Well, I was wrong about you...

[Version1.0]

20 hours ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

Jack Evans. Seeing him in TWC promo videos I thought the guy looked amazing. Then you got to see him be more and more botchy and when he showed up in AEW near the start I couldn't believe what I was seeing. 

You mean this promo video? 

It's the best thing of his entire career and made by TWC. I hope he was sending this to promoters.

I tried to find Jack's matches and then gave up after a boring 6-minute match against Bryan Danielson in RoH.

[Version1.0]

20 hours ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

Jack Evans. Seeing him in TWC promo videos I thought the guy looked amazing. Then you got to see him be more and more botchy and when he showed up in AEW near the start I couldn't believe what I was seeing. 

You mean this promo video? 

It's the best thing of his entire career and made by TWC. I hope he was sending this to promoters.

I tried to find Jack's matches and then gave up after a boring 6-minute match against Bryan Danielson in RoH.

[RedRooster]

I'm going to add Swerve in their Glory to this.

When Keith Lee first joined AEW, he didn't exactly find his footing too quickly. Swerve Strickland too, there was something that wasn't quite connecting there. 

Now that they're teaming together, I'm bloody loving them. I was pretty frustrated when they won the titles randomly from The Bucks, when all signs seemed to point to a Bucks/FTR match, but by some happy accident, this couldn't have worked out better. 

They're such a fun team, and have been instrumental in the rise of The Acclaimed. I'm very invested in their feud, and I really hope Tony Khan thinks twice about splitting Lee/Strickland - if he goes all in on them both as heels, I think he'll have something special on his hands. 

[Keith Houchen]

On 7/23/2022 at 6:04 AM, Version1.0 said:

It's the best thing of his entire career and made by TWC. I hope he was sending this to promoters.

 

It was actually made by one of the posters on TWC forums. RM Punk was his name. 

[Frankie Crisp]

Another couple of reverse ones, both determined by learning more as I got older.

Jerry Lawler

As a kid I couldn’t understand why this wigged oaf was put in a storyline with the main man after King of the Ring 1993. Chubby, old, sat behind the desk. Are you kidding? He had no right being near Bret. I was fuming about it as a 14 year old.

Sat with me for a while but as I got more into the industry and understood more, I realised how absolutely brilliant he was. The nonce stuff obviously sours it all.

William Regal

Similarly, not really ‘getting it’ at first, I just thought he was some bloke from up the road who was funny but I couldn’t understand some of the hype. His matches were boring as fuck.

You roll it on and realise that as well as being one of the very best promos, he’s also one of the absolute best at what he did in the ring. The psychology, the selling, the storytelling. Had the lot. Up there with the greats.

On the other side of things, Goldberg. He’s shite, isn’t he?

[air_raid]

3 hours ago, Frankie Crisp said:

Jerry Lawler

As a kid I couldn’t understand why this wigged oaf was put in a storyline with the main man after King of the Ring 1993. Chubby, old, sat behind the desk. Are you kidding? He had no right being near Bret. I was fuming about it as a 14 year old.

Sat with me for a while but as I got more into the industry and understood more, I realised how absolutely brilliant he was. The nonce stuff obviously sours it all.

This was basically my experience with Lawler too. I bought the SummerSlam 93 tape having not heard any results, and having seen Bret in so many matches with bigger, stronger, nastier guys, I didn’t see why he’d have difficulties with a guy who just reminded you of that kid that always talked himself into a fight at school because he was annoying as eczema - except still the same into his midlife crisis. The Doink debacle and cheap attack leading into the second match, the amount of time Bret had to sell for little more than cheating, then the sheer outrage of The King actually being declared the winner and being carried out with arm raised, defiant… it all combined to make my piss absolutely boil. LIVID, I was. Of course, within a couple of years I realized that was the point, and I grew to appreciate that particular story, and him. As a commentator much further than 1998…. no so much.

[Hannibal Scorch]

Jon Moxley. I thought he was the worst member of the Shield as Dean Ambrose. Absolutely hated that rebound clothesline thing he’d do and then when he had that weird bane phase I wasn’t sad to hear him say he was leaving. And announcing him for AEW I thought may bring eyes to the product, but did nothing for me.
 

He was obviously having a tough time, and after he had his stint in rehab I think he’s been on an incredible roll and was in the right place at the right time for AEW. And I feel his work in ring and promos is much better now as well.

[Shane O' Mac Version 2]

On 7/23/2022 at 1:34 PM, Michael_3165 said:

Nakamura in WWE. Honestly thought he would be a megastar, putting on classics every ppv and being a multi time world champion. Been a damp squib really  given the beautiful work he did in njpw. He has all but given up, sadly. 

Only saw a handful of Nakamura matches pre-WWE (was never massively into NJPW and just caught a couple of the Wrestle Kingdoms back then when they started adding more English commentary). One of those WKs had Nakamura vs. Styles though, and I was impressed. Then he came to WWE/NXT and had a classic with Sami Zayn.

Then immediately after that amazing debut, he just seemed to switch off. Happy to do his signature spots and collect a paycheck. Some people raved about his NXT run- I thought everything he did firmly sat at the 3 snowflake territory at best, and obviously he was never going to wow with his promos or segments.

It's especially frustrating getting a glimpse of how great he was, but then he decided to not give a fuck in a flash. At least he has fun surfing in America. Good for him.

[air_raid]

8 hours ago, Shane O' Mac Version 2 said:

Only saw a handful of Nakamura matches pre-WWE (was never massively into NJPW and just caught a couple of the Wrestle Kingdoms back then when they started adding more English commentary). One of those WKs had Nakamura vs. Styles though, and I was impressed. Then he came to WWE/NXT and had a classic with Sami Zayn.

Then immediately after that amazing debut, he just seemed to switch off.

I’d started a post in the Zayn thread right before it was locked about that very match. Best example ever of a pro wrestler doing exactly the job they needed to ; gave Nakamura a really competitive match and put him over strong, in other words, made sure he looked worth beating before he was beat. 100% took a match with preconceptions of “debuting star gets an obvious win” to a level I for one for was not expecting, that lived long in the memory. It was always going to be tough living up to that.

[DavidB6937]

20 minutes ago, air_raid said:

I’d started a post in the Zayn thread right before it was locked about that very match. Best example ever of a pro wrestler doing exactly the job they needed to ; gave Nakamura a really competitive match and put him over strong, in other words, made sure he looked worth beating before he was beat. 100% took a match with preconceptions of “debuting star gets an obvious win” to a level I for one for was not expecting, that lived long in the memory. It was always going to be tough living up to that.

And that's part of the reason why I hate the "losing = jobbing" rhetoric that a lot of people throw around. It's too black and white for a pre-determined sport. Being defeated doesn't have to be a bad thing. It's not just about wins and losses (as AEW have realised with trying and failing with their rankings really) but how it happens too. Create a memorable match or moment and the result itself often becomes meaningless.

[Devon Malcolm]

For somebody dubbed the King of Strong Style, his offence could not look more piss weak.

[air_raid]

3 hours ago, DavidB6937 said:

And that's part of the reason why I hate the "losing = jobbing" rhetoric that a lot of people throw around. It's too black and white for a pre-determined sport. Being defeated doesn't have to be a bad thing. It's not just about wins and losses (as AEW have realised with trying and failing with their rankings really) but how it happens too. Create a memorable match or moment and the result itself often becomes meaningless.

It’s a balancing act. The two bold words are what matters. If you lose every week to absolutely anyone, sure you’ll be devalued, and nobody will take you seriously for the almighty push, a belt and a boost to your earnings. It’s not all on the talent, of course, the bookers and agents have to do their part. When Flair was losing every week he became worthless - Ric fucking Flair. He did a clean job on Raw to Rico that nobody remembers. If Ric Flair booked sensibly does a clean loss to someone they should be a made man, but in 2002-03 he was usually presented as just another midcard loser.

Conversely when Steve Austin was positioned to challenge Bret in 1996, even if he did come in with momentum (booked well), he still could easily have looked like a loud mouthed midcarder put in his place by the returning hero if they’d gone 15 minutes and finished with a Sharpshooter submission, one and done, Bret moves on to Sid and Shawn. But wrestlers and their agent (I believe Patterson) assembled something so strong that Austin lost but still came out better off than when he went in. I don’t really need to mention Mania 13 either.

[BomberPat]

4 hours ago, DavidB6937 said:

And that's part of the reason why I hate the "losing = jobbing" rhetoric that a lot of people throw around. It's too black and white for a pre-determined sport. Being defeated doesn't have to be a bad thing. It's not just about wins and losses (as AEW have realised with trying and failing with their rankings really) but how it happens too. Create a memorable match or moment and the result itself often becomes meaningless.

It goes both ways - losing doesn't have to be "jobbing", but also losing to someone isn't always "putting them over". There are ways to lose that protect the heat and credibility of the loser, and there are ways to lose that do nothing to benefit the winner either. Wins and losses obviously matter, but not on their own - it's all about the execution, and as often as not, the follow-up. 

[air_raid]

32 minutes ago, BomberPat said:

It goes both ways - losing doesn't have to be "jobbing", but also losing to someone isn't always "putting them over". 

See that match in 2007 where HHH lost to Jeff Hardy then pissed himself laughing afterwards like it was a total fluke. Or RVDs debut in 2010 when he pinned Sting, but Stinger then gave him a lengthy battering thereafter.

[69MeDon]

Kevin Nash has to be one for fans of a certain age. I remember the absolute pasting he'd take in the IWC for *years* during and after WCW went in the ground. Now, everybody loves Kevin Nash.