Joekishi
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,490
|
Post by Joekishi on Dec 16, 2007 16:28:37 GMT -5
Boogie Woogey Man Jimmy Valiant really sucked
At the least guys like Dreamer, Nash, Sid, Virgil, Hacksaw Jim Duggan, and Mark Henry have provided some good entertaining bouts.
Jimmy Valiant has always sucked, no matter how over he was, he always sucked.
No seriously Valiant gets a huge pop when he enters, then when the match starts it's just crickets.
At least with other guys it's pretty evident they know what to do.
I mean getting the crowd to pop is just one part of the match, keeping them interested is the most important part.
I'm not saying you have to be a Flair, Savage, Michaels, or Hart to be considered talented. I'm just saying if you can keep a crowd rocking throughout a match, you've got some talent. Especially if you can keep them rocking for just trading punches like Jerry Lawler/KErry Von Erich
|
|
|
Post by Mongo & Pepe: Back in Black on Dec 16, 2007 16:34:22 GMT -5
No mention of Andre the Giant? El Gigante was pretty over in WCW too. The gentle giant characters always seem to get over.
|
|
|
Post by laotioncommotion on Dec 16, 2007 16:43:07 GMT -5
I think you could probably make a case for about half of the ECW roster. Dreamer, Sandman, New Jack, The Rottens, 911, Balls Mahoney. As far as their actual in-ring abilities, they weren't great technical wrestlers. But they were used in a perfect way got over big-time. I'd also have to agree with Mick Foley, Jimmy Valiant and Warrior. But I don't think it's an insult at all. I think it's a testament to their charisma and solid characters.
|
|
Bo Rida
Fry's dog Seymour
Pulled one over on everyone. Got away with it, this time.
Posts: 24,148
Member is Online
|
Post by Bo Rida on Dec 16, 2007 16:44:33 GMT -5
Giant Haystacks and Big Daddy. They were big, immobile and their offence was often just walking into each other, the Granny’s and kids loved them though.
|
|
|
Post by Real Folk Bruce on Dec 16, 2007 18:09:42 GMT -5
A question that needs to be addressed: what is talent in a FAKE sport? This is not a pure form of wrestling (amateur), it's simply an exaggerated form of violence. So why does it matter if someone can perform submission moves or "wrestling moves"? The main focus is to tell a story with your actions, get the crowd involved in the matches, and most importantly, draw an audience. THAT is talent in wrestling. I guess I agree with Kevin Nash's line of thinking. The best wrestlers are the guys who draw the most money. Hogan, Rock, and Austin are the best workers ever. Andre, Piper, Savage, Undertaker, Warrior, Goldberg, etc, were also good to great. I laugh when people try to praise Hogan by saying "watch his Japan stuff". No, watch his AMERICAN stuff. He had the audience in the palm of his hand every night, and he was able to attract a new audience during the most critical stage in mainstream wrestling (the 80's). A person without talent can't do that. People didn't pay to see Hogan chain wrestle either. The Rock is much the same way. He knows how to work a crowd to the point where he doesn't have to do anything to get a response. THAT IS TALENT! End of rant. Best post this year. I wish their were more people like you on this board.
|
|
Hiroshi Hase
Patti Mayonnaise
The Good Ol' Days
Posts: 30,755
|
Post by Hiroshi Hase on Dec 16, 2007 18:10:58 GMT -5
A question that needs to be addressed: what is talent in a FAKE sport? This is not a pure form of wrestling (amateur), it's simply an exaggerated form of violence. So why does it matter if someone can perform submission moves or "wrestling moves"? The main focus is to tell a story with your actions, get the crowd involved in the matches, and most importantly, draw an audience. THAT is talent in wrestling. I guess I agree with Kevin Nash's line of thinking. The best wrestlers are the guys who draw the most money. Hogan, Rock, and Austin are the best workers ever. Andre, Piper, Savage, Undertaker, Warrior, Goldberg, etc, were also good to great. I laugh when people try to praise Hogan by saying "watch his Japan stuff". No, watch his AMERICAN stuff. He had the audience in the palm of his hand every night, and he was able to attract a new audience during the most critical stage in mainstream wrestling (the 80's). A person without talent can't do that. People didn't pay to see Hogan chain wrestle either. The Rock is much the same way. He knows how to work a crowd to the point where he doesn't have to do anything to get a response. THAT IS TALENT! End of rant. Amen to that. Couldn't have said it better myself.
|
|
NOwave
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,735
|
Post by NOwave on Dec 16, 2007 18:33:21 GMT -5
absolutely correct. Talnet in wrestling means a variety of things. This is one of the few areas where I disagree with Ric Flair, who criticizes guys who can't work in the ring, like Mick Foley.
Just as Ric Flair is probably the best in-ring worker ever, Hogan had the most charisma, closely followed by Austin and the Rock. There's no question that Hogan, Rock and Austin worked hard at what they did, just as Flair works hard at what he does.
A better question, therefore, would be: Who is the wrestler who got over the most by means of something other than his own efforts? In other words, who got the most benefit from a push, a situation, other wrestlers, etc, and probably wouldn't have gotten over on his own?
|
|
|
Post by The Booty Disciple on Dec 16, 2007 19:17:15 GMT -5
Well, I'll flat out admit that my bias against Goldberg's push to the moon jades me there. I didn't like the guy, and I don't think a guy that green should be getting world title pushes, though it was refreshing to see it off of Hogan for a while.
In so far as Foley goes, I guess my main criticism of his work isn't that the brawl isn't good, but rather for much of his career, it was the fact that his foil had to know how to work with him. Brawls are only good if the other guy can go with you. I don't think that many can, and Foley happened to be in a time when he was surrounded by the very best we've seen in the business in the last 10 or so years.
That being said, I can't honestly think of much in the way of his matches that are all that remarkable. Yes, there's blood and gore in Japan. I've seen that, and whilst it's a gross out moment and a holy s*** moment, I don't know that it equates talent, since we all bleed when we jump onto explosives and thumbtacks (and I admire him more than anyone for that...what's a frickin' loon). His brawls are probably a bit lesser in my mind because the hardcore stuff was never my bag, and it became so overxposed before it was all said and done. What I loved about ECW hardcore in its day was the fact that it didn't have to happen...when you introduce a Hardcore Title, you wind up putting it out there all the time, and for me, it lost a lot of charm.
So I suppose, probably not the best examples I could come up with.
|
|
Indigocrates
Unicron
I got bored. Decided to become a philosopher. Just 'cause.
Posts: 2,953
|
Post by Indigocrates on Dec 16, 2007 19:42:58 GMT -5
No, just for some reason i am not impressed with Punk, he has nothing that makes him standout. The GTS as well is not a move that deserves to be a finisher, and he don't look right doing it. Every match I've seen of his in the E. he is being carried, except maybe his first few matches where he wasn't being carried by the opponent but by his hype. CM Punk was overrated on the Indies and he is still now in WWE. The only reason he is out of development is because ECW came around, if it wasn't for that he'd be jobbing on Heat or back in ROH. If the summer of Punk doesn't bring you to the dark side, nothing will. Also, I feel Ric Flair is one of the most overrated wrestlers I've ever seen (Chops+Flair Flop+Figure Four= OMG!1!1!!!1!1 ***** STARZ!!1!1!!!11!!!1). Foley though, I feel is respected because of everything he's willing to do to himself to entertain the fans.
|
|
|
Post by sexualvanilla on Dec 16, 2007 21:15:23 GMT -5
I agree about the only real way to gauge talent is if the wrestler can draw money and get the most out of doing as little as possible. The criteria for "wrestlers who can put on the best matches" is a different beast and isn't indicative of who the best wrestlers are. So Hogan wins. He brought wrestling to the mainstream and played a crucial role in the 90's boom and qualifies
|
|
|
Post by gertner on Dec 16, 2007 22:20:35 GMT -5
Hulk Hogan anyone?
|
|
|
Post by T Vang is a HO-DADDY~! on Dec 16, 2007 23:30:09 GMT -5
Psst--the OP talks about him...
|
|
algertman
Hank Scorpio
Heroes Die. Legends Live Forever.
Posts: 5,486
|
Post by algertman on Dec 16, 2007 23:34:52 GMT -5
HHH
|
|
Massive G
Hank Scorpio
yo hago esto
Posts: 6,224
|
Post by Massive G on Dec 17, 2007 1:14:26 GMT -5
Nash, Nash, Nash.
|
|
biff
Bubba Ho-Tep
RIP Mike Awesome
Posts: 642
|
Post by biff on Dec 17, 2007 2:23:54 GMT -5
Jeff Hardy
|
|
Reverend BTY
Hank Scorpio
Christian Troy: God's Gift
Posts: 7,206
|
Post by Reverend BTY on Dec 17, 2007 2:30:34 GMT -5
I'm just gonna assume you mean talented as far as technical skills go. With that out of the way, my answer is Warrior. He made a lot of money and main evented Wrestlemania while being terrible in the ring.
|
|
MCMGM
Vegeta
WC's Official Jeff Buckley Stalkeress.
Red Sonic My Ass
Posts: 9,184
|
Post by MCMGM on Dec 17, 2007 4:43:06 GMT -5
I'm just gonna assume you mean talented as far as technical skills go. With that out of the way, my answer is Warrior. He made a lot of money and main evented Wrestlemania while being terrible in the ring. I agree.
|
|
Dolph Zalgo
Don Corleone
He who waits behind the walls
҉҉ ̵̡̢̢̛̛̛̖̗̘̙̜̝̞&
Posts: 1,939
|
Post by Dolph Zalgo on Dec 17, 2007 10:34:40 GMT -5
Kevin Nash: great on the mic and over as hell, but HORRIBLE in the ring; he can barely move without injuring himself
Batista: I'm surprised how many people seem to left buying his hype. Since he came back from injury every match I saw him in was a painful to watch botchfest. He cannot even do his signature moves halfway right. Talent-wise he should be a midcarder like Snitsky.
Ultimate Warrior: Over as hell, over like nothing else, but not that good in the ring.
Hulk Hogan: Yes, I know he was mentioned in the opener and YES I've seen his matches from Japan but NO he is not a good wrestler. But that was then... TODAY he is still over, but FAR WORSE than he ever was. Age, ring-rust and injuries have made him as bad a wrestler as Khali and Khali is about 1/10 of Nash talent-wise... ...and Nash is a horrible wrestler...
|
|
Schemer
Don Corleone
Total class wit' a capital K!
Posts: 1,950
|
Post by Schemer on Dec 17, 2007 15:23:52 GMT -5
Warrior. I never got him as a kid, and as an adult, I think he's a schmuck. I'll never understand how he got over.
|
|
J is Justice
Patti Mayonnaise
Will now be grateful.
Hi.
Posts: 31,477
|
Post by J is Justice on Dec 17, 2007 15:30:49 GMT -5
Hulk was/is extremely talented on the mic.
Unless this is just about wrestling ability
|
|