Bret Hart as well who were a lot more technical than WWE allowed them to be most of the time, and their Wrestlemania X and matches throughout 94 are two very good examples. Same for Dynamite Kid, those 3 i'd easily substitute for Baba, Danielson and Finlay (who was great in his prime, but who is now a shadow of his former self)

VR!

Tricity Bendix

validreasoning! wrote: »

Like who exactly? Other than Cena, Orton and Michaels, that's about it. And they've all had their day in the sun. So you're looking at a pretty thin list to be honest. And quite honestly, I'd rather see an 11-14 time HHH champion than another 1 year run of Cena as champion.

VR!

Jericho, Guerrero and Benoit shouldn't have had to wait so long for their title runs. Kane (in his prime, certainly not now) would be another one who could have held the strap.

flahavaj

validreasoning! wrote: »

Funny you mention that, because out of anyone better than Angle, Benoit was first on my list too. You missed Owen and Bret Hart as well who were a lot more technical than WWE allowed them to be most of the time, and their Wrestlemania X and matches throughout 94 are two very good examples. Same for Dynamite Kid, those 3 i'd easily substitute for Baba, Danielson and Finlay (who was great in his prime, but who is now a shadow of his former self)

VR!

Well there you go, I was only throwing out names off the top of my head, certainly the Harts and Dynamite (can't believe I omitted him, one of my favourites of all time:mad:) were far superior I'm considering everyone in their prime here, as surely we must if we're discussing the greatest technician of all time and that includes Angles best work also.

ShawnRaven

b.ie polar wrote: »

Jericho, Guerrero and Benoit shouldn't have had to wait so long for their title runs. Kane (in his prime, certainly not now) would be another one who could have held the strap.

Hold up a sec, Jericho got his first run 2 years in the company, while HHH had to wait 4 years. So Jericho is a bad example there.

Kane? Not a chance! Especially when he was given the belt for his 24 hour run. There was a reason why he was given his gimmick, because he couldn't cut a promo to save his life. That's a big factor for top guys. Same with Benoit, as great as he was in the ring, are we really meant to be bowled over when he tells us he's "4 real"? Guerrero i will give you, but given the amount of times he's f*cked up over the years in both WCW and WWE, obviously the company was gonna be somewhat cautious before giving him the main strap. So Guerrero realistically only has himself to blame.

VR!

Witcher

fatal wrote: »

as opposed to the whole Tito VS Shamrock "feud" which was 100% legit:rolleyes:

Cage fighting???????????Shows how much you know about the sport anyway.Let me guess,you read a tabloid and decided to go a Cage rage show because it sounded like "deadly buzz!"

you're a funny man! hahah


watching men pretend to hit each other

SAD!!

when they bleed they cut themselves!

ask youselves this- why after a match do none of them have black eyes??

they get trashed for 20 minutes and turn up the next day in pristine condition!

My opinion is that its fake!

GROW UP


:cool::cool::cool:

Witcher

validreasoning! wrote: »

You don't like what you're reading? Simple solution. F*ck off over to the SD and MA forum.
:cool::cool::cool::cool::cool::cool:

VR!

ohhhhhhhh!!! touchy! touchy! please dont hit me with your steel chair!


hahahahhahahahahaa


:cool::cool::cool:

krudler

blay1 wrote: »

you're a funny man! hahah

except that you're a very sad man!

watching men pretend to hit each other

SAD!!

when they bleed they cut themselves!

ask youselves this- why after a match do none of them have black eyes??

they get trashed for 20 minutes and turn up the next day in pristine condition!

My opinion is that its fake!

GROW UP


:cool::cool::cool:

****ing DUH how else do you think it happens, i love the way idiots who know nothing about wrestling think they know more about it than people who actually watch it