TheShowOff Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Â Shane O Mac Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarTheSlouch Posted February 16, 2013 Author Share Posted February 16, 2013 ShowOff you are so right with that post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wrestlingmad Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Man, Vince looks younger, healthier and more surprisingly in better shape. How embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Arch Stanton Posted February 16, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted February 16, 2013 Shane's only really a haircut away from looking the same as he ever did. He's always had a tubby face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Freebird Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Shane's only really a haircut away from looking the same as he ever did. He's always had a tubby face. My thoughts exactly. If he got a bit of just for men and a short back and sides he'd look no different at all. A lot of wild exaggerations going on up until your post, Arch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiffingtonClyro Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Shane's only really a haircut away from looking the same as he ever did. He's always had a tubby face. My thoughts exactly. If he got a bit of just for men and a short back and sides he'd look no different at all. A lot of wild exaggerations going on up until your post, Arch. Â Exactly, it's like Ken Barlow in reverse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Up Chuck Posted February 16, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted February 16, 2013 I think it was just the general old-man vibe of his hair and get-up. He looks like a slob next to his sharp-as-fuck dad. Not saying he didn't before, but the grey fuzziness and the jumper accentuates it quite a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted February 16, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted February 16, 2013 I disagree with Show Off. It's already come to pass. Jeff's been a WWE main eventer and World champ three times, is a two-time and current World champ in TNA, and is always over even when he's not at his best. Matt has held midcard titles, gotten fat, lost his mind and is swapping razorblades with Masada on the indies. I'm not entirely sure how Jeff could do "much" better, or Matt "much" worse.  The only thing to come to pass is that Jeff is more successful than Mat, I don't think anybody would argue that, despite the fact that for a couple of years it looked like the pendulum may of swung the other way. But Jeff has never been at the level of a Shawn Michaels nor has Matt been to the depths of Marty Jannety. I get this whole "the Marty of the team thing" but you can't force that into every tag team break up direction just for the sake of a goofy little saying.  You're going off wrestling accomplishments on paper. In reality there is a world of difference between winning the world title in 1996 in contrast to 2009. I love Jeff Hardy - but he isn't in Shawn Michael's league in terms of how he is presented to the audience, or by what he can do in the ring, or through his body of work.  Matt was a solo act in the WWE for years with varying success rates and also had additional tag runs with Jeff that were a success. He's been in countless computer games, had countless action figures - the guy made his money despite what anybody may think of him. Marty didn't reach the level of a Matt Hardy frankly.  Apples vs Oranges.  There aren't many people who've reached the level of a Shawn Michaels, so using his exact degree of success is taking the analogy a bit too far, I think. Ultimately, the Marty/Shawn comparison is invariably used to describe which one goes on to be successful and which one fades into obscurity. There's nothing wrong with that. Picking at specifics misses the point.  Jeff Hardy has been presented extremely well for someone of his level, or indeed any wrestler who isn't HBK, The Rock, Cena, Hogan, Taker or Triple H. Most wrestlers in the industry would probably climb over the corpses of their parents to get the push he got. But he was the more successful of the Hardy Boyz, sold a load of merch, got high profile feuds and was given three World title reigns.  Matt Hardy was more successful than Marty, true, but given that he's now risking getting hep C in front of audiences of 50 on the indies, I'd say his career trajectory has gone exactly the direction of Marty's - kept around the midcard for a while, given runs with midcard titles, before being unceremoniously released to obscurity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheShowOff Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 But Kevin Nash works tiny indie shows, I doubt many would call him a failure, or liken him to a failure or being on the losing end of success. People do like working indy shows - not everyone doing it is looking for a payday, or indeed needing one. Â Marty was jobbing to Ludvig Borger on PPV months after his zenith, that being just a few cracking matches with Michaels. As a solo performer, he wasn't in Matt Hardy's league. Â Not having a pop at you mate, I just think this "Marty of the Team" tag just doesn't fit (and I know you wasn't the one to bring it up). The Rockers had a hugely noticeable gap between the team after the split. Hardy Boyz, not so much frankly, albeit like I say Jeff clearly did achieve more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ultimo the great Posted February 16, 2013 Share Posted February 16, 2013 Â I haven't seen Big Mondo in a while. When was this one taken? Looks fairly recent judging by the others. It was posted on Nikkan Lee's blog in november, so somewhere around then i'd guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Carbomb Posted February 16, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted February 16, 2013 But Kevin Nash works tiny indie shows, I doubt many would call him a failure, or liken him to a failure or being on the losing end of success. People do like working indy shows - not everyone doing it is looking for a payday, or indeed needing one. Marty was jobbing to Ludvig Borger on PPV months after his zenith, that being just a few cracking matches with Michaels. As a solo performer, he wasn't in Matt Hardy's league.  Not having a pop at you mate, I just think this "Marty of the Team" tag just doesn't fit (and I know you wasn't the one to bring it up). The Rockers had a hugely noticeable gap between the team after the split. Hardy Boyz, not so much frankly, albeit like I say Jeff clearly did achieve more.  I didn't think you were, it's just a discussion.  Nash does work indie shows, but he had a significant degree of success first, so I don't think he's the best example to raise - especially also as, when he was a regular-ish member of a tag team, both he and Hall had already had singles success previously.  Personally, I think you're looking at the analogy in too much detail. It's just a general reference to one tag partner doing better than the other. Plus, I'd say the gap between the Hardys is quite significant, especially in light of recent events. Sure, their career paths aren't exactly the same as the Rockers', but I don't think anyone's is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarTheSlouch Posted February 17, 2013 Author Share Posted February 17, 2013 Â Rick Rude Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 (edited) I thought it might have been some sort of commemorative piece, produced after the contest had taken place. That Edited February 17, 2013 by Keith Houchen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 Personally, I think you're looking at the analogy in too much detail. It's just a general reference to one tag partner doing better than the other. Plus, I'd say the gap between the Hardys is quite significant, especially in light of recent events. Sure, their career paths aren't exactly the same as the Rockers', but I don't think anyone's is. Â The Marty Jannetty of his generation thing didn't read to me like it just meant "weaker member of a tag team." I thought it alluded to him being a drugged-up waster who couldn't get his act together long enough to hold a job or ever do anything of note outside of the team. And I don't think Matt Hardy really falls anywhere near Jannetty on that front. He was in WWE years longer than Jeff was, and was a fairly big deal for much of that time with a good few title wins and plenty of solo merchandise. He has ended up in a similar spot to post-WWF Jannetty, though, which does help the comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members LaGoosh Posted February 17, 2013 Paid Members Share Posted February 17, 2013 Â Â Â And the most insane gif I've ever seen: Â Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts