|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 22:50:01 GMT -5
I think ring psychology trumps workrate.
However, a guy like Bret Hart has a firm grasp of both. He had both an excellent workrate and excellent ring psychology. So did Steve Austin. So did The Rock [YES! THE ROCK WORKED HIS ASS OFF! Check his matches.]
However, most of the time John Cena couldnt identify ring psychology if it slapped him in the face twice and then kicked him in the balls. He works hard, but he has no grasp of that factor of wrestling.
|
|
|
|
Sandman
Oct 8, 2009 22:19:37 GMT -5
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 22:19:37 GMT -5
Wrestler and character wise, yes.
Sure he was limited in the ring but so was Austin after his injury. Sandman was a brawler and thats what people wanted to see out of him. Similar to Mick Foley.
He could have been big after he was drafted to RAW. The only thing though, is that Sandmans lifestyle and personality would never mesh with being a representative of a company like WWE.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 19:05:52 GMT -5
What about his run as "The Narcissist" when he feuded before Mr. Perfect, before the whole Lex Express gayness? I thought he played that role really well. I honestly think bookers have dropped the ball consistently with Luger his entire career? I didn't like him then. I was still a kid though, maybe I would have a different perspective now. I mean, I thought he was okay, but I just remember thinking he was playing a Mr. Perfect like role, against a face Mr. Perfect, and not doing as good of a job as Hennig did if that makes sense. I will agree that bookers dropped the ball on him. They consistently did stupid things with Luger and placed him into roles he wasn't fit for. The only time I liked Luger, as I said, was as a face against the nWo and in all my experience watching him that was probably the only time he could be considered as being booked well. Then he shortly got lost in the shuffle following that. Example: being put into the hip and cool at the time nWo Wolfpac. Luger was a horrible fit for that and just looked like a dork alongside them. |
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 18:57:48 GMT -5
LOL @ Greenman.
Whenever I finally have the extra cash to rebuy a 360 or get a PS3, definitely going to make a Charlie CAW and create a Greenman storyline.
|
|
|
|
Ted Jr.
Oct 8, 2009 18:48:06 GMT -5
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 18:48:06 GMT -5
Eh, I am not saying Cody is going to be a megastar. Just that, at this point in time I see more potential in him than I do with Ted. Either of them could break out though as they both have skill and could easily develop a character and become comfortable on the mic. It is more on the booking team to push them the right way and utilize them correctly. There are guys on the roster who right now are more skilled in the ring and at least as good on the mic as Cody and Ted, such as Charlie Haas or Paul Burchill. Yet, they do not have the booking team behind them. Just as Legacy, if these guys were given interesting things to do and booked properly they could do well. Another example of this would be Val Venis. Charisma and ring ability plus the sort of look WWE likes, but since the booking team never got behind him he wasnt as successful as he could have been. Its more on WWE Creative to book guys to their strengths and push them properly. Potential and ability can only take you so far if you arent presented to the fans the right way, especially in WWE. Cody Rhodes is years ahead of both Paul Burchill, Charlie Haas, Val Venis, and pretty much 90% of the WWE roster. He's a downright natural on the stick. I think people are far too harsh on two guys that have only been in the company just over one and two years respectively. They haven't got some crazy gimmick, but that doesn't mean they 'lack charisma'. The aim of what they are doing with Cody Rhodes and Ted Dibiase is to make the crowd hate them simply for being Cody Rhodes and Ted Dibiase. If they can develop into their personas natural heel traits, without needing crazy gimmicks, they will go very far. And there's a reason respected people in the industry, like JR, call Cody and Ted future Wrestlemania main eventers. They know what they are talking about. Can you name me one great promo Cody has done? Enough to facilitate the belief that he is years ahead of almost everyone on the roster? Talk about hyperbole. I like Cody, but that is taking it way too far. When Cody dishes out a great promo I will agree. So far, no. I suppose it highlights how far pro wrestling has fallen when people are considering Cody Rhodes as a great promo man. |
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 18:13:49 GMT -5
I never liked Luger. I thought he sucked, honestly. Ever seen his late 80s stuff? Nah not really. I was pretty young at that time. I am more referring to his WWE run and then return to WCW, so admittedly I am not a scholar on the subject. I heard he used to be great but never checked out his early work. I guess what I am trying to say is I thought he sucked in WWF and mostly sucked in WCW. As a fan at the time I didn't buy into Luger. That probably wasn't all his fault, of course. |
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 18:10:57 GMT -5
Hulk Hogan. He kick started both wrestling boom periods and without the huge mainstream exposure he gave the WWF, I doubt any one of us would be watching wrestling let alone posting on this board. So true because without Hogan in the 80's. There would have been no main stream wrestling without main stream wrestling there would have been no Wrestlemania. Without Wrestlemania wrestling would have feel on it;s face.If wrestling fell on it;'s face without Vince) with no Hulkamania or Hogan or Wrestlemania in the 80;s there would be no wrestling in the 80;s and no wrestling today. It would not have lasted the way it was going. Wrestling at that time had to transit into somthing knew or go bankrupt 9from the territory's). That should answer the above poster. On why Hogan was more popular to wrestling than Flair. No one else could have took Hogans spot. He had everything.A few wrestlers came close to having what Hogan did but Hogan just had the 'it factor'. What makes you say that? I dont see how you can assume wrestling would have just up and died without Hulkamania or the Rock n Wrestling era. Wrestling was around long before that and would be around today with or without it. The idea that wrestling was just some kinda tiny niche carny thing until WWF came around is nonsense anyways, as history clearly shows. Obviously wrestling wouldn't have been as big as it got and guys would have made less money but that is an entirely different argument. Besides, when you look at the state of wrestling today and say it wouldn't be as big as it is without Hogan, you really mean WWE wouldn't be as big as it is. In fact outside of WWE wrestling is very obviously at a very low point as far as popularity goes. Hogan was very important in making WWF the biggest thing going, to be sure. He was integral to the popularity boom of WWF and as a consequence pro wrestling in general for a time. It is ludicrous to say HOGAN SAVED WRESTLING though, especially considering wrestling needs a saviour now and is back to being at a low point in popularity and revenue. |
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 18:00:44 GMT -5
I never liked Luger. I thought he sucked, honestly.
I always saw him as a poor mans Hulk Hogan, even before they attempted to push him AS Hulk Hogan...and this was as a kid when I wasn't exactly a pro wrestling critic.
The only time I liked him was his face run in WCW when the nWo was hot. He was pretty good in that role. I didn't think he was a very good heel either. I suppose with a manager he could have been a decent heel but on his own he just came off as a goof to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 17:55:48 GMT -5
They probably could, but to be honest it would be like WWE trying to market John Cena as a technical wizard.
He COULD pull it off if booked the right way, but why not book the guy more to his strengths instead of trying to fit him into a mold that isn't as good of a fit for him?
A sexy ODB would just draw comparisons between her and the other beauty queens in TNA, instead of letting her stand out and be different like she currently does. Besides, there is already a certain segment of fans that already find her sexy and attractive. So it would be better to let ODB be ODB instead of forcing something else.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 17:50:31 GMT -5
For all the flack WWE gets for booking show to job to Cena all the time and the like, it is still worlds better than when they were doing things like having Spike Dudley beat him or having him in a tag team with Billy Gunn.
|
|
|
|
Ted Jr.
Oct 8, 2009 17:40:41 GMT -5
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 17:40:41 GMT -5
See, I think he is 100x's better than Rhodes. He is worlds better in the ring and when he gets the chance to speak and be serious, he does better than anyone gives him credit for. Rhodes isn't bad but, I just don't see this megastar that others seem too. Eh, I am not saying Cody is going to be a megastar. Just that, at this point in time I see more potential in him than I do with Ted. Either of them could break out though as they both have skill and could easily develop a character and become comfortable on the mic. It is more on the booking team to push them the right way and utilize them correctly. There are guys on the roster who right now are more skilled in the ring and at least as good on the mic as Cody and Ted, such as Charlie Haas or Paul Burchill. Yet, they do not have the booking team behind them. Just as Legacy, if these guys were given interesting things to do and booked properly they could do well. Another example of this would be Val Venis. Charisma and ring ability plus the sort of look WWE likes, but since the booking team never got behind him he wasnt as successful as he could have been. Its more on WWE Creative to book guys to their strengths and push them properly. Potential and ability can only take you so far if you arent presented to the fans the right way, especially in WWE. |
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 16:04:09 GMT -5
You act as if Bret is Billy Jack Haynes doing shoot interviews saying WCW, Vince McMahon, etc. ruined his life or crap like that. I'm sure Bret feels that way about Vince. Ever read any of his interviews? "Punching Vince Was The Best Thing I Ever Did" was one. That crap annoys me that Bret must always be the vocal point. He needs to just get on with his life. So he got over Montreal in '05. That's still nearly 10 years of complaining about being "screwed". I'm not singling Bret out at all. Amen't I allowed to criticize Bret if I feel the need to? You're taking my personal criticism of Bret way too seriously. Nah. I am just making points about the situation...dont think I am taking this hard or anything. I believe that Brets bitterness or inability to get over things is constantly exaggerated because there is a popular opinion out there that he is still angry over things he hasn't been angry about in years. I mean, look at this thread. There are still a lot of people out there that believe he hates Goldberg, for instance, or that he blames Goldberg for ending his career when it couldn't be further from the truth. When you look at the guy he has every reason to be bitter. He was involved in a real life, legit situation where he got humiliated on PPV. His brother died after being pushed to do something he wasn't very comfortable with by the same company. Yet he still made amends with said company, did appearances for them, and accepted a HOF induction. I am not saying Bret is perfect or doesn't have an ego or what have you. Just that he is a pretty classy guy. When you consider all the ex WWE guys who are extremely bitter over petty things like not getting the push they wanted or feeling like their checks weren't quite as high as they wanted Bret looks pretty good by comparison to me. |
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 15:48:59 GMT -5
Except he doesn't blame Goldberg for this. I know. Bret blames the powerplant. Bret has been bitter (IMO) since Montreal which is more than 10 years. He blamed Michaels, Vince etc for the past 10 years or so. Maybe now he's getting over it. He always has someone to blame is my point. He never blames himself though. He's totally self-centered in my eyes. Bret got over it way more than just recently. He made amends with Vince back in 2005. He even thanked Vince in his HOF speech which was in 2006. So yeah, not just recently. As far as HBK goes, like I said he dislikes HBK for more reasons than just Montreal. He may partially blame the Powerplant, which is warranted IMO. He took a measure of personal responsibility, as I said, because he continued wrestling even though he should have taken a break. Its not like Bret came out and said it was all the Powerplant trainers faults that his career was ended and then tried to sue them or something. You act as if Bret is Billy Jack Haynes doing shoot interviews saying WCW, Vince McMahon, etc. ruined his life or crap like that. Considering the HUGE number of bitter retired wrestlers out there, why must Bret Hart be singled out? Especially when he shows a much higher measure of class than the majority of them. Hell, Ric Flair to this day still bitches about WCW supposedly misusing him. Bret Hart has a much, much stronger case for being misused there but he doesn't constantly complain on TV shows or DVDs any chance he gets like Flair does. |
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 15:37:35 GMT -5
As I remember didn't Mayweather legit punch Show that first time and really break his nose?
Both of these guys can certainly take a punch, so more than likely Mayweather is partially telling the truth. They probably both really hit each other at least to make it look real.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 15:30:53 GMT -5
As far as I can see Bret never blames himself for anything. Not saying the Goldberg incident is his fault (of course it's not) but he seems to have gotten so whiny and so into complaining since Montreal. He always has someone to blame. Except he doesn't blame Goldberg for this. He also forgave Vince for Montreal and made amends. As I recall he has said that he understands how Vince felt and why he did it even though he wishes it wouldn't have happened the way it did. Its not like Bret is Ultimate Warrior or something, spewing venom from everyone at his website. Then, as others have said Bret took a measure of responsibility for his career ending because he got checked out by a WCW doctor and went out and wrestled even though he didn't feel confident about it. He should have gotten a second opinion. If Bret had rested up after the kick his career would have went on and he has acknowledged that. I get tired of people overestimating how much Bret complains or how bitter he is. If he was so bitter he wouldn't have accepted a WWE HOF induction or gave a great speech saying bye to his fans. About the only thing Bret still seems bitter about is towards Shawn Michaels, but theres a pretty long line of guys who dislike Shawn the same way Bret does, and Hart has more reasons beyond just Montreal. |
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 15:19:05 GMT -5
Bradtherad reminds me of a really tired, worn out meme at this point.
|
|
|
|
Ted Jr.
Oct 8, 2009 15:09:31 GMT -5
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 15:09:31 GMT -5
I have a feeling they'll do the typical face turn thing ala Orton and Morrsion, i.e. his heel buddies kick the crap outta him. Never figured out why that's then supposed to make us root for someone. See: Orton post Evolution. Of course they never learn from that. WWE: Hey guys, I know this guy has been a dick for ages now, but it finally came back and bit him in the ass! You should like him now! When stuff like that happens to people in real life, I just say GOOD. I am not saying that type of storyline cannot work, as long as you build to it. You could have Ted begin having doubts, not doing what Orton tells him, etc. Finally he just says that he has done a lot of things for Orton, things he isn't proud of and he wishes he could take back. Orton acts like he agrees for a week or two, maybe even acts more facelike in general but then beats the stuffing out of him. THAT would be effective. It wont go that way though, they will just do a random beatdown and not give the crowd any reasons they should like or respect Ted now beyond that. As far as Ted the wrestler goes, I would much rather see Cody get the push. He is far more interesting. I wish they had done more with him after the Dusty Rhodes RAW which closed out with CODY CHANTS!!!!...yet of course WWE, as usual, did nothing with it since it did not fit in their plans. |
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 15:00:46 GMT -5
I am glad he is staying away from WWE.
The current product bums me out enough without Stone Cold coming out, shaking hands with Cena before giving him a hug, telling the crowd Cena will open up a can of whoopfanny on Orton at the PPV, then motioning for some ice cold Capri Suns to share as RAW ends.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 14:55:59 GMT -5
There were way more problems with Conway than just his music.
Generic character, unremarkable on the mic. Capable in the ring but thats it.
He was simply average in every respect. Nothing stood out about him. Buff Bagwell with less charisma and overness.
The music certainly did not help, but a good performer doesn't need to rely on the music they come out to or the color of their trunks to get over.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bubble Lead on Oct 8, 2009 14:44:18 GMT -5
WWE has more than enough old guys on the verge of retirement anyway, and most of them easily outdraw Booker. Can I be contrarian about this? Sure, he might being a dick in TNA, but maybe, considering his legacy, maybe he has a certain right to? This guy was a main eventer and upper midcarder in WCW and WWF respectively, and perhaps he should have a certain prilivege to perhaps demand for certain things in a company like TNA? Booker was main event in WWE and WCW and headlined PPVs. TNA has treated him like a midcarder pretty much his entire run. I am not saying I agree with it, but I do understand where he is coming from. TNA has a tendency to bring guys in, make a big deal about them, kiss their ass and then once they have them they change their tune and do nothing with them until they strike upon the next big debut. Perhaps he was promised better treatment and more of a spotlight than he received. At any rate it doesn't matter because Booker wont be able to pull any BS in WWE. |
|
