Wrestlers That Could Have Been HUGE!

  • Welcome to "The New" Wrestling Smarks Forum!

    I see that you are not currently registered on our forum. It only takes a second, and you can even login with your Facebook! If you would like to register now, pease click here: Register

    Once registered please introduce yourself in our introduction thread which can be found here: Introduction Board


catlady

The People's Champion
Main Eventer
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
15,849
Reaction score
2,005
Points
0
I look at the current roster, and I can't help but think some of these guys who deserved credit and a solid push never got billed the right way and flopped because of it. What are some wrestlers who you think could be huge right now if they were given a solid chance?

For me, its Wade Barrett. It seems like because of the Nexus flop, his career suffered. They should have kept the Nexus, clean, small and simple like how we see the Shield and the Wyatts. He is a great heel. I really enjoyed seeing him be a part of the main story line when the Nexus were taking over.
 

Cloud

Champion
Joined
Jan 23, 2012
Messages
10,486
Reaction score
1,562
Points
118
Age
40
Barrett, Gabriel, Brodus, Kidd.

Quite a few but some just dont go over like others pretty sure its called the Billy Gunn effect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: catlady

catlady

The People's Champion
Main Eventer
Joined
Sep 26, 2012
Messages
15,849
Reaction score
2,005
Points
0
inb4igotowendys
 

Lockard 23

The WWF/E Guru
Joined
Feb 10, 2012
Messages
6,691
Reaction score
1,927
Points
0
Age
37
Location
Union City, Tennessee
Ryback. I like to think there's still time for him to be something but I think the best chance to capitalize on his momentum has passed. Going into HIAC 2012 against Punk, he was pretty over. Just listen to his pop here when saving Vince:



No telling how much more over he could have gotten if he ended Punk's nearly year long title run at that point. Even after the loss at HIAC, I don't think he was dead in the water as some like to claim, the issue was that if he was never gonna win the WWE Title from Punk in a rematch (which obviously he wasn't going to, otherwise he would have won the strap the first time), then they should have kept him out of the main event and out of Punk's way. They could have even built up to a Punk/Ryback rematch at WM29 by having Ryback create a warpath in his quest to get another title shot, culminating in him winning the Rumble and winning the belt from Punk on the big stage.

Rock/Cena could have been a non-title rematch but the two issues with that is that the title gave those two a kayfabe excuse to wrestle again despite their first match being promoted as "Once In A Lifetime", plus The Rock genuinely wanted to win the championships again in real life. He also wanted to be the one to end the long title streak, which might be why an original pondered idea didn't happen, which was Ryback winning the title at HIAC, retaining it at Survivor Series, but then losing it back to Punk in the TLC match (which ended up being on Raw instead of PPV.)

Hell, he didn't even have to win the world title. He could have just went after one of the mid card championships and still been booked like a monster. But the ultimate killer of whatever momentum he did have after HIAC was that he lost virtually every match that was important up until now.

Wade Barrett is another example for obvious reasons that have already been mentioned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Farooq

Leo C

Backlund Mark
Joined
Apr 7, 2012
Messages
23,437
Reaction score
2,232
Points
0
Age
29
Location
São Paulo, Brazil
Ryback as KL said, not having him beat Punk was a problem but he could've still been saved had they not had him job to him so many times and be booked like crap afterwards (or just give him the damn belt and create yourself a new star but it seems like Vince was too busy bending over to Rock to do that). Barrett is another prime example, Nexus flopped but had they booked it somewhat differently even if Cena went over Wade could be a main eventer by now.
 

Dolph'sZiggler

Biggest self-mark since Bret Hart
Joined
Feb 2, 2012
Messages
47,754
Reaction score
14,050
Points
0
Age
34
Ryback. I like to think there's still time for him to be something but I think the best chance to capitalize on his momentum has passed. Going into HIAC 2012 against Punk, he was pretty over. Just listen to his pop here when saving Vince:



No telling how much more over he could have gotten if he ended Punk's nearly year long title run at that point. Even after the loss at HIAC, I don't think he was dead in the water as some like to claim, the issue was that if he was never gonna win the WWE Title from Punk in a rematch (which obviously he wasn't going to, otherwise he would have won the strap the first time), then they should have kept him out of the main event and out of Punk's way. They could have even built up to a Punk/Ryback rematch at WM29 by having Ryback create a warpath in his quest to get another title shot, culminating in him winning the Rumble and winning the belt from Punk on the big stage.

Rock/Cena could have been a non-title rematch but the two issues with that is that the title gave those two a kayfabe excuse to wrestle again despite their first match being promoted as "Once In A Lifetime", plus The Rock genuinely wanted to win the championships again in real life. He also wanted to be the one to end the long title streak, which might be why an original pondered idea didn't happen, which was Ryback winning the title at HIAC, retaining it at Survivor Series, but then losing it back to Punk in the TLC match (which ended up being on Raw instead of PPV.)

Hell, he didn't even have to win the world title. He could have just went after one of the mid card championships and still been booked like a monster. But the ultimate killer of whatever momentum he did have after HIAC was that he lost virtually every match that was important up until now.

Wade Barrett is another example for obvious reasons that have already been mentioned.

But Ryback sucks at everything except looking muscular