|
Post by Mike Giggs' Munchies on Jul 20, 2013 11:21:42 GMT -5
HBK is just one of those polarizing figures....some think hes the greatest....some feel he is overrated etc. for me he falls just short of GOAT.but that's just me....I still think he was an awesome performer. I always think its interesting how many wrestlers themselves say "HBK was a c*nt in his first run, but he's still the greatest ever in the ring," and I think WWE have said multiple times they consider him the greatest. Just like when footballers praise Scholes as better than what people thought, I feel that if the people in the know feel so strongly about him then it must be an indicator to how good he really was.
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Jul 20, 2013 12:22:08 GMT -5
There have been plenty of guys who have claimed HBK's whole "finding god" thing was BS. Kurt Angler and Gregory Helms are two guys who have gone over it quite a bit in interviews. Personally in my experience w/ guys who claim they "find god" its mostly BS to try and cover up their shortcomings. I simply don' believe that someone who was as bad as HBK was in the 90s can do a complete 180 like the WWE claims he did.
I've always felt that being Vince and HHH's best buddies have helped his stock as well. Good performer but I felt he is overrated as hell. For me he's definantly not in the GOAT group but he is in the tier right below that.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 20, 2024 21:14:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2013 13:13:30 GMT -5
There have been plenty of guys who have claimed HBK's whole "finding god" thing was BS. Kurt Angler and Gregory Helms are two guys who have gone over it quite a bit in interviews. Personally in my experience w/ guys who claim they "find god" its mostly BS to try and cover up their shortcomings. I simply don' believe that someone who was as bad as HBK was in the 90s can do a complete 180 like the WWE claims he did. I've always felt that being Vince and HHH's best buddies have helped his stock as well. Good performer but I felt he is overrated as hell. For me he's definantly not in the GOAT group but he is in the tier right below that. I agree. I think it could be a damage control thing the WWE did. There was no way that the fans would like Shawn knowing what a dick he is/was, with some of the stuff he pulled. He literally pissed off every single person who was in the company from 93-97.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 20, 2024 21:14:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 20, 2013 13:29:52 GMT -5
HBK is just one of those polarizing figures....some think hes the greatest....some feel he is overrated etc. for me he falls just short of GOAT.but that's just me....I still think he was an awesome performer. I always think its interesting how many wrestlers themselves say "HBK was a c*nt in his first run, but he's still the greatest ever in the ring," and I think WWE have said multiple times they consider him the greatest. Just like when footballers praise Scholes as better than what people thought, I feel that if the people in the know feel so strongly about him then it must be an indicator to how good he really was. I actually have seen a VERY small number of people ever say that Shawn is the best ever. And they're mostly people who are employed by WWE or one of his friends like Nash. There are far more of his peers who were surprised Shawn ever got to where he was. I recall the Powers of Pain saying in an interview that they were shocked that Shawn ended up a champion, but said that they always knew Bret was going to go far. The WWE has a tendency to try (and a lot of the time succeed) and revise history. And they are very good at convincing fans who was good, and who wasn't. Was Shawn good? Absolutely. The best? Not even close. Shawn was lucky that he was so unlike-able, as it translated to such a good heel persona in 92-94. It als went in his favour lot of his first feuds as a single star were with ultra talented wrestlers like Jannetty, Tatanka and Tito Santana. Fans loved to hate him. It's not even debatable, Shawn was one of the most naturally gifted heels of all time. As soon as he turned heel, he lost nearly his entire shtick. His championship run (although other things definitely factor into it) was a total bomb and he was drawing horribly, but it was mostly because he wasn't likeable. He made a terrible face. The majority of wrestling fans in the 90s were children and men. Neither of which wanted to watch Chippendale's, they wanted to watch wrestling. Shawn dancing around in tight shorts didn't appeal to them, especially when they had the NWO in WCW to watch instead. Part of the reason Shawn even got to the top was because he tagged along with the ultra popular Diesel. Now before you go having a go at me for that comment, I know that Shawn saved Diesel. But Diesel made Shawn a star by association, he was unbelievably over in 94. His first singles PPV match was for the title against Bret Hart, and he was a triple crown winner in under a year. Shawn being tagged with the champ did wonders for him.
|
|
Dante, The Voc
Main Eventer
If I'm not online, I'm on the toilet
Joined on: Dec 5, 2010 9:48:02 GMT -5
Posts: 1,374
|
Post by Dante, The Voc on Jul 20, 2013 13:40:07 GMT -5
Greatest of All Time Hulk Hogan Undertaker Steve Austin The Rock John Cena
World-Class Performers Bruno Sammartino Roddy Piper Randy Savage Andre the Giant Sting Ric Flair Bret Hart Shawn Michaels Triple H Kurt Angle
High-Level Superstars Ricky Steamboat Ultimate Warrior Chris Jericho Randy Orton CM Punk
|
|
|
Post by Markw on Jul 20, 2013 16:58:34 GMT -5
Greatest Of All Time Hulk Hogan Ric Flair Steve Austin The Rock
World-Class Performers Bret Hart John Cena Shawn Michaels Sting Undertaker
High-Level Superstars Andre The Giant Bruno Sammartino Chris Jericho CM Punk Kurt Angle Randy Savage Ricky Steamboat Roddy Piper Triple H Ultimate Warrior
Something Slightly Lower/Doesn't Really Deserve To Be In The List Randy Orton
Tried to be as fair as possible, although when half of them were retired before I'd even got in to wrestling that was difficult. Have also tried to be fair by not judging based too much on the criteria that's most important to me, which would have seen the likes of Jericho and Punk move up to replace guys like Cena.
|
|
|
Post by Nivro™ on Jul 20, 2013 21:46:18 GMT -5
HBK is just one of those polarizing figures....some think hes the greatest....some feel he is overrated etc. for me he falls just short of GOAT.but that's just me....I still think he was an awesome performer. HBK goes in the same pile with Hart for me. I realize that Bret is the "most popular wrestler in the entire world" during his run but simply put, when HBK & Bret were champions, business was at an all time low. Now while that might not be all their fault, in wrestling the champion is always seen as the leader. If the Hart-HBK combo drew money like the Hogan-Savage combo or the Austin-Rock combo then I would certainly put both of them in the GOAT category but I had to leave them out for this reason alone.
|
|
Lithium
Superstar
Joined on: Jun 5, 2010 18:09:07 GMT -5
Posts: 859
|
Post by Lithium on Jul 20, 2013 22:41:17 GMT -5
What's the criteria for World Class Performers and High Level Superstars?
|
|
|
Post by Nivro™ on Jul 20, 2013 22:53:55 GMT -5
What's the criteria for World Class Performers and High Level Superstars? Are you asking me because of the statement I made above or is it just a generalized question? Honestly, like a lot of threads, its just simply opinion but if you're asking what my opinion was as to why I listed mine, it goes like this.... Greatest of All Time- These were the guys that were the top draw of their company, #1 guy of their era, face of their company and also put asses in the seats on consistent basis. Hogan, Austin, Flair, Andre & Bruno are the obvious guys on here. World Class Performers- These guys were usually the #2 guy in the company, former World Champions they could draw but just didnt have the extra "it" to climb over the bigger name and/or didnt draw as well in their era. Savage was great but wasnt as big as Hogan. Sting was amazing but wasnt as big as Flair. Hart & Michaels I explained earlier. Some might want to put Rock here but personally I chose not. He was pretty much always the #2 guy behind Austin and even when he got to the point where he was going to be the man "99-2000" Triple H was rising up on the ranks and I just feel that Triple H had a much better and longer run then Rock so I dropped him to the 3rd Tier. High Level Superstars- These were the guys that either never reached the highest peak (Piper as Champion), still has an active career and thus I wont rank them yet (Orton, Punk, Jericho, Angle, Cena). While they've had great careers, they were never seen as "the guy" in the company (Undertaker) or while they might have became World Champions they were the #3 guy in the company (Warrior/Rock)
|
|
|
Post by ztj_wwf on Jul 21, 2013 4:09:25 GMT -5
Greatest of All Time: Randy Savage Shawn Michaels Steve Austin Ric Flair Undertaker Bret Hart Kurt Angle Chris Jericho
World Class Performers: Roddy Piper Ricky Steamboat Sting The Rock Triple H CM Punk
High Level Superstars: Bruno Sammartino Hulk Hogan Ultimate Warrior Andre the Giant John Cena Randy Orton
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 20, 2024 21:14:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2013 4:31:51 GMT -5
HBK is just one of those polarizing figures....some think hes the greatest....some feel he is overrated etc. for me he falls just short of GOAT.but that's just me....I still think he was an awesome performer. HBK goes in the same pile with Hart for me. I realize that Bret is the "most popular wrestler in the entire world" during his run but simply put, when HBK & Bret were champions, business was at an all time low. Now while that might not be all their fault, in wrestling the champion is always seen as the leader. If the Hart-HBK combo drew money like the Hogan-Savage combo or the Austin-Rock combo then I would certainly put both of them in the GOAT category but I had to leave them out for this reason alone. Bret drew better as a champion than Hogan did in 93. Hogan would still work house shows but the numbers were still awful.
|
|
|
Post by Nivro™ on Jul 21, 2013 11:20:53 GMT -5
HBK goes in the same pile with Hart for me. I realize that Bret is the "most popular wrestler in the entire world" during his run but simply put, when HBK & Bret were champions, business was at an all time low. Now while that might not be all their fault, in wrestling the champion is always seen as the leader. If the Hart-HBK combo drew money like the Hogan-Savage combo or the Austin-Rock combo then I would certainly put both of them in the GOAT category but I had to leave them out for this reason alone. Bret drew better as a champion than Hogan did in 93. Hogan would still work house shows but the numbers were still awful. Im sure he did but I didnt look at just 1 year, I was looking at the whole run of their career. Hogan was just simply untouchable unless your name was Steve Austin.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 20, 2024 21:14:28 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 21, 2013 11:24:38 GMT -5
Bret drew better as a champion than Hogan did in 93. Hogan would still work house shows but the numbers were still awful. Im sure he did but I didnt look at just 1 year, I was looking at the whole run of their career. Hogan was just simply untouchable unless your name was Steve Austin. I think it's a good indication of the times effecting the draw. There was a time when Bret drew higher than Hogan. He also drew higher than Shawn in 96. So Bret had better drawing power than people like to admit.
|
|