Jump to content

Best ever heel in WWF/E?


tiger_rick

Recommended Posts

Edge would get my shout, for one simple reason:

 

The whole thing with Lita made us realise that he was an absolute shit in real-life too. the Ultimate Opportunist angle ran offscreen, when him and Lita are both injured together, Matt is on the road, he swoops in and nicks one of his friends ladies. It then stretching into his onscreen character wasn't a huge jump - if he'd go behind his mates back for a girl, what would he do to win the world title? The answer was simple - marry Vickie G, cash in MITB, goad someone into losing MITB, be entered into a triple threat at Survivor Series after Triple H and Kozlov had been fighting for a while, used lookalikes to win another triple-threat, snuck into an Elimination Chamber after blasting Kofi Kingston...

 

In short, a complete bastard. And you could believe it was real, too.

 

You and me both, I thought Edge during this era was a arsehole and not knowing whether he was being also in character or whether he was a total bastard in general. Fantastic Heel!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 42
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Again, I don't think real-life stuff should factor in "how good a heel" a performer is. Grant Mitchell isn't the best EastEnders villain ever because you've heard Ross Kemp kicks his dog, is he?

 

But you can believe Ross Kemp is a hardman, which is what Grant Mitchell was, rather than a villain. I'll now veer away from the Eastenders chat!

 

Edge as a heel has an air of believability to it, something a lot of other heels never have, because it bled into what we knew about him offscreen. He's the closest guy we've had for years to the kayfabe of the 80s - Edge's character on and off-screen are the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

I'm was the right age at the time when it has to be the 1991/92 incarnation of Jake the Snake Roberts really.

I won't rehash it all again, but I think this thread covers most of it. 

 

Mind you, Jerry Lawler from the opening post is a cracking shout too. Its a travesty how watered down he is these days to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

 

Triple H. He was the heel when the top babyfaces were Rock and Austin, and he absolutely convinced at their level. If the boom period makes the top babyfaces the best babyfaces ever, the same applies to the top heel.

 

My favourite was Edge from 2005-2009, though. Slimy, cowardly, willing to go to any length to escape with a belt, and so entertaining with it.

 

The argument for Hunter there is sound and logical, and will probably be attacked by some dribblers that will insist Austin and Rocky would have done the same numbers working Jericho, Boss Man or Pete Gas.

 

You're most likely right; the Hogan boom period provides just as many examples. I don't think Hogan would've done the same numbers without Piper, Macho, DiBiase, Andre, Slaughter (I know that's not a brilliant example, but Slaughter did make a great foil for Hogan), Macho did wonderfully when he was briefly allowed to be the top man against DiBiase and Flair, and his feud with Roberts was mental, and I certainly don't think Warrior would've gone as far as he did without Macho, Rude, and (to a certain degree) Roberts.

 

I've often argued a top blue-eye will only really ever go as far as the villains he's working with. Ability will make a huge difference, certainly, but outside the Attitude Era, heroes are traditionally only reactive, not pro-active, as it's usually a heel who starts the feud by being so objectionable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting pro active/ reactive point, Carbomb.

 

It probably shows how times/ society has changed over the years. In the 80s the good guy indeed was reactive to something the heel had done instead of starting a feud himself, because that is how good guys are, fighting "evil" etc.

 

Nowadays showing ONLY reactive behaviour probably would weaken the babyface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Interesting pro active/ reactive point, Carbomb.

 

It probably shows how times/ society has changed over the years. In the 80s the good guy indeed was reactive to something the heel had done instead of starting a feud himself, because that is how good guys are, fighting "evil" etc.

 

Nowadays showing ONLY reactive behaviour probably would weaken the babyface.

 

I guess the Attitude Era was probably the same really, it was only Austin and, to a lesser degree, The Rock, who seemed to go after heels relentlessly (the main example coming to mind is Austin attacking Vince in the hospital).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WWE's greatest ever heel is Vince. The problem with most heels, particularly in the last ten years (Edge is a fine example), is they are still trying to have a good match. By trying to have a good match they become impressive and sections of the crowd enjoy what they do. 

 

Vince has been the only heel willing to avoid doing anything to please the crowd and as a result helped Austin become, arguably, their best ever babyface.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Vince takes the prize for me too. Heel Jake is the most pure evil personality I've seen in wrestling - chilling, demonically intelligent, a complete fucking scumbag that you could completely believe would be a rapist or paedophile and commit the lowest social act possible. Part of why I hate the execution of the Bray character is because for all his talk, he never actually commits a horrific act. Jake set his cobra on the Macho Man, slapped a women, DDT'd Paul Bearer, tried to cave in Elizabeth's skull with a chair and blindsided Taker, all with such malice. Its a shame the circumstances at the time were so bad and that heel Jake in 91 and 92 didnt draw at all.

 

But Vince was great because he was versatile, superb, and there wasn't a fan in the world who could side with him. You could laugh at him, hate him, enjoy seeing him get his ass beat, use him to heat up a heel, anything, up until 2001. After that it was hit and miss at best.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Vince takes the prize for me too. Heel Jake is the most pure evil personality I've seen in wrestling - chilling, demonically intelligent, a complete fucking scumbag that you could completely believe would be a rapist or paedophile and commit the lowest social act possible. Part of why I hate the execution of the Bray character is because for all his talk, he never actually commits a horrific act. Jake set his cobra on the Macho Man, slapped a women, DDT'd Paul Bearer, tried to cave in Elizabeth's skull with a chair and blindsided Taker, all with such malice. Its a shame the circumstances at the time were so bad and that heel Jake in 91 and 92 didnt draw at all.

 

But Vince was great because he was versatile, superb, and there wasn't a fan in the world who could side with him. You could laugh at him, hate him, enjoy seeing him get his ass beat, use him to heat up a heel, anything, up until 2001. After that it was hit and miss at best.

 

Well put on Bray, Bray Wyatt is not a heel. Further to the not actually doing anything is the fireflies shtick, anyone who gets that level of crowd participation is not a heel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Add me in for Savage Era Jake. Had history gone a different way, him feuding with Bret instead of Lawler would have been dynamite. Don't get me wrong, Lawler's goading of the Hart's worked, and worked well.

 

But that version of Jake, goading Bret, stalking Helen - I could see that feud being pure gold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...