|
Post by evenbroddt on May 19, 2015 15:02:22 GMT -5
Nash has had classics, though most if not all of them were with Bret and Shawn. I'd say of we were to look at someone's career as a whole, Undertaker would have to be my choice. If his opponent could have great matches, the match would be great. If not... Then his matches kinda truly sucked
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on May 19, 2015 20:51:05 GMT -5
Andre The Giant
He didn't do much from about 1985 onwards in terms of wrestling moves, but holy shit the guy had amazing star presence.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 21:17:31 GMT -5
Sandman is a great pick. Talk about right place and right time for him, without ECW no major promotion would give him a shot. Vince is a good one too but I think he's more debatable. He was uncoordinated as hell, but he played his part perfectly and had a knack for character work and storytelling, his character is "millionaire megalomaniac boss" who shouldn't be expected to put on traditional wrestling clinics, for what he was supposed to be he did it perfectly. With Kevin Nash I wouldn't call him a bad wrestler, as Diesel when he was around all those workhorses he put in the work. He says himself that once he got to WCW he worked them into guaranteed contracts and took it pretty easy, but even in the WCW days I wouldn't call him a bad wrestler, he was lazy but he still knew how to keep an audience. Nash has had classics, though most if not all of them were with Bret and Shawn. I'd say of we were to look at someone's career as a whole, Undertaker would have to be my choice. If his opponent could have great matches, the match would be great. If not... Then his matches kinda truly sucked 'Taker's gimmick stifled him in the early goings. The whole doesn't feel pain thing wasn't really conducive to great matches. It's really weird because I hated it at the time but you look back and see his work as Biker 'Taker is when he really started to be great. If he had made it as Mean Mark his career would be so different. Also, he has to be up there in terms of guys who was given the most polarizing list of opponents to work with, I mean, for every Bret Hart there was a Giant Gonzales, and even in his later years they really wasted so much of his time with guys like Heidenreich, Mark Henry, Khali, all these pet projects that never went anywhere. It was always either the bottom of the barrel or the cream of the crop. I wouldn't say best of all time but Snitsky was amazing. His character was a work of art to me even though he never had very good matches. The foot fetishist, misunderstood baby-killer, lasted for such a short while but he was so off the wall absurd I'll remember him forever. Virgil should be considered just in terms of career longevity, not that he ever did anything of worth to anyone who's ever seen him but to be around so long around some of the best wrestlers of all time, during the hottest periods of wrestling.
|
|
|
Post by Amazing Kitsune on May 19, 2015 21:58:20 GMT -5
Beyond his classic against Batista, the Undertaker was not skilled at Big Man vs. Big Man matches. Those tend to be the hardest type of match to work. I'm not entirely sure why. Taker worked a lot better against guys that were smaller than him. For a significant portion of his career, his gimmick and his feuds kind of prevented amazing matches.
He's certainly had enough amazing matches to disqualify him from this contest.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2015 1:59:30 GMT -5
New Jack
|
|
Rick Mad
Grimlock
Rick Mad Champion
Posts: 14,613
|
Post by Rick Mad on May 20, 2015 2:42:02 GMT -5
Snitsky.
If you don't agree, well..
It wasn't. His. Fault.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on May 20, 2015 3:29:34 GMT -5
Sid is the one for me.
That man was bad on the mic, bad in the ring, and had a weird look... but he just had SOMETHING. He believed every goddamn second in what he was doing when that red light was on.
He is probably in my top 10 favourite wrestlers of all time, but I don't think he's ever had a good match or even cut a good promo.
|
|
Emmet Russell
King Koopa
Quieter
The best wrestler on earth.
Posts: 12,526
|
Post by Emmet Russell on May 20, 2015 4:47:37 GMT -5
Sid is the one for me. That man was bad on the mic, bad in the ring, and had a weird look... but he just had SOMETHING. He believed every goddamn second in what he was doing when that red light was on. He is probably in my top 10 favourite wrestlers of all time, but I don't think he's ever had a good match or even cut a good promo. When I started watching, it was in 1994, so I missed the eras of Hogan, Warrior. When Sid came along in 1995, he had a presence that I'd never seen before at that time - he stood out above everyone else. From the intensity to the promos to the music to the pyro, he just screamed big star. I was in awe of him. Looking back, he's had maybe two matches where he put in a solid performance: against Michaels a the Survivor Series 96 and Benoit at Souled Out 2000. Apart from those, everything else he did was carried on presence alone.
|
|
tms
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,901
|
Post by tms on May 20, 2015 5:54:32 GMT -5
I've always had a soft spot for Mongo. He looked dangerous as hell to work with, but for some reason he was one of my faves. He had a cool look, like a big Italian lug a don would send out to just wreck someone. His constant screaming (and voice in general) was annoying, but he carried himself well as an intimidating presence aside from that.
|
|
|
Post by Oh Cry Me a Screwball on May 20, 2015 6:28:07 GMT -5
Ryback may one day be among this list of true legends. There is no one in today's scene that is an endearing as a personality, but with less-than-stellar performances in the ring as Ryback.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on May 20, 2015 6:54:12 GMT -5
I've always had a soft spot for Mongo. He looked dangerous as hell to work with, but for some reason he was one of my faves. He had a cool look, like a big Italian lug a don would send out to just wreck someone. His constant screaming (and voice in general) was annoying, but he carried himself well as an intimidating presence aside from that. This post is apropos, and I'm not talking about digging in the dirt with farm implements, baby.
|
|
|
Post by CATCH_US IS the Conversation on May 20, 2015 6:58:58 GMT -5
Ryback may one day be among this list of true legends. There is no one in today's scene that is an endearing as a personality, but with less-than-stellar performances in the ring as Ryback. Ryback isn't amazing, but in-ring I think he's a lot more competent than the likes of Sid, Goldberg, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Tea & Crumpets on May 20, 2015 7:08:43 GMT -5
Goldberg is incredibly underrated as a wrestler but I get why- he didn't often work above 5 minutes, and he threw the kick that ended Bret Hart's career, so it's very easy to give him flak. However he was freakishly athletic, even in those early 5 minute squashes, and a much better wrestler than people give him credit for. He needed a good hand opposite him to have a truly good match, he wasn't the type to carry somebody, but when he wanted to go, he didn't really need to be carried that much either. Nash gets to much hate because I don't think he was ever that bad. Sure he wasn't Kane or Taker athletic wise but most guys that size aren't. I mean Sid moveset for example. Sid shown he was more athletic like kicking up but his moveset was just as limited, Nash I felt was a better in ring worker than Sid. I'm going to second Vince McMachon, while he wasn't really a wrestler he had plenty of matches and they all was a drawing point. Why? Simple fact fans wanted to see the boss get his ass kicked and it never got old. Plus Vince was golden at EVERYTHING else that he didn't have to be a ring general plus he was in his 50s when he had his first match anyway. For an full time wrestlers I'm going to put Abdullah the Butcher. For as many years he wrestled and was in most cases in a big time promotion WCW or Japan really. He wasn't ever a good in ring worker but fans brought into his crazy ECW style before ECW was a thing. His extreme style was people paid too see him for but never was his matches considered good or he showed he good really wrestle. The other same thing when I add New Jack to it for the same reasons. Fans loved New Jack in ECW hayday but again like Abdullah, he crazy style of going extreme is what fans brought into but never was a good wrestler. Nash could work back in the day and was again pretty athletic- he did planchas and stuff as Diesel. But his basketball injuries and the fact that WCW let him do what he wanted meant he didn't have to bust his ass for most of his career. He definitely achieved a lot despite wrestling pretty mediocre matches- but I think that was generally just that he didn't want to, rather than couldn't. Sandman was terrible but somehow made it work. Sid...take away the look and he's got nothing. I give Sandman the edge though as he had no look, no real athleticism, was drunk for most of his promos, but inspite of EVERYTHING sucking it somehow was successful. Sid at least had the look & presence.
|
|
Johnny Flamingo
Hank Scorpio
Killing the business one post at a time
Posts: 6,477
|
Post by Johnny Flamingo on May 20, 2015 7:12:11 GMT -5
Andre The Giant He didn't do much from about 1985 onwards in terms of wrestling moves, but holy shit the guy had amazing star presence. Once his body started breaking down his matches were quite bad and his offense looked horrible (which I've hear was because he was quite scared of hurting someone). He may have had a bigger star presence than anyone I've ever seen. Shame he wasn't born later now that they have medical knowledge to help people with gigantism. His work when he started out was amazing though as he was a very good technical wrestler before his body started giving out on him. Really amazing that he continued to go out to the ring despite his body being wracked in pain. __________ As far as who I would pick, Sandman. Absolutely horrible in the ring but the crowd never cared and you never felt bored while watching him.
|
|
|
Post by somsta on May 20, 2015 8:43:14 GMT -5
Jose Lothario. He's the worst person ever born, let alone worst wrestler, and yet he's painfully ingrained in the memories of multiple generations of fans.
|
|
|
Post by Can you afford to pay me, Gah on May 20, 2015 9:10:11 GMT -5
Goldberg is incredibly underrated as a wrestler but I get why- he didn't often work above 5 minutes, and he threw the kick that ended Bret Hart's career, so it's very easy to give him flak. However he was freakishly athletic, even in those early 5 minute squashes, and a much better wrestler than people give him credit for. He needed a good hand opposite him to have a truly good match, he wasn't the type to carry somebody, but when he wanted to go, he didn't really need to be carried that much either. Nash gets to much hate because I don't think he was ever that bad. Sure he wasn't Kane or Taker athletic wise but most guys that size aren't. I mean Sid moveset for example. Sid shown he was more athletic like kicking up but his moveset was just as limited, Nash I felt was a better in ring worker than Sid. I'm going to second Vince McMachon, while he wasn't really a wrestler he had plenty of matches and they all was a drawing point. Why? Simple fact fans wanted to see the boss get his ass kicked and it never got old. Plus Vince was golden at EVERYTHING else that he didn't have to be a ring general plus he was in his 50s when he had his first match anyway. For an full time wrestlers I'm going to put Abdullah the Butcher. For as many years he wrestled and was in most cases in a big time promotion WCW or Japan really. He wasn't ever a good in ring worker but fans brought into his crazy ECW style before ECW was a thing. His extreme style was people paid too see him for but never was his matches considered good or he showed he good really wrestle. The other same thing when I add New Jack to it for the same reasons. Fans loved New Jack in ECW hayday but again like Abdullah, he crazy style of going extreme is what fans brought into but never was a good wrestler. Nash could work back in the day and was again pretty athletic- he did planchas and stuff as Diesel. But his basketball injuries and the fact that WCW let him do what he wanted meant he didn't have to bust his ass for most of his career. He definitely achieved a lot despite wrestling pretty mediocre matches- but I think that was generally just that he didn't want to, rather than couldn't. Sandman was terrible but somehow made it work. Sid...take away the look and he's got nothing. I give Sandman the edge though as he had no look, no real athleticism, was drunk for most of his promos, but inspite of EVERYTHING sucking it somehow was successful. Sid at least had the look & presence. Nash falls under the same umbrella as Hogan for me. Both of them can work but when they didn't have too they didn't because the fans still paid to see them do what they did. WCW did allow Nash to do what he wanted just as much as the WWE and WCW did for Hogan. I mean Hogan WCW schedule was insanely light and go months without a title defence and his style. I mean we all know about Hogan in Japan is totally different then Hogan we get in the states. People call Nash lazy but really he and Hogan did the main things fan pay too see. Neither where known as the guy giving you that 5 star clinic of a match. Nash style even at the mediocre level was still better then most guys his size. For big man in height Nash is top 5 easily for me is number 4. I put him right there in this order Prime years Andre, Taker, Kane,and Nash.
|
|
Magnus the Magnificent
King Koopa
didn't want one.
I could write a book about what you don't know!
Posts: 12,451
Member is Online
|
Post by Magnus the Magnificent on May 20, 2015 9:13:51 GMT -5
I think Sandman's 2006-07 WWE run proved that, while not a technical wizard, he was at least passable in the ring while sober. Plus points for him whipping himself into great shape, too.
Like other's have said, Sid would be my choice. He's the very definition of having "It" when it comes to wrestling.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,281
|
Post by The Ichi on May 20, 2015 12:13:56 GMT -5
Warrior was pretty much an abysmal wrestler (at least Hogan could hit moves properly/safely), but a combination of his charisma and WWE having Hogan pass the torch to him (albeit briefly) ensures he'll always be one of the biggest legends in wrestling.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips Has Left on May 21, 2015 5:41:36 GMT -5
Beyond his classic against Batista, the Undertaker was not skilled at Big Man vs. Big Man matches. Those tend to be the hardest type of match to work. I'm not entirely sure why. Taker worked a lot better against guys that were smaller than him. For a significant portion of his career, his gimmick and his feuds kind of prevented amazing matches. He's certainly had enough amazing matches to disqualify him from this contest. Oddly enough for this thread, Taker vs Nash at Wrestlemania 12 was a pretty solid Big Man brawl.
|
|
Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-]
FANatic
Writer, Lover of all things Wrestling. Analytical, Critical, Lovable (hopefully). Lets all have fun!
Posts: 234,926
|
Post by Xxcjb01xX [PIECE OF: SH-] on May 21, 2015 5:52:23 GMT -5
The reason no one ever noticed Sid's In-Ring work is for a good portion of it we were all fixated on one of the greatest Wrestling Themes of all time...
|
|