Jump to content

Objectively great wrestlers you just... don't get!


Loki

Recommended Posts

  • Paid Members

There's few wrestlers that bore me more than post 2002 HBK. I love mid 90s HBK but his second half of his career bored me to death. Hokey, melodramatic matches, a complete nothing bland babyface character and he had lost most his muscle mass so looked completely unthreatening. It's like all the pills and coke were the secret to his success all along. And I'd argue that his shitty Wrestlemania matches with Undertaker ruined the WWE match style forever.

Edited by LaGoosh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, garynysmon said:

Personally I was a Bret fan from a young age, but I think it was more down to thinking he was cool as fuck rather than buying into the 'excellence of execution' in-ring stuff. But totally get what you mean about the characters.

WWF Superstars/Challenge were the perfect shows for me as a kid really. You got the wrestlers making their entrances, a quick 2 min match and you got to see their usually cool finisher. Rinse and repeat, very little wastage.

I seemed to skip my teenage workrate period altogether. And while pay per views were great as culminations for feuds, truth be told, I usually found a lot of matches to be a bit long for my liking.

There have certainly been periods when I've questioned if I'm a fan of the actual wrestling at all, or simply the characters, pageantry and bollocks surrounding it.

Even during my teenage workrate years I enjoyed the outright coolness of Kevin Nash, a triple cage match with David Arquette, stuff involving Vampiro, The Godfather, The Brood and Gilberg. Even in recent years I've enjoyed the sillyness of MJF, Rosemary and who shot John E Bravo, a 60 year old Sting bumping and no selling and a mental Russian girl squashing the impact roster. The characters and pageantry are wrestling and if you book a match right it doesn't have to be some 7 star classic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone mentioned Jericho and I sort of agree for my own reasons. He was the coolest wrestler in the company for a while, around the time they teased him beating HHH for the title (99/00 I'm not sure.) I was sure he'd have a long red hot babyface run as the main man but it never truly came to fruition. Not long after he's the heel with the square goatee and all the heel gags, and he's great and had a great career. But I will personally remember him more for not having the run he should've had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

In a way Jericho peaked for me the night he made his WWF debut. Loved his heel run in WCW and I was buzzing when the word ‘JERICHO’ popped up on the Titantron when he finally arrived on Raw. But then he wasn’t even on SummerSlam and was fucking about with Mr Hughes, Road Dogg and Chyna for the rest of 99. He got hot again in 2000 but fizzled out completely for me by the time he played second fiddle to a bulldog at WrestleMania X8. I never bought into him again. Granted, a lot of that was the booking but there always felt like something was missing with him to me when he got past IC title level. I could probably count on one hand the times he actually looked like he belonged in there at the main event level. There were a couple of times. But mostly, he looked out of place to me. Him beating Rock and Austin on the same night had me crying out for a restart of the Invasion angle they’d killed off the month before. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HBK, from the moment he did Marty dirty. I actually preferred Marty in The Rockers. I was always a Bret boy so my hatred of Michaels was well placed and just kind of stuck past childhood markdom. He’s got me invested plenty of times, he’s one of the greatest in ring ever but I just can’t be arsed with him. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, garynysmon said:

Personally I was a Bret fan from a young age, but I think it was more down to thinking he was cool as fuck rather than buying into the 'excellence of execution' in-ring stuff. But totally get what you mean about the characters.

WWF Superstars/Challenge were the perfect shows for me as a kid really. You got the wrestlers making their entrances, a quick 2 min match and you got to see their usually cool finisher. Rinse and repeat, very little wastage.

I seemed to skip my teenage workrate period altogether. And while pay per views were great as culminations for feuds, truth be told, I usually found a lot of matches to be a bit long for my liking.

There have certainly been periods when I've questioned if I'm a fan of the actual wrestling at all, or simply the characters, pageantry and bollocks surrounding it.

Omg yes with the long matches. I enjoy the old Wrestlemanias so much more where some matches last about 5 minutes. Maybe it’s an attention thing. We have WWEADHD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Lorne Malvo said:

Great thread idea!

Jeff Hardy is up there for me. Although more people are finally coming around to the idea that he's a useless liability due to his tragic AEW run, I've never liked the knob. Some of the worst looking offense in wrestling history coming from a lad dressed in a teenage goth girls wardrobe. The idea of him beating a Triple H or Randy Orton was laughable. Makes Darby Allin look like Roddy Piper on the mic. 

Also I'm very much aware there's not many of us banging this drum anymore but John Cena is shite. Everything he does looks uncoordinated and awkward - there was a clip of him and Punk teaming up doing the rounds on Twitter a few months back and they did that spot where they use each others moves, and Cena doing the high knee in the corner was painful. Also see that rotten leg drop he used to do off the top. Beating him didn't mean anything because with the exception of the fantastic Lesnar squash, he never sold the loss - the next night on Raw he'd be out there business as usual, like he wasn't arsed he'd just lost his title. Look at his reaction to LA Knight signing his tag team contract last week - just the most unnatural forced shit like he's doing a Youtube reaction video. Lastly he does that thing where he cuts people to shreds during promos to the point it actually makes me lose interest in the match - his promo to Reigns in 2017 about him not doing Cena's job was a stand out, but more recently that promo where he called out Austin Theory being a failed experiment just made me feel sympathy for the mid-card heel instead of anything else. 

Oh, the Attitude Adjustment is crap too.

(I should point out that I love Cena as an actor too and think he's really gifted comedically - it's just as soon as he puts his jorts on I lose interest.)

I love Cena but he deserves nomination solely for years of making the STFU look like the least painful looking submission in human history, having multiple people including Austin on his podcast telling him "This looks really shit and you should make it look like it hurts more", and then going on for a few more years of having it look like the least painful looking submission in human history. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Hannibal Scorch said:

Roman Reigns and LA Knight.

Sheild into first singles run Roman I was pretty on board with. But his first title run just seemed once he’d won the belt, the momentum stopped. When he came back post Lockdown and the first few months as the tribal chief, I was on board. It felt fresh. The fact we’re now into year 4 of the never ending story of the Bloodline, and it’s well past done. I know why he’s still champ, but god it’s so boring to me.

LA Knight, ripping of The Rock and Stone Cold like a Brit wrestler in 2002 is super over with the crowd. But he’s move set is dull, matches rarely more then just good and he’s 40 ish. I just don’t get it.

No doubt I’m confusing you with someone else but I thought you stopped watching WWE after the Ashley Massaro stuff? Apologies if that’s the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
1 hour ago, Keith Houchen said:

No doubt I’m confusing you with someone else but I thought you stopped watching WWE after the Ashley Massaro stuff? Apologies if that’s the case. 

I did, and also stopped paying for my WWE Network. But due to having BT sports and being a night owl, I do watch it sometimes or at least have it on in the background. But up until then I pretty much watched everything religiously. Still don’t have the network though, or buy merch.

I did also go to a Smackdown this year due to a mate not being able to go. I wouldn’t go again though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members
1 hour ago, Keith Houchen said:

No doubt I’m confusing you with someone else but I thought you stopped watching WWE after the Ashley Massaro stuff? Apologies if that’s the case. 

People commenting on On-Topic despite not watching wrestling? It'll never catch on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Booker T fits this category perfectly for me. He’s always been praised from all angles but genuinely I could not tell you one singles match of his that I enjoyed. The only thing he ever done that I liked was that supermarket brawl, I hated him as King Booker even more to the point he was part of the reason I switched off from wrestling for a period. I don’t even dislike him in general since he’s retired, he just never done it for me.

He wouldn’t belong here for 2023 me but I never got Mankind either. Not Mick Foley, just Mankind. I didn’t get the joy others did when he won that title on RAW, in fact I was pretty sour about it. My wrestling likes have changed since as a kid though and I love watching Mankind matches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Paid Members

Not quite on topic but I think undertaker is overrated because of the WWE hype machine. Post 91 to 96 was shit and post summerslam to him fucking off was shit.

His 2000 return was good until mania 17 then he was on and off until mania 24.

I'm not saying he's not good, he's just not as good as wwe says and so not as good as people looking only through the WWE lense say 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Tommy! said:

Not quite on topic but I think undertaker is overrated because of the WWE hype machine. Post 91 to 96 was shit and post summerslam to him fucking off was shit.

His 2000 return was good until mania 17 then he was on and off until mania 24.

I'm not saying he's not good, he's just not as good as wwe says and so not as good as people looking only through the WWE lense say 

I considered it faintly ridiculous when SCG sent him down on their Trial of the Undertaker episode but it's aged like fine wine now. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...