TheOne Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 Not sure if this has been posted. But, according to VKM, ""Shawn Michaels was the best in-ring performer in the history of WWE." http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/2011...C2%AE-Hall-Fame Your thoughts? I would definitely put him in the top 10, probably 5 as well, but I do not agree he is the best performer in WWE history. Who do you think it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoistVaj Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 Not sure if this has been posted. But, according to VKM, ""Shawn Michaels was the best in-ring performer in the history of WWE." http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/2011...C2%AE-Hall-Fame Your thoughts? I would definitely put him in the top 10, probably 5 as well, but I do not agree he is the best performer in WWE history. Who do you think it is? Â Â Who do you think it is, whilst dismissing HBK you must surely have someone in mind? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted January 15, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted January 15, 2011 Jesus, your harsh. There's an argument if he's number one, but I cant think of many that would knock him out of a top 10! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cum Doctor Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 I'd be inclined to say that Chris Benoit is probably the best in ring performer in WWE history, although Shawn Michaels certainly isn't very far behind him. Bret Hart is probably there or thereabouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fye Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 it is always going to be about opinions but I think "in-ring" Benoit, Angle, Eddie, Owen, Bret, Waltman and a handful of others are the greatest I can recall seeing but I wouldnt put any of them anywhere near Michaels for consistently performing the style of wrestling I want to see, but thats all you can judge it on. I cant really comment too much on the 80s and early 90s stuff as I watched it with a different mindset and anything pre UK mainstream I have little to no knowledge of. I am a massive Michaels fan, always was and always will be. I think his stuff will stand up in 20-30 years more than watching something from the early 80s or 90s would today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOne Posted January 15, 2011 Author Share Posted January 15, 2011 Not sure if this has been posted. But, according to VKM, ""Shawn Michaels was the best in-ring performer in the history of WWE." http://www.businesswire.com/news/home/2011...C2%AE-Hall-Fame Your thoughts? I would definitely put him in the top 10, probably 5 as well, but I do not agree he is the best performer in WWE history. Who do you think it is? Â Â Who do you think it is, whilst dismissing HBK you must surely have someone in mind? Â IDK, that's the thing though. Lets see, in any order, IMO, these are the top WWE in-ring performers through-out WWE: Shawn Michaels, Chris Jericho, Kurt Angle, Bret Hart, Ricky Steamboat, Randy Savage, Eddie Guerrero, Mr. Perfect, (Excluding Ric Flair, since IMO his run with WWF was nowhere near as great as his NWA, WCW runs), but I suppose you can make a really good case if you are just talking about the best WWE in-ring performers, you have to go with HBK since he has been having 5-star matches with Marty Jannety back in 93 until his retirement match with Taker, so if we are just talking about the best WWE performer, its HBK. But, in pro wrestling history, I have him in my top 10, but not top 5. But, if I had to pick, it's one of these four: Ric Flair, Ricky Steamboat, Bret Hart, and Randy Savage. Those four are IMO are the best performers in wrestling history. So yea. lol Who do you have as the best WWE in-ring performer and also the best in-ring performer in pro wrestling history? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members air_raid Posted January 15, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted January 15, 2011 Objectively, yes he probably is. There are other men that were better wrestlers/technicians, but in terms of PERFORMANCE standards, reach and remaining at an impeccable level for a sustained length of time, fuck me, the man probably has no equal. Â Subjectively, there are many more that I preferred because they were better at making me CARE about who won the match. As much as I loved to watch Shawn wrestle, there weren't as many of his matches where I had emotional interest in the winner, and my favourite matches of his tend to be ones where I wanted the other guy to kick his head in. My favourites of all time were/are the ones that I wanted to WIN - Bret, Benoit, AJ, Nigel, Kobashi, Marufuji. Â As I put it to a mate on Facebook : Â "Shawn Michaels has a career like no other, spanning Hulkamania, the Attitude Era and post-attitude. Arguably either side of his injury you could say he had two careers that would be better than most wrestlers runs. The only men who wrestled at the top in all three "eras" are Sting, Flair and Undertaker, and if someone wants to say Michaels is the only man who has had BRILLIANT matches in all three eras, I will agree. Like yourself boss, I too am a Bret Hart man, and I'll tell you how they match up. Arguably with his tenure, HBK has had more matches in the "excellent-incredible" bracket, in terms of a body of work. However if you stand his best matches next to Bret's and ask me to pick the ones I thought I were best - I will take the Hitman every time." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members PunkStep Posted January 15, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted January 15, 2011 Waltman?? Good worker, but punching above his weight being mentioned alongside those names. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smegma Cake Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 Its purely subjective. One person might think HBK is the best in ring performer, another might think its Mr Perfect or Rick Rude. There's probably people that think John Cena is the best in ring performer. Â I think there's better 'wrestlers' out there like Angle, Benoit, Guerrero for example. However HBK just had everything. He had the looks, the charisma, the athletic ability and the fact he could draw an emotion from you at any time. Heel or face, before back injury or afterward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fye Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 Waltman?? Good worker, but punching above his weight being mentioned alongside those names. Â What I mean is what I personally enjoy and I hardly saw him have a bad match until the turn of the century, he was one of those I knew would entertain me when his music hit, I suppose he was the reliable guy who seemed motivated regardless of whether it was a big match or not. I cant believe I never mentioned Savage, Hennig or Steamboat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted January 15, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted January 15, 2011 Here's an interesting audio show, from the Observer. Its talking about listing the top wrestlers of all time to be compiled in a book. Larry Matysik and Dave Meltzer take on Michaels is interesting. There's the transcript fellow, but there's the link when talking about the rest of them. It's a great listen. http://hotfile.com/dl/94716778/6885f39/wre...th_jan.mp3.html  Matysik: "One name that will pop up is Shawn Michaes, because WWE had him as the greatest wrestler of all time. Please, give me a break. Shawn Michaels is a terrific worker, but here's my thinking on him. I see him as a guy comparable to a guy like Carpentier, who was a good performer, so was Carpentier. But when I look, really, look at all the things (Carpentier) was involved in in the 50s and 60s, he was in the middle of a lot of stuff, he was headlining everywhere, so how can you not say that he was certainly comparable to Michaels. Plus Michaels stands out now, because he's fresh in peoples mind and he was one of 4, 5, 6 workers, really good psychological workers that were left when you got into the 2000s. If he'd have been that same wrestler in 1976, he'd have been one of 50 or 60. He would not have stood out because of his size." Meltzer: He'd have still have been a pretty good big star, but I'd say he would not have stood out as a worker like he did.  Matysik: And if he was a drama queen like he was throughout much of his career, he may have gotten shoved aside.  Meltzer: You know what the thing with him would be, he would have survived based on if he could draw money, because if you were a drama queen and you could draw money, there was going to be a promoter that would take you. If you were a headache and couldnt draw and you were super talented, it was going to be difficult. Look at Karl Gotch. He was a phenominal wrestler, but a lot of promotions didnt want anything to do with him at all.  Matysik: My point is, even saying that about Shawn Michaels, do you think he's the best wrestler of all time? Please. I mean, if you add the element of being a tough guy, I have to go back to the story of when I was in the WWF and was working for Vince McMahon, he was in the Garden and something happened in the match he hardway got opened up a little bit. It wasnt a bad cut or anything. I thought we were going to have a melodramatic breakdown in the dressing room. He was like "oh my god, will I need stitches!" I'm looking at that going, I saw Harley Race get his head cut open five times wider than that and he's going "do I need stitches, cant you get a doctor to look at my head" and I like "what a wuss". So that was my first impression of him was grow up. My point being, if I'd have reacted that way, how do you think Sam Mushnick would have reacted? Or Eddie Graham? Or Verne Gagne? Or Fritz Von Erich? They have said go sit in the corner until you grow up. And maybe he did grow up to some extent later on, and I'm not saying he shouldnt be at least in there, because I've got him on the list, but he's not close to 1, 2 or 3.  Meltzer: The one thing you said about Michaels and Carpentier, and I saw some Carpentier and what I saw was past his prime ... I think Michaels was a far, far, far better worker than Carpentier but you can not even make the argument that Shawn Michaels at any point in his career that he was a draw that exploded on the scene that everybody wanted that Carpentier was when he first came to the US, because the acrobatics was new and unique and whatever the reason was Carpentier was a big time player. Shawns a real big time player now, but its a different type of thing. He didnt make a difference in box office, where Carpentier very much did.  Matysik: And the reason he got the belt in the first place was because it was a low ebb in the WWF, just as it was for Bret Hart, they were having problems drawing and thats why guys like Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels got the opportunity to wear the belt ...  Meltzer: Well, they had to keep the belt from muscle heads at that point for political reason.  Matysik: And there was politics involved to. I'm not saying thats Shawn Michaels fault. He took advantage of an opportunity that was there: more power to him because thats not just wrestling, thats business. But here you see the problem putting together lists like this because every single guy, your going to have pros and cons and both arguments are pretty much right.  Meltzer: One thing about Michaels, of all the guys I've seen at doing American style, he's very close to the best as far as in-ring. He's really ... I wouldnt say he's the best, and he's not the best at being a world champion. Being a great performer, there was certain things that he did that were getting himself over as a worker in a sense like showing off, that didnt help the match, yet, he had a lot of incredible matches.  Matysik: I agree and thats a good point to bring up, sometimes people "working", by thinking its making yourself look spectacular with bumps. Thats not what working is. Working really requires so much more, and there's a lot of psychology involved and a lot of that isnt appreciated anyway. But I think Michaels is one of the good ones, and I've got him in the top 20, and if you look at all the wrestlers from the 1900s (onwards). Thats pretty good I think.  Meltzer: When I think of all the guys I've seen doing the American style, he's someone who I would consider in that top league. I dont know if I'd say number one, but the group isnt close.  Ironically, on this list of greatest ever, Hulk Hogan will be ranked higher on the list than Michaels. Which you would have thought Melzer would have recommended Michaels ahead of Hogan, and the WWE would have had Hogan higher. Its all arse backwards these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lawz Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 Yup and in my eyes Michaels is the greatest wrestler/superstar in the history of the business. Theres nothing he couldn't do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigBoot Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 He's up there, certainly. Despite any criticisms I have with some of his work when you look at his WWF/E career overall and you compare and contrast it to others based soley on what they did in that company then he's got to be somewhere near the top. Â Randy Savage, Chris Benoit, Bret Hart and Steve Austin are the first WWF/E names I thought of that I'd put either above or consider putting above him. There are loads who I think were better for a short period but not many that last long enough to overtake his entire body of WWF/E work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tattooedgooner Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 I would find it hard to call it between Michaels, Angle and Benoit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aaron Posted January 15, 2011 Share Posted January 15, 2011 I've got Bret Hart at the top of my list. As it's WWE specific, Shawn will get onto my top ten. Probably in my top five.  1. Bret Hart 2. Randy Savage 3. Shawn Michaels  Fuck, he actually came in my top three. Ah well. He was great since his comeback in 2002 though. Without that return to action he would not get into my top twenty.  But, yeah, this list is from the past twenty-five years only. The company has been around double that. And Bret is firmly in the number one spot unchallenged.  The answer to the question for me is a resounding no.  EDIT - And it begins... I forgot about Eddie. He's number two now. Give me another couple of names and Shawn's out my top five. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.