2009 Most Overrated

[Next Big Thing]

Chris Jericho's match with John Cena was alright but brought down by the finish. As much as they 'couldn't help it' it still takes away from the match and makes it worse, but I don't blame you for not realising, you've said some pretty dumb shit in your few posts

LOL I have said some dumb shit? Why, because I don't think like a typical smark and how most people on this forum think? Please show me some of the dumb things I have said, and explain to me how I am wrong instead of just saying I have said some dumb shit in my posts.

 

[Batistafan333]

I gotta vote Randy Orton or The Miz. Can't stand either one of them.

 

[chessarmy]

Batista, he should have turned heel ages ago and right now he's incredibly stale. He hasn't had a great match at all in 2009 so far, and I'm just sick and tired of seeing him on my TV screen. Not only that, but he's extremely injury prone and seems to always be out nursing some kind of torn muscle. If Kennedy can get axed because of something like that, Batista should too

 

[He who knows more than Nation]

First off, sorry it took so long to respond to this. I have been really busy the last few days and when I did get a chance to come on the computer, I was much to tired to give a decent response to this.

A wrestler is someone hired by a promoter to put on a staged performance for an audience, with the intent of entertaining that audience to the point where they will turn over their money to watch the show again.

Since both Luger and Hart were hired with the sole purpose of making their promoter money, it proves that Luger was better at his job.

The more you can draw, the better wrestler you are. It’s fairly simple really. The only way to measure a wrestler’s talent is by how well they can connect with the audience, and if they are a good draw then clearly they are good at what they do. Position on the card doesn’t always dictate who is better between two wrestlers. For example take a look at CM Punk and Chris Jericho. Punk is the world champion but Jericho is far more over with the audience than Punk is. But, more often than not the guys on the top of the card are in fact the most over, as it only makes sense to put the people the audience wants to see at the top of the card.

Why I can see your point, I don't agree with it because it isn't that simple. Maybe to you, and that's your opinion, your entitled to it. The more you draw the more entertaining you are, still doesn't prove someones a better wrestler. The term "wrestler" does indeed include the ability to wrestle, albeit viewed subjectively since it's fixed, but before wrestlers became entertainers, they were wrestlers who were forced to get over by wrestling. Lou Thesz, Dory Funk, Jack Brisco did nothing BUT wrestle, better than anybody and it drew. Times have changed but the meaning of the word hasn't changed much and it's too narrowsighted to say someone's a better wrestler because they are more popular, being a draw is just part of the job, and every wrestler hired is NOT hired to be a draw. Not every debuting guy gets the monster push that some do. If a guy pegged for the mid-card hits it big thats a bonus, see:Austin, Steve.

Wrestlers, while actors to a degree are quite similar to legitimate athletes. Some are hired to fill roles, not every wrestler is going to be the next Rock or Hogan like every athlete drafted isn't going to be the next Kobe, Peyton or Jeter. Some guys are hired to be plain out squash guys because they can wrestle so well that they can make the other guys, while more popular, look great in the ring. That has been Steve Lombardi's job for over 20 years, it was Val Venis's job for the last two years of his WWE tenure, that's what they were paid for. To fill a role. Mid-carders have their role. Guys like Tito Santana, Greg Valentine, Junkyard Dog and so forth were never the top guys, but had overly successful careers and are common names that people know and remember.

By your definition, Hulk Hogan is arguably the greatest wrestler ever, yet almost anyone in the industry will tell you, including Hogan himself, he can't really "wrestle" a lick but he had an undeniable charisma that drew fans by the assload, once he started doing that, it became his role. Yet he was never hired to be a star until he struck it big with the AWA and Rocky III but where his inability to actually wrestle kept him from that strap, then he was hired to be a star for Vince and his plans, but NO ONE is ever hired to be a star, they are hired to be a wrestler. The fans decide who becomes a star.

I have a few questions for you. Why do you keep pulling these ratings out of your ass like they actually mean something? Where are you getting them anyways? Also, why do you continue to hold the finish of the Cena/Jericho match against them? The no finish was not their choice. They only thing they could control was what happened for the 15-20 minutes they were given before the WWE decided they would put an end to the match with Edge’s interference. They did a fantastic job with what they were given, despite the no finish. That’s what you should be rating the match on.

That's HIS opinion, you should respect that and wrestling is completely subjective, so who is to say how someone views and rates matches? Why demoralize someone's opinion, if you dont dig, big whupt, don't be a douche.