10 Overrated Matches

[Zardnaar]

This thread is about a whatculture article. Basically they are saying that there have been 10 over rated matches.

10 Most Overrated "Classic" Matches In Wrestling History

I think they are being unfair to several of them as sure they may not hold up to well today but if you watch them now you miss the build up or context to it. In other cases some have not aged that well. This is just IMHO of course.

10. Brock/Angle WM XIX
OK whatculture is being fair here. A match more famous for Brock landing on his head botching a shooting star press. Even I knew about this and I was not wathcing wrestling at this time.

9. Eddie Guerrero/Brock (No Way Out 04)
I have not seen this match. Next.

8. Whats worse than old WWF matches form the early/mid 90's? Old WCW matches.

7. Randy/Steamboat WM III

I have recently rewatched this match and I think Whatculture may be wrong. It has lost a bit of its impact but it still hold up reasonably good. For an 980's match this is outstanding. In effect this was a modern wrestling match or HBK match around 10 years or more to early. Treat it like Terminator 2- special effects not so great now at the time it was amazing and still a good movie now.

6. Triple H/Undertaker WM 28.
I have not seen this match but triple HHH moment was around 15+ years ago if not 19.

5. Hulk/Warrior WM VI
I will be the 1st to admit this match doesn't hold up from a technical PoV. However at the tiome this match rocked. THis was the equivalent of Rock vs Austin or Bret/Austin or Undertaker vs HBK etc. Basically the 2 biggest stars collide. It was also one of the 1st face vs face matches at a main event. The matrch was good because of the spectacle and who was in it not because of what they could do in the ring. And because of that I still remmebr it 25+ years after I saw it (thats rare) and I have recently rewatched it and did not hate it.

4. Mankind/Undertaker Hell in a Cell 1998
What they said about the match is mostly true. Its not a great a match in terms of wrestling. In terms of shock value, WTF and how can you top this it is still up there. Mostly memorable for 2 spots and thumbtacks (shdders at the thumbtacks). With Foley at the time I was wondering how he faked things. Turns out he did not.

3. Ric Flair /Sting Clash of Champions
I have recently watched this matchdue to a recommendation on these very boards. I found it boring to be honest but I am not a fan of mtches that last much past half an hour and even 20 minutes can be pushing it.

2. Hulk/Andre WMIII
This is actually a bad match remembered for 1 spot- Hogan slamming Andre. Similar to WM VI for spectacle value but I prefer the WM VI match over this one. 80s wrestling not so good when looked at now.

1. Bret Hart/HBK WM XII
Mostly agree with Whatculture on this one. At the time I found it boring and only recently found out why it was so long (thin roster). This was also close to the nadir of crap WWE they made and wrestling kinda sucked until WM XIII the following year with Austin/Bret and the prototype attitude era. 1996 had other things I remember more like Goldust, Pillmans got a gun and Austin 3:16. 1997 I watched WCW and they had this thing called the NWO (when it was good).

 

[seabs]

This kind of article is a pretty good example of why I'm not a 'Whatculture' fan - they're bringing up matches which aren't even rated very highly by most people. The two Hogan matches are remembered for their social impact not the actual workrate in ring for instance, if they try and dispute the impact they had from that perspective they don't have a leg to stand on so to speak.

 

[collim1]

I have to strongly disagree with the Undertaker/Mankind 1998 match.

Growing up back then most folks just had basic cable, and the PPV's were particularly expensive. Finding a friend's whose parents had the ability to get PPV, and would allow us to buy a $49.99 PPV match was a big deal. That was an amazing show to watch.

Although not a match that was rife with technical wrestling ability, it was one of the wildest and most exciting matches I have ever seen. People talked about it for weeks, and even people who didn't watch wrestling tuned into Raw on Monday just because of all the talk they heard about that match.

Hard to classify that infamous match as "overrated". Bad call on that one. Not everything from the Attitude Era holds up these days, but this one definitely does in my opinion.

 

[seabs]

I have to strongly disagree with the Undertaker/Mankind 1998 match.

Growing up back then most folks just had basic cable, and the PPV's were particularly expensive. Finding a friend's whose parents had the ability to get PPV, and would allow us to buy a $49.99 PPV match was a big deal. That was an amazing show to watch.

Although not a match that was rife with technical wrestling ability, it was one of the wildest and most exciting matches I have ever seen. People talked about it for weeks, and even people who didn't watch wrestling tuned into Raw on Monday just because of all the talk they heard about that match.

Hard to classify that infamous match as "overrated". Bad call on that one. Not everything from the Attitude Era holds up these days, but this one definitely does in my opinion.

Yeah once you add the context in its very difficult to overrate the match. No one had done a spot like Foleys before, being first really helps highlight the importance.

 

[Mustafar Reginald]

Mankind vs. Taker is actually my go-to answer if someone ask me for the most over-rated match in WWE history actually. Overrated is often lobbied around as some major pejorative which is something I never really aligned with, I always used it as a preface to my opinion, to quickly establish my personal opinion using the popular consensus as a gauge (that way if you choose to ignore my more in-depth expression, you get an insight into my take regardless).

The article (which is messily written, several of the entries seem to have been included due to fans hype while a few of them are explicitly because WWE themselves touts the matches [Hogan/Andre for example], would've been better to tackle it from one perspective than both, I think the latter is more interesting, since you can use that as an avenue to discuss how quality work-rate often doesn't equate into the most significant bouts but whatever) pretty much covers my main reason for not liking Mankind/Taker but to summarize in my own words, I'd much rather watch those two spot clips than the whole match. I just can't regard a match I never want to watch in full again as the best/favorite Hell in a Cell match of all-time like I constantly see it lauded as by most of the wrestling community (every thread I've seen about the best HIAC matches [my favorite gimmick match, at least before WWE ruined it btw] is dominated by Mankind/Taker, at worst second place to the original [which is my pick]).

And that's not me ignoring the match significance or original context. And no, I didn't watch it live, I watched it when that Hell in a Cell compilation DVD came out in 2007 (?) as I only started watching wrestling in 2006. Anyway, my point is that it's entirely possible to appreciate what a match accomplished from a historical standpoint while not actually enjoying the match at all. I also think a match being able to remain entertaining throughout the ages is an important quality to have. It's cool of course if you think it does that and do treasure it as one of your favorite, I just don't like the fact that this thread is seemingly landing on the opinion that you can't consider a match overrated because of it's historical context. Though some discussions points that's valid in a sense, but I don't agree with it in nature because it dismisses the personal context somebody has with the match and how that shapes their own opinion of it.

Which segues nicely into HHH vs. Taker at Mania XXVIII. It's one of my favorite matches of all-time because watching it with my friend and father, and experiencing it with them, particularly as they both believed the streak was over and had polar opposite reactions to that, was one of the most fun experiences I had watching wrestling. I've actually seen a ton of backlash online to the Shawn/Bret IronMan match, but I would generally agree the bout isn't nearly compelling enough to warrant it's length. I love the story told on paper, not in execution. Hulk/Andre is fine imo, the match isn't super entertaining but it properly builds to the final spot, and the match with Warrior is fine too though admittedly has probably aged worse. I don't entirely agree with Eddie/Brock, Angle/Brock (it's actually one of my favorite Mania matches), or Steamboat/Savage either and I don't know about the WCW bouts. Regardless, it's interesting to talk about, even if I feel like Andrew should've focused on one perspective for this list.