Why is HBK considered the best ever by a lot of fans?

[Jokaine]

This is a very interesting thread in that it discussed why Shawn Michaels is, maybe, the best in-ring guy ever.

It then turned to several people arguing against that opinion, but factoring in things (attitude, backstage politics, "the machine," etc.) that have nothing to do with his in-ring performances or ability.

The thing most bothersome to me, however, is how damn judgemental some folks are about HBK as a person. There are literally people on here calling him a piece of shit as a human being based on things co-workers said about him 20-plus years ago when the dude was in a stage of deep addiction.

Imagine if we held ourselves and our own peers to that same standard.

Person 1: Old Bob down at the Toyota plant is a no-good piece of shit.

Person 2: Why?

Person 1: He's got a lot of pull down there and he makes sure his buddies, all qualified workers by the way, are in a good position to make strong bonuses. He's also gotten kinda hard to work with since he fell off the wagon.

Person 2: You must work with Bob.

Person 1: No, why would you think that?

[Deleted]

Imagine? That does happen in every field.

[Jokaine]

Jan 1, 2018 15:52:42 GMT -5 @irontyger said:

Imagine? That does happen in every field.

It happens in every field with people who work with the person. If I know someone who works at Subway and he uses his stroke to get out of doing back-to-back closes and opens it has no bearing on whether I think he's a good or bad person.

[schma]

Jan 1, 2018 11:58:54 GMT -5 KofiMania said:

Jan 1, 2018 6:22:14 GMT -5 Tea & Crumpets said:

I can understand this argument because yes, HBK's had more classics. But HBK also often had higher calibre guys to work with in terms of storytelling- Scott Hall at his peak, Foley at his peak, Bret at his peak, Austin at his peak, Undertaker during the best years of the Streak era. Jericho didn't tend to get paired with guys on that level, but when he did- Benoit, Malenko, Rey for example- it was great. And I still argue he had terrific ability at adapting to his opponent's style and pulling a good match out of them, whether it be his Cruiserweight days, transitioning to the WWE main event style, hell I actually enjoyed his matches with Goldberg particularly the Bad Blood match. I'll agree that Jericho doesn't have the collection of 5 star matches that HBK has, but again, how many times in comparison did Jericho work with someone on the level of the guys HBK worked with?


On the subject of Savage, I tend to find looking back that I actually quite like his WCW run. He does come across like a bit of an out of touch old man, but at the same time he's Macho Madness. It kind of works with his whole gimmick. And his DDP matches are proof that scripting a match out can work just as well as calling it in the ring. Heck, didn't he script his matches out his whole career?

I can't buy that argument at all. Jericho worked with almost all of the same people HBK worked with. And again I'm not saying Jericho was not a very good worker, because he was and still is to an extent, but he just never reached that level that HBK basically always resided in.

I think it's less that Jericho worked with them but more that Shawn got those people at their peaks whereas Jericho got them after they'd peaked.  That's the impression I got.

[2coldMack is even more baffled]

Jan 1, 2018 16:07:51 GMT -5 Jokaine said:

Jan 1, 2018 15:52:42 GMT -5 @irontyger said:

Imagine? That does happen in every field.

It happens in every field with people who work with the person. If I know someone who works at Subway and he uses his stroke to get out of doing back-to-back closes and opens it has no bearing on whether I think he's a good or bad person.

Throwing a tantrum to your boss to get out of doing your job the way your asked makes you, if not a piece of shit, a deeply unprofessional person, so....yeah. Bad person? Eh. Deeply unprofessional and childish? Yeah, absolutely. Shut up and work.

[schma]

Jan 1, 2018 16:07:51 GMT -5 Jokaine said:

Jan 1, 2018 15:52:42 GMT -5 @irontyger said:

Imagine? That does happen in every field.

It happens in every field with people who work with the person. If I know someone who works at Subway and he uses his stroke to get out of doing back-to-back closes and opens it has no bearing on whether I think he's a good or bad person.

It'd be less about avoiding back to back closes and more about preventing co-workers from getting promotions.  There are several people who were meant to get titles in his first run (wrestling equivalent of a promotion), that he used his pull to prevent, others had to put him over due to politics.  Several people have also mentioned matches where he would deliberately try to make someone look bad because he wasn't happy about the outcome.  HBK's second run did a lot to change many minds about him and redeem his reputation, but you can't just ignore that his attitude and actions in his first run actually had significant effects on many careers. 

[2coldMack is even more baffled]

Jan 1, 2018 16:31:45 GMT -5 schma said:

Jan 1, 2018 16:07:51 GMT -5 Jokaine said:

It happens in every field with people who work with the person. If I know someone who works at Subway and he uses his stroke to get out of doing back-to-back closes and opens it has no bearing on whether I think he's a good or bad person.

It'd be less about avoiding back to back closes and more about preventing co-workers from getting promotions.  There are several people who were meant to get titles in his first run (wrestling equivalent of a promotion), that he used his pull to prevent, others had to put him over due to politics.  Several people have also mentioned matches where he would deliberately try to make someone look bad because he wasn't happy about the outcome.  HBK's second run did a lot to change many minds about him and redeem his reputation, but you can't just ignore that his attitude and actions in his first run actually had significant effects on many careers. 

To say nothing of the time that him, Nash and Hall basically held a show hostage until they got to "talk" to McMahon, and then, not long after, shock horror, several people the Klique had problems with were unemployed.

[Woo]

Jan 1, 2018 14:10:48 GMT -5 KofiMania said:

Jan 1, 2018 13:47:12 GMT -5 Woo said:

I didn't ignore it. I said his mic work was far better than his first run. So I can't remember that many incredible promos he cut.

I also don't think he has nearly as many great matches in his second run as people think. Summerslam 2002, Wrestlemania with Angle (though he pissed me off so much in that match), Wrestlemania XX,Jericho at Mania, Backlash 04, Flair.... Now I struggling. I for one thought the Undertaker matches especially the second were overrated and would point to them two as being the start of WWE's decline into an overuse of finishers substituted for drama that we can now see in every Cena and HHH match.

I don't know where this great psychology is honestly.

The best thing in his entire second run was the feud with Jericho. The Angle stuff was great as was some of the HHH and Taker stuff and his very brief heel run, but I can't remember much outside that. Some have said every PPV match he had was a classic but for every Jericho and Angle feud there was a forgettable one with Chris Masters, Kane and JBL. His refusal to turn heel made him so stale to me and he sort of meandered in the midcard until it was time for Mania.

You were ignoring it because you were merely menitioning his matches with Diesel and Sid and the like without focusing on the classics after his return.

And he most certainly had as many great matches as people think in his second run. Summerslam 2002, the Mania triple threat and subsequent rematch, the hour-long match with Cena on Raw, the Cena Mania match, the Mania match with Jericho, the series of matches with Jericho during Jericho's SRS run, the Angle matches, his other matches with HHH (there were 3-4 of them), his Mania matches with Taker, his Survivor Series match with Orton, he carried Vince and Hogan to entertaining PPV matches, the Flair Mania match, just off the top of my head. Psychology and storytelling wise he had the great Flair feud, the feud with Taker leading into his retirement (his whole becoming obsessed with the streak was great storytelling), the feud with serious Jericho involving his wife.

I wasn't ignoring the second run. I mentioned Diesel and Sid as examples of him being unprofessional on camera. I suppose I should have mentioned him being unprofessional in the Hogan match too or his backstage hissy fit at Umaga because he wore red trunks and Shawn was wearing red that day.

I mentioned all of those matches in my post. I did forget the Cena hour long match though I was there live for it and it didn't seem that great in person honestly. The HHH matches to me aside from the one on a December Raw and Summerslam largely stunk and the Hogan and Vince matches weren't any good either.

[MAGGLE]

HBK was awesome, but Randy was a Savage

[Ganon83]

Shawn Michaels had the best match of:
-Undertaker's career.
-Bret Hart's career.
-Hulk Hogan's career (20 years past his peak, mind)
-Mick Foley's career before the f*** finish.
-Scott Hall's career.
-Kevin Nash's career.
-Agruably John Cena's career.

Randy Savage had the best match of:
-Ultimate Warrior's career.
-DDP's career.
... and that's about it. Flair-Steamboat is superior to Savage-Steamboat and the build to Hogan-Savage was better than the actual match.

[The Thread Barbi]

Jan 2, 2018 2:22:51 GMT -5 Ganon83 said:

Shawn Michaels had the best match of:
-Undertaker's career.
-Bret Hart's career.
-Hulk Hogan's career (20 years past his peak, mind)
-Mick Foley's career before the f*** finish.
-Scott Hall's career.
-Kevin Nash's career.
-Agruably John Cena's career.

Randy Savage had the best match of:
-Ultimate Warrior's career.
-DDP's career.
... and that's about it. Flair-Steamboat is superior to Savage-Steamboat and the build to Hogan-Savage was better than the actual match.

Michaels had the best match of:
-Undertaker's career - yes
-Bret Hart's career - close. vs Austin at Wrestlemania 13
-Hulk Hogan's career (20 years past his peak, mind) - eh? Hogan never had a proper match. I would argue the first Warrior match was his career best
-Mick Foley's career before the f*** finish - probably, but that Hell in a Cell defines Foley
-Scott Hall's career - yes
-Kevin Nash's career - no, definitely not. Bret Hart had a superior set of matches in the same time frame with Nash.
-Agruably John Cena's career - can't say, I haven't watched much of Cena's career.

[wgdj]

Shawn is one of the greatest of all-time, no doubt. I'd put Bret above him, though. Now, I must admit that I'm not as familiar with Shawn's second run as I'd like to be, although I've seen most of the highlights. I'm very familiar with his work from the Rockers through to WM14, and also the "Commissioner Michaels" stuff, although obviously that was just in a speaking role.

My issue with Shawn is that his work never felt as real as Bret's did. He was a great wrestler, but his holds never looked quite as sharp as Bret's, and many of Bret's subtleties would make his matches seem "real." A great example of how I set the two apart is their turnbuckle spots. Shawn would do the Flair spot, where he'd flip over upside down. We're all familiar with it. It's entertaining, but that would never happen in a "real" match. One could argue that the Irish whip in general wouldn't happen in a real match, but there are certain things we just have to accept as part of wrestling. Bret's great turnbuckle spot was running sternum-first into it. I love how it makes things seem all the more real. If someone Irish whipped you into the corner and you couldn't stop running (wouldn't happen, but this is wrestling...), you wouldn't likely have the presence of mind or even the time to turn around. Hitting it front-on makes the move seem much more brutal. It's just one of the cool things Bret did to enhance the realism of his matches.

That, to me, sums up the difference between the two. Shawn was a great wrestler who did some really cool spots, whereas Bret turned wrestling into an art form. I love them both. I met Shawn in 1998 as an 11 year old kid, and sadly I haven't met Bret. I loved DX, I loved the Rockers, and Shawn was one of the shining lights of the New Generation era. Bret, on the other hand, is my #2 favourite wrestler of all time. His matches have such a fantastic realism, and even his promos are, IMO, extremely underrated. The Hitman character is a no-nonsense wrestler who isn't about flash or glitz and glamour. He's there to win the fight. The promos reflect that, and it's one of the reasons his heel turn worked so well: his frustration seemed real! (It kinda was!)

I'm surprised the Hogan match has been called great in this thread. Yeah, it's hilarious to watch, but wrestling isn't meant to be a joke. It can have a lot of fun elements but, ultimately, it's supposed to be a simulation of a real fight. Hogan/Warrior from WM6 isn't a technical masterpiece by any stretch, but it tells a great story and is believable. Put that next to Hogan/HBK and, really, could you call the latter a great match? It's a great comedy performance from Shawn, but that's all it is.

At the end of the day, any list of greats should feature both Bret and Shawn in the top 10, I believe. I am of the opinion that there's generally no single greatest of all time in any field because it's so subjective. I think Shawn is slightly overrated at times, but he's undoubtedly very comfortably a top 10 talent of the modern WWE era (ie post-1985 or so). That's nothing to sneeze at.

[KofiMania]

Jan 2, 2018 8:49:32 GMT -5 wgdj said:

Shawn is one of the greatest of all-time, no doubt. I'd put Bret above him, though. Now, I must admit that I'm not as familiar with Shawn's second run as I'd like to be, although I've seen most of the highlights. I'm very familiar with his work from the Rockers through to WM14, and also the "Commissioner Michaels" stuff, although obviously that was just in a speaking role.

My issue with Shawn is that his work never felt as real as Bret's did. He was a great wrestler, but his holds never looked quite as sharp as Bret's, and many of Bret's subtleties would make his matches seem "real." A great example of how I set the two apart is their turnbuckle spots. Shawn would do the Flair spot, where he'd flip over upside down. We're all familiar with it. It's entertaining, but that would never happen in a "real" match. One could argue that the Irish whip in general wouldn't happen in a real match, but there are certain things we just have to accept as part of wrestling. Bret's great turnbuckle spot was running sternum-first into it. I love how it makes things seem all the more real. If someone Irish whipped you into the corner and you couldn't stop running (wouldn't happen, but this is wrestling...), you wouldn't likely have the presence of mind or even the time to turn around. Hitting it front-on makes the move seem much more brutal. It's just one of the cool things Bret did to enhance the realism of his matches.

That, to me, sums up the difference between the two. Shawn was a great wrestler who did some really cool spots, whereas Bret turned wrestling into an art form. I love them both. I met Shawn in 1998 as an 11 year old kid, and sadly I haven't met Bret. I loved DX, I loved the Rockers, and Shawn was one of the shining lights of the New Generation era. Bret, on the other hand, is my #2 favourite wrestler of all time. His matches have such a fantastic realism, and even his promos are, IMO, extremely underrated. The Hitman character is a no-nonsense wrestler who isn't about flash or glitz and glamour. He's there to win the fight. The promos reflect that, and it's one of the reasons his heel turn worked so well: his frustration seemed real! (It kinda was!)

I'm surprised the Hogan match has been called great in this thread. Yeah, it's hilarious to watch, but wrestling isn't meant to be a joke. It can have a lot of fun elements but, ultimately, it's supposed to be a simulation of a real fight. Hogan/Warrior from WM6 isn't a technical masterpiece by any stretch, but it tells a great story and is believable. Put that next to Hogan/HBK and, really, could you call the latter a great match? It's a great comedy performance from Shawn, but that's all it is.

At the end of the day, any list of greats should feature both Bret and Shawn in the top 10, I believe. I am of the opinion that there's generally no single greatest of all time in any field because it's so subjective. I think Shawn is slightly overrated at times, but he's undoubtedly very comfortably a top 10 talent of the modern WWE era (ie post-1985 or so). That's nothing to sneeze at.

I think Shawn's second run has more of the realism that you may remember Bret for. I certainly wouldn't argue against someone holding Bret's run ahead of Shawn's first run.

As for the Hogan match, there are certainly differing opinions on the quality of that match but I think a lot of people would be surprised at how good it actually was if they re-watched it, especially considering the state of Hulk's body at that time. He was essentially a statue. I don't know many that call it a "great" match but it's definitely solid to good.

Google Summerslam 2005 review and the the first 3 "star ratings" for that match I found are 4 stars, 2.5 stars, 3 stars.

[Toilet Paper Roll]

I couldn't conclusively say one guy is clearly the best ever, but if you put a short list together of the best in ring performers he's on it.

[YAKMAN is ICHIBAN]

Wrestling is too subjective for any one guy to be The Best.

It isn't too subjective to say that he should comfortably be on any short list though.

["Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay]

Honestly, the more of his work I watch, the harder it is to deny it. Even seeing how nuanced his small part in the 1992 Rumble was, he just had a psychology and character consistency unlike anybody else, and has two separate phenomenal bodies of work in WWF/E alone.

edit: In fact the only person I'd put over him is Jericho.

[BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps]

There are other workers I like over HBK, but Shawn was such an amazingly complete package. He wasn't the absolute best in one single area, but he was great at so many things. HBK had timing, athleticism, the ability to read a crowd, and a butt-ton of charisma.

[The Thread Barbi]

Jan 2, 2018 13:13:29 GMT -5 BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps said:

There are other workers I like over HBK, but Shawn was such an amazingly complete package. He wasn't the absolute best in one single area, but he was great at so many things. HBK had timing, athleticism, the ability to read a crowd, and a butt-ton of charisma.

And yet he couldn't deliver where it truly mattered - he couldn't draw a dime. As much as he had all the attributes you and everyone has mentioned, he never captured anyone's attention outside of the wrestling bubble.

Bret Hart was the well McMahon kept visiting because company finances didn’t nosedive whenever he was champion.

You couldn't build a company around Shawn Michaels during any of his two main runs. You could around Bret.

Shawn Michaels is like Michael Jackson - an exceptional, once in a generation talent, but without the rocketing financial success of Jackson.

[KofiMania]

Jan 2, 2018 14:30:51 GMT -5 The Thread Barbi said:

Jan 2, 2018 13:13:29 GMT -5 BayleyTiffyCodyCenaJudyHopps said:

There are other workers I like over HBK, but Shawn was such an amazingly complete package. He wasn't the absolute best in one single area, but he was great at so many things. HBK had timing, athleticism, the ability to read a crowd, and a butt-ton of charisma.

And yet he couldn't deliver where it truly mattered - he couldn't draw a dime. As much as he had all the attributes you and everyone has mentioned, he never captured anyone's attention outside of the wrestling bubble.

Bret Hart was the well McMahon kept visiting because company finances didn’t nosedive whenever he was champion.

You couldn't build a company around Shawn Michaels during any of his two main runs. You could around Bret.

Shawn Michaels is like Michael Jackson - an exceptional, once in a generation talent, but without the rocketing financial success of Jackson.

Shawn's main event run during '96 certainly was during a down period for the company, but should that be pinned on his shoulders or on WCW's growth in popularity? And he has main evented a bunch o PPVs that had great buyrates, just not during his '96 run.

[2coldMack is even more baffled]

Jan 2, 2018 16:41:42 GMT -5 KofiMania said:

Jan 2, 2018 14:30:51 GMT -5 The Thread Barbi said:

And yet he couldn't deliver where it truly mattered - he couldn't draw a dime. As much as he had all the attributes you and everyone has mentioned, he never captured anyone's attention outside of the wrestling bubble.

Bret Hart was the well McMahon kept visiting because company finances didn’t nosedive whenever he was champion.

You couldn't build a company around Shawn Michaels during any of his two main runs. You could around Bret.

Shawn Michaels is like Michael Jackson - an exceptional, once in a generation talent, but without the rocketing financial success of Jackson.

Shawn's main event run during '96 certainly was during a down period for the company, but should that be pinned on his shoulders or on WCW's growth in popularity? And he has main evented a bunch o PPVs that had great buyrates, just not during his '96 run.

It should be pinned on his shoulders, because he couldn't turn the tide. Austin did. Then Rock pushed it even further. Shawn couldn't get the job done as a top guy.