|
Post by punksnotdead on Mar 12, 2013 10:51:59 GMT -5
I know most will disagree and not like this, but...I feel like it needs to be said. People always go out of their way to disparage the Ultimate Warrior. Hardly anyone wants to give the guy the credit he earned and deserves. He paid his dues down in the territories, and couldn't help but get mega pushes because of his massive popularity. Every thread about him on every wrestling forum inevitably has some variation of: "Yeah, he was in some of the greatest matches in history, BUT..." "Yeah, he's one of the most entertaining characters the industry has ever seen, BUT..." Professional wrestling is a work. It's entertainment, not a sporting competition. You are either an entertaining performer or you are not. If a guy doesn't know the difference between an arm bar and a wrist lock, who cares? As long as he is putting on an entertaining show, driving merchandise sales, getting butts in seats and PPV buys, that's what matters. Warrior did that in spades. It takes two to tango in the ring. If just anybody could have performed the role of Warrior in those matches, why aren't all of Hogan's matches as good as WM6? Why aren't all of Savage's matches as good as WM7? Savage vs. Hogan at Wrestlemania 5 wasn't as good as either match from WM6 or WM7. Why is that? He wasn't the most prolific technical guy but when the match called for it, he could perform (there are some great early matches with Savage as well). His character, personification of intensity, simply would not have worked had he gone out and flopped all over the mat like Ric Flair for 25 minutes each night. While most of his matches with Andre in 89 were squashes, there are a couple floating around from MSG or BG where they were in the 15-20 minute range and really had the crowd on their feet throughout. Sgt. Slaughter was with the WWF during times of Hulkamania's peak, Stone Cold, The Rock, etc., and is on record of saying nobody got the house off their feet and pop like Warrior did. Slaughter's ears would ring. That's as good as it gets in the sports entertainment business. The guy hasn't been in a ring on this continent since 1998 and still a few times each year, you'll see signs on RAW with him mentioned. Not bad for a guy that some want to make you believe couldn't work in the ring and had no mic skills. I guess anybody with makeup and ropes tied to their arms would have left that kind of mark on the business. I agree with what you're saying, which is Warrior deserves more credit than he gets, but you turned into kind of a homer about it at the end. Hogan vs Warrior at Halloween Havoc is one of the worst modern era matches to ever air on PPV, EVER. Didn't want to talk about that one? And Savage had great matches with everyone. You comparing his Mania 5 match to his Mania 7 match is just cherry picking with your opinion, splitting hairs. Why wasn't Savage vs Warrior as good as Steamboat vs Savage from Mania 3? See how easy that is to squash? Not to mention it's opinion. Savage vs Flair was better than Savage vs Warrior imo. The guy was hella entertaining, but he wasn't a great worker, neither was Hogan. Hogan was great at psychology, working the crowd, which is a completely different skill. Warrior was one of the most entertaining and exciting characters the WWE has ever had, but he was a body builder in a costume. I just don't know why people can't be comfortable with that. Warrior, Goldberg, Ryback, even Lex to some degree, all cut from the same mold and the audience love(d)(s) them for it. That's what it's about in pro wrestling, but it's not for everyone. Hogan, Savage, Warrior, Bret, HBK, Taker, Perfect, Piper, all kinds of characters. What's great about pro wrestling is there is something for everyone, and the Ultimate Warrior more than exceeded at his specific role. What makes someone great in pro wrestling isn't defined by any one thing. The internet might not love Warrior or Goldberg, but plenty of people don't like Daniel Bryan or Chris Benoit. So it's about understanding what segmentation a guy fills for the audience. I just wouldn't, and I don't, call Warrior a great worker because he had really entertaining matches. Just two different things if you ask me.
|
|
HuskerTornado
Superstar
Joined on: Jul 8, 2004 14:19:47 GMT -5
Posts: 607
|
Post by HuskerTornado on Mar 12, 2013 17:48:09 GMT -5
Homer? It's all reality, no skew. You pretty much just came back with all of the "buts" I already talked about. Comparing the WM5 Hogan/Savage match to the WM6 Warrior/Hogan match and the WM7 Warrior/Savage match is not cherry picking. That is as good as it gets at direct comparisons. Not going to dig into this deeper, because I don't think you got the point in that part of the post. Ok, let's talk `98. Hogan along with the overall incompetence of WCW in 1998 were the main reasons that Halloween Havoc match was terrible. Watch Warrior's shoot (produced by Ringside), he jokes about how it was one of the worst matches ever and details what a disorganized mess WCW was. Remember that UW hadn't really been wrestling for a couple of years, and not with much regularity for six. Warrior pushed to work on the match with Hogan, but Hogan didn't want to work on the match. He pushed to work his ring rust off in actual singles matches, but Bischoff and Co. didn't book him in much of anything, only in short gimmick matches like the tag with Sting where he barely got any ring time, and War Games where he was barely in it. The reason they brought him back was for Hogan to get a pin over him, plain and simple. This is what happens when the inmates run the asylum. I recently went through 1998 WCW shows and wanted to talk about his return. It wasn't as bad as many remember (the first appearance was fine, but went on too long and Bischoff blew the whole thing by saying he called Warrior at his house to bring him back - apparently he knows the number to parts unknown : . In fact, the Nitro after Havoc, the crowd was hot when Warrior came out, he cut an old school Warrior promo in the ring which should have been a solid way to keep the OWN vs NWO storyline going. Unfortunately, their mission was already accomplished, Hogan finally got his pin over Warrior. Had they done a better job, getting him in some house show work, get that rust off, get his timing back, the return could have been a great financial success for WCW. There were so many things WCW could have done with that roster and the OWN vs NWO angle, but they were being run by idiots. They didn't want to make money, they wanted to stroke each others' egos. One of many reasons that company isn't around anymore.
|
|
|
Post by mikey1974 on Mar 12, 2013 18:51:01 GMT -5
for as weird as this is about to sound, part of Warrior's problem was he came about in the wrong era.
yes,I just said that. cause he was part of the era that still prized kayfabe,and the boys wanted and expected workers who could actually,you know,work! Warrior's problem was he was more about the entertainment value than the actual sweet science,and that I know pissed a lot of his peers off.he was an entertainer when a lot of guys still considered wrestling a sport. between that and some sloppiness that injured or almost injured his fellow wrestlers,that's why he got the bad reputation he did.
believe me,I loved the Warrior! I almost cried when he beat Hogan,and almost did for other reasons when I thought he was going to lose to Savage at WM 7. but a good wrestler he was not. a showman and world class entertainer, yes.
|
|
|
Post by Nivro™ on Mar 12, 2013 20:25:36 GMT -5
I know most will disagree and not like this, but...I feel like it needs to be said. People always go out of their way to disparage the Ultimate Warrior. Hardly anyone wants to give the guy the credit he earned and deserves. He paid his dues down in the territories, and couldn't help but get mega pushes because of his massive popularity. Every thread about him on every wrestling forum inevitably has some variation of: "Yeah, he was in some of the greatest matches in history, BUT..." "Yeah, he's one of the most entertaining characters the industry has ever seen, BUT..." Professional wrestling is a work. It's entertainment, not a sporting competition. You are either an entertaining performer or you are not. If a guy doesn't know the difference between an arm bar and a wrist lock, who cares? As long as he is putting on an entertaining show, driving merchandise sales, getting butts in seats and PPV buys, that's what matters. Warrior did that in spades. It takes two to tango in the ring. If just anybody could have performed the role of Warrior in those matches, why aren't all of Hogan's matches as good as WM6? Why aren't all of Savage's matches as good as WM7? Savage vs. Hogan at Wrestlemania 5 wasn't as good as either match from WM6 or WM7. Why is that?He wasn't the most prolific technical guy but when the match called for it, he could perform (there are some great early matches with Savage as well). His character, personification of intensity, simply would not have worked had he gone out and flopped all over the mat like Ric Flair for 25 minutes each night. While most of his matches with Andre in 89 were squashes, there are a couple floating around from MSG or BG where they were in the 15-20 minute range and really had the crowd on their feet throughout. Sgt. Slaughter was with the WWF during times of Hulkamania's peak, Stone Cold, The Rock, etc., and is on record of saying nobody got the house off their feet and pop like Warrior did. Slaughter's ears would ring. That's as good as it gets in the sports entertainment business. The guy hasn't been in a ring on this continent since 1998 and still a few times each year, you'll see signs on RAW with him mentioned. Not bad for a guy that some want to make you believe couldn't work in the ring and had no mic skills. I guess anybody with makeup and ropes tied to their arms would have left that kind of mark on the business. The Hogan-Warrior match really isnt a "good" match. Its simply memorable because it was two top faces of the company facing off. It was the first time, on a big stage we were getting a "good guy" vs a "good guy". Hogan-Warrior goes into the same category as Hogan-Andre. The actual match was very average at best, however the build and the aura of the event made it seem bigger then it actually was. Savage-Warrior was a good match. But like mentioned, when did Savage have a bad match? Vs. Steamboat was one of the greatest ever. I much prefer Savage Vs. Hogan but also remember, unlike Hogan-Warrior...We saw Savage Vs. Hogan MANY time over the years. It didnt have its "once in a lifetime" feel to it like Hogan-Warrior did. Savage Vs. Flair was a better match then Savage Vs. Warrior. Another great example, Rick Rude. Go and look at old threads on here, most people on this site say he was highly underrated and was one of the best workers in the 80s. However, we dont come in here and talk about the great matches he had with Warrior. Simply because while Rude had the in ring ability to make up for what Warrior lacked, he didnt have the "star power" that Hogan and Savage did to push Warrior into this larger then life character. You can say "Why arent all of Hogans matches as big as WM6?" or "Why arent all of Savages matches as big as WM7?" but then you have to ask yourself, Why arent all of Warrior's matches as big as his matches against Hogan & Savage, by far the two biggest faces in the company in the 80s.
|
|
|
Post by Bartman on Mar 12, 2013 20:29:40 GMT -5
for as weird as this is about to sound, part of Warrior's problem was he came about in the wrong era. hmm, not sure if I agree with that. In fact, I think the complete opposite. I think he was in the perfect era. Wrestling at the time was all about the larger than life characters - Hogan, Savage, Andre, Legion of Doom. Warrior fit in perfectly.
|
|
|
Post by mikey1974 on Mar 13, 2013 6:02:31 GMT -5
for as weird as this is about to sound, part of Warrior's problem was he came about in the wrong era. hmm, not sure if I agree with that. In fact, I think the complete opposite. I think he was in the perfect era. Wrestling at the time was all about the larger than life characters - Hogan, Savage, Andre, Legion of Doom. Warrior fit in perfectly. I agree with that part of it,the character part. my thought though is that it was still an era where being able to work was prized,more so by the boys in the back than in the front office (who at that point was becoming more concerned about the marketing than the actual skills). he was working with a lot of guys who got their starts in the 70's, if not earlier. and back then you got stretched and beat up until you showed you had the resolve - and the skills - to make it in the business. Warrior was never one of those type of guys. he had a great look, got some training,and was pushed to the moon. and I think a lot of the boys resented that, especially the ones who learned their craft and worked on it every day. I guess I mean a guy like Warrior would've been more accepted by his peers in today's environment,where it's all about the ratings and the merchandise sales rather than how many miles you logged or your actual level of skills.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 21:54:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2013 11:52:35 GMT -5
I know most will disagree and not like this, but...I feel like it needs to be said. People always go out of their way to disparage the Ultimate Warrior. Hardly anyone wants to give the guy the credit he earned and deserves. He paid his dues down in the territories, and couldn't help but get mega pushes because of his massive popularity. Every thread about him on every wrestling forum inevitably has some variation of: "Yeah, he was in some of the greatest matches in history, BUT..." "Yeah, he's one of the most entertaining characters the industry has ever seen, BUT..." Professional wrestling is a work. It's entertainment, not a sporting competition. You are either an entertaining performer or you are not. If a guy doesn't know the difference between an arm bar and a wrist lock, who cares? As long as he is putting on an entertaining show, driving merchandise sales, getting butts in seats and PPV buys, that's what matters. Warrior did that in spades. It takes two to tango in the ring. If just anybody could have performed the role of Warrior in those matches, why aren't all of Hogan's matches as good as WM6? Why aren't all of Savage's matches as good as WM7? Savage vs. Hogan at Wrestlemania 5 wasn't as good as either match from WM6 or WM7. Why is that?He wasn't the most prolific technical guy but when the match called for it, he could perform (there are some great early matches with Savage as well). His character, personification of intensity, simply would not have worked had he gone out and flopped all over the mat like Ric Flair for 25 minutes each night. While most of his matches with Andre in 89 were squashes, there are a couple floating around from MSG or BG where they were in the 15-20 minute range and really had the crowd on their feet throughout. Sgt. Slaughter was with the WWF during times of Hulkamania's peak, Stone Cold, The Rock, etc., and is on record of saying nobody got the house off their feet and pop like Warrior did. Slaughter's ears would ring. That's as good as it gets in the sports entertainment business. The guy hasn't been in a ring on this continent since 1998 and still a few times each year, you'll see signs on RAW with him mentioned. Not bad for a guy that some want to make you believe couldn't work in the ring and had no mic skills. I guess anybody with makeup and ropes tied to their arms would have left that kind of mark on the business. The Hogan-Warrior match really isnt a "good" match. Its simply memorable because it was two top faces of the company facing off. It was the first time, on a big stage we were getting a "good guy" vs a "good guy". Hogan-Warrior goes into the same category as Hogan-Andre. The actual match was very average at best, however the build and the aura of the event made it seem bigger then it actually was. Savage-Warrior was a good match. But like mentioned, when did Savage have a bad match? Vs. Steamboat was one of the greatest ever. I much prefer Savage Vs. Hogan but also remember, unlike Hogan-Warrior...We saw Savage Vs. Hogan MANY time over the years. It didnt have its "once in a lifetime" feel to it like Hogan-Warrior did. Savage Vs. Flair was a better match then Savage Vs. Warrior. Another great example, Rick Rude. Go and look at old threads on here, most people on this site say he was highly underrated and was one of the best workers in the 80s. However, we dont come in here and talk about the great matches he had with Warrior. Simply because while Rude had the in ring ability to make up for what Warrior lacked, he didnt have the "star power" that Hogan and Savage did to push Warrior into this larger then life character. You can say "Why arent all of Hogans matches as big as WM6?" or "Why arent all of Savages matches as big as WM7?" but then you have to ask yourself, Why arent all of Warrior's matches as big as his matches against Hogan & Savage, by far the two biggest faces in the company in the 80s. Rick Rude is probably one of the top 10 greatest wrestlers of all time. Absolutely phenominal. He should have been champion instead of Sgt Slaughter heading into WM8. It's strange that Warrior/Savage at WM7 is such a good match, but their Summerslam 92 match is one of the most forgettable matches I've ever seen. I'm not a big fan of Flair/Savage (I could hear your giant gasp from here as you read that). But in all honesty I actually think that they've both had better matches, the ending was great but other than that I find their WM8 match to be one of the most forgettable main events in Wrestlemania history, and completely overshadowed by Hart/Piper.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 21:54:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2013 20:08:20 GMT -5
IMO Hogan vs Savage at WM5 was 10 times better than
Warrior vs Hogan @ 6 Warrior vs Savage @ 7.
its one of my favorite WM main events.
|
|
HuskerTornado
Superstar
Joined on: Jul 8, 2004 14:19:47 GMT -5
Posts: 607
|
Post by HuskerTornado on Mar 13, 2013 22:08:11 GMT -5
Rick Rude is probably one of the top 10 greatest wrestlers of all time. Absolutely phenominal. He should have been champion instead of Sgt Slaughter heading into WM8. It's strange that Warrior/Savage at WM7 is such a good match, but their Summerslam 92 match is one of the most forgettable matches I've ever seen.I'm not a big fan of Flair/Savage (I could hear your giant gasp from here as you read that). But in all honesty I actually think that they've both had better matches, the ending was great but other than that I find their WM8 match to be one of the most forgettable main events in Wrestlemania history, and completely overshadowed by Hart/Piper. Probably because of how it ended. The match was just a vehicle for the Survivor Series main event (that ended up not happening, at least, not as planned).
|
|
TheEvilDoink1987
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 22, 2010 21:37:52 GMT -5
Posts: 2,631
|
Post by TheEvilDoink1987 on Mar 13, 2013 22:59:15 GMT -5
I know most will disagree and not like this, but...I feel like it needs to be said. People always go out of their way to disparage the Ultimate Warrior. Hardly anyone wants to give the guy the credit he earned and deserves. He paid his dues down in the territories, and couldn't help but get mega pushes because of his massive popularity. Every thread about him on every wrestling forum inevitably has some variation of: "Yeah, he was in some of the greatest matches in history, BUT..." "Yeah, he's one of the most entertaining characters the industry has ever seen, BUT..." Professional wrestling is a work. It's entertainment, not a sporting competition. You are either an entertaining performer or you are not. If a guy doesn't know the difference between an arm bar and a wrist lock, who cares? As long as he is putting on an entertaining show, driving merchandise sales, getting butts in seats and PPV buys, that's what matters. Warrior did that in spades. It takes two to tango in the ring. If just anybody could have performed the role of Warrior in those matches, why aren't all of Hogan's matches as good as WM6? Why aren't all of Savage's matches as good as WM7? Savage vs. Hogan at Wrestlemania 5 wasn't as good as either match from WM6 or WM7. Why is that? He wasn't the most prolific technical guy but when the match called for it, he could perform (there are some great early matches with Savage as well). His character, personification of intensity, simply would not have worked had he gone out and flopped all over the mat like Ric Flair for 25 minutes each night. While most of his matches with Andre in 89 were squashes, there are a couple floating around from MSG or BG where they were in the 15-20 minute range and really had the crowd on their feet throughout. Sgt. Slaughter was with the WWF during times of Hulkamania's peak, Stone Cold, The Rock, etc., and is on record of saying nobody got the house off their feet and pop like Warrior did. Slaughter's ears would ring. That's as good as it gets in the sports entertainment business. The guy hasn't been in a ring on this continent since 1998 and still a few times each year, you'll see signs on RAW with him mentioned. Not bad for a guy that some want to make you believe couldn't work in the ring and had no mic skills. I guess anybody with makeup and ropes tied to their arms would have left that kind of mark on the business. great post. far too many people bought into the Ultimate Warrior DVD from WWE wholesale. Great post! I also agree that too many people were brainwashed by the DVD. Warrior is not the greatest guy in the world, but WWE went out of their way to totally bury him. Give me a few days and I could fill a 5-disc collectors set with nothing, but stories about how HBK was the biggest jerk-off in the '90s. WWE has their favorites and Warrior is not one of them.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 21:54:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 13, 2013 23:10:55 GMT -5
WArrior's entrance was enough to hype a crowd up for his match! No question he had energy and charisma. He is just an all around weird guy! That's all
|
|
|
Post by Emerald Enthusiast on Mar 14, 2013 0:21:51 GMT -5
It's strange that Warrior/Savage at WM7 is such a good match, but their Summerslam 92 match is one of the most forgettable matches I've ever seen.. I thought that was a decent match, one of a very small collection for Warrior. Yet it also had the tell tale blown spot where Warrior tried to do a simple tights pull and throw Macho Man in the corner. Instead, he slipped, fell to his back, and pulled Macho on top of him. It was this kind of thing that often ruined Warrior matches. He was always breaking the illusion with his clumsiness.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 21:54:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2013 6:49:07 GMT -5
he had a bad night at Fall Brawl 98 too........
he sprained his ankle kicking out the weakened section of the cage and then tore his biceps brawling with Hogan..........Warrior limping up the ramp after Hogan was not a pretty sight IIRC
|
|
HuskerTornado
Superstar
Joined on: Jul 8, 2004 14:19:47 GMT -5
Posts: 607
|
Post by HuskerTornado on Mar 15, 2013 0:30:04 GMT -5
he had a bad night at Fall Brawl 98 too........ he sprained his ankle kicking out the weakened section of the cage and then tore his biceps brawling with Hogan..........Warrior limping up the ramp after Hogan was not a pretty sight IIRC Yeah, he had some bad luck there. He recovered from the torn bicep very fast, though.
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Mar 15, 2013 1:04:59 GMT -5
Homer? It's all reality, no skew. You pretty much just came back with all of the "buts" I already talked about. No, it's all opinion on a completely subjective matter. And you just blamed an entire company on one bad match. WCW had plenty of good and great matches in 1998. Warrior just wasn't a part of any of them. I'm a fan of Warrior. He just isn't anything special in the ring imo. He had a few good matches and he was a big star, but that's all. You overselling his matches doesn't make what he did with Savage better than what Savage did with Steamboat at Mania 3. He had entertaining matches with the two biggest stars of the era, shocker. Doesn't make him Bret Hart or HBK. I can name 100 guys off the top of my head that have more ability than he did, but they didn't have the gimmick, the entrance, the look, or the charisma, which was what made the difference.
|
|
HuskerTornado
Superstar
Joined on: Jul 8, 2004 14:19:47 GMT -5
Posts: 607
|
Post by HuskerTornado on Mar 15, 2013 1:33:43 GMT -5
Homer? It's all reality, no skew. You pretty much just came back with all of the "buts" I already talked about. No, it's all opinion on a completely subjective matter. And you just blamed an entire company on one bad match. WCW had plenty of good and great matches in 1998. Warrior just wasn't a part of any of them. I'm a fan of Warrior. He just isn't anything special in the ring imo. He had a few good matches and he was a big star, but that's all. You overselling his matches doesn't make what he did with Savage better than what Savage did with Steamboat at Mania 3. He had entertaining matches with the two biggest stars of the era, shocker. Doesn't make him Bret Hart or HBK. I can name 100 guys off the top of my head that have more ability than he did, but they didn't have the gimmick, the entrance, the look, or the charisma, which was what made the difference. I put it pretty plainly in my first post that UW was no techical wizard. Not sure why you are arguing like I said he was one. There's more to a match and storyline than what goes on in the ring. I didn't say the in-ring of Warrior/Savage was better than Savage/Steamboat either, you keep putting BS in my mouth. I said why aren't all of Savages matches better than his match with Warrior (since Warrior is always called a terrible worker)? Certainly some are, but not a majority, and quite honestly, only a few. Part of what makes a great match is how well you hold the crowd. I feel like that gets overlooked by many. I don't care if you can go 60 in an iron man match, if the crowd isn't into it for 60, it's not a great match. The Warrior and Savage characters were perfect fits for each other and those matches they had (talking also about the matches from 88-90), people were into them for the duration. On the Havoc match, the whole company should be blamed. They brought the guy back solely to appease Hogan's ego. I'm not sure why you aren't aware of this. They refused to book him on house shows to work his ring rust off (because they had no plan to keep him after HH) and Hogan didn't want to work on their match before hand like they did with WM 6.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 21:54:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2013 7:15:13 GMT -5
it is true that Warrior was signed to be fed to Hogan.Hogan even wanted them to sign Yoko in 98 for him to beat too......
that way he could avenge his two losses as the top guy in WWF.
|
|
|
Post by mikey1974 on Mar 16, 2013 7:33:52 GMT -5
it is true that Warrior was signed to be fed to Hogan.Hogan even wanted them to sign Yoko in 98 for him to beat too...... that way he could avenge his two losses as the top guy in WWF. and that's totally a feasable Hogan ego thing. hell,the reason WCW created the Renegade character was because,to quote Hogan, he "Sees a guy who looks like the Ultimate Warrior" , with the intentions of building him up over 2 years as an undefeated monster, possibly even putting the US title on him (this is unconfirmed,but I've heard this rumor before),then build to a Starrcade 1996 match - World Champion Hogan vs US Champion Renegade - where Hogan would go over and this would,in Hogan's mind, "give him back" the loss to Warrior at WrestleMania VI !!
|
|
|
Post by Next Man’s Knowing Rock on Mar 16, 2013 7:36:57 GMT -5
Hogan and Warrior aren't really bad workers. They can go out and entertain which is actually quite a rare gift. They don't deserve half the hate they get. I also love Warrior vs Triple H . Hogan is actually a decent worker. You can look at his Japanese and AWA stuff and tell that. Warrior though is just entertainment only. Ring work wise, just about any pro wrestler walking could do what he did. Including Lex Luger. False. If Luger could do what Warrior did, Luger would've been as big a star as him. That HuskerTornado post was pretty spot on. A lot of people think being a good wrestler is all about CRISPGERMANS~ and moonsaults, but it isn't. As WrestleMania 6 and 7 prove, you don't have to know a million Japanese armbars to have an all-time classic wrestling match. Warrior was great for his era and he had all the tools needed to be a top star. He was completely passé by his 1998 WCW run, main-event wrestling had evolved past those cartoon characters at the time... But for the late eighties and early nineties, he was practically perfect.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Apr 28, 2024 21:54:16 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2013 8:10:46 GMT -5
Bret described Luger as being a "mechanical worker who stuck to the basics and stayed there" in his book. Sounds about right to me.
Luger simply lost steam after Summerslam because he didn't win the title when he had the chance.
|
|