|
Post by Hendrix83 on Dec 25, 2014 14:10:43 GMT -5
I agree that the WWE would have probably given him a World Title run on Smackdown if he was around currently, because seemingly everyone got one. However, let's look at the Champions of the past ten years. I'll start with the WWE Title to see who Billy was more talented than. JBL - Billy had more talent, JBL was way more over as a heel and earned this run John Cena - Nope. Edge - Please. Nope. Rob Van Dam - Negative. Randy Orton- Again, nope. Triple H - What a surprise, nope. Jeff Hardy - Nope. Batista - No. Sheamus - No. The Miz - Like JBL, Billy has more talent than him, but again, Miz was pretty great at drawing heat. CM Punk - Don't make me laugh. Nope. Rey Mysterio - No. Alberto Del Rio - No, but Billy was more over. The Rock - Ha. Daniel Bryan - Please. Not even ten levels below Bryan in talent. Brock Lesnar - No. So, maybe two guys that Billy was better than. Let's look at the World Title, which is the belt I could have seen Billy getting pushed to. I'll just use the guys I haven't mentioned yet. Kurt Angle - Ha. Never. King Booker - No. The Unertaker - Do I even have to say it? The Great Khali - Yes. Billy was more over and better than him. Khali won because of his size only. Chris Jericho - Never. Jack Swagger - No, but Billy was more over. Kane - No. Dolph Ziggler - Nope. Christian - No, but Billy was arguably more over. Mark Henry - Yes, but Henry was awesome during the Hall of Pain run Big Show - Yes. So three or four. Not "Billy had more talent than so many World Champions of the past 10 years." Three or four. Maybe. Of those listed, I would personally say JBL - Also around during the era, outlasted Billy. Edge - had 100x more charisma, but Billy had more talent. Sheamus - Yes. The Miz - Really? Alberto Del Rio - Absolutely no entertainment value in or out of the ring. Great Khali - No need to explain. Jack Swagger - No more charisma than Billy. Christian - Another case of someone who simply outlasted Billy to the point of a title run. Mark Henry - See above. Big Show - He's big. That's about it. There are others which could be argued but it's not really worth the argument. Billy Gunn is on my list of guys who could have been World Champions but weren't. He's not at the top of the list, but he's there. Along with guys like British Bulldog, Owen Hart, Mr. Perfect, Ken Shamrock, etc.
|
|
|
Post by Brunt's Left Foot on Dec 25, 2014 15:04:37 GMT -5
I agree that the WWE would have probably given him a World Title run on Smackdown if he was around currently, because seemingly everyone got one. However, let's look at the Champions of the past ten years. I'll start with the WWE Title to see who Billy was more talented than. JBL - Billy had more talent, JBL was way more over as a heel and earned this run John Cena - Nope. Edge - Please. Nope. Rob Van Dam - Negative. Randy Orton- Again, nope. Triple H - What a surprise, nope. Jeff Hardy - Nope. Batista - No. Sheamus - No. The Miz - Like JBL, Billy has more talent than him, but again, Miz was pretty great at drawing heat. CM Punk - Don't make me laugh. Nope. Rey Mysterio - No. Alberto Del Rio - No, but Billy was more over. The Rock - Ha. Daniel Bryan - Please. Not even ten levels below Bryan in talent. Brock Lesnar - No. So, maybe two guys that Billy was better than. Let's look at the World Title, which is the belt I could have seen Billy getting pushed to. I'll just use the guys I haven't mentioned yet. Kurt Angle - Ha. Never. King Booker - No. The Unertaker - Do I even have to say it? The Great Khali - Yes. Billy was more over and better than him. Khali won because of his size only. Chris Jericho - Never. Jack Swagger - No, but Billy was more over. Kane - No. Dolph Ziggler - Nope. Christian - No, but Billy was arguably more over. Mark Henry - Yes, but Henry was awesome during the Hall of Pain run Big Show - Yes. So three or four. Not "Billy had more talent than so many World Champions of the past 10 years." Three or four. Maybe. Of those listed, I would personally say JBL - Also around during the era, outlasted Billy. Edge - had 100x more charisma, but Billy had more talent. Sheamus - Yes. The Miz - Really? Alberto Del Rio - Absolutely no entertainment value in or out of the ring. Great Khali - No need to explain. Jack Swagger - No more charisma than Billy. Christian - Another case of someone who simply outlasted Billy to the point of a title run. Mark Henry - See above. Big Show - He's big. That's about it. There are others which could be argued but it's not really worth the argument. Billy Gunn is on my list of guys who could have been World Champions but weren't. He's not at the top of the list, but he's there. Along with guys like British Bulldog, Owen Hart, Mr. Perfect, Ken Shamrock, etc.The difference between those guys and Billy Gunn is that they all have a talent and a trait that you can point to and say "they are great at that" or "that makes him a star". Bulldog was incredibly over at times as a face (a singles face) and a big international draw, Owen was excellent in ring, Perfect was the complete package and Ken Shamrock was a legit badass who was incredibly over as a face at times. What was Billy Gunn? Had a good look, was pretty athletic. That's about it. He had no defining qualities that would set him apart from anyone else. He was a great tag team wrestler and a decent midcarder. No one bought tickets to see Billy Gunn as a singles wrestler.
|
|
|
Post by Hendrix83 on Dec 25, 2014 16:11:56 GMT -5
And now, an emotional tribute to Billy Gunn lmao
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 5:02:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2014 18:09:21 GMT -5
I've never seen as much love for Billy Gunn as as I have on this forum. And it all seems to revolve around some weird cult of personality that Anvil Fan has. Years ago he was one of the only people I've ever seen suggest that Gunn could be world champion and now suddenly we have a thread like this where half of the people in it seem to think he would have been a good world champ. It's just so bizarre. Also there's nothing wrong with liking someone a whole lot but accepting their limitations. Billy Gunn was average in the ring and only got over when he was in tag teams. I can't recall him ever having a great match yet somehow he's better in the ring than Dolph Ziggler, who's had several MOTY candidates just in the past 12 months? I don't think so. It's one thing to have an opinion contrary to the norm but at least back it up to form some kind of cogent argument. Of course you'll completely ignore that Billy had world title matches in his time (where the crowd was 100% behind him to win). Just like the other wrestlers that generally fall under the "should have had the title" bracket with a group of fans, ie: Owen, Bulldog, Piper etc. But nah, we'll ignore that and just put it down to me using some kind of voodoo on everyone to manipulate them. That makes a lot more sense. Ziggler may be having MOTY candidates (debatable), but jesus christ, who is his competition? Bryan has been out for most of the year, Punk is gone, and Cena has been feuding with dead weight like Wyatt, or people who he doesn't click with at all like Rollins. The product is at an all time low right now. So basically it's boiled down to: when you take everyone else out of the equation, Dolph is having the best matches. Hardly an impressive feat at all. We've already established in this thread, that Billy's problem came from the stacked roster. With The Rock, Foley, Austin, Triple H, Big Show, Kane, Undertaker etc, the main event scene was already stacked. Guys like Shamrock (who on his worst day was better than 99.99% of the current roster), X-Pac, Taka, Test, Owen Hart, Jarrett etc were mid carders.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Dec 25, 2014 18:21:28 GMT -5
I've never seen as much love for Billy Gunn as as I have on this forum. And it all seems to revolve around some weird cult of personality that Anvil Fan has. Years ago he was one of the only people I've ever seen suggest that Gunn could be world champion and now suddenly we have a thread like this where half of the people in it seem to think he would have been a good world champ. It's just so bizarre. Also there's nothing wrong with liking someone a whole lot but accepting their limitations. Billy Gunn was average in the ring and only got over when he was in tag teams. I can't recall him ever having a great match yet somehow he's better in the ring than Dolph Ziggler, who's had several MOTY candidates just in the past 12 months? I don't think so. It's one thing to have an opinion contrary to the norm but at least back it up to form some kind of cogent argument. Of course you'll completely ignore that Billy had world title matches in his time (where the crowd was 100% behind him to win). Just like the other wrestlers that generally fall under the "should have had the title" bracket with a group of fans, ie: Owen, Bulldog, Piper etc. But nah, we'll ignore that and just put it down to me using some kind of voodoo on everyone to manipulate them. That makes a lot more sense. Ziggler may be having MOTY candidates (debatable), but jesus christ, who is his competition? Bryan has been out for most of the year, Punk is gone, and Cena has been feuding with dead weight like Wyatt, or people who he doesn't click with at all like Rollins. The product is at an all time low right now. So basically it's boiled down to: when you take everyone else out of the equation, Dolph is having the best matches. Hardly an impressive feat at all. We've already established in this thread, that Billy's problem came from the stacked roster. With The Rock, Foley, Austin, Triple H, Big Show, Kane, Undertaker etc, the main event scene was already stacked. Guys like Shamrock (who on his worst day was better than 99.99% of the current roster), X-Pac, Taka, Test, Owen Hart, Jarrett etc were mid carders. Saying Dolph has no competition is a cop out response. He's had standout great matches for years. When talented guys like Cena, Punk, Bryan, Orton, the Shield, Undertaker, Edge and tons more. Dolph, no matter what, even if they aren't MOTY, has standout great matches. Billy doesn't have a memorable singles match to his credit. He barely had memorable tag matches and that's his specialty.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 5:02:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2014 18:45:59 GMT -5
Of course you'll completely ignore that Billy had world title matches in his time (where the crowd was 100% behind him to win). Just like the other wrestlers that generally fall under the "should have had the title" bracket with a group of fans, ie: Owen, Bulldog, Piper etc. But nah, we'll ignore that and just put it down to me using some kind of voodoo on everyone to manipulate them. That makes a lot more sense. Ziggler may be having MOTY candidates (debatable), but jesus christ, who is his competition? Bryan has been out for most of the year, Punk is gone, and Cena has been feuding with dead weight like Wyatt, or people who he doesn't click with at all like Rollins. The product is at an all time low right now. So basically it's boiled down to: when you take everyone else out of the equation, Dolph is having the best matches. Hardly an impressive feat at all. We've already established in this thread, that Billy's problem came from the stacked roster. With The Rock, Foley, Austin, Triple H, Big Show, Kane, Undertaker etc, the main event scene was already stacked. Guys like Shamrock (who on his worst day was better than 99.99% of the current roster), X-Pac, Taka, Test, Owen Hart, Jarrett etc were mid carders. Saying Dolph has no competition is a cop out response. He's had standout great matches for years. When talented guys like Cena, Punk, Bryan, Orton, the Shield, Undertaker, Edge and tons more. Dolph, no matter what, even if they aren't MOTY, has standout great matches. Billy doesn't have a memorable singles match to his credit. He barely had memorable tag matches and that's his specialty. TBH the only standout matches from Dolph for me were vs. Sheamus and vs. Punk both in 2012. And with his opponents being who they were in those matches, it's certainly not hard to see why. Sheamus was a star in 2012, having standout matches with Big Show, and ADR, two of the most consistently terrible wrestlers of all time, and Punk is Punk, he's one of those guys who could wrestle a mannequin and put on a great match. Put Dolph in the AE, and it's pretty much a guarantee that he'd be curtain jerking with D-Lo, if that. Dolph seems a lot better than he really is because the measuring stick for talent is a lot lower now than it was 10+ years ago. That last comment is just ignorance in its most blatant form.
|
|
|
Post by BrIaNMeRcY on Dec 25, 2014 18:56:44 GMT -5
In this generation, Dolph Ziggler is one of the most overrated pieces of talent at the moment. I agree with @cabbageconkers, you put Dolph Ziggler in the Attitude Era and he would be jerking the curtain almost every week. The way we look at workrate is different now compared to sixteen years ago. We weren't greeted to lengthy matches during the AE. To say Billy Gunn didn't do anything memorable is a foolish statement to make. He was one of the most over midcarder's. If you look at Ziggler, he is one of those internet darlings who people tend to overlook his flaws. He does too much in the ring and doesn't protect his body. If Ziggler wants to add years to his life/career, he needs to slow it down.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Dec 25, 2014 19:07:03 GMT -5
Saying Dolph has no competition is a cop out response. He's had standout great matches for years. When talented guys like Cena, Punk, Bryan, Orton, the Shield, Undertaker, Edge and tons more. Dolph, no matter what, even if they aren't MOTY, has standout great matches. Billy doesn't have a memorable singles match to his credit. He barely had memorable tag matches and that's his specialty. TBH the only standout matches from Dolph for me were vs. Sheamus and vs. Punk both in 2012. And with his opponents being who they were in those matches, it's certainly not hard to see why. Sheamus was a star in 2012, having standout matches with Big Show, and ADR, two of the most consistently terrible wrestlers of all time, and Punk is Punk, he's one of those guys who could wrestle a mannequin and put on a great match. Put Dolph in the AE, and it's pretty much a guarantee that he'd be curtain jerking with D-Lo, if that. Dolph seems a lot better than he really is because the measuring stick for talent is a lot lower now than it was 10+ years ago. That last comment is just ignorance in its most blatant form. How is it ignorance in its most blatant form? Because you don't agree with it? Seeing as how nobody can list a Billy Gunn singles match that was really good or memorable. He got a chance to work with some good people. Also, it's ignorance in its most blatant form that because you've only considered two Dolph matches standout, he's not better than Billy. Billy has had none. Dolph has, by most people opinion's, a bunch of good matches and it's not because "the measuring stick for talent is lower." Dolph can work with anyone. Also, ADR, while painfully dull, was one of the most consistently good wrestlers in recent memory. Daniel Bryan, Seth Rollins, John Cena, Sheamus, CM Punk, Edge, Undertaker, etc. All guys that have been around with Dolph while he has had damn great matches, but you seem to blindly ignore that when you talk about the "measuring stick for talent is lower." There is no singles Billy Gunn match that holds a candle to any of Dolph's 10-20 best matches. Also, if you want to call ADR a consistently bad wrestler and praise Sheamus for his work with him, don't overlook Dolph's match with ADR at Payback 2013. Outstanding and the best double turn in a match that wasn't Bret/Austin at WrestleMania 13. Dolph can flat out go, better than Billy ever could. And of course, my comments will be swept under the rug as "ignorant" or "bitter." Neither of us is going to change our stance on this. You're a huge Billy Gunn fan, so you're blinded by that and maybe I'm blinded by being a Dolph fan. And yes, I know you also like Dolph. Regardless, we can keep doing this for 15 more pages but it's not going to get us anywhere. I say Dolph is miles better, you say Billy is way better. It is what it is.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Dec 25, 2014 19:15:39 GMT -5
In this generation, Dolph Ziggler is one of the most overrated pieces of talent at the moment. I agree with @cabbageconkers, you put Dolph Ziggler in the Attitude Era and he would be jerking the curtain almost every week. The way we look at workrate is different now compared to sixteen years ago. We weren't greeted to lengthy matches during the AE. To say Billy Gunn didn't do anything memorable is a foolish statement to make. He was one of the most over midcarder's. If you look at Ziggler, he is one of those internet darlings who people tend to overlook his flaws. He does too much in the ring and doesn't protect his body. If Ziggler wants to add years to his life/career, he needs to slow it down. It would indeed by foolish if I said Billy did nothing memorable, hence why I never said that. Billy has never had a memorable singles match. Or at least one that worth a damn. If someone manages to find one, that's cool, but it's not in the league of the ones that Dolph has had. However, this whole thing is a clear indication of how people see wrestling differently. AF holds Billy Gunn, Jim Neidhart and Lex Luger in high esteem, while he shits on someone like Dean Ambrose. Me, on the other hand feel that Billy was overrated, Luger was one of the worst ever and I think Dean is spectacular. We see things differently an that's actually the most interesting thing to me.
|
|
|
Post by Halloween King on Dec 25, 2014 19:28:32 GMT -5
I just thought that I'd share this with you guys. I really believe that Billy Gunn had Main-Event potential. Now, is it just me or do other people feel this way? Discuss-it-away! Absolutely, he won the King of the Ring. Usually King of the Ring winners were being groomed for better things. For some reason though wwe never gave him that main event push. Gunn certainly had what it took to get over with the fans. He got over as a "Smoking Gun", he got over as a New Age Outlaw, he got over as Mr. Ass, and he got over as Billy of Billy and Chuck fame.
|
|
|
Post by BrIaNMeRcY on Dec 25, 2014 20:05:16 GMT -5
In this generation, Dolph Ziggler is one of the most overrated pieces of talent at the moment. I agree with @cabbageconkers, you put Dolph Ziggler in the Attitude Era and he would be jerking the curtain almost every week. The way we look at workrate is different now compared to sixteen years ago. We weren't greeted to lengthy matches during the AE. To say Billy Gunn didn't do anything memorable is a foolish statement to make. He was one of the most over midcarder's. If you look at Ziggler, he is one of those internet darlings who people tend to overlook his flaws. He does too much in the ring and doesn't protect his body. If Ziggler wants to add years to his life/career, he needs to slow it down. It would indeed by foolish if I said Billy did nothing memorable, hence why I never said that. Billy has never had a memorable singles match. Or at least one that worth a damn. If someone manages to find one, that's cool, but it's not in the league of the ones that Dolph has had. However, this whole thing is a clear indication of how people see wrestling differently. AF holds Billy Gunn, Jim Neidhart and Lex Luger in high esteem, while he shits on someone like Dean Ambrose. Me, on the other hand feel that Billy was overrated, Luger was one of the worst ever and I think Dean is spectacular. We see things differently an that's actually the most interesting thing to me. One issue with Billy Gunn was he never had a very lengthy singles run. It was always go-stop-go-stop with him. When they rebranded him as Rockabilly, it was meant to be a short term thing. As for his pseudo-singles run in 1998-1999, I would think they wanted to test the waters with him. When he came back as "The One" Billy Gunn, the stigma of being Mr. Ass was still there. Gunn didn't have much longevity as "The One." Sure he was there in 2003-2004 as a singles competitor, he wasn't doing much at all. You can I can agree that timing was never on Billy Gunn's side. Dolph Ziggler was given an incredibly long run as a singles performer. Something Billy Gun wasn't fortunate to have for most of his WWE tenure. You would be hard pressed to find anybody who was a fan of the Attitude Era and puts heavy emphasis on workrate. Compared to today, fans regard workrate more now thn during the AE.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Dec 25, 2014 20:06:52 GMT -5
It would indeed by foolish if I said Billy did nothing memorable, hence why I never said that. Billy has never had a memorable singles match. Or at least one that worth a damn. If someone manages to find one, that's cool, but it's not in the league of the ones that Dolph has had. However, this whole thing is a clear indication of how people see wrestling differently. AF holds Billy Gunn, Jim Neidhart and Lex Luger in high esteem, while he shits on someone like Dean Ambrose. Me, on the other hand feel that Billy was overrated, Luger was one of the worst ever and I think Dean is spectacular. We see things differently an that's actually the most interesting thing to me. One issue with Billy Gunn was he never had a very lengthy singles run. It was always go-stop-go-stop with him. When they rebranded him as Rockabilly, it was meant to be a short term thing. As for his pseudo-singles run in 1998-1999, I would think they wanted to test the waters with him. When he came back as "The One" Billy Gunn, the stigma of being Mr. Ass was still there. Gunn didn't have much longevity as "The One." Sure he was there in 2003-2004 as a singles competitor, he wasn't doing much at all. You can I can agree that timing was never on Billy Gunn's side. Dolph Ziggler was given an incredibly long run as a singles performer. Something Billy Gun wasn't fortunate to have for most of his WWE tenure. You would be hard pressed to find anybody who was a fan of the Attitude Era and puts heavy emphasis on workrate. Compared to today, fans regard workrate more now thn during the AE. I do agree that workrate is much more highly regarded nowadays. We were all just fans enjoying a good time back then. It doesn't change that he's never really had a good singles match, but I see where you're coming from. I really want to get off of this subject though so I probably won't respond much in here anymore.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 5:02:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2014 20:13:23 GMT -5
TBH the only standout matches from Dolph for me were vs. Sheamus and vs. Punk both in 2012. And with his opponents being who they were in those matches, it's certainly not hard to see why. Sheamus was a star in 2012, having standout matches with Big Show, and ADR, two of the most consistently terrible wrestlers of all time, and Punk is Punk, he's one of those guys who could wrestle a mannequin and put on a great match. Put Dolph in the AE, and it's pretty much a guarantee that he'd be curtain jerking with D-Lo, if that. Dolph seems a lot better than he really is because the measuring stick for talent is a lot lower now than it was 10+ years ago. That last comment is just ignorance in its most blatant form. How is it ignorance in its most blatant form? Because you don't agree with it? Seeing as how nobody can list a Billy Gunn singles match that was really good or memorable. He got a chance to work with some good people. Also, it's ignorance in its most blatant form that because you've only considered two Dolph matches standout, he's not better than Billy. Billy has had none. Dolph has, by most people opinion's, a bunch of good matches and it's not because "the measuring stick for talent is lower." Dolph can work with anyone. Also, ADR, while painfully dull, was one of the most consistently good wrestlers in recent memory. Daniel Bryan, Seth Rollins, John Cena, Sheamus, CM Punk, Edge, Undertaker, etc. All guys that have been around with Dolph while he has had damn great matches, but you seem to blindly ignore that when you talk about the "measuring stick for talent is lower." There is no singles Billy Gunn match that holds a candle to any of Dolph's 10-20 best matches. Also, if you want to call ADR a consistently bad wrestler and praise Sheamus for his work with him, don't overlook Dolph's match with ADR at Payback 2013. Outstanding and the best double turn in a match that wasn't Bret/Austin at WrestleMania 13. Dolph can flat out go, better than Billy ever could. And of course, my comments will be swept under the rug as "ignorant" or "bitter." Neither of us is going to change our stance on this. You're a huge Billy Gunn fan, so you're blinded by that and maybe I'm blinded by being a Dolph fan. And yes, I know you also like Dolph. Regardless, we can keep doing this for 15 more pages but it's not going to get us anywhere. I say Dolph is miles better, you say Billy is way better. It is what it is. A statement like "He barely had memorable tag matches" is extremely ignorant. The NAO are heralded as one of the best things about the AE for a reason. They had dozens upon dozens of amazing tag matches. If you're unfamiliar with them (which your posts seem to suggest you are), then I suggest looking on youtube. "New Age Outlaws vs." is a good place to start. As for singles matches, I'd suggest looking into his work with Shamrock, X-Pac, Eddie, Benoit, Jeff Jarrett, HHH, hell, the guy pulled the best out of guys like Jamie Noble and the Dudleys too. That's without going into his work with Chuck and Bart. I didn't say the reason why Dolph isn't as good as Billy is because he hasn't had many standout matches. His lack of classic matches is merely a direct consequence of his lack of greatness. He's good, that's pretty much all there is to it. Dolph isn't the kind of guy who can pull out great matches with just anyone, not like a Bret Hart. Dolph's more comparable to Triple H in that regard. He'll work well with great performers, with lesser performers, he just doesn't get the job done.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Dec 25, 2014 20:21:18 GMT -5
How is it ignorance in its most blatant form? Because you don't agree with it? Seeing as how nobody can list a Billy Gunn singles match that was really good or memorable. He got a chance to work with some good people. Also, it's ignorance in its most blatant form that because you've only considered two Dolph matches standout, he's not better than Billy. Billy has had none. Dolph has, by most people opinion's, a bunch of good matches and it's not because "the measuring stick for talent is lower." Dolph can work with anyone. Also, ADR, while painfully dull, was one of the most consistently good wrestlers in recent memory. Daniel Bryan, Seth Rollins, John Cena, Sheamus, CM Punk, Edge, Undertaker, etc. All guys that have been around with Dolph while he has had damn great matches, but you seem to blindly ignore that when you talk about the "measuring stick for talent is lower." There is no singles Billy Gunn match that holds a candle to any of Dolph's 10-20 best matches. Also, if you want to call ADR a consistently bad wrestler and praise Sheamus for his work with him, don't overlook Dolph's match with ADR at Payback 2013. Outstanding and the best double turn in a match that wasn't Bret/Austin at WrestleMania 13. Dolph can flat out go, better than Billy ever could. And of course, my comments will be swept under the rug as "ignorant" or "bitter." Neither of us is going to change our stance on this. You're a huge Billy Gunn fan, so you're blinded by that and maybe I'm blinded by being a Dolph fan. And yes, I know you also like Dolph. Regardless, we can keep doing this for 15 more pages but it's not going to get us anywhere. I say Dolph is miles better, you say Billy is way better. It is what it is. A statement like "He barely had memorable tag matches" is extremely ignorant. The NAO are heralded as one of the best things about the AE for a reason. They had dozens upon dozens of amazing tag matches. If you're unfamiliar with them (which your posts seem to suggest you are), then I suggest looking on youtube. "New Age Outlaws vs." is a good place to start. As for singles matches, I'd suggest looking into his work with Shamrock, X-Pac, Eddie, Benoit, Jeff Jarrett, HHH, hell, the guy pulled the best out of guys like Jamie Noble and the Dudleys too. That's without going into his work with Chuck and Bart. I didn't say the reason why Dolph isn't as good as Billy is because he hasn't had many standout matches. His lack of classic matches is merely a direct consequence of his lack of greatness. He's good, that's pretty much all there is to it. Dolph isn't the kind of guy who can pull out great matches with just anyone, not like a Bret Hart. Dolph's more comparable to Triple H in that regard. He'll work well with great performers, with lesser performers, he just doesn't get the job done. I've seen ALL of Billy Gunn's work. From Smoking Guns right up to 2014 NAO. His stuff with Ken Shamrock, X-Pac Jarrett and Hunter weren't great. The stuff with Eddie was solid as was the Benoit stuff (particularly their Armageddon match where Benoit beat the hell out of Billy to take the belt from him.), but that could be attributed to him working with FAR superior guys like Eddie and Benoit. Hell, Noble, X-Pac and Hunter were better too. Your post about Dolph not being able to pull out great performances with lesser workers suggests that you haven't seen his work. Youtube "Dolph Ziggler vs." for starters. He's had just as good, if not a better match with someone you consider terrible, Alberto Del Rio, than Sheamus did. I'm done here though. I think that Billy Gunn was not a main event talent, you clearly do. Agree to disagree, because if not, this is going to go in circles. What you consider good and what I consider good is vastly different.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 5:02:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2014 20:28:48 GMT -5
A statement like "He barely had memorable tag matches" is extremely ignorant. The NAO are heralded as one of the best things about the AE for a reason. They had dozens upon dozens of amazing tag matches. If you're unfamiliar with them (which your posts seem to suggest you are), then I suggest looking on youtube. "New Age Outlaws vs." is a good place to start. As for singles matches, I'd suggest looking into his work with Shamrock, X-Pac, Eddie, Benoit, Jeff Jarrett, HHH, hell, the guy pulled the best out of guys like Jamie Noble and the Dudleys too. That's without going into his work with Chuck and Bart. I didn't say the reason why Dolph isn't as good as Billy is because he hasn't had many standout matches. His lack of classic matches is merely a direct consequence of his lack of greatness. He's good, that's pretty much all there is to it. Dolph isn't the kind of guy who can pull out great matches with just anyone, not like a Bret Hart. Dolph's more comparable to Triple H in that regard. He'll work well with great performers, with lesser performers, he just doesn't get the job done. I've seen ALL of Billy Gunn's work. From Smoking Guns right up to 2014 NAO. His stuff with Ken Shamrock, X-Pac Jarrett and Hunter weren't great. The stuff with Eddie was solid as was the Benoit stuff (particularly their Armageddon match where Benoit beat the hell out of Billy to take the belt from him.), but that could be attributed to him working with FAR superior guys like Eddie and Benoit. Hell, Noble, X-Pac and Hunter were better too. Your post about Dolph not being able to pull out great performances with lesser workers suggests that you haven't seen his work. Youtube "Dolph Ziggler vs." for starters. He's had just as good, if not a better match with someone you consider terrible, Alberto Del Rio, than Sheamus did. I'm done here though. I think that Billy Gunn was not a main event talent, you clearly do. Agree to disagree, because if not, this is going to go in circles. What you consider good and what I consider good is vastly different. I saw ADR/Ziggler when it happened, and was completely unimpressed. But I'll concede that we're going to have to agree to disagree.
|
|
mrassbillygunn
Main Eventer
WF 10+ Year Member
Joined on: Jul 23, 2011 19:35:48 GMT -5
Posts: 4,298
|
Post by mrassbillygunn on Dec 25, 2014 21:23:12 GMT -5
lol...I never thought Billy Gunn would make a 4 page thread on the forum.
|
|
|
Post by BrIaNMeRcY on Dec 25, 2014 21:59:04 GMT -5
lol...I never thought Billy Gunn would make a 4 page thread on the forum. Apparently, Billy Gunn has suddenly become a hot topic here now. I know nothing. I digress.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 5:02:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 25, 2014 22:35:27 GMT -5
Whoa! Varying opinions? No way!!!!
|
|
|
Post by Weemanv1 on Dec 26, 2014 1:31:38 GMT -5
Whoa! Varying opinions? No way!!!! Nah, that can't be right. Everyone follows the same mindset and it's all flip flops and sandals.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 5:02:48 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2014 3:44:20 GMT -5
Damn...I missed all dis? Anyway, I don't mean to beat a dead horse here but if Billy Gunn had "IT" to be a main event talent then he would've been. There was no better time for him than the Attitude Era. If he wasn't going to break through the glass ceiling during that era then it was NEVER going to happen. He didn't and it didn't. Therefore, Billy Gunn did NOT have the talents to be a main event talent. There were SO many workers more talented than Billy Gunn at the time who shined and broke through into main event status. If they could do it then what was Billy's excuse? Hell, he even got more of an "office push" by winning KOTR and STILL couldn't get himself over to that consistent main event status. I would say that argument is logically flawed. To say, "If [Billy Gunn] wasn't going to break through the glass ceiling during [The Attitude] era then it was NEVER going to happen." Is no different from saying, "If [The Miz] was going to break through the glass ceiling during [The PG] era then it was ALWAYS going to happen." That is just not the truth. Billy Gunn had more talent than so many World Champions of the past 10 years. He couldn't talk, but hell if he was around now I'm sure they'd script him something to say anyway. Look at Roman Reigns being pushed to the moon, greener than the grass on your front lawn. No it isn't. Billy Gunn's most successful run was as Mr. ass in the Attitude Era. The Mr. Ass gimmick wouldn't have worked to the success it did in any other era. Regardless, Billy Gunn couldn't maintain a main event level status even during that era. Therefore, if it didn't happen then...it was never going to happen.
|
|