|
|
Post by Brunt's Left Foot on Dec 26, 2014 5:23:38 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. Billy Gunn had world title matches where the crowd wanted him to win? When was this? As a face the only time I can picture him getting a title shot would be against Triple H and of course they would have cheered for Gunn to win, the crowd hated HHH. They cheered when Brooklyn Brawler beat him. Even if I accept your theory that Ziggler only stands out right now because everybody else sucks, what about in previous years? Ziggler has been putting on great matches consistently since at least 2010. For the record, I don't agree with your assertion. Cesaro, Del Rio, BNB, Ambrose, Orton, Rollins, Sheamus are all capable of putting on some excellent matches and have done this year. If a stacked roster was Billy's only problem, why didn't he get a big push in 1997 when the WWF was desperate for new top stars? Or 2000 when the WWF needed new top stars? Or 2004 when the WWE needed new top stars? And why wasn't he a main eventer in TNA? |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 4:49:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2014 6:39:45 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. Billy Gunn had world title matches where the crowd wanted him to win? When was this? As a face the only time I can picture him getting a title shot would be against Triple H and of course they would have cheered for Gunn to win, the crowd hated HHH. They cheered when Brooklyn Brawler beat him. Even if I accept your theory that Ziggler only stands out right now because everybody else sucks, what about in previous years? Ziggler has been putting on great matches consistently since at least 2010. For the record, I don't agree with your assertion. Cesaro, Del Rio, BNB, Ambrose, Orton, Rollins, Sheamus are all capable of putting on some excellent matches and have done this year. If a stacked roster was Billy's only problem, why didn't he get a big push in 1997 when the WWF was desperate for new top stars? Or 2000 when the WWF needed new top stars? Or 2004 when the WWE needed new top stars? And why wasn't he a main eventer in TNA? That's just a ridiculous cop out. If the crowd didn't want Billy to win, they wouldn't have been behind him to win. Of course I'm sure you'll ignore that and spout off some other nonsense. I don't know where all these "great" matches have come from that supposedly happened in 2010. None of those men have been putting on great matches this year, at least not consistently. This is just ridiculous. Billy was saddled with "Rockabilly" in 97, that's like saying "why wasn't Dolph a main eventer in 2006 when he was in the Spirit Squad". In Jan 2000, he got injured by one of the Dudley Boys and didn't return until October, because of this he missed out on being the guy who hit Austin, which was the original intent. In 2004 the WWE didn't need new stars anyway, they still had a stacked roster (Angle, Hogan, Shawn, HHH, Undertaker, Brock, Goldberg, Rock, Jericho etc etc), and by 2004, Billy had some pretty bad drug problems, not being reliable with all the injuries he'd had, and the crowd never really forgave him for the Billy and Chuck marriage stuff. He was also over 40 by this time. What I find most ironic about this whole thing, is that even Dolph recognises that Billy was a hell of a talent. He's a self professed fan, and Billy was his pick for most under rated in an article on wwe.com a while back. de.wwe.com/classics/underrated-list/page-2 |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 4:49:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2014 11:26:29 GMT -5
Some of the logic being used here is...questionable.
So a "stacked" roster is the reason Billy Gunn wasn't a main eventer?
Therefore, it's the fault of Rock, Jericho, HHH, Austin, Taker, etc. that Billy Gunn wasn't a main event but it's not HIS fault?
That's like a sports fan saying his favorite football team didn't win the super bowl because there were so many better teams that year.
Well...no sh*t. That's how it works.
If Billy had "it" to be a main eventer than he would've been. The fact he got outshined by other talent is nobody's fault but his own. Hell, Billy even got the "office push" for a short time and STILL couldn't reach main event while guys with more talent passed him up.
Again, I can show you a match from Raw where Taka Michinoku challenged Triple H for the WWF title and the crowd goes NUTS for Taka because he came close to winning on a couple of occasions. That one match doesn't mean Taka should've been a main eventer. He was a comedy character (like Mr. Ass) at the time and the crowd wanted HHH to lose.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brunt's Left Foot on Dec 26, 2014 11:42:36 GMT -5
Billy Gunn had world title matches where the crowd wanted him to win? When was this? As a face the only time I can picture him getting a title shot would be against Triple H and of course they would have cheered for Gunn to win, the crowd hated HHH. They cheered when Brooklyn Brawler beat him. Even if I accept your theory that Ziggler only stands out right now because everybody else sucks, what about in previous years? Ziggler has been putting on great matches consistently since at least 2010. For the record, I don't agree with your assertion. Cesaro, Del Rio, BNB, Ambrose, Orton, Rollins, Sheamus are all capable of putting on some excellent matches and have done this year. If a stacked roster was Billy's only problem, why didn't he get a big push in 1997 when the WWF was desperate for new top stars? Or 2000 when the WWF needed new top stars? Or 2004 when the WWE needed new top stars? And why wasn't he a main eventer in TNA? That's just a ridiculous cop out. If the crowd didn't want Billy to win, they wouldn't have been behind him to win. Of course I'm sure you'll ignore that and spout off some other nonsense. I don't know where all these "great" matches have come from that supposedly happened in 2010. None of those men have been putting on great matches this year, at least not consistently. This is just ridiculous. Billy was saddled with "Rockabilly" in 97, that's like saying "why wasn't Dolph a main eventer in 2006 when he was in the Spirit Squad". In Jan 2000, he got injured by one of the Dudley Boys and didn't return until October, because of this he missed out on being the guy who hit Austin, which was the original intent. In 2004 the WWE didn't need new stars anyway, they still had a stacked roster (Angle, Hogan, Shawn, HHH, Undertaker, Brock, Goldberg, Rock, Jericho etc etc), and by 2004, Billy had some pretty bad drug problems, not being reliable with all the injuries he'd had, and the crowd never really forgave him for the Billy and Chuck marriage stuff. He was also over 40 by this time. What I find most ironic about this whole thing, is that even Dolph recognises that Billy was a hell of a talent. He's a self professed fan, and Billy was his pick for most under rated in an article on wwe.com a while back. de.wwe.com/classics/underrated-list/page-2Wait so you come up with all these excuses for Billy Gunn but it's me with a ridiculous cop out? Dolph was saddled with three terrible gimmicks before he got a push but his talent was still obvious. If Billy Gunn was really that good, he would have gotten what he deserved. Even though guys like Owen Hart and Mr. Perfect never got the world title, they often main evented, held numerous midcard titles and occasionally got world title matches. How many world title matches did Billy Gunn get? How many PPV did he main event? How many singles midcard titles did he win? All the facts show Billy Gunn just did not have what it takes. Oh and I think you're mistaking 2004 for 2003. Hogan was not around then, Goldberg, Brock and Rock wrestled a handful of times and Angle was injured for several months. The SmackDown side was incredibly weak hence JBL's megapush. If Billy Gunn was so good, why did Bradshaw get the push and not Billy? |
|
|
|
Post by T R W on Dec 26, 2014 11:48:12 GMT -5
I never bought Billy Gunn as anything other than a tag team wrestler or as a mid carder. Never once did I think this is a guy who should be world champion. He had a hell of a career. But not everyone needs to be champion.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Dec 26, 2014 12:16:37 GMT -5
I never bought Billy Gunn as anything other than a tag team wrestler or as a mid carder. Never once did I think this is a guy who should be world champion. He had a hell of a career. But not everyone needs to be champion. And that is a completely logical thought. However, if you try to explain why you think Billy wasn't a main event talent, it's considered ignorance, absurd or some sort of cop out which is what leads to arguments. |
|
|
|
Post by TheSystem 1.5 on Dec 26, 2014 12:23:34 GMT -5
 That was pretty memorable |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 4:49:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2014 12:26:45 GMT -5
Stone Cold
The Rock
Undertaker
Kane
Chris Jericho
Triple H
Mr. Ass
...one of these does not belong...
I can see the PPV main event posters and tag lines now...
WRESTLEMANIA 2000: Rock vs. Ass. Get your ass rocked!
BACKLASH: The Game vs. The Ass Man!
JUDGMENT DAY: Can Undertaker bury Mr. Ass six feet under or will the ass rise to victory?
Fully Loaded: Ass clown vs. Ass man
Yup, main event material for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by Next Manufactured’s Sweater on Dec 26, 2014 12:27:18 GMT -5
Some of the logic being used here is...questionable. So a "stacked" roster is the reason Billy Gunn wasn't a main eventer? Therefore, it's the fault of Rock, Jericho, HHH, Austin, Taker, etc. that Billy Gunn wasn't a main event but it's not HIS fault? That's like a sports fan saying his favorite football team didn't win the super bowl because there were so many better teams that year. Well...no sh*t. That's how it works. To be fair, that's how these things always go. If it weren't for all the real main eventers in the attitude era, Billy Gunn might have main evented. If it weren't for all the real main eventers now (as few as there are), Dolph Ziggler might be a main eventer. If it weren't for there being better choices for the spot every year, CM Punk would have main evented a WrestleMania. There will always be fans of wrestlers who decide it is everybody else's fault (other wrestlers, Vince, writers, HHH etc) who are to blame instead of the wrestler himself. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 4:49:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2014 12:51:46 GMT -5
Some of the logic being used here is...questionable. So a "stacked" roster is the reason Billy Gunn wasn't a main eventer? Therefore, it's the fault of Rock, Jericho, HHH, Austin, Taker, etc. that Billy Gunn wasn't a main event but it's not HIS fault? That's like a sports fan saying his favorite football team didn't win the super bowl because there were so many better teams that year. Well...no sh*t. That's how it works. To be fair, that's how these things always go. If it weren't for all the real main eventers in the attitude era, Billy Gunn might have main evented. If it weren't for all the real main eventers now (as few as there are), Dolph Ziggler might be a main eventer. If it weren't for there being better choices for the spot every year, CM Punk would have main evented a WrestleMania. There will always be fans of wrestlers who decide it is everybody else's fault (other wrestlers, Vince, writers, HHH etc) who are to blame instead of the wrestler himself. Damn man. Very well put. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 4:49:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2014 13:02:25 GMT -5
That's just a ridiculous cop out. If the crowd didn't want Billy to win, they wouldn't have been behind him to win. Of course I'm sure you'll ignore that and spout off some other nonsense. I don't know where all these "great" matches have come from that supposedly happened in 2010. None of those men have been putting on great matches this year, at least not consistently. This is just ridiculous. Billy was saddled with "Rockabilly" in 97, that's like saying "why wasn't Dolph a main eventer in 2006 when he was in the Spirit Squad". In Jan 2000, he got injured by one of the Dudley Boys and didn't return until October, because of this he missed out on being the guy who hit Austin, which was the original intent. In 2004 the WWE didn't need new stars anyway, they still had a stacked roster (Angle, Hogan, Shawn, HHH, Undertaker, Brock, Goldberg, Rock, Jericho etc etc), and by 2004, Billy had some pretty bad drug problems, not being reliable with all the injuries he'd had, and the crowd never really forgave him for the Billy and Chuck marriage stuff. He was also over 40 by this time. What I find most ironic about this whole thing, is that even Dolph recognises that Billy was a hell of a talent. He's a self professed fan, and Billy was his pick for most under rated in an article on wwe.com a while back. de.wwe.com/classics/underrated-list/page-2Wait so you come up with all these excuses for Billy Gunn but it's me with a ridiculous cop out? Dolph was saddled with three terrible gimmicks before he got a push but his talent was still obvious. If Billy Gunn was really that good, he would have gotten what he deserved. Even though guys like Owen Hart and Mr. Perfect never got the world title, they often main evented, held numerous midcard titles and occasionally got world title matches. How many world title matches did Billy Gunn get? How many PPV did he main event? How many singles midcard titles did he win? All the facts show Billy Gunn just did not have what it takes. Oh and I think you're mistaking 2004 for 2003. Hogan was not around then, Goldberg, Brock and Rock wrestled a handful of times and Angle was injured for several months. The SmackDown side was incredibly weak hence JBL's megapush. If Billy Gunn was so good, why did Bradshaw get the push and not Billy? Yeah I remember Kerwin White's sidekick, man that guy was so talented, I'm surprised they didn't give him the world title then and there. Gimmicks are extremely important. Do you think if Bret Hart had stayed as a cowboy, that he'd have ended up being the greatest of all time? with a body of 5* matches exceeding every other wrestler ever? Doubt it. Titles don't mean now what they did then. And even less then than they did prior to that. Some of the greatest and most over wrestlers of all time never held a single title in the WWF. Off the top of my head this includes Jake Roberts, Vader, Bigelow, Brian Pillman and Orndorff. Then you have Miz as a former champion. He's clearly not better than the aforementioned, but his "resume" would suggest he is. Times are completely different now than they were back then. JBL was younger than Billy Gunn. Didn't have drug problems, didn't have an angle where he nearly married a man, and didn't have a long list of prior injuries. All the facts show that Billy Gunn was just a victim of circumstances. One of the best in ring wrestlers of his generation, and one of the most popular wrestlers in the most popular era of wrestling. Deal with it. |
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Dec 26, 2014 13:16:07 GMT -5
Again, I know we won't change each other's minds, but it's crazy how when someone states that Billy wasn't good in the ring or had any memorable matches it's "ignorant" but when you say Billy was "one of the best in ring performers of his generation" (which a fair amount of us disagree with) it's facts. Isn't that, in itself, ignorant?
|
|
|
|
Post by hbkbigdaddycool on Dec 26, 2014 13:23:37 GMT -5
Again, I know we won't change each other's minds, but it's crazy how when someone states that Billy wasn't good in the ring or had any memorable matches it's "ignorant" but when you say Billy was "one of the best in ring performers of his generation" (which a fair amount of us disagree with) it's facts. Isn't that, in itself, ignorant? If Billy Gunn wasn't good, than Shawn Michaels wouldn't have worked with him. And they had a small program on Raw for a few weeks in the summer of 1996, between IYH in July to SummerSlam. Billy Gunn even had a WWE Title match with HBK on Raw, and the match was pretty amazing. If Billy Gunn's single run flopped after the NAO broke up, it wasn't because of Billy. He was still doing the same stuff he always did. Just he didn't win. He wasn't even supposed to win the KOTR that year, and maybe his singles fun was supposed to flop. Maybe they broke Roadie and Billy up so when they put them together again a few months later, that the fans would pop for it. I don't know really. But Billy Gunn was good in the ring, very good actually. |
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Dec 26, 2014 13:27:39 GMT -5
Again, I know we won't change each other's minds, but it's crazy how when someone states that Billy wasn't good in the ring or had any memorable matches it's "ignorant" but when you say Billy was "one of the best in ring performers of his generation" (which a fair amount of us disagree with) it's facts. Isn't that, in itself, ignorant? If Billy Gunn wasn't good, than Shawn Michaels wouldn't have worked with him. And they had a small program on Raw for a few weeks in the summer of 1996, between IYH in July to SummerSlam. Billy Gunn even had a WWE Title match with HBK on Raw, and the match was pretty amazing. If Billy Gunn's single run flopped after the NAO broke up, it wasn't because of Billy. He was still doing the same stuff he always did. Just he didn't win. He wasn't even supposed to win the KOTR that year, and maybe his singles fun was supposed to flop. Maybe they broke Roadie and Billy up so when they put them together again a few months later, that the fans would pop for it. I don't know really. But Billy Gunn was good in the ring, very good actually. Interesting point. You see in ring work different than I do. We all do since some think he was a fine mid-carder at best. That's not the point I was making. I was saying that when I, Bash and some others said Billy wasn't a main event level guy we got told it was ignorant, but when a Billy fan claims he's "one of the best in ring performers of his generation", we're supposed to shut up and accept it as facts and gospel. That's a bit unfair don't you think? Also, I will admit that I recall that HBK/Gunn match and it was actually good. It wasn't very memorable since I didn't remember it, but I take back my statement that he never had a really good singles match. Although since some people wanted to take away from Dolph's good matches because he worked with a superior performer, the same could be said there. Shawn Michaels could have a good match with a broomstick. |
|
|
|
Post by hbkbigdaddycool on Dec 26, 2014 13:34:36 GMT -5
If Billy Gunn wasn't good, than Shawn Michaels wouldn't have worked with him. And they had a small program on Raw for a few weeks in the summer of 1996, between IYH in July to SummerSlam. Billy Gunn even had a WWE Title match with HBK on Raw, and the match was pretty amazing. If Billy Gunn's single run flopped after the NAO broke up, it wasn't because of Billy. He was still doing the same stuff he always did. Just he didn't win. He wasn't even supposed to win the KOTR that year, and maybe his singles fun was supposed to flop. Maybe they broke Roadie and Billy up so when they put them together again a few months later, that the fans would pop for it. I don't know really. But Billy Gunn was good in the ring, very good actually. Interesting point. You see in ring work different than I do. We all do since some think he was a fine mid-carder at best. That's not the point I was making. I was saying that when I, Bash and some others said Billy wasn't a main event level guy we got told it was ignorant, but when a Billy fan claims he's "one of the best in ring performers of his generation", we're supposed to shut up and accept it as facts and gospel. That's a bit unfair don't you think? Also, I will admit that I recall that HBK/Gunn match and it was actually good. It wasn't very memorable since I didn't remember it, but I take back my statement that he never had a really good singles match. Although since some people wanted to take away from Dolph's good matches because he worked with a superior performer, the same could be said there. Shawn Michaels could have a good match with a broomstick. Thing is about Billy, just like Roadie, is that they were so over in 1998 and early 1999, that they really didn't even have to wrestle. That's how good they were! Fans wanted to say along with them "Ladies and Gentlemen, boys and girls, children of all ages..." and then say "Suck It!" and that was it. The NAO never had to be great workers, cause they didn't need to be then. And I can respect that you don't think Billy deserved to be 'the guy' or a main event guy, that's cool. But I still think that some on this thread are being very blind to the fact that Billy Gunn was good. He was. If he wasn't good, there wouldn't be a 5 page thread about him happening right now. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 4:49:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2014 13:36:51 GMT -5
Stone Cold The Rock Undertaker Kane Chris Jericho Triple H Mr. Ass ...one of these does not belong... I can see the PPV main event posters and tag lines now... WRESTLEMANIA 2000: Rock vs. Ass. Get your ass rocked! BACKLASH: The Game vs. The Ass Man! JUDGMENT DAY: Can Undertaker bury Mr. Ass six feet under or will the ass rise to victory? Fully Loaded: Ass clown vs. Ass man Yup, main event material for sure. Birds will fall. Wrap your worm with me. Mr. Ass wasn't his name, it was a nickname, just like "Hitman". As far as I remember, nothing was ever billed as Hitman vs. Undertaker, or Hitman vs. Heart Break Kid. You're just using a fallacy to try and make your argument have more prominence. There are only so many people who can be main eventing at any one time, when you already have at least 10 different main eventers at once, and only 5 real PPVs a year, that's a logistical problem. Especially when you have at least half a dozen other EXTREMELY talented and over people bubbling under the main event scene. |
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Dec 26, 2014 13:39:15 GMT -5
Interesting point. You see in ring work different than I do. We all do since some think he was a fine mid-carder at best. That's not the point I was making. I was saying that when I, Bash and some others said Billy wasn't a main event level guy we got told it was ignorant, but when a Billy fan claims he's "one of the best in ring performers of his generation", we're supposed to shut up and accept it as facts and gospel. That's a bit unfair don't you think? Also, I will admit that I recall that HBK/Gunn match and it was actually good. It wasn't very memorable since I didn't remember it, but I take back my statement that he never had a really good singles match. Although since some people wanted to take away from Dolph's good matches because he worked with a superior performer, the same could be said there. Shawn Michaels could have a good match with a broomstick. Thing is about Billy, just like Roadie, is that they were so over in 1998 and early 1999, that they really didn't even have to wrestle. That's how good they were! Fans wanted to say along with them "Ladies and Gentlemen, boys and girls, children of all ages..." and then say "Suck It!" and that was it. The NAO never had to be great workers, cause they didn't need to be then. And I can respect that you don't think Billy deserved to be 'the guy' or a main event guy, that's cool. But I still think that some on this thread are being very blind to the fact that Billy Gunn was good. He was. If he wasn't good, there wouldn't be a 5 page thread about him happening right now. I admitted that the NAO were super over. They didn't have to be good in the ring. Road Dogg is the one I credit mostly for that because the man had the gift of gab. Billy contributed but it was more Road Dogg to me and it was why he stayed over. He wasn't over near Austin levels on his own, but he was a solid mid-carder and I felt that was his ceiling. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 16, 2024 4:49:10 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2014 13:50:16 GMT -5
Stone Cold The Rock Undertaker Kane Chris Jericho Triple H Mr. Ass ...one of these does not belong... I can see the PPV main event posters and tag lines now... WRESTLEMANIA 2000: Rock vs. Ass. Get your ass rocked! BACKLASH: The Game vs. The Ass Man! JUDGMENT DAY: Can Undertaker bury Mr. Ass six feet under or will the ass rise to victory? Fully Loaded: Ass clown vs. Ass man Yup, main event material for sure. Birds will fall. Wrap your worm with me. Mr. Ass wasn't his name, it was a nickname, just like "Hitman". As far as I remember, nothing was ever billed as Hitman vs. Undertaker, or Hitman vs. Heart Break Kid. You're just using a fallacy to try and make your argument have more prominence. There are only so many people who can be main eventing at any one time, when you already have at least 10 different main eventers at once, and only 5 real PPVs a year, that's a logistical problem. Especially when you have at least half a dozen other EXTREMELY talented and over people bubbling under the main event scene. THAT WASNT HIS NAME?!?! His f*cking theme music, titantron and tagline was all about nothing but ass!!! Kicking, shoving, picking and sticking ass!!! Hell, his name in the Wrestlemania 2000 video game was MR. ASS! His name wasn't Mr. Ass though....ok. |
|
|
|
Post by Brunt's Left Foot on Dec 26, 2014 13:59:55 GMT -5
Wait so you come up with all these excuses for Billy Gunn but it's me with a ridiculous cop out? Dolph was saddled with three terrible gimmicks before he got a push but his talent was still obvious. If Billy Gunn was really that good, he would have gotten what he deserved. Even though guys like Owen Hart and Mr. Perfect never got the world title, they often main evented, held numerous midcard titles and occasionally got world title matches. How many world title matches did Billy Gunn get? How many PPV did he main event? How many singles midcard titles did he win? All the facts show Billy Gunn just did not have what it takes. Oh and I think you're mistaking 2004 for 2003. Hogan was not around then, Goldberg, Brock and Rock wrestled a handful of times and Angle was injured for several months. The SmackDown side was incredibly weak hence JBL's megapush. If Billy Gunn was so good, why did Bradshaw get the push and not Billy? Yeah I remember Kerwin White's sidekick, man that guy was so talented, I'm surprised they didn't give him the world title then and there. Gimmicks are extremely important. Do you think if Bret Hart had stayed as a cowboy, that he'd have ended up being the greatest of all time? with a body of 5* matches exceeding every other wrestler ever? Doubt it. Titles don't mean now what they did then. And even less then than they did prior to that. Some of the greatest and most over wrestlers of all time never held a single title in the WWF. Off the top of my head this includes Jake Roberts, Vader, Bigelow, Brian Pillman and Orndorff. Then you have Miz as a former champion. He's clearly not better than the aforementioned, but his "resume" would suggest he is. Times are completely different now than they were back then. JBL was younger than Billy Gunn. Didn't have drug problems, didn't have an angle where he nearly married a man, and didn't have a long list of prior injuries. All the facts show that Billy Gunn was just a victim of circumstances. One of the best in ring wrestlers of his generation, and one of the most popular wrestlers in the most popular era of wrestling. Deal with it. Okay forget the titles, what about singles main events? How many of them did Billy Gunn have? What's that? None? Yeah that's what I thought. Unlike the people you have been trying to compare him to in this thread. Oh and apparently Billy Gunn is one of the best wrestlers of his generation? The same Billy Gunn who never had a great singles match in his life? I fully expect you to post a bunch of mediocre matches Billy had on TV and tell me they're great. As for your other points in this thread - Billy worked a program with Shawn Michaels? Don't make me laugh. Shawn worked a program with Sunny cuz he was  ing her in real life and Billy was just the guy who did the ring work. And even then I'd hardly call two episodes of Raw 'a program'. Billy's name was never Mr. Ass? That's what he was called on SmackDown 1. That's what the announcers called him. Very seldom, if at all, did you hear them call him "Mr. Ass" Billy Gunn. The facts show Billy Gunn was one of the best tag team wrestlers of his generation and that's it. No one gave a damn about Rockabilly or The One, which is why he quickly formed tag teams shortly after starting those gimmicks. There's a reason Edge and The Rock got two of their biggest most memorable promos based on telling Billy Gunn how much he sucked. Billy Gunn was even a face during the Edge one! |
|
|
|
Post by Brunt's Left Foot on Dec 26, 2014 14:20:41 GMT -5
The "Billy Gunn was never called Mr. Ass" really is ludicrous. Everything else you've said Anvil Fan, I can at least accept as your opinion no matter how much I disagree with you. You're entitled to have that opinion no matter what.
But there's clear proof his name was Mr. Ass. It was only for around 4-5 months in 1999 when the NAO first split, but it definitely happened. Here's an example:
His titantron says Mr. Ass, the name graphic says Mr. Ass, he's announced as Mr. Ass and the commentators only refer to him as Mr. Ass. They didn't say Billy Gunn, not even once.
I defy you to find me one video of a match out there where Bret Hart is not called Bret Hart and is only called Hitman throughout.
|
|
