|
Post by corndog on Jun 27, 2018 12:07:31 GMT -5
Today the Rock sent out a tweet replying to Shane "Hurricane" Helms tweet thanking the Rock for putting him over. twitter.com/TheRock/status/1011953548970614784But it made me think, I can't remember hearing any stories about the Rock refusing to put anyone over or even complaining about booking. Austin had the walk out, Bret had Montreal and stories about not wanting to put Diesel over, Hogan has countless stories and same with Michaels. Haven't heard the same stories about Sammartino, but he did "take his ball and go home" and outside of his run in the mid 80s never really put too many guys over and always got his win back, so what do you think FAN?
|
|
Josh Spicer
Trap-Jaw
Ladies and genlelmen, my new hero.
Posts: 424
|
Post by Josh Spicer on Jun 27, 2018 12:08:22 GMT -5
Hamburgers are the most valid form of currency.
|
|
|
Post by Slanted and Enchanted on Jun 27, 2018 12:14:15 GMT -5
By all accounts, I'd say Roman. Yes, management has forced him down our throats but he has had more than his fair share of clean losses and I can't recall any stories of him politicking and refusing to job. Aside from the Shield as a collective refusing to lose to Cena early on.
Rock was certainly very unselfish during his prime but his comeback in the early 2010s soured me. You can't call him unselfish while also having an entire episode of RAW dedicated to him on his birthday, and doing it 100% unironically.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2018 12:16:08 GMT -5
Yeah I think he was. I haven't heard 1 story about Rock not wanting to work with or put someone over besides those HBK stories but we know why Rock said that and it makes sense. Rock's always been amazing.
You know, I'm watching some Raws from 97 and I'm in November which is directly after the Screwjob and during that time Rock's starting to call himself "The Rock" and he's working with a midcard Austin, messing around with the Nation, stuff like that. It's great looking back at this time and see guys like Farooq make way for Rock to lead to become who he is today, seeing guys like Austin work with him given he sees where he's going and yet he sees Rock and he knows he's got something, seeing his evolution. Just goes to show you that sometimes helping people out can go a long way. Because of how Rock was treated by the company, he does his best to give that back times 10 for anyone else he works with no matter who they are.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Jun 27, 2018 12:19:05 GMT -5
Randy Orton is up there too
|
|
|
Post by corndog on Jun 27, 2018 12:22:35 GMT -5
Randy Orton is up there too But was Orton ever really "the top guy"? He was up there, but I wouldn't put him on the level of the ones I listed.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Jun 27, 2018 12:24:15 GMT -5
Randy Orton is up there too But was Orton ever really "the top guy"? He was up there, but I wouldn't put him on the level of the ones I listed. He was. In theory of this previous generation you can argue he ranged from 1-3 at points between him, Batista and Cena.
|
|
|
Post by ChitownKnight on Jun 27, 2018 12:30:37 GMT -5
Besides the whole nexus thing how about Cena? Especially in recent years. He put over Kevin Owens clean in his first match on the main roster, and don’t forget about losing to Ambrose and Nakamura clean on Smackdown as well as Rollins in a gauntlet match being the second guy in while Rollins was still tired from The first match
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Jun 27, 2018 12:30:45 GMT -5
Rock, Orton and Bret.
|
|
|
Post by Tiger Millionaire on Jun 27, 2018 12:35:58 GMT -5
I don't think Sting ever complained about putting anyone over, but that's WCW.
|
|
Jobes
Unicron
Posts: 3,199
|
Post by Jobes on Jun 27, 2018 12:39:06 GMT -5
You're joking, right? One of the biggest moments in professional wrestling history concerns Bret's refusal to put another guy over.
|
|
Nosnorb
El Dandy
Nachos and Fraggle Rock are TIMELESS.
Posts: 7,715
|
Post by Nosnorb on Jun 27, 2018 12:43:18 GMT -5
Randy Orton is up there too Considering how many times Orton has phoned it in during feuds, and that he was only really a top guy for the period 2008-2009 when he was red hot until that awful WM25 match with Trips and the thousands of matches with Cena, I have a hard time seeing Orton in the same bracket as The Rock.
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Jun 27, 2018 12:51:20 GMT -5
You're joking, right? One of the biggest moments in professional wrestling history concerns Bret's refusal to put another guy over. Nope. He had creative control in his contract and his refusal was that he didn't want to lose in Canada, as was his right in his contract. He'd put Shawn over before and he would have done it again. The issue was Vince fearing Bret would take the title to WCW, based on nothing, and notorious shit-stirrers Shawn and Triple H getting his ear. Vince is in the wrong, not Bret. Bret's entire career was making others look good and being a professional.
|
|
|
Post by I'm Team Bayley and Indi on Jun 27, 2018 12:54:57 GMT -5
Chris Jericho has to be up there including putting over John Cena and Fandango (did little in the long run), I even felt his feud with Dean Ambrose was to help undue the damage of facing Brock Lesnar.
|
|
|
Post by Zombie Mod on Jun 27, 2018 12:56:23 GMT -5
I'd say F.A.N.s favourite local man is in with a shout, you rarely hear anything bad said about Kane.
|
|
Dub H
Crow T. Robot
Captain Pixel: the Game Master
I ❤ Aniki
Posts: 47,880
|
Post by Dub H on Jun 27, 2018 13:00:35 GMT -5
We kinda need a mroe strict definition.Do we mean main eventer of Austin-Rock-Hogan tier?
|
|
Jobes
Unicron
Posts: 3,199
|
Post by Jobes on Jun 27, 2018 13:03:12 GMT -5
You're joking, right? One of the biggest moments in professional wrestling history concerns Bret's refusal to put another guy over. Nope. He had creative control in his contract and his refusal was that he didn't want to lose in Canada, as was his right in his contract. He'd put Shawn over before and he would have done it again. The issue was Vince fearing Bret would take the title to WCW, based on nothing, and notorious shit-stirrers Shawn and Triple H getting his ear. Vince is in the wrong, not Bret. Bret's entire career was making others look good and being a professional. The whole idea that he had a clause in his contract that he "couldn't lose in Canada" is proof to the contrary. It's fake. The fans know it's fake. You're not going to look "less than" by losing in Canada. The general wrestling fan isn't going to remember where a certain match took place. Most fans probably forget where an event is happening before it even ends. His refusal to put Shawn over isn't as black and white as you put it. Even if Bret relinquished the title the following night on RAW, that kind of buries the title, does it not? "Our champion is giving us the title back so he can go work for the competition," is not a good look for the belt or for the WWF as a whole. Another shining example of non-selfish Bret Hart: (LINK BECAUSE LANGUAGE WARNING) youtu.be/av8P_MORJjE
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 27, 2018 13:13:37 GMT -5
I think Foley is probably the least selfish top guy there was. I truly wish more guys approached wrestling in their later stages like he did, he really went the extra mile to make guys. Maybe there's stuff I've forgotten but I've never seen the Rock as a selfless wrestler. The Rock/Hurricane thing was a good moment but does Rock really have a great track record for getting guys over? His character was never really conducive to making other guys look good. I would even put Hogan over Rock in terms of having built guys up thanks to his last big WWE run where he pretty much lost to everyone, tagged with Edge for a while, worked with midcarders.
The Rock had some moments that were pretty much one-and-dones like losing the battle royal to Booker T, and losing to Hurricane, but it never really seemed like there was a concentrated effort on his part to help anyone like Foley or Jericho have, or even Triple H on his good days.
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Jun 27, 2018 13:15:39 GMT -5
Nope. He had creative control in his contract and his refusal was that he didn't want to lose in Canada, as was his right in his contract. He'd put Shawn over before and he would have done it again. The issue was Vince fearing Bret would take the title to WCW, based on nothing, and notorious shit-stirrers Shawn and Triple H getting his ear. Vince is in the wrong, not Bret. Bret's entire career was making others look good and being a professional. The whole idea that he had a clause in his contract that he "couldn't lose in Canada" is proof to the contrary. It's fake. The fans know it's fake. You're not going to look "less than" by losing in Canada. The general wrestling fan isn't going to remember where a certain match took place. Most fans probably forget where an event is happening before it even ends. His refusal to put Shawn over isn't as black and white as you put it. Even if Bret relinquished the title the following night on RAW, that kind of buries the title, does it not? "Our champion is giving us the title back so he can go work for the competition," is not a good look for the belt or for the WWF as a whole. Another shining example of non-selfish Bret Hart: youtu.be/av8P_MORJjEHe had a creative control clause in his contract and he used it, whether you think not losing in Canada is silly isn't relevant. Vince was the one who gave the contract with the clause in it to him, as a way to get him to stay when he couldn't pay what WCW was offering Bret. Bret, unlike Shawn had and Triple H would in the future, never gave Vince a reason to think he wouldn't be a professional. Shawn balked at returning the loss at Mania 13 so Bret helped another guy instead, at his own request. Vince's loyalty was to Shawn and his buddy and they got in his ear because they didn't like Bret, simple as. Everyone involved has even said that's how the meeting went. Vince even knew he'd done wrong by Bret when he let him punch him. I also wouldn't take the word of Kevin Nash as gospel on what it is to be professional. Edit: having actually now watched that video, Bret was right. If more people took wrestling and perceptions as seriously as Bret did, we'd all be better off.
|
|
|
Post by nickcave on Jun 27, 2018 13:16:52 GMT -5
Nope. He had creative control in his contract and his refusal was that he didn't want to lose in Canada, as was his right in his contract. He'd put Shawn over before and he would have done it again. The issue was Vince fearing Bret would take the title to WCW, based on nothing, and notorious shit-stirrers Shawn and Triple H getting his ear. Vince is in the wrong, not Bret. Bret's entire career was making others look good and being a professional. The whole idea that he had a clause in his contract that he "couldn't lose in Canada" is proof to the contrary. It's fake. The fans know it's fake. You're not going to look "less than" by losing in Canada. The general wrestling fan isn't going to remember where a certain match took place. Most fans probably forget where an event is happening before it even ends. His refusal to put Shawn over isn't as black and white as you put it. Even if Bret relinquished the title the following night on RAW, that kind of buries the title, does it not? "Our champion is giving us the title back so he can go work for the competition," is not a good look for the belt or for the WWF as a whole. Another shining example of non-selfish Bret Hart: (LINK BECAUSE LANGUAGE WARNING) youtu.be/av8P_MORJjEI thought that he was originally ok with it but Shawn said that he would never return the favor or put over Bret Hart ever which caused him to change his mind. Seems like a legit thing to be upset about I don't knpw
|
|