|
Post by Piccolo on Jul 24, 2011 20:18:46 GMT -5
I don't care about drawing power. When I'm ranking a wrestler my criteria is based on one thing and one thing only: how much entertainment I got out of them over the years (with big bonus points to having great matches). So with that being said, Shawn Michaels is in the Top 3 best wrestlers of all time, maybe in the #1 spot depending on my mood. Wouldn't this be more of a top favorite wrestlers list, rather than best? Don't mean to be picky, but you're not the only one who seems to be misinterpreting the question here. I mean, I'm not partial to Hogan (he'd never make a favorites list of mine), but I'd never try to argue that he's not one of the best ever at performing in such a manner that got people interested and motivated to spend money to see his exploits. Pro wrestling is performance art. What good is a piece of art if it's never experienced? I don't agree with the general public's taste in a lot of things, but I can recognize it for being good for what it is. It's presumptuous to say that people are misinterpreting the question based on nothing but your realization that your interpretation and theirs don't match. How do you know that you aren't misintepreting the question? Anyway, people rank based on their opinions of what criteria are important. No one has to rank based on yours, nor do you have to rank based on theirs. If you don't think Bret Hart is better than Hulk Hogan, that's your prerogative, but others who weight certain characteristics more heavily than others may disagree. That doesn't mean they're misunderstanding the question, or that they can't recognize what's good. Any art could be judged as unworthy if it's not well known. But I wouldn't take that road. I think popularity and excellence sometimes go hand-in-hand, but sometimes they don't.
|
|
|
Post by crimsonwolf on Jul 24, 2011 20:49:47 GMT -5
HBK is easily a top 10, maybe top 5. Him and Bret had the unfortunate situation of not being at the top during Wrestling peak period in the 90's. Bret got lost in the shuffle in WCW and had a game breaking injury. Shawn pretty much broke his back and missed out on the WWF really taking off.
|
|
|
Post by gnr123 on Jul 24, 2011 22:07:24 GMT -5
Greatet of all time? Nope, nto even close. There's many wrestlers who were better than Michaels. He's not even in the top 20. I am not trying to agree or disagree here but can you please name the 20 that you feel are better? I am curious. Well, I can't name the all, becuase there's been so many great wrestlers through wrestlings history. Guy's like Mysterio, Terry Funk, Ric Flair, Hogan, Jerry Lawler, Undertaker. Michael's was never the top draw, his run as the top guy wasn't as good, his matches weren't always good, he definately is not the best wrestler of at time.
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Jul 24, 2011 22:12:58 GMT -5
Of ALL time in terms of WWE all time then hes probably top 5-10. Of ALL TIME of ALL TIME factoring in all the territories, and the complete history of every guy in the business then Shawn doesn't rank anywheres near the top. He was never a huge draw, never led a boom period, very good-great in the ring but there has been better. Granted, there hasnt been too many better if you just include WWE but of all time, there yes theres been plenty better. WWE ranking: Top 5-10 of all time below the likes of Bruno, Hogan, Superstar Billy Graham, Piper, Savage, Austin, Rock, etc. And probably on par with Bret Hart and Taker OF ALL TIME: Top 40-50 somewheres but no higher No higher than 40th? So you can name 39 wrestlers better than Shawn Michaels? Dying to see this list.
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Jul 24, 2011 22:19:33 GMT -5
Well, I can't name the all, becuase there's been so many great wrestlers through wrestlings history. Then can't we name them? I doubt Rey would even agree with this one Depends on criteria, but no one is going to argue too much over these three. Definition of a regional draw...a big regional draw, but never really drew outside of Memphis Everything you hold against Michaels can be applied to Taker. Sure he was...1996 as a babyface, late 1997-early 1998 as a heel Depends on your definition of good. Downtime for business, yes. His heel run leading up to WM XIV kicked off the Attitude Era which was a major boom for business. No one's matches were ALWAYS good, but HBK and Flair are probably 1 and 1a on the list of consistently delivering the best matches. Debatable, but he's definitely top 20.
|
|
|
Post by foreveryoung on Jul 24, 2011 22:28:38 GMT -5
Of ALL time in terms of WWE all time then hes probably top 5-10. Of ALL TIME of ALL TIME factoring in all the territories, and the complete history of every guy in the business then Shawn doesn't rank anywheres near the top. He was never a huge draw, never led a boom period, very good-great in the ring but there has been better. Granted, there hasnt been too many better if you just include WWE but of all time, there yes theres been plenty better. WWE ranking: Top 5-10 of all time below the likes of Bruno, Hogan, Superstar Billy Graham, Piper, Savage, Austin, Rock, etc. And probably on par with Bret Hart and Taker OF ALL TIME: Top 40-50 somewheres but no higher No higher than 40th? So you can name 39 wrestlers better than Shawn Michaels? Dying to see this list. OF ALL TIME? Taking every aspect into a account? Impact,drawing power, ring work star power etc? Sure. Easily Hogan Austin Rock Savage Piper Thesz Flair Bockwinkle Race Rhodes Nature Boy Buddy Rogers Johnny Valentine Rikidozan Bruno Inoki Londos Andre Ed Lewis Brody Lawler Vern Gagne Terry Funk Bret Hart Blassie Gotch El Santo Gorgeous George Ray Stevens Mil Mascaras Just to name a few..... I don't think you could put Shawn ahead of ANY of them. Overrall. Shawn is only a top 5-10 all time in the world of WWE. But wrestling history is bigger then NY Wrestling DID exist outside of the WWE and has been around prior to the attitude era or rock n wrestling era
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Jul 24, 2011 22:38:28 GMT -5
As an all-round talent, HBK is IMO the greatest wrestler I've ever seen in my lifetime.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 39,090
|
Post by fw91 on Jul 24, 2011 22:40:15 GMT -5
I am not trying to agree or disagree here but can you please name the 20 that you feel are better? I am curious. Well, I can't name the all, becuase there's been so many great wrestlers through wrestlings history. Guy's like Mysterio, Terry Funk, Ric Flair, Hogan, Jerry Lawler, Undertaker. Michael's was never the top draw, his run as the top guy wasn't as good, his matches weren't always good, he definately is not the best wrestler of at time. ?
|
|
|
Post by woowoowoox on Jul 24, 2011 22:43:27 GMT -5
If you wanted someone who no matter what would give you an interesting segment, promo, and match for a feud... there was no one better than HBK in my books for pure entertainment value and he is my favourite wrestler This is pretty much my thoughts, and I think he is the best ever, plain and simple. My sentiments exactly.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,305
|
Post by The Ichi on Jul 24, 2011 22:50:06 GMT -5
I don't care about drawing power. When I'm ranking a wrestler my criteria is based on one thing and one thing only: how much entertainment I got out of them over the years (with big bonus points to having great matches). So with that being said, Shawn Michaels is in the Top 3 best wrestlers of all time, maybe in the #1 spot depending on my mood. Wouldn't this be more of a top favorite wrestlers list, rather than best? Don't mean to be picky, but you're not the only one who seems to be misinterpreting the question here. I mean, I'm not partial to Hogan (he'd never make a favorites list of mine), but I'd never try to argue that he's not one of the best ever at performing in such a manner that got people interested and motivated to spend money to see his exploits. Pro wrestling is performance art. What good is a piece of art if it's never experienced? I don't agree with the general public's taste in a lot of things, but I can recognize it for being good for what it is. Like I've said, I only have one criteria when ranking the greatest wrestlers, and that's my own personal opinion. I'm not denying who the biggest draws are, but I'm not answering for the general public, I'm answering for me. I've never heard someone answer Titanic when asked what they think the best movie is based on it's huge box office numbers (unless Titanic happens to be thier favourite movie). They're gonna answer with the movie that gave them the most enjoyment. Shawn Michaels has given me the most enjoyment in wrestling over the years, along with The Rock and Chris Jericho, so naturally my answer to who I think is the greatest would be him. Get it now?
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Jul 24, 2011 23:06:16 GMT -5
Drawing power, top 15 In the ring, best ever
|
|
Renslayer
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
every time i come around your city...
Posts: 16,638
|
Post by Renslayer on Jul 24, 2011 23:57:01 GMT -5
Well, he's not Steve Austin, Hogan, Flair, Rock, Angle or Bret in terms of my personal "greatest" list, but Michaels was still great.
|
|
|
Post by MichaelMartini on Jul 25, 2011 0:11:18 GMT -5
Even if we're talking only WWE, he wouldn't crack my top ten. I'm not that big on workrate and I'm not that impressed by a guy's ability to flop around. I prefer the storytellers. Shawn always told the same story in the ring.
|
|
spagett
Hank Scorpio
Great Job!
Posts: 5,649
|
Post by spagett on Jul 25, 2011 3:18:57 GMT -5
He's definitely up there. He's obviously a notch below icons like Hogan, Austin and Rock but in terms of in ring talent he's probably in the top 2 or 3 greatest of all time.
I'm more of a Bret Hart fan but you can't argue with the body of work Shawn Michaels has, especially 2002-2010 when he was easily the greatest wrester in the world. I used to hate Shawn Michaels and if he'd stayed retired in 1998 I probably still would but his comeback was so good you can't help but admire him and miss him now he's gone.
For me it's between Flair, Bret, HBK and Angle as the greatest in ring talent of all time.
|
|
Johnny Flamingo
Hank Scorpio
Killing the business one post at a time
Posts: 6,508
|
Post by Johnny Flamingo on Jul 25, 2011 3:37:21 GMT -5
I consider him the best wrestler of all time. Had amazing ring work, great on the mic, and was consistently good throughout his career.
|
|
|
Post by Robbymac on Jul 25, 2011 11:43:41 GMT -5
No higher than 40th? So you can name 39 wrestlers better than Shawn Michaels? Dying to see this list. OF ALL TIME? Taking every aspect into a account? Impact,drawing power, ring work star power etc? Sure. Easily Hogan Austin Rock Savage Piper Thesz Flair Bockwinkle Race Rhodes Nature Boy Buddy Rogers Johnny Valentine Rikidozan Bruno Inoki Londos Andre Ed Lewis Brody Lawler Vern Gagne Terry Funk Bret Hart Blassie Gotch El Santo Gorgeous George Ray Stevens Mil Mascaras Just to name a few..... I don't think you could put Shawn ahead of ANY of them. Overrall. Shawn is only a top 5-10 all time in the world of WWE. But wrestling history is bigger then NY Wrestling DID exist outside of the WWE and has been around prior to the attitude era or rock n wrestling era So, you mind telling me what your all time favorite Ed "Strangler" Lewis match is? Seriously, I'm guessing at least 15 of the guys on the list you've at best only seen clips of. So how can unequivocally rate them ahead of Michaels?
|
|
randomranter
Dennis Stamp
When you grow up....... YOU'RE GONNA BE WROOOOOONG!!!!
Posts: 4,804
|
Post by randomranter on Jul 25, 2011 11:50:06 GMT -5
He's not in the "household name" category like Hogan, Austin, Rock, Andre, and maybe Savage. However, he is in the "best wrestlers of all time" category with Bret and Flair. I think this sums it up. Though I wouldn't put Savage in the "household name" category. I think that's reserved for relatively successful crossover stars: Hogan, Austin, Rock, and Andre. I could also see top pre-TV era stars like Bruno in that group as well. Piper is also a candidate. WWE is trying to force John Cena into this category come hell or high water. The next tier down are the greatest of all time, but don't have the mainstream popularity of the above category. Undertaker, Bret, Savage, and HBK fall into this category. I don't know where I'd put Flair. I would actually rank him above Taker/Bret/Savage/HBK, but I don't know if he had the mainstream appeal to be considered on par with Hogan/Rock/Andre/Austin.
|
|
ASYLUMHAUSEN
Fry's dog Seymour
GIFs | Shitposts | Fun
Posts: 24,417
|
Post by ASYLUMHAUSEN on Jul 25, 2011 12:24:31 GMT -5
He is the greatest of all time. period.
In baseball terms; he was a 5 tool player.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2011 12:27:29 GMT -5
"One of the."
|
|
|
Post by foreveryoung on Jul 25, 2011 13:47:51 GMT -5
OF ALL TIME? Taking every aspect into a account? Impact,drawing power, ring work star power etc? Sure. Easily Hogan Austin Rock Savage Piper Thesz Flair Bockwinkle Race Rhodes Nature Boy Buddy Rogers Johnny Valentine Rikidozan Bruno Inoki Londos Andre Ed Lewis Brody Lawler Vern Gagne Terry Funk Bret Hart Blassie Gotch El Santo Gorgeous George Ray Stevens Mil Mascaras Just to name a few..... I don't think you could put Shawn ahead of ANY of them. Overrall. Shawn is only a top 5-10 all time in the world of WWE. But wrestling history is bigger then NY Wrestling DID exist outside of the WWE and has been around prior to the attitude era or rock n wrestling era So, you mind telling me what your all time favorite Ed "Strangler" Lewis match is? Seriously, I'm guessing at least 15 of the guys on the list you've at best only seen clips of. So how can unequivocally rate them ahead of Michaels? They made more of an impact to the business and drew more money and were bigger stars in their respective primes. I guess with your criteria we can only make a list of guys we have had first hand knowledge with and guys we have only seen live and totally IGNORE the past? Should we put Shawn ahead of someone like Lou Thesz just because we didn't see Thesz live or witness his era? When you are going "all time" then it means ALL TIME as in right up to this point in the entire history of wrestling. Not just picking and choosing who we grew up watching. Thats not objective. And thats the problem with fans today of any sport. They only choose greatness based on who they have watched. Without doing any research on those who came before their favorites and paved the way. Its as if people today just think wrestling never existed before the 80s or 90s
|
|