Enough is enough!

[Guest alfdogg]

Way to play to the lowest-common denominator, guy. And since when is changing your opinion of someone because they stop entertaining you the act of a sheep?

 

"Wow, I stopped enjoying Test as a wrestler when his matches started to get really bad-why can't I think for myself for once?"

Um...try not twisting my words around and maybe you'll understand what I meant.

 

The point I was trying to get across was that whenever someone from a "group" (HHHaters, Angle marks, etc) disagree with some people, they are dismissed as sheep, and I'm getting tired of it.

[Guest MrRant]

Are you talking to me? Cuz I just posted that I didn't flame you in particular if that's what has gotten you upset

[Guest Rob Edwards]

Dear Mr. Rant:

 

God damn, for the last time...

 

SOME PEOPLE (ME) NEVER FUCKING LIKED HHH!!! WE ARE NOT ALL FUCKING BANDWAGON JUMPERS!!! JUST BECAUSE WE DISAGREE WITH YOUR GODDAMN OPINIONS DOES NOT MAKE US SHEEP!!! IF HHH JOBS TO EVERYONE IN THE COMPANY IN ***** MATCHES, I WILL STILL HATE HIM!!! TRUST ME!!! I HAVE NEVER LIKED TEST EITHER!!! IF HE HAS ***** MATCHES, I WILL STILL NOT LIKE HIM, YOU STUPID STEREOTYPICAL WASTE OF SPACE!!!

 

Rant over.

How does that make sense? Presumably if a guy is working ***** matches (We're talking ***** in your opinion here not anyone elses) then you must like him as a worker right?

[Guest evenflowDDT]

Maybe it's because it's more than pure workrate that makes you like or dislike someone. Opinions are formed on many different things... how else would so many people think so highly of Hulk Hogan?

[Guest Anglesault]

For the record, I like cruisers when theya ren't playing superballs

[Guest Rob Edwards]

Maybe it's because it's more than pure workrate that makes you like or dislike someone. Opinions are formed on many different things... how else would so many people think so highly of Hulk Hogan?

That depends if we're talking as a worker or as a person. Since this thread is based around workrate I presumed we were talking liking someone as an ir ring worker here which you would if they were putting out matches you were enjoying

[Guest Goodear]

Boy was this a wonderful thread topic before it got ... you know.

 

If you wanna hate the big men (i.e. Test), fine. That's your right. If you wanna say that they have bad matches, fine. That's your opinion. But for God's sake, stop being so f'n ignorant and comparing them to wrestlers like Brad Armstrong or Kurt Angle.

 

Indeed, the fact of the matter is that wreslters that are different sizes work differently, and they should be. The Big Show shouldn't really bother with side headlocks to start his matches, he's big enough that he should just be shoving people around, it makes more sense that way. There's no earthly reason for Show to be trading armdrags like Brad Armstrong. If you prefer one style to another, that is completely fair, but expecting people to wrestle exactly the same would be a problem, not a solution.

 

I know I've said this before, but I'm going to say it again anyway: there is no one style of professional wrestling, and there is no "right" or "wrong" style of professional wrestling. You have your technical wrestlers, you have your high-flying cruiserweights, you have your brawlers, and you have your big men who rely on high-impact, power maneuvers.

 

Yup, for instance Puro (both strong style and whatever else) and Lucha are totally different but equaly valid styles of wrestling. Everyone working the same exact way tires the fans and I think the recent outcry of "every WWE worker does the same thing" reflects this.

 

A lot of you write big men off because they aren't "workers". Well, not everybody can be a "worker". It's absolutely ridiculous to criticize guys like Test or Undertaker or Kane or even Mike Awesome because they can't do some of the things in the ring that a smaller wrestler can.

 

Here is the deal. Bigger guys generally hit harder and their moves generally have more impact than their smaller compadres. A slam from Undertaker is going to "mean" more than a slam from Scotty II Hotty. In my mind, bigger guys should take a longer time to hit moves, because it lends more importance to the move by allowing their opponents to sell the impact for a little bit longer.

 

For the record, Test has a high workrate. Do you see any wasted motion in his matches? I sure as hell don't. He's intense from bell to bell.

 

Workrate is overrated. A figure four is just as restful as standing there, but one doesn't "count" as much as the other. But I see you point.

 

Do you see anybody criticizing the smaller wrestlers because they can't do some of the stuff that the big men can do? No. Never. Sure, Test "sucks" because he can't mat wrestle like Brad Armstrong. But does Brad "suck" because he can't pumphandle powerslam his opponents? Nope.

 

It's all about appreciation. I appreciate that Rey Mysterio Jr. can do a springboard 'rana. I appreciate that Albert can press Kane over his head. Not everyone appreciates the same thing. Some people seem to look at the use of strength as being easy. I don't think I'll ever understand why.

[Guest evenflowDDT]

Maybe it's because it's more than pure workrate that makes you like or dislike someone.  Opinions are formed on many different things... how else would so many people think so highly of Hulk Hogan?

That depends if we're talking as a worker or as a person. Since this thread is based around workrate I presumed we were talking liking someone as an ir ring worker here which you would if they were putting out matches you were enjoying

Well, in that case, it's still about more than pure workrate. Hardcore Holly hits all his moves perfectly and is one of the most solid in-ring workers in the WWE right now and nobody likes him, so it's more than just workrate, which is what I was trying to say.