Who has gotten better with age? [Archive]

View Full Version : Who has gotten better with age?

Rollermacka

11-11-2008, 02:43 PM

Besides the obvious Undetaker which wrestlers do you think have gotten better now that they are older?

Nash- Even though he has lost alot of his mobility after so many knee surguries I think Nash has gotten better over the years and is better now than he was 10 years ago

Big Show- He's trying now, to add a few new moves to his matches. He started using that jab and knockout combo. He still uses that cobra clutch backbreaker so he's at least trying to change up his routine.

I wouldnt mind seeing Sting start doing some diffrent moves when he wrestles now. I mean I was watching a match from 10 years ago with the Wolfpack Sting body slamming The Giant and comparing how he looked then, he looks alot smaller now. I dont think he could let him get away with something like that nowadays

Bad Company

11-11-2008, 02:47 PM

Hardys, obviously.
DDP

NeanderCarl

11-12-2008, 12:06 AM

HBK

St. Jimmy

11-12-2008, 12:31 AM

HHH.

Fox

11-12-2008, 01:20 AM

DDP was awesome up until his last match and seemed to just keep getting better. And that's not a bad thing.

FourFifty

11-12-2008, 01:23 AM

HBK, HHH, DDP. Nash, Matt, Jeff.... Pretty much a lot of people whose names can be said with four or less letters.

McLegend

11-12-2008, 01:43 AM

I don't think you can count the Hardy's.

Obviously they are better now then they were, but they were so young they had no choice but to get better.

Juan

11-12-2008, 01:45 AM

Lord Steven "William" Regal

BigDaddyCool

11-12-2008, 01:18 PM

What do you mean by better? Do you mean a better story teller because most of these guys can physically do less than when they started.

Chavo Classic

11-12-2008, 01:46 PM

Lord Steven "William" Regal

2nd'd

NeanderCarl

11-12-2008, 01:51 PM

Why does Nash keep popping up? Nash is awful, and has been since around 1996.

Juan

11-12-2008, 02:51 PM

Why does Nash keep popping up? Nash is awful, and has been since around 1996.

Because he's "cool"

Rollermacka

11-12-2008, 03:36 PM

What do you mean by better? Do you mean a better story teller because most of these guys can physically do less than when they started.

Why does Nash keep popping up? Nash is awful, and has been since around 1996.

Basically who may have be like meh, when you first saw them and now have changed up there matches so your not just doing the same three moves over and over again. Undertaker is a good example of this, he was just a kinda pound and grab kinda guy when he first came out. He slowly added in some boxing jabs and strikes and started to do the triangle choke and dragon sleeper. Matt Hardy is another one who has encorperated alot more to is matches durring the V1 days (even though I hated the gimmick). He went from just being a high flyer, to adding in more grapping moves (side effect, splash mountian bomb, flash back, etc)

As for Nash, comparing him now to when he first came out he still moves well in the ring after so many knee surguries.

Tazz Dan

11-12-2008, 04:53 PM

DDP was awesome up until his last match and seemed to just keep getting better. And that's not a bad thing.

I see what you did there.

Yeah, Nash got better with age, no doubts. For the people who think he's bad now, watch any match of his from TNA then find a tape from when he was Vinnie Vegas. NO comparison.

Rollermacka

11-12-2008, 05:28 PM

Yeah, Nash got better with age, no doubts. For the people who think he's bad now, watch any match of his from TNA then find a tape from when he was Vinnie Vegas. NO comparison.

Well, let's compare

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/t2GvTSSqMLY&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/t2GvTSSqMLY&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Like I said before I dont think Sting looks as good now as he dose here, but Nash looks alot better though.

NeanderCarl

11-12-2008, 10:46 PM

That isn't hard.

Nash improved in leaps and bounds between 1991 and 1994. He actually had some good matches 1995-1996. Still wasn't bad in WCW 1997-1998. But since then, he's just been too washed up and lazy, by his own admission.

Indifferent Clox

11-13-2008, 12:22 PM

show a recent nash match

Juan

11-13-2008, 03:12 PM

The Franchise

11-13-2008, 03:18 PM

Michaels.

Mr. Nerfect

11-15-2008, 07:18 PM

William Regal, if nothing else because of the personality he shows, and how awesome his hair now is.

I did think of The Hardys, I have to admit. Especially Matt. While they might not be "old," both have really grown as workers. To the point where I think it deserves mention. Matt Hardy is actually a great wrestler now, not just an over one. Jeff Hardy also has a lot more substance to his style now.

Kevin Nash is a fair point, if just for being more entertaining, and taking the time off to rest his body and allow him to seem fresher when he's in a ring these days.

JBL is someone I'd throw out there. He's nowhere near as in good shape as he used to be, but there is a good approach taken with a lot of his matches, and his promos and acting ability shine a lot more. Time in the business has allowed him a chance to show what he can do.

Big Show is one I'd agree with. He's definitely worked on improving, and working towards his strengths.

It wouldn't be me if I didn't point out Val Venis. The man isn't getting any younger, but he's having some of the best matches (from a technical perspective) of his career right now. Well, when he's not injured, I mean. He was a fantastic gimmick back in the day, but I don't know if his ring work really measured up to anything special (despite never being bad). I think as a worker he has really altered and broadened himself.

NeanderCarl

11-17-2008, 09:56 PM

The Optimist

11-17-2008, 10:16 PM

Edge, that's all I got.

Mr. Nerfect

11-18-2008, 09:08 AM

What??? Val Venis is having some of the best matches of his career right now???

When???

I don't think I've even seen him wrestle a competitive match in about 4 years. He just gets squashed every time he's on TV. Which is... basically, never.

I said from a technical perspective. I haven't seen his complete body of work, and I'm sure it's solid, but his stuff on Heat against guys like Charlie Haas and Shelton Benjamin escapes through the "gimmick" filter, and they actually get to work a really good professional wrestling match. The guy's selling is also fantastic. I'd say that he's had to sell so much that he's gotten so good at it, to be honest.

Fox

11-18-2008, 10:55 AM

This guy:

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d99/dasd52000/wooderson1.jpg

BigDaddyCool

11-18-2008, 11:16 AM

I said from a technical perspective. I haven't seen his complete body of work, and I'm sure it's solid, but his stuff on Heat against guys like Charlie Haas and Shelton Benjamin escapes through the "gimmick" filter, and they actually get to work a really good professional wrestling match. The guy's selling is also fantastic. I'd say that he's had to sell so much that he's gotten so good at it, to be honest.

The part that gets me is this "I haven't seen his complete body of work, and I'm sure it's solid" So you are basing your statement on what you assume, not actaul fact? Now you go on to say he matches against Shelton on heat are good. Shelton hasn't been on Raw for over a year now. So I'm willing to guess that you are saying right now, Val Venis is improving because you last saw a decent heat match with him and Shelton a year ago? Am I right? You are just saying Val Venis because you think he is doing good, and no one else has seen what he does so you are betting no one will argue the fact?

NeanderCarl

11-18-2008, 08:14 PM

Heat still exists?

NeanderCarl

11-18-2008, 08:20 PM

NeanderCarl

11-18-2008, 08:23 PM

Unless you simply mean that he sells better now than he used to...?

Which doesn't account for him having "some of the best matches (from a technical perspective) of his career right now", during a time when he is, for all intents and purposes, inactive.

If his best matches are occurring right now, when he isn't actually having any, then his early stuff must really stink!

Kane Knight

11-18-2008, 09:00 PM

Heat still exists?

I thought it had ended.

In fact, it apparently ended in May of this year. What this says about the argument, I'll leave to you.

BigDaddyCool

11-18-2008, 10:49 PM

I agree with Noid, Val Venis not being at tv, is an improvement.

Fabien Barthez

11-19-2008, 06:31 AM

Val was great in the first place. He was one of the few to go through Dory Funks Training camp with Edge when he was brought in. He would be good in the midcard right now, but they aren't going to come up with a decent gimmick for him, and it's obvious he has no desire to dream one up either.

Kane Knight

11-19-2008, 08:57 AM

hb2k

12-04-2008, 09:08 AM

I've got to say it - I've never been bored like I have been during Val Venis matches. Outside of 1998, he has zero in-ring charisma.

Mr. Nerfect

12-04-2008, 08:57 PM

Venis was a fairly exciting, solid worker from 1998 to around 2001. Nothing he has really done since then has been impressive... even if he has improved from a "technical" perspective (which isn't hard to do, in theory you should improve from a "technical" standpoint each and every time you wrestle a match and learn a little something new, no matter how tenured you are). In fact, how could you possibly tell he has improved when all he ever does is get squashed in rapid fashion?

At what point in the last 4 years have you watched a Val Venis match and honestly thought "wow, this guy has improved so much" as he stares at the lights for another midcarder? I'm not saying that he hasn't, he may well have, but how could you possibly tell?

OK, first thing's first (not really aimed at you, although you did bring it up) -- I didn't mean right now as of today. I meant now as in this arc of his career. The question was who I thought has gotten better with age. I suggested Val Venis, due to his maturing as a worker.

Did you ever watch Heat? Val Venis was not always "squashed in rapid faction." This is a myth. Venis was more often than not used to exhibit the skills of workers the WWE were trying to showcase or mapping out the abilities of. His matches were almost always better than most of the shit you'd see on RAW (granted, RAW was going through a bit of a slump). I'm not the only one who feels this way. A lot of internet reporters that got stuck reviewing Heat actually found themselves to grow and appreciate the show for it's little gems like that.

Venis is one of the best sellers in the WWE. I'd be worried if he weren't given how often he has needed to put over some guy's offense. But nonetheless, his psychology is fantastic. He might have always had that in him, my point earlier is that I haven't seen it in his earlier work, but it might have been displayed in some of his longer matches. With focus being moved from him and onto younger stars, his role might have just changed to the point where he now gets to show off these talents he always had.

Back in the day it seemed Val's matches were more gimmick, and now they are more wrestling. You'd be surprised how exposing some of his stuff on Heat was.

KYR

12-04-2008, 09:48 PM

You'd be surprised how exposing some of his stuff on Heat was.

That's why he wore a towel to the ring :roll:

Mr. Nerfect

12-04-2008, 11:32 PM

That's why he wore a towel to the ring :roll:

I'm surprised Val didn't print the name of some companies on there so he could hold it up and make a few extra bucks.

hb2k

12-05-2008, 08:59 AM

If Val is that good at selling and psychology, how come his heat matches were usually done in front of silence.

Mr. Nerfect

12-07-2008, 09:21 AM

Because of years of the WWE telling their audience that Heat doesn't matter?

Fox

12-07-2008, 01:46 PM

Of course Heat matters. How else would we heat up our Christmas ham on Christmas morning?

Also, Val Venis does not apply here.

Heyman

12-07-2008, 02:33 PM

What do you mean by "get better with age?"

Obviously - a wrestler that is 21 years old (and sticks with wrestling) will be a lot better in a few years. With that being said, almost EVERYONE in the WWE fits that mold (or if they started at a later age...and then got better).

Having said that - I don't think anyone above the age of 35 (who has been wrestling for a LONG time) has gotten better.

-Given the fact that these wrestlers are 'aging' (combined with the extreme physical demands of the sport), it's almost impossible. Guys like Angle, Undertaker, Jericho, HBK, Benoit, Triple H, etc. are all/were great wrestlers, but aren't the wrestlers that they once were. Benoit is dead.

Ironballs

12-08-2008, 05:56 AM

Jericho, Edge

Mr. Nerfect

12-08-2008, 04:13 PM

Of course Heat matters. How else would we heat up our Christmas ham on Christmas morning?

Also, Val Venis does not apply here.

Does age imply you need to be sexually inactive?

Anybody Thrilla

12-09-2008, 10:43 PM

Val Venis and CM Punk did have an excellent match on Heat in 2005. That's all I'm going to say about this topic.

NeanderCarl

12-12-2008, 05:24 PM

I'd say Undertaker has gotten better with age. His matches against Batista and Edge (for example) over the last couple years were better than his matches with The Rock and Kurt Angle and RVD and Jeff and Brock (circa 2002-2004) which were better than his matches against Austin and Mankind and Bret Hart (circa 1996-1999) which were much much better than anything he produced pre-1995.

That isn't meant to disparage any of the matches listed, as I rate them ALL as very good or better. But in a big match scenario right now, Taker is AS good or better than ever. Maybe not QUITE as consistantly good as when he was younger if you want to rate his performances across a whole year, but take Taker's best match of 2008, and it will be better than his best match of 2007, which will be better than his best match of 2006 and so on and so on, which barring a couple of poor years (2001, 1999 for example) and a couple of steller matches to disprove the rule (nothing he did in 1998 could top the Shawn Michaels Hell In A Cell match, thus throwing a spanner in the 'each year is better' works which I will overlook because it is just a GENERAL rule... that's my excuse and I'm sticking to it).... right, I've rambled myself into a corner now, forgive me, this is my first post in weeeeeeeeeeks.

DaVe

12-13-2008, 06:28 AM

Yeah, I agree wholeheartedly. Taker is 10 times the worker he was 10 years ago.

However:

Besides the obvious Undetaker which wrestlers do you think have gotten better now that they are older?

Edit: BTW, Taker/Angle No Way Out 05 has got to be in the top few favourite Taker matches of mine. 30 minute classic.

NeanderCarl

12-24-2008, 10:37 PM

Very very very good match.

Rollermacka

12-25-2008, 12:01 AM

Yeah, I agree wholeheartedly. Taker is 10 times the worker he was 10 years ago.

However:

Edit: BTW, Taker/Angle No Way Out 05 has got to be in the top few favourite Taker matches of mine. 30 minute classic.

I still consider Undertaker Vs Kurt Angle a "New Taker match", compare that match to a match between the Undertaker Vs Kerry Von Erich it's not the same.

Russenmafia

12-25-2008, 11:18 AM

Yeah, I agree wholeheartedly. Taker is 10 times the worker he was 10 years ago.

However:

Edit: BTW, Taker/Angle No Way Out 05 has got to be in the top few favourite Taker matches of mine. 30 minute classic.

Amazing match that Taker had with Angle. Every match he has had Angle since that Smackdown match in 2003/2004 has been amazing. He managed to get excellent matches out of Batista and his match with Edge at WM24 was also amazing.

Taker has come on leaps and bounds from 10 years ago. I do find his matches in recent years a lot better than from 1998 - 2003. I also think the Hell In A Cell match he had with Lesnar is the best HIAC match of them all.

Rammsteinmad

12-25-2008, 04:14 PM

I don't think I've seen his name anywhere in this thread but Eddie Guerrero definitely improved with age. By the time of his death he was probably the best example WWE had of any wrestler being a "complete package".

Legend Killer

12-25-2008, 08:04 PM

Mr. Nerfect

12-25-2008, 09:48 PM

Besides his match with Kurt Angle, a very simply way to measure just how much Taker has found his stride, is by watching one of his recent matches with Big Show. They might not be classics, but compare them to what he used to do with Big Show. Both men are just so much more in the zone now than they ever were.

Eddie Guerrero is a very good answer. Always entertaining and a good worker, I guess, but he was just so fantastic towards the end. He was so beloved and respected, yet could still play a cold heel. It was pretty much taken as lore that Eddie was about to win the World Heavyweight Championship from Superman Batista, wasn't it?

It's a little surreal that Eddie apparently died so close to winning the big gold belt, and Chris Benoit died just before he became ECW Champion. If Benoit had stuck it out, and wrestled the series of matches that were forseeable with Punk, I think both the ECW Championship and CM Punk would be a lot more legitimate right now. But yeah, just a random little aside there.

I've got to throw William Regal and Finlay out there, too. Both guys have always been good in the ring, but Regal is really displaying a fantastic personality and Finlay doesn't seem to be slowing down. He seems more important to the industry than he's ever been, to sum it up.

Legend Killer

12-25-2008, 11:44 PM

Wisdom comes with age, I believe is the key here.

Savio

12-27-2008, 03:25 PM

Nervous Ferret

Savio

12-27-2008, 03:27 PM

It's a little surreal that Eddie apparently died so close to winning the big gold belt, and Chris Benoit died just before he became ECW Champion. If Benoit had stuck it out, and wrestled the series of matches that were forseeable with Punk, I think both the ECW Championship and CM Punk would be a lot more legitimate right now.should he have killed his family after he put punk over still?