I watched the first 9 minutes of that video, and that was long enough to deduct that nothing has changed.

So you watch the first 9 minutes and STILL say Khali is BETTER than him?

That just proves your list is a joke.

I don't consider Doink to be Lombardi's gimmick anyway. Brawler makes the list where other 'enhancement talent' wouldn't because of the sheer number of chances he got to get himself over in his WWF tenure, failing every damn time. In the ring, he certainly wasn't offensively bad, but he didn't know how to be a success with the crowd. And don't say 'he wasn't supposed to be' because he was pushed as a serious contender at certain points... hell, he was even in the Heenan Family for a while. If you can't even get over with Bobby Heenan fighting your corner, you got no hope.

As for "Brian Adams was ten times the wrestler Randy Orton is".... puhlease! I'll give you that if you can name me one great Brian Adams singles match besides the WrestleMania X match I already mentioned. Even one good one will do. Even if he was carried allllll the way through it.

No, I didn't say Khali is better than him or anyone else on the list. I said that the jury is still out on Khali. He's less than two years into his mainstream US career, and is still currently active. Khali is awful, but let's consider him innocent until proven guilty... a couple more years at the level he currently resides at, he may even knock Big Duddy V from the top spot. I just think it's too soon to jump to conclusions. In contrast, Albert has had nearly a decades exposure and still sucks.

Then get Gonzalez off the list. He may have had a short career, but who knows how much he may have improved if he continued.

In contrast, Khali has done more shit in the same amount of time as Gonzalez. He's been a main eventer, a world champion and been a contender for the top face's championship. That far outweighs a few low-profile terrible matches.

Crush had a damn entertaining series with heel Doink in 1993
Goldust vs Crush, KoTR '97

Yea, I know it's not much. Crush was never in the main event, he didn't have any big time matches, and he started out being overshadowed by Ax and Smash as part of Demolition. You won't find a Crush dvd anytime soon. I'm not saying he was one of the best ever, but to be in the bottom 25 is just wrong.








and as of the brawler I didn't know he was with the Heenan family, I take back my statement about him. You're right, if you're not oever with The Brain, you're a nobody.

Yes, the Doink series was entertaining, mainly because of Doink, but didn't feature one notably good match the entire time.

Goldust vs Crush was a waste of airtime. Awful.

I don't agree with your "same amount of time" philosophy, but dammit if you're not right... simply because I forgot Khali was the World champ. Having represented the company as the top dog, he is fair game, and therefore should be inserted somewhere in the top 5, posthaste. Maybe number 3.

Gonzales debuted in WCW around May of 1990 and retired in September 1993. About three and a half years.

Khali debuted in the WWE April of 2006. As of now, it's almost two years. I was wrong on him being in WWE the same amount of time as Gonzales in WWF/WCW.

HOWEVER - he wrestled in New Japan as early as 2001. So, assuming he'd had an on and off career from 2001 to 2005, he's been in major companies for AT LEAST 4 years. If you don't improve in 7+ years, you're not going to improve.

No a three year career which is over is more open to a criticism than a three year career thats ongoing. By career, I'm pigeonholing that as on-air career in a high prfile company. In contrast, a ten year career is fair game, ongoing or not.

So New Japan isn't a high-profile company?

Seriously, you can't just ignore New Japan just because you've never seen it.

And how many New Japan matches did the guy work?

I don't have an exact number of matches, but he was in New Japan working with Silva until AT LEAST 2002, though I also ready he continued until 2003 or so.

Pretty sure he only had a handful of matches there, including a brutal series of matches with Silva that were unscreenable.

Um, if Gonzales was better than Khali, how come he wasn't called "Great". I mean, with Khali, we at least known he's great. No so for Gonzales... :shifty:

Kahli isn't gonna change anytime down the line. What you see is what you get.

As for Giant Bernard he gets more time to show what he can do in Japan and is better than what people think of him from WWE.

I'll be fair with Loch Ness, as I never saw Giant Haystacks in action. So I'll scratch Loch Ness in favor of Nathan "the Lactator" Jones.

No, Loch Ness was the pits from day one.

He was, however, the UK's second biggest wrestling star of all time (next to Big Daddy... not counting guys who made their name overseas like Davey Boy) which is why I didn't really consider him (nor Daddy, who was also fucking awful) because they were high in the "redeeming features" category.

If you asked any Brit of a certain age (who doesn't watch wrestling from overseas) to name two wrestlers, chances are they will say "Daddy and Haystacks".

I'm glad NeanderCarl renegged on the thing with Khali. If you were gonna wait for the guy to improve...you'd be waiting a loooooooooong time dude.

As for Warrior...he was pretty awful in the ring BUT he had a huge fan base, was way over and also has the fact that looking back his promos were batshit crazy (and thus entertaining). That's too many redeeming qualities given that the original list was supposed to be of guys who brought absolutely NOTHING to the table.

For some reason, when I think of UK wrestlers, I think of William Regal and Dave Taylor (haven't seen much of Brookside, but that's his own fault.). Then again, they were also more famous for what they did overseas.

Yeah, Taylor was a bigger name in the UK as "Rocky Dave" (saw him in my hometown a fair few times) than Regal ever was on these shores. Even so, he wasn't a household name like Haystacks or Daddy. The only ones who came close really were Jackie Pallo, Mick McManus and Kendo Nagasaki.

I wish I had.

Oh well, opinion is subjective, but in my opinion 90% of Valentine's matches sucked pond water.

He was far from the worst ever (well... 27 places, according to the revised list) but he was nothing to get excited about, ever. I'm sure with a bit more thought and a little more time, Valentine would have been bumped from my list by a bigger margin... but when I think of boring wrestlers, I think of 'The Hammer' and I'd be surprised if I'm alone in that mindset.

Hmmm, I didn't see the vWo coming to Big Duddy V's defence.

Yah, where is Khali?

As a member of the V.W.O I must come to the defence of Big Daddy V.

He's the ultimate combination of technical wrestling ability, size, strength and aerial assault.

how are cade and murdoch bad workers? They probably work better as a tag team than anybody team in the wwe.

A-Train was EXTREMELY under-rated in the WWE. He had a great arsenal of moves.

Yokozuna was pretty much the top heel in the mid nineties, and for a guy that big he sure could move.

No. No, he couldn't.

Just because the commentators, magazines etc said he could really move for a guy that big doesn't mean it's true. You ever see a match of his??? Jesus.

Cade and Murdoch don't belong on any list of worst performers of all time, unless it's like the 1000 worst performers of all time and they're near the bottom.

Fixed.

The revised list loses Valentine and Duggan. Insert Khali in at number 4 and Henry in at number 3.

How did Batista not make this list? Also The Great Kahli?

So it's now...

25. The Warlord
24. Jim Neidhart
23. Nailz
22. Jon Heidenreich
21. Albert
20. Steve Lombardi
19. Virgil
18. Brakus
17. Bill Kazmaier
16. Yokozuna
15. Sylvester Terkay
14. Brutus Beefcake
13. Tiger Ali Singh
12. Mideon
11. Outback Jack
10. Dave Sullivan
9. Dan Severn
8. Giant Silva
7. Kamala
6. Brian Adams
5. Great Khali
4. Mark Henry
3. Zeus
2. Giant Gonzalez
1. Big Daddy V

Because you couldn't say Batista is worthless with no redeeming qulaities whatsoever, and I wasn't going to include Khali on the basis he's only been a round a few years and is a work in progress, until I was reminded that he was indeed the World champion and therefore should be fair game. Therefore he places at number 5.

Just noticed that 7 of the top 10 are either black or foreign. Just wanted to point out... I am not prejudiced.

In fact, if there's one thing I hate more than a nigger, it's a racist.

People are always going to disagree with other peoples opinionms, but I do beleive your leist could of been filled with a few more people we could all agree on.

Most moves back in the day were punches and kicks. I mean, u could add half of the wrestlers from the 80's with that. What the fuck did Hogan ever do? Yeah he as a huge draw, but then again most people on your list were, or even used to put over the big drawers. I mean, Hacksaw still gets crowds involved now with the classic "HOooooooo" and "USA, USA, USA". It's just his verison of putting is hand to his ear. Otherwise he and Hogan have the same fucking movest... but even then 3 point stance > leg drop.

What part of NO redeeming qualities do people not get? Yes a list of most pitiful in-ring performers of all-time may well have included Hogan (even though he is underrated as an actual wrestler by the IWC)... but this is simply my list of worst all-round performers.

Duggan was on the cusp anyway because he wasn't bad in his prime and could talk, and he's off the list now... Nailz had a great character but his abysmal ring work negated any goodwill his mic work may have earned him.

yeah, he should be in the hall of fame. The fact that he could delive a superkick for his size is incredible. Yoko could move very well for his size and essentially carried the wwe during the mid 90's.