HBK is the greatest WWF/E Performer of all time

[Ferocious]

Discuss........and I'll rebut your pathetic attempts to disprove this statement. :cool:

[Mr. Nerfect]

I've never watched many of his old matches, as I'm a fairly recent wrestling fan, but I was hyped for his return to the WWE in 2002, just because of his reputation. But as for the greatest performer, I'd say Hulk Hogan, Bret Hart, The Rock & Stone Cold Steve Austin score more points. Maybe even Triple H.

[Volchok]

woah.. your gonna put Triple H before HBK? wtf are you thinking.. just because HHH has held the World Title 9 times...that means nothing HBK is far greater then Triple, Austin and Rock... IMO

[Champion of Europa]

I do agree.

He was fantastic with the Rockers.

He was a great performer in his prime.

He's one of the best of the RAW roster when he's not exactly in his prime.

[Ferocious]

Hogan, Rock and Austin all pretty much sucked in the ring, So they are out of the question. although they were bigger draws, they weren't as good. Hogan, Rock and Austin to some extent are all as popular as they are due to the character they played.

Bret Hart, yeah sure he was great and did a lot for the company, he carried it somewhat. However if you look back over the years HBK has had a lot more Charisma, has had more classic matches. eg. HIAC 1, Mind Games against Mankind, vs Razor in the ladder match. and besides that giving kids in the front row a pair of glasses made him look pussy.

The only reason Bret is more popular with fans is that he played the No1 face in the company for so long. I'm not saying Bret was a bad worker in the ring or on the mic, he just wasn't as good as HBK.

[Loose Cannon]

Well..........if he was such a great preformer, why did he suck big time as WWF Champion in the mid 90's?

[Ferocious]

I do agree.


He was fantastic with the Rockers.

He was a great performer in his prime.

He's one of the best of the RAW roster when he's not exactly in his prime.

Alas we have a believer. HBK rules all.

[Ferocious]

I've never watched many of his old matches, as I'm a fairly recent wrestling fan, but I was hyped for his return to the WWE in 2002, just because of his reputation. But as for the greatest performer, I'd say Hulk Hogan, Bret Hart, The Rock & Stone Cold Steve Austin score more points. Maybe even Triple H.
HHH has been fucking the bosses daughter to long, any push he's recieved has come from that, he has no talent although pulls some great heel promo's out of the bag now and then.

Another to fall at the Demi-God like feet of HBK

[Mister Sinister]

Well I agree, HBK is the best mix of Wrestling and Entertainment...

[Loose Cannon]

JUST throwing that out there for you to argue cause I know he great, but he has had some flaws.

[John la Rock]

Shawn Michaels is one of the greatest wrestlers of all time. In the ring and on the mic he was outstanding.

The only wrestlers that I think were better than HBK were The Rock and Stone Cold Steve Austin. Why? because they were both solid in the ring and especially on the mic and they drew the fans back into the WWF something that HBK failed to do when he was on top.

[Ferocious]

Well..........if he was such a great preformer, why did he suck big time as WWF Champion in the mid 90's?
He was to small to be the champ,

However if you look at the actual matches of this period you will see that they were very high quality, something you would come to expect from HBK. Thus still meaning he was the best performer. But yeah I'll give you that he did suck as the champ.

[Ferocious]

Shawn Michaels is one of the greatest wrestlers of all time. In the ring and on the mic he was outstanding.

The only wrestlers that I think were better than HBK were The Rock and Stone Cold Steve Austin. Why? because they were both solid in the ring and especially on the mic and they drew the fans back into the WWF something that HBK failed to do when he was on top.
The thread is about performing sure Rock outshines anyone on the mic but his ring work has always been lacking, without the Rock Bottom and Peoples Elbow what do you have left except a ball of charisma?

Now imagine Austin without the stunner and the Lou Thesz Press,

Point made, get out of my thread.

[John la Rock]

There is more to performing than just in ring skills...... moron

[thecc]

There is more to performing than just in ring skills...... moronBut having them would be a big help.

[Cruiserweight 3:16]

Austin and Rock were solid performers - they never went round botching up moves, and they wrestled in matches that drew and made viewers want to watch them more. HBK was made to look real strong between '96-'98 and yet he drew fuck all, whereas somebody like the Rock has barely had a lengthy title reign (apart from one 5 month reign they've always been reasonably short) and look at what he's done for the business.

Don't get me wrong, I do rate HBK and I really enjoy his matches, but there have been better performers in the business as a whole in comparison

[Mr. Nerfect]

woah.. your gonna put Triple H before HBK? wtf are you thinking.. just because HHH has held the World Title 9 times...that means nothing HBK is far greater then Triple, Austin and Rock... IMO

Triple H is a great wrestling psychologist. He gains great heat, and like it or not, has kept the WWE afloat for a while. I don't remember too many "bad" Triple H matches. Sure he doesn't have as many classics, but for the period of time when he truly flourished, he's kept consistant with quality.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Hogan, Rock and Austin all pretty much sucked in the ring, So they are out of the question. although they were bigger draws, they weren't as good. Hogan, Rock and Austin to some extent are all as popular as they are due to the character they played.

Bret Hart, yeah sure he was great and did a lot for the company, he carried it somewhat. However if you look back over the years HBK has had a lot more Charisma, has had more classic matches. eg. HIAC 1, Mind Games against Mankind, vs Razor in the ladder match. and besides that giving kids in the front row a pair of glasses made him look pussy.

The only reason Bret is more popular with fans is that he played the No1 face in the company for so long. I'm not saying Bret was a bad worker in the ring or on the mic, he just wasn't as good as HBK.

Stone Cold Steve Austin and The Rock don't suck in the ring. Austin tells great stories in his matches. He really gets the fans into it, and it seems as if the "WWE style" of main events has really evolved because of him. When a promotion revolves around your style, you know you're a great performer.

Hogan was never a technical wonder, but he was a much better performer than HBK, IMO. He drew. That makes him a better performer, since he got people that had never watched wrestling before and drew them into the product with his wrestling. HBK never did that.

I love HBK as much as the next time, but best performer, nah. I don't think there ever will be an official "best performer", but if there was, I doubt it would be HBK. He's a great wrestler, he brings entertainment, and he loves the business, but there's that lack of drawing that guys like Austin, Rock and Hogan have. Triple H argueably has that ability to carry the company on his shoulders as well, and he trumps Michaels in that exchange. Kane's worked well with what he has, too. He puts 100% into his matches, and has been in some memerable stuff. There are so many candidates, I think there will always be room for discussion.

[Mr. Nerfect]

The thread is about performing sure Rock outshines anyone on the mic but his ring work has always been lacking, without the Rock Bottom and Peoples Elbow what do you have left except a ball of charisma?

Now imagine Austin without the stunner and the Lou Thesz Press,

Point made, get out of my thread.

I'd have to disagree there. Without the Stunner or the Lou Thesz Press, Austin would still have his style. That's what has really made the WWE what it's become today. The roughneck beat down style, and the quick brawl to the outside. Austin's never relied on his moveset, but he relies very much on his wrestling style, much like the WWE in the 1998-2002 era.

[Mr. Nerfect]

This is a great thread, SirRoundSound. Maybe there should be more installments of these?

[McLegend]

Not only is HBK the best in performer ever hes the best champion ever. I saw him live at mind games vs Mankind one of the best wrestling matches ever. He beat everyone in one great match after another

[Ferocious]

possibly

[Joe Kerr]

No arguing he is the best

[The CyNick]

Being a great performer doesn't give involve being a great in ring worker. Being a performer means being able to draw the fans into matches and most of all being able to connect with them. As a result, I would rank Hogan, Rock, Flair, Foley and Austin all well ahead of HBK. If we are just talking about bell to bell "wrestler" I would rank Benoit, Angle, Eddie and Bret above HBK. HBK is an awesome talent, one of the best of all time, but the best? Nah.

[Afterlife]

He's not my favorite character, but then again, he has no gimmick. ANd for a guy w/o a gimmick to be as outstanding as HBK, well...mad props! :D Besides, anyone who bleeds in every ppv match ( and most of the weeklies) has GOT to be deserving enough to be #1.

[Joe Kerr]

He's not my favorite character, but then again, he has no gimmick. ANd for a guy w/o a gimmick to be as outstanding as HBK, well...mad props! :D Besides, anyone who bleeds in every ppv match ( and most of the weeklies) has GOT to be deserving enough to be #1.


The heart break kid has no gimmick? The showstoppen boy toy has no gimmick?

[Afterlife]

I don't care what you say. He has no gimmick. He's just Shawn Micheals.

[Joe Kerr]

sammy sam sam sam, he has a gimmick..remember the Heartbreak hotel?

[Loose Cannon]

He's not my favorite character, but then again, he has no gimmick. ANd for a guy w/o a gimmick to be as outstanding as HBK, well...mad props! :D Besides, anyone who bleeds in every ppv match ( and most of the weeklies) has GOT to be deserving enough to be #1.

WOW

[Joe Kerr]

I don't care what you say. He has no gimmick. He's just Shawn Micheals.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Just called me to argue his point :rofl:

[Afterlife]

Wow what? And just because he has a nickname doesn't mean he has a gimmick. "Hurricane Helms" was just a nickname. But when he became "The Hurricane", THAT was a gimmick. HBK has a nickname. Evolution is a bunch of guys that run together, but it's not a gimmick. Just a name. I'm not taking anything away from Michaels. He's still great. I'm just pointing out that he doesn't have a gimmick. So :P

[Loose Cannon]

Dude, until you know what the hell you are talking about, don't reply. I'm pretty sure about everyone on this board will disagree with your point there. "Heartbreak kid" was a gimmick. Enough Said.

[McLegend]

I don't care what you say. He has no gimmick. He's just Shawn Micheals.
What bout I'm not your boytoy i'm just your sexyboy. Thats a gimmick isn't it?

[John la Rock]

The Heartbreak Kid was definetly a gimmick

[Shaggy]

I would have to agree that HBK is a great entertainer in the ring. I really havnt been disapointed that much with him since his return. He has put some good wrestling back on WWE TV and I thank him for that.

Flair is still one of the best in my book but in his old age today he cant pull off some of the stuff he did in the past. Im sure when HBK gets that age that he will limit him self down also. In my eyes Flair and HBK are the best in ring performers.

[CosaNostra]

For HBK to be "stripped" of a title because he "lost his smile" rather than do a job properly, he can go kiss Mae Young's wrinkled prune ass.

However, with that being said, he IS one hell of a preformer, easily top 5 in my books. :y:

[Azriel]

You're probably right that he is one, if not the, greatest performers in the WWE today. Not my no.1 favorite (that's still Taker), but he's pretty close.

[FakeLaser]

Nobody can convince me that anyone is better than Bret Hart. It's just a fact of life.

[Kapoutman]

Nobody can convince me that anyone is better than Bret Hart. It's just a fact of life.
I gotta agree with that, and even after Hart, I can think of at least 5 people who were better performer in WWE for the duration of their career.

[Mayo]

I would list the following above HBK: Angle, Rock, Austin

Edit: Hart also, how could I forget :$

[Afterlife]

Let's understand each other.... I'm not saying he NEVER had a gimmick. Hell, look at HHH. When he started out as "Hunter Hearse Helmsley", the stuck up little rich kid, THAT was a gimmick. Now he's just a big angry man. Being big and angry isn't a gimmick. It's a hulking mass with a sour disposition. These guys have grown as stars beyond the NEED of a gimmick. Nobody is gonna say "Shawn Micheals who?" because everyone on Earth knows who he is. He's got personality. He's got showmanship. He does NOT have a gimmick.

[Mayo]

Let's understand each other.... I'm not saying he NEVER had a gimmick. Hell, look at HHH. When he started out as "Hunter Hearse Helmsley", the stuck up little rich kid, THAT was a gimmick. Now he's just a big angry man. Being big and angry isn't a gimmick. It's a hulking mass with a sour disposition. These guys have grown as stars beyond the NEED of a gimmick. Nobody is gonna say "Shawn Micheals who?" because everyone on Earth knows who he is. He's got personality. He's got showmanship. He does NOT have a gimmick.Your definition of the term 'gimmick' is very exclusive. You need to understand that the general opinion of a gimmick can be something very minor. For instance, HHH's gimmick is that he's a badass that will do anything in his power to keep the World title, he's the cerebral assassin, etc. Michaels' gimmick (pre- born again Christian) was being a cocky showman who would never quit in any match. There are different degrees of gimmicks, and while the Undertaker has a very developed gimmick, others like Christian and Jericho have less degree of gimmick.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I agree that now the "Heartbreak Kid" is just something attached to his name, but back in his prime, it was very much a gimmick.

[LK]

Can't diasgree with Shawn being ht egreatest perormer of all time. I always prefered him to Bret and in his prime he could carry anyone to a decent match and even now he is still better than most of the WWE roster.

[Jaton]

Apart from that, Shawn Michaels doesn't even use his real name. HBK is a gimmick and until he starts coming out to different music as Michael Hickenbottom or whatever his real name is, he's still using a gimmick.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Apart from that, Shawn Michaels doesn't even use his real name. HBK is a gimmick and until he starts coming out to different music as Michael Hickenbottom or whatever his real name is, he's still using a gimmick.

That's not true. A gimmick is sort of like a colourful role. Shawn Michaels is his wrestling name, but that doesn't make it a gimmick. His theme music and "HBK" moniquer were both part of the "Heartbreak Kid" gimmick, but he doesn't do anything gimmicky anymore.

[BlackDawn2024]

Discuss........and I'll rebut your pathetic attempts to disprove this statement. :cool:

You'll get no argument from me. In my humble opinion, HBK is THE single greatest WWE performer of all time. Fact? No. Opinion? Yes.

[Afterlife]

I hate to harp on something so trivial, but really, being a hardass that wants to keep a title belt would describe anybody with the title, except RVD who would be a laid back stoner who wants to keep his belt. As posted on Dictionary.com, a gimmick is "An innovative stratagem or scheme employed especially to promote a project." Having personality, a nickname, or theme music, is not a gimmick. That's a requirement of every WWE star. That's character. There is a difference between "gimmick" and "character" that we are, somehow, not making clear.

[MVP]

Bret Hart, Steve Austin, The Rock, Ric Flair, Mick Foley, Kurt Angle, Chris Jericho, and Undertaker are all miles better than HBK; some in terms of frawing ability, some in terms of wrestling, some in terms of their legacy, and some are better in all three of those categories.