View Single Post
Old 06-10-2005, 10:06 AM   #25
Londoner
One Of A Kind
 
Londoner's Avatar
 
Posts: 22,178
Londoner puts the "bang" in Bangladesh (30,000+)Londoner puts the "bang" in Bangladesh (30,000+)Londoner puts the "bang" in Bangladesh (30,000+)Londoner puts the "bang" in Bangladesh (30,000+)Londoner puts the "bang" in Bangladesh (30,000+)Londoner puts the "bang" in Bangladesh (30,000+)Londoner puts the "bang" in Bangladesh (30,000+)Londoner puts the "bang" in Bangladesh (30,000+)Londoner puts the "bang" in Bangladesh (30,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vastardikai
I consider Shelton to be a very good Wrestler. . I want to give him about another year or two before I can consider him great. The same is true for the likes of Cena and Batista, both of who get a mixed rep here. Cena, like his talents or hate them, draws in a huge amount of people. Batista is closing in superstardom if he can get away from feuding with a guy who has a big nose and is trying to look like Lemmy.
You have named 3 very different styles of wrestlers there. Only one i consider a 'great wrestler' is Shelton because of his amatuer wrestling background., that's why i know i don't need to wait another year or so before i can call him a great wrestler, a great superstar in the wwe on the other hand i can wait for another year before i say so. They're two entriely different things if you want to be specific.

As for Cena an Batista, cena hasn't got much wrestling ability i don't think(you saw that in his match with kurt Angle), but he has talents in other areas which makes him(or will make him) a great superstar, and Batista has a mix of the two, plus, he's bigger than the others and more powerful. With these two i don't feel they'll become great wrestlers but instead great superstars in the WWE.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vastardikai
The fact is, though, Entertainment ties into Wrestling to the point that a bad gimmick can kill a good Wrestler (Terry Taylor, anyone?). You can blame that on Vince McMahon or even the original Gorgeous George, but that's the way it is: Wrestling = Entertainment, so a Great Entertainer = a Great Wrestler. How one becomes a Great Entertainer or a Great Wrestler varies as widely as the many gimmicks of Kevin Nash throughout his career. You have a guy like Mick Foley, who gets by on his Mic Skills and risks, and you have "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, who got over with his Attitude, Charisma, and Mic Skills, and you have a guy like Andre the Giant, who got over because he was freaking huge and portrayed a likable personality, and then there's Ric Flair, who became the only true Icon of Professional Wrestling with his ringwork and charisma. It's mainly about knowing your strengths and playing to them, which is an advantage in both the ring, and in life in general.

Didn't mean to get so deep there...

But this thread is actually getting kind of interesting. I am enjoying the feedback.
Exactly, Mick Foley and Stone Cold etc, got over because of other stuff, not being a great wrestler though, which is what the topic of this thread is about. Ric Flair(as much as i hate that guy i have to admit this)was a great wrestler, he is what a great wrestler is meant to be.

I kinda got lost in what you were trying to say in that post, since it seems like to me that you contradicted yourself.Maybe i'm just reading it wrong?
Londoner is offline   Reply With Quote