Unpopular wrestling opinions

rovert

Omackeral wrote: »

Serious women's wrestling to me is what what women's football is to most other blokes. It's just irrelevant in the grand schemes of things, for the most part. I see you know or knew Lynch/Knox on a personal level though, so can understand the support.

I can understand that but if there is an exception to the rule for you or anyone else with your POV it probably is/will be her. Genuinely anyone I know, read or heard who has met her or saw her Wrestle always are effusive about it. It sounds like I am biased, fanboying and if we weren't on an Irish forum you could accuse me of Nationalism but I am being as objective as can be about her. Could spend the rest of the day phrasing a hundred other ways but she's honestly a stand out by either male or female Wrestling standards on a Worldwide basis.

Sirsok

I wish all world heavyweight title wins from 2003 when triple h was given the title wasn't counted when a wrestler states how many time they have been the champ....the likes of cena orton edge or HHH becoming double figure champions is bull**** when you consider the amount of title wins the likes of Austin taker hart hbk rock hogan have. I think it's insulting! Ziggler being what a two time world champ? Swagger etc

I don't know why but it annoys me so much!

grames_bond

^^ I agree!

I mean John Cena has more titles than HBK and Bret Hart combined!

A Primal Nut

connemara man wrote: »

Not sure if unpopular but I think look/size is important. Ie Reigns look/size makes him the more impressive of the three in the Shield.

I agree. I never got all the smarky hate for big, muscly guys. The great thing about WWE superstars is their diversity, I certainly wouldn't want everyone to be a technical submisssion specialist. The big strong brawlers can be just as impressive. There is definitely a place for them especially as heels; and often the best stories are the skillful, smaller baby face beating the big strong heel.

Certainly if I am at a live show; the likes of Big Show and Kane will always be a big attraction.

I guess the main reason big guys got a bad reputation are because of Vince signing guys with zero skill like Giant Gonzalez and the Great Khali.

Vision of Disorder

A Primal Nut wrote: »

Certainly if I am at a live show; the likes of Big Show and Kane will always be a big attraction.

Just on Big Show, his KO punch finisher is possibly my least favourite in the history of wrestling, it looks like it's pulled every time (because it's pulled obviously), is a really ham fisted way of making him seem strong (and everybody else on the roster who's ever thrown a punch look weak) and is another example of them ignoring their own 'rules'. Isn't a closed fist punch grounds for DQ (or at least an agitated ref) when it suits them?

Deadlie

On the topic of numbers of titles held, I always thought the bigger the number the less impressive it was.

Oh you've held the belt 14 times?... So you lost it 13 times before, yeah?

Omackeral

Deadlie wrote: »

On the topic of numbers of titles held, I always thought the bigger the number the less impressive it was.

Oh you've held the belt 14 times?... So you lost it 13 times before, yeah?

OMG Ric Flair was a jobber!

Deadlie

Omackeral wrote: »

OMG Ric Flair was a jobber!

:pac:
I always thought they should just said 'X held the belt for XYZ amount of days'. Numder of times one means nothing; Like one of Cena's reigns was under 5 minutes and Orton won the belt twice at No Mercy a few years back.

nasty_crash

I love the shield - but my unpopular opinion is being force fed Roman Reigns!!
I like the guy as a wrestler and understand his part in the shield but i think WWe have there plans for him.... he doesnt wrestle outside of 4 or 5 moves now - as much as i love ambrose and rollins in ring work for both - but all he seems to do now is superman punch and spear!!
But the main thing that annoys me about him is the amount of actions he does between moves is a bit ridiculous - i seen on raw about 3 weeks ago he readied his arm (i dont know what way to explain it!!!) about 4 times before he hit the superman punch and i was just thinking.... will ya just calm down a bit!!

Just a bit of overkill for me... love the shield with the masks tho... thats epic!!!

Omackeral

Deadlie wrote: »

:pac:
I always thought they should just said 'X held the belt for XYZ amount of days'. Numder of times one means nothing; Like one of Cena's reigns was under 5 minutes and Orton won the belt twice at No Mercy a few years back.

Punk's 434 day reign did that nicely actually. Good shout.

Ape Lincoln

Omackeral wrote: »

OMG Ric Flair was a jobber!

Some of his 16 world titles came about cause they'd drop the belt at a house show and he would win it back. There's a lot of confussion actually about how many times he won cause of this. I've seen estimates that it could be up to 20

TGJD

A Primal Nut wrote: »

I agree. I never got all the smarky hate for big, muscly guys. The great thing about WWE superstars is their diversity, I certainly wouldn't want everyone to be a technical submisssion specialist. The big strong brawlers can be just as impressive. There is definitely a place for them especially as heels; and often the best stories are the skillful, smaller baby face beating the big strong heel.

Certainly if I am at a live show; the likes of Big Show and Kane will always be a big attraction.

I guess the main reason big guys got a bad reputation are because of Vince signing guys with zero skill like Giant Gonzalez and the Great Khali.

I very much agree with this point. It is something that really annoys me, how much people seem to hate big wrestlers and want a roster of Cm punks and daniel bryans. That would bore the hell out of me for one anyway. They are good wrestlers and fun to watch as well but the really big guys using power moves are more fun to watch for me and when they compete against smaller guys you then have a good story on the match, watching the small guy try to string together moves to take the big guy down and avoid being hit. It gets to me on here when people get really pissy about the big guys no selling some moves and burying the small guys but to me it makes more sense. Someone like russev will take a lot more punishment to get down and keep down than daniel bryan would, that is just realism. I think the look is really important for wrestling, a guy with a physique like reigns just looks the part and is a lot more intimidating than cm punk. Reigns is believable as a guy who can come down to the ring and clear 3 or 4 guys by himself whereas cm punk or daniel bryan are better suited to fight as underdogs who manage to beat their opponents by catching them in a submission out of nowhere. Of course I am one of the few people who have enjoyed watching russev dominate people these last few weeks and throw people which is the wrong opinion to have on the internet. As for being the the audience I;d actually more look forward to seeing the larger than life monsters like kane or brock lesnar than watching daniel bryan do some nice technical wrestling. If prefer to watch brock lesnar destroying an opponent than watching technical wrestling, that seems to be a hugely unpopular thing to say these days but I'm sure if the smarky fans got their way and everyone was a small technical wrestler then the business would end up dying out and even the smarks would get bored with no one to make fun off. they would have to resort to hating daniel bryan because he is slightly lore muscular than cm punk.

While I'm here I also think that Bray Wyatt is one of the most entertaining in ring performers in WWE. He is a much better story teller than almost anyone else, he plays up pscyhing out his opponents in the ring and never slips out of character. It wouldn't be believable for him to be super technical and be the type of wrestler internet forum people want to see. He is a cult leader from some rural part of america. His moveset is fairly unpredictable and disjointed and he uses some less seen but high impact moves. they don;t look pretty but they look effective, which is what I would expect of a crazed cult leader.

DM_7

Those points on Wyatt are well made, remember what Undertaker uaed to be like!

max life

Rusev bores the hell out of me.

Hashtag_HEEL

max life wrote: »

Rusev bores the hell out of me.

Lana is the only upside to him. Other than that he's boring generic foreigner #594

leggo

max life wrote: »

Rusev bores the hell out of me.

Give him a chance, Cesaro got booked the exact same way when he first came in and the only difference with him and Rusev was that anyone who knew the indies knew he had a lot more to offer. We won't be able to fairly judge Rusev for a couple months at least.

ShagNastii

I said in the Extreme Rules thread. Whatever it is about him I don't see him as the "monster behemoth" they are making him out to be.

Think it might be his height?

gerrybbadd

ShagNastii wrote: »

I said in the Extreme Rules thread. Whatever it is about him I don't see him as the "monster behemoth" they are making him out to be.

Think it might be his height?

Or his truck driver physique

gnfnrhead

leggo wrote: »

Give him a chance, Cesaro got booked the exact same way when he first came in and the only difference with him and Rusev was that anyone who knew the indies knew he had a lot more to offer. We won't be able to fairly judge Rusev for a couple months at least.

Despite the booking, Cesaro was showing he had the talent and ability. Can't say the same for Rusev thus far.

Blue_Dabadee

max life wrote: »

Rusev bores the hell out of me.

That's not exactly an unpopular opinion on here.

I have neither been impressed by Rusev in the ring and this is coming from a guy who has watched most of his matches from NXT.

One thing that separates Rusev from other generic foreign heels in the past is that he has a hot ass manager.

jaykhunter

Yeah I've no time for "Wascaly Wussians" or played out stereotypes - I hear Rusev is an accomplished wrestler though, much better work in NXT. They've given Lana her own theme so I'm sure she'll drop him soon enough, like Lita & Essa Rios!

ShagNastii

jaykhunter wrote: »

Yeah I've no time for "Wascaly Wussians" or played out stereotypes - I hear Rusev is an accomplished wrestler though, much better work in NXT. They've given Lana her own theme so I'm sure she'll drop him soon enough, like Lita & Essa Rios!

I don't wholly mind stereotype gimmicks but half the time it lumps a wrestler with a one dimensional character that can't really be expanded on.

With the likes of Rusev, Borga and Koslov. The silent foreign toughman is done once they've beat a few jobbers and challenged for a title.

But Sheamus' hardfighting smiling Irishmen thing has been brilliant. And all of super super Regal was produced when milking the Englishman thing (be that his pomp or his British style of slapstick).

bobby_says_hi

It's just the way a monster heel gets booked when they first debut. They have to have squash matches to establish them as the formidable threat. Once he actually gets an opponent who's able to fight back at him somewhat and have a meaningful feud with, then he'll probably fare better

On the topic of Lana, one I think I like about her is that she reminds me of a female Paul Heyman in a way. Apart from the way she dresses (and even then it's not too overtly sexy), it's a role that could easily be filled by a man.

Omackeral

I loved the ending to Wyatt vs Cena cage match. Loved it. Sent goosebumps through me.

Lord TSC

Could be unpopular with some - I'm loving Rusev right now. He looks like a beast, but seems to have a fair bit of agility. His superkick looks awesome imo.

leggo

gnfnrhead wrote: »

Despite the booking, Cesaro was showing he had the talent and ability. Can't say the same for Rusev thus far.

It's tough to show your full arsenal in two minute matches though.

krudler

Teamshadowclan wrote: »

Could be unpopular with some - I'm loving Rusev right now. He looks like a beast, but seems to have a fair bit of agility. His superkick looks awesome imo.

I like him too, the silent Russian stereotype is ridiculously 80's (even though he's not Russian but tell that to WWE, the Putin thing was in fairly bad taste too, using real world events for cheap heat is stupid in this day and age unless its something throwaway like insulting a home team losing or whatever, wars not so much). He does look impressive though.

ShagNastii

Was just looking at the reports of David Benoit in the news thread.

Don't know whether it's unpopular but I think the reporting of him and his pursuit to become a wrestler to be painful to read.

The poor chap has been dealt a truly horrendous hand in life. Of course he has a link to his father and his father's legacy but don't mention the crimes that Chris conducted linking it to his son. He had SFA to do with that.

The whole Benoit incident and how it's dealt with is a bit of head scratcher to me. I don't know if you have all seen MVP's interview about it. I would share MVP's views. The mind is a mind field and the brain is so delicate.

Like so much in the media there is "good mental illness" and "bad/evil mental illness".

gimmick

Iron Sheik stories bore me

beakerjoe

- Vince made a big mistake in letting Jeff Jarrett go in 99, could have been a use asset to the company in relation to being an agent back stage. Think he could have been big in WWE if used right


-
- Brodus Clay's gimmick is horrible, but he's a decent enough wrestler. Hes completely mis-used by creative

- WWE's recent tag team division, is still horrible. None of the teams there are really worth anything.

- CM Punk went downhill fast as a face and Im happy he isnt back as Ive been enjoying him being away. Much better heel.

- Michael Cole is fine when he is in commentator mode. It's when he slips into heel or comedy mode that he sucks. (Though he is basically Vinces puppet.

- Booker T and The King are awful commentators. Both need to be let go.

- Jeff Hardy/Willow isn't that bad. His promos suck, but when it comes to wrestling he is still quite good. I just rather Jeff Hardy than Willow.

- I hope we don't see Steve Austin wrestle again. He was going downhill fast when he retired, imagine how bad he would be after such a long break. Should stay retired

- Think the majority of the WWE undercard should be either used properly or fired.

-I think TNA have a great roster, its just mis managed by creative. Awful booking has crippled it in recent times