|
|
Post by mauled on May 12, 2012 3:33:56 GMT -5
HBK has the reputation of being the most talented in ring peformer off all time. You have people like Austin/Jericho and Trips etc all saying they think he is the best they have ever been in with. While even JR said that in the ring he was untouchable.
On the other hand the WWE does like to hype a bit so does Shawn truly deserve the greatest in ring peformer title of all time that or is it merely the WWE hype machine ?
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on May 12, 2012 3:37:24 GMT -5
It's WWE hype, and it drives me nuts every time someone on WWE programming and documentaries says it. Being the greatest of all time consists of a lot more than just in-ring skills, and Michaels couldn't draw ratings to save his life in his time on top of the WWF. Besides, if it were based soley on in-ring skills, he's still outclassed by Bret Hart.
Basically, the true options for "greatest of all time" are any combination of Hogan, Austin, Flair, and Rock. Anyone else is just hyperbole.
|
|
|
|
Post by juvijuiceisloose on May 12, 2012 3:38:35 GMT -5
It's definitely hype, because every few years The WWE is calling a different guy the Greatest Ever.
When Hogan came back in '02, he was called the Greatest Ever.
When Flair retired, he was called the Greatest Ever.
Austin was called the Greatest Ever.
The Rock was called the Greatest Ever.
I think Taker was called the Greatest Ever.
|
|
Bub (BLM)
Patti Mayonnaise
advocates duck on rodent violence
Fed. Up.
Posts: 37,742
|
Post by Bub (BLM) on May 12, 2012 3:42:31 GMT -5
It's definitely hype, because every few years The WWE is calling a different guy the Greatest Ever. When Hogan came back in '02, he was called the Greatest Ever. When Flair retired, he was called the Greatest Ever. Austin was called the Greatest Ever. The Rock was called the Greatest Ever. I think Taker was called the Greatest Ever. All of those guys have legitimate claims, though. I'd forgotten Undertaker before, but he's another one. The guy's been in WWE for 20 years and he's STILL over as hell doing the same basic gimmick. |
|
|
|
Post by mauled on May 12, 2012 3:51:44 GMT -5
It's definitely hype, because every few years The WWE is calling a different guy the Greatest Ever. When Hogan came back in '02, he was called the Greatest Ever. When Flair retired, he was called the Greatest Ever. Austin was called the Greatest Ever. The Rock was called the Greatest Ever. I think Taker was called the Greatest Ever. All of those guys have legitimate claims, though. I'd forgotten Undertaker before, but he's another one. The guy's been in WWE for 20 years and he's STILL over as hell doing the same basic gimmick. I wouldnt include Flair in that list but for Hogan/Austin and Rock its for there drawing ability. For Shawn they mean for match quality and having the best match on the card |
|
|
|
Post by onestepplan on May 12, 2012 3:57:48 GMT -5
It's WWE hype, and it drives me nuts every time someone on WWE programming and documentaries says it. Being the greatest of all time consists of a lot more than just in-ring skills, and Michaels couldn't draw ratings to save his life in his time on top of the WWF. Besides, if it were based soley on in-ring skills, he's still outclassed by Bret Hart. Basically, the true options for "greatest of all time" are any combination of Hogan, Austin, Flair, and Rock. Anyone else is just hyperbole. HBK has the reputation of being the most talented in ring peformer off all time. Even still, Michaels gets a bad rap on the drawing front. The WWF(E) was in a down period and no one person could've really pulled them out of it. Not to mention that people often forget that Michaels was bringing attitude just as hard as Austin in 97 and had to retire before it fully blossomed. I think the guy would've been a MAAAJOR name, more so than he is now, if he hadn't had to call it quits right as everything was taking off. In ring, I think HBK was a lot more versatile than Hart. I think the IWC (I know, I know) puts too much weight on mat wrestling skills alone. Michaels' psychology was just as good if not better than Hart's and he could do anything in the ring. Hart was more about the science of it, Michaels was more about the art. So, no, I don't think that accolade is just hype. I've never heard of anyone having more great matches in big name situations than Michaels. The guy couldn't miss, that makes me pretty sure he really knew what he was doing. |
|
|
|
Post by The Beast Disincarnate on May 12, 2012 4:20:38 GMT -5
WWE hype...If WCW won the monday night war, they would call Sting the greatest ever...
|
|
Marvelously Mediocre
Fry's dog Seymour
Beggin' for a little SWAGGAH!
Haha. What a story Mark.
Posts: 21,224
|
Post by Marvelously Mediocre on May 12, 2012 4:53:34 GMT -5
Neither. Greatest Ever, especially in wrestling is purely a matter of opinion and Shawn Michaels has certainly done enough for me to be considered the best.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on May 12, 2012 4:55:55 GMT -5
Hulk Hogan is the greatest ever, in terms of star power, charisma, pop-culture fame etc...
But Michaels is IMO the most talented in-ring performer
|
|
|
|
Post by lewis1711 on May 12, 2012 5:22:50 GMT -5
Dunno about greatest ever, but he's certainly up there. Oddly enough, I think his greatest match ever was a throw away match against Shelton Benjamin on monday night raw..
|
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Digby Stamp on May 12, 2012 5:32:00 GMT -5
They make a point to say 'in ring performer', and by that standard, absolutely. Shawn Michaels has the greatest body of work of any wrestler past or present.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2012 6:06:48 GMT -5
If he's not THE best, he's a damn close second.
|
|
|
|
Post by KRUGkiller on May 12, 2012 6:11:58 GMT -5
to me he's in the top 5 in terms of pound for pound great wrestling skills.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Bunsen Honeydew on May 12, 2012 6:20:23 GMT -5
Besides, if it were based soley on in-ring skills, he's still outclassed by Bret Hart. Completely false. Shawn was way better than Bret. |
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips on May 12, 2012 6:26:00 GMT -5
Greatest will always be a matter of opinion but you could definitely argue a case for him.
|
|
BHB
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 5,778
|
Post by BHB on May 12, 2012 6:51:32 GMT -5
"The best wrestler ever" is simply a matter of opinion, just like saying "so and so is the best actor ever". Everyone likes different things so it's impossible to say who is truly the one best ever.
It's much easier and fairer to narrow it down to 5-10 wrestlers who could each be the best at different times. I'd say Shawn would be in that top 10 for me but not the top 5.
|
|
|
|
Post by Big Daddy Bad Booking on May 12, 2012 7:03:42 GMT -5
From this guy's opinion, he certainly is. Worked his ass off to be champion, overcame demons that would have ended most mens' careers, then had a second career so awesome that not even young guys could match it. HBK is a GOAT alright.
|
|
|
|
Post by Wolf Hurricane on May 12, 2012 7:40:32 GMT -5
Neither. Greatest Ever, especially in wrestling is purely a matter of opinion and Shawn Michaels has certainly done enough for me to be considered the best. My thoughts exactly. |
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,706 
|
Post by The Ichi on May 12, 2012 7:44:13 GMT -5
They make a point to say 'in ring performer', and by that standard, absolutely. Shawn Michaels has the greatest body of work of any wrestler past or present. This. It's said because he had a near career ending injury, came back from it and had a second run that was even better than the first. Who in wrestling has that claim? That said, I do agree that the praise can get a bit overbearing, but at the same time it's nearly impossible to disagree with it. |
|
|
|
Post by Todd's crazy , Man. on May 12, 2012 9:17:56 GMT -5
They make a point to say 'in ring performer', and by that standard, absolutely. Shawn Michaels has the greatest body of work of any wrestler past or present. You really need to qualify that statement because as it stands , opinion or not that's just completely ridiculous on several levels. I love HBK but come on , that is not true at all. I could probably about ten guys off the top of my head who were better then HBK in-Ring while HE was wrestling. At least ten. |
|
