|
Post by James McCloud IS John Godot on May 11, 2010 22:59:23 GMT -5
He was good. He brought something to the table. He had a nice run. But a legend? Like, honest to goodness one of the greatest of all time, legend? Wow, no. I don't believe so.
|
|
|
Post by BlackoutCreature on May 12, 2010 1:41:23 GMT -5
Just because he liked to swear alot on the mic doesn't make him good on it IMO. It was just a cheap way to get heat. Definitely not a legend. An ECW legend, but not an overall wrestling legend. If I can touch on his mic skills for a second. The things about Douglas is that while his promo's wouldn't traditionally be called "good" by modern standards, they were definitely innovative and influential. He was the first guy to do things like curse, shoot and call people out. Nobody was doing things like that in his early days (94-95ish). The problem is within a few short years, just about every major player in the WWF, WCW and ECW, if not taking Douglas' bit wholesale, was atleast taking aspects of it, and most of them were doing it a lot better then Douglas ever could. Whether that makes him a legend or not is up for debate though.
|
|
|
Post by Slingshot Suplay on May 12, 2010 2:13:53 GMT -5
Even if the I-C title run lasted a whole 10 mins? That he only given because HBK forfit because he was hurt. The US title run how can you say that means anything. When it was during the dieing days of WCW. WCW was a joke at the time he became champion. The way WCW was ran how can you even think anybody in WCW knew what the hell they where doing was ever a good move? On top of that was he even impressive as either champion no. How can a 10 min title run be said that he was worth something? How does holding the US during the worst of the company when he beat the likes of Hugh Morris to win it. Nothing against Bill Demont but it not impressive when you beat a guy who spend most of the time in WCW as a jobber to the stars. That was only pushed for about 6 months with MIA. So yeah I can't really say that WWF and WCW didn't think he was worthless when what the whole picture looked like. Shawn Michaels was champion during one of the worst financial times in the WWF, is Shawn's legacy tainted because the company was in bad shape? Was it his fault? No, it wasn't. Just because WCW was in bad shape management-wise doesn't mean that the title reigns of guys like Shane Douglas, Jeff Jarrett, Booker T and others meant absolutely nothing. As far as his 10 minute IC title reign, obviously the company recognized he was over enough as a heel to even have a program for the IC title, let alone holding it for even a minute at a time when the IC title had prestige.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,137
|
Post by Mozenrath on May 12, 2010 2:33:22 GMT -5
He's a legend of sorts, yes. You can't tell the story of early ECW without him. If you think that is worth something, sure, he's a legend. If you don't think anything of ECW, then no, he isn't a legend in your eyes. I think ECW was the greatest promotion I've ever seen. On that side, anyone could have won that match and anyone could have cut the same promo and threw away the belt. To me, he just happened to be the person that Paul picked to cut the promo. I think more credit should go to Paul for booking that angle. We could talk about what could of, would of, or should of happened, but like all arguments about people being in the right place at the right time, it really comes down to speculation. I think Shane was the right guy for things to happen, even if he's not a personal favorite.
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on May 12, 2010 8:24:35 GMT -5
Even if the I-C title run lasted a whole 10 mins? That he only given because HBK forfit because he was hurt. The US title run how can you say that means anything. When it was during the dieing days of WCW. WCW was a joke at the time he became champion. The way WCW was ran how can you even think anybody in WCW knew what the hell they where doing was ever a good move? On top of that was he even impressive as either champion no. How can a 10 min title run be said that he was worth something? How does holding the US during the worst of the company when he beat the likes of Hugh Morris to win it. Nothing against Bill Demont but it not impressive when you beat a guy who spend most of the time in WCW as a jobber to the stars. That was only pushed for about 6 months with MIA. So yeah I can't really say that WWF and WCW didn't think he was worthless when what the whole picture looked like. Shawn Michaels was champion during one of the worst financial times in the WWF, is Shawn's legacy tainted because the company was in bad shape? Was it his fault? No, it wasn't. Just because WCW was in bad shape management-wise doesn't mean that the title reigns of guys like Shane Douglas, Jeff Jarrett, Booker T and others meant absolutely nothing. As far as his 10 minute IC title reign, obviously the company recognized he was over enough as a heel to even have a program for the IC title, let alone holding it for even a minute at a time when the IC title had prestige. For HBK is no because he was still facing big enough stars and having good matches and despite the money problems the WWE had. The on air product wasn't terrible. Now Shane it all great that he got to work a program for the title. That doesn't mean he was that over. There been a lot of "not so over guys" Who had gotten title shots. Hell Hardcore Holly got a WWE title shot in 04.. That guy was mid card for life going into that. So you honestly believe he was that over to be in the ME? I'm sure you do. The real reason he only got that match because he was an easy back story. Which why after that match he went no where but back to Mid card king. Teaming will Billy Gunn. He was only champion for ten mins which was odvise that there was no plans for Shane to have a long title run. Just because he got a shot doesn't mean he was that over. Booker T and Jarrett title runs means very little from the time because the way that World title was booked. As A joke. That belt along changed hands 6 times in ONE month. When you have David Arquette holding that same belt. How much meaning does it have when a movie actor with no wrestling training can become champion? Yeah it one thing having money issues but it is another when your product is terrible as well. It not Shane fault but what I'm saying at that point it ment jack. Because three months after he won it the company was out of business. So by that time nobody have a crap. Your talking about a US title run during the time the product was bad. Fans where wearing bags over there head at the shows and holding pro WWE signs. That doesn't paint a good picture for anybody to say who is and isn't over. Plus working that program with Hugh Morris doesn't help. Point I'm making is that your making these title runs like it ment so much. Yes the I-C title at the time ment a great deal but it doesn't automanicly make whoever hold the belt that much of a bigger star when he doesn't get it long then a couple mins.
|
|
NIXON
Unicron
Hail to the Chief Bootknocker
Posts: 3,354
|
Post by NIXON on May 12, 2010 8:40:12 GMT -5
Shawn Michaels was champion during one of the worst financial times in the WWF, is Shawn's legacy tainted because the company was in bad shape? Was it his fault? No, it wasn't. Just because WCW was in bad shape management-wise doesn't mean that the title reigns of guys like Shane Douglas, Jeff Jarrett, Booker T and others meant absolutely nothing. As far as his 10 minute IC title reign, obviously the company recognized he was over enough as a heel to even have a program for the IC title, let alone holding it for even a minute at a time when the IC title had prestige. For HBK is no because he was still facing big enough stars and having good matches and despite the money problems the WWE had. The on air product wasn't terrible. Now Shane it all great that he got to work a program for the title. That doesn't mean he was that over. There been a lot of "not so over guys" Who had gotten title shots. Hell Hardcore Holly got a WWE title shot in 04.. That guy was mid card for life going into that. So you honestly believe he was that over to be in the ME? I'm sure you do. The real reason he only got that match because he was an easy back story. Which why after that match he went no where but back to Mid card king. Teaming will Billy Gunn. He was only champion for ten mins which was odvise that there was no plans for Shane to have a long title run. Just because he got a shot doesn't mean he was that over. Booker T and Jarrett title runs means very little from the time because the way that World title was booked. As A joke. That belt along changed hands 6 times in ONE month. When you have David Arquette holding that same belt. How much meaning does it have when a movie actor with no wrestling training can become champion? Yeah it one thing having money issues but it is another when your product is terrible as well. It not Shane fault but what I'm saying at that point it ment jack. Because three months after he won it the company was out of business. So by that time nobody have a crap. Your talking about a US title run during the time the product was bad. Fans where wearing bags over there head at the shows and holding pro WWE signs. That doesn't paint a good picture for anybody to say who is and isn't over. Plus working that program with Hugh Morris doesn't help. Point I'm making is that your making these title runs like it ment so much. Yes the I-C title at the time ment a great deal but it doesn't automanicly make whoever hold the belt that much of a bigger star when he doesn't get it long then a couple mins. But the fact that after just a few short months he was working a program with Razor Ramon and Shawn Michaels, leads me to believe he was pretty over as a heel. And who is to say he might not have had a very long title run if not for The Kliq bitching to McMahon.
|
|
|
Post by navajomartian on May 12, 2010 15:00:01 GMT -5
I considered him a mediocre Brian Pillman.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips Has Left on May 12, 2010 15:54:12 GMT -5
Even as an ECW legend, he still takes a back seat to Funk, Sandman, Sabu, Taz, RVD, Dreamer and Raven.
|
|
|
Post by Shameful_Lobsterhead on May 12, 2010 17:01:40 GMT -5
As a wrestler -NWA World Heayweight Champion -ECW World Champion (4x) -ECW TV Champion -XPW World Champion -WWE IC Champion -WCW US Champion -WCW World Tag Team Champion (2x) -Hardcore Hall of Fame (2009) -Formed legendary ECW faction, Triple Threat
His stats speak for themselves, he is def a ECW legend but legend overall...No. I would say he is a high midcard legend at best
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on May 12, 2010 22:53:08 GMT -5
For HBK is no because he was still facing big enough stars and having good matches and despite the money problems the WWE had. The on air product wasn't terrible. Now Shane it all great that he got to work a program for the title. That doesn't mean he was that over. There been a lot of "not so over guys" Who had gotten title shots. Hell Hardcore Holly got a WWE title shot in 04.. That guy was mid card for life going into that. So you honestly believe he was that over to be in the ME? I'm sure you do. The real reason he only got that match because he was an easy back story. Which why after that match he went no where but back to Mid card king. Teaming will Billy Gunn. He was only champion for ten mins which was odvise that there was no plans for Shane to have a long title run. Just because he got a shot doesn't mean he was that over. Booker T and Jarrett title runs means very little from the time because the way that World title was booked. As A joke. That belt along changed hands 6 times in ONE month. When you have David Arquette holding that same belt. How much meaning does it have when a movie actor with no wrestling training can become champion? Yeah it one thing having money issues but it is another when your product is terrible as well. It not Shane fault but what I'm saying at that point it ment jack. Because three months after he won it the company was out of business. So by that time nobody have a crap. Your talking about a US title run during the time the product was bad. Fans where wearing bags over there head at the shows and holding pro WWE signs. That doesn't paint a good picture for anybody to say who is and isn't over. Plus working that program with Hugh Morris doesn't help. Point I'm making is that your making these title runs like it ment so much. Yes the I-C title at the time ment a great deal but it doesn't automanicly make whoever hold the belt that much of a bigger star when he doesn't get it long then a couple mins. But the fact that after just a few short months he was working a program with Razor Ramon and Shawn Michaels, leads me to believe he was pretty over as a heel. And who is to say he might not have had a very long title run if not for The Kliq bitching to McMahon. Hard to say really. Only Vince really would know what he had planned orginally for that feud. But like I said before. In the WWE you never know. But then again like another example I used. Hardcore Holly had a program with Lensar. Was he really that over to have a ME feud with Lensar over to lets say Angle for example? Overness sometimes you wonder. What about Billy Gunn in late 00. Who had month title run as I-C champion. Was he that over as "the One" No he wasn't. That why he was depush as a singles guy and then became a Tag team which is what he does best.
|
|
|
Post by James Fabiano on May 12, 2010 23:03:11 GMT -5
Is it me or does anyone get a chuckle imagining Shane at his Target store going to the toy department and doing a shoot on how Dick Prime held back all the other Autobots? (As it was mentioned on another site...)
|
|
|
Post by "Playboy" Don Douglas on May 12, 2010 23:57:20 GMT -5
I picture him checking the toy department, seeing a Ric Flair action figure, and slowly walking away, shaking his head and muttering profanities.
|
|
|
Post by Ryushinku on May 13, 2010 7:52:29 GMT -5
He did get to spank Kimona.
That's pretty legendary.
|
|
|
Post by Judas Heyman on May 22, 2010 0:51:03 GMT -5
I consider Shane Douglas to be an ECW legend....he will be remembered as the guy who was the man in ECW but couldn't cut it in WWF or WCW. Shane's ego is bigger than his wrestling talent.Period.
|
|
|
Post by poontangler on May 22, 2010 1:08:31 GMT -5
Shane was definitely an ECW legend, for sure. A wrestling legend? No, definitely not. While I was never a big fan, I always thought he had good matches. But I also agree with many of you, his biggest fan was himself.
|
|