Guest thebear Report post Posted March 31, 2002 The guy can't work a singles match to save his life... However, I'll go on record and say Billy Gunn is one of the best tag team wrestlers of all time... He is great in tag matches, he's wrestled almost exclusively tag since he came in 93 as the smokin gunns with Barton... My question to you is: Is he really a horrible wrestler, as he seems to play a tag wrestler better than almost anyone Just looking to start some debate, and might as well defend the internet whipping boy... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest muzanisa Report post Posted March 31, 2002 The smoking gunns sucked. New Age Outlaws were entertaining but overrated. Billy & Chuck are sometimes amusing. But whether in singles or tag his work sucks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest thebear Report post Posted March 31, 2002 I don't know... he seems like a solid role player... I'll be the first to admit, his singles stuff sucks ass Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Dace59 Report post Posted March 31, 2002 The fact that even Benoit couldn't carry him to a halfway good match proves Billy Gunn is utter crap. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Northern Lights Brainbuster Report post Posted March 31, 2002 Ive gotta admit though: as one half of Billy & Chuck, Gunn has shown more confidence and workrate in the ring than he has in years. Maybe its because he feels comfortable in his new role? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Mystery Eskimo Report post Posted March 31, 2002 No, he is thoroughly and unredeemably awful. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest papacita Report post Posted March 31, 2002 I dunno. From a mark standpoint, I've hated Billy Gunn since the Smokin' Gunns stole HBK's and Diesel's Tag Titles that night in 95 (Billy Gunn kicked Yoko with the toe of the boot! That is SOOO ILLEGAL!!! DQ!!! Sorry...got carried away there). As far as workrate is concerned, I think he's better that people give him credit for, and his moveset has expanded somewhat since he's been teaming with Chuck. And the crowd responds to him for whatever reason, so I guess he's not all bad. Although I think he'd be 10 times better if Eddie Guerrero was allowed to hit him in the head with a bottle at least once per show. Comprendes, ese?!?! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Report post Posted March 31, 2002 >>>The fact that even Benoit couldn't carry him to a halfway good match proves Billy Gunn is utter crap.<<< Or maybe Benoit ISN'T the messiah after all! *Gasp* Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Smeghead Report post Posted March 31, 2002 Or maybe Benoit ISN'T the messiah after all! *Gasp* Blasphemy. YOU DIE!!! Seriously though, Billy Gunn may be underrated. He's still not that good, but I don't think he's nearly as bad as some people make him out to be. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kinetic Report post Posted March 31, 2002 Considering how low the consensus opinion of him is, he can't help but be underrated. Personally, I've never found the sight of him to be completely offensive like I do with, say, the Bossman. He may be a fairly awful wrestler, but I wouldn't put him in "Kevin Nash" zone of sub-workrate. The real issue is this: With all of the genuinely *good* wrestlers the WWF has under contract, does Billy Gunn really deserve another push? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BA_Baracus Report post Posted March 31, 2002 Nope...he sucks. I didn't like any of his tag teams. Worst of all he's sloppy. He constantly half kills his opponents in the ring and it's only so long until he seriously injures someone... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Hogan Made Wrestling Report post Posted March 31, 2002 Gunn is definitely underrated. As a singles wrestler he's awkward, but he's found a niche in tag team wrestling where he is much more comfortable, and as a result a lot of his teams have been over. The Gunns were over (for that time period), NOA was one of the most over teams ever, and C&B are the best thing the WWF has going right now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest X-Factor Corperation Report post Posted March 31, 2002 I enjoyed him as Intercontenental champion. He's underrated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kinetic Report post Posted March 31, 2002 Nope...he sucks. I didn't like any of his tag teams. Worst of all he's sloppy. He constantly half kills his opponents in the ring and it's only so long until he seriously injures someone... Yeah. Maybe if he's in high-profile tag teams for another ten years, that'll actually happen. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest saturnmark4life Report post Posted March 31, 2002 No, no god NO i can't accept this theory. He's one of those people (Hennig, kane) who are just lucky at some point or another. Without DX he'd never have made it as a singles wrestler. He's mildly competent in a tag match, but still blows everything and has no personality. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest The Man in Blak Report post Posted March 31, 2002 You know, you can list all of his tag teams and say that they were over, but do you honestly think it was because of his workrate? I mean, really - the NOA were huge over because the gimmick (or, more accurately, Road Dogg talking), and Billy & Chuck are over because they're working a half-comedic ambiguously gay gimmick. Other than the Smoking Gunns, which were never really "big" almost seven years ago anyway, he's been over because of angles that he ultimately has not had that much of a part in. He's worthless. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest papacita Report post Posted March 31, 2002 Look down Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest papacita Report post Posted March 31, 2002 NOA was one of the most over teams ever I think that's more a credit to Road Dogg's mic work than anything Billy did. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest buffybeast Report post Posted April 1, 2002 I think to a certain extent Billy is underrated. He does have a natural athleticism about him. And his wrestling isn't that bad. But he isn't that good, either. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Report post Posted April 1, 2002 Billy Gunn is good wrestler who has had great tag team success. You can try to rationalize what he has done over the years, but the fact remains he is likely the most successful tag wrestler in WWF history. Some of you throw out the phrase 'work rate' like you know what you are talking about. If it was that important, Hogan wouldn't be the greatest superstar ever. No matter what you think, Billy Gunn is Over as a tag or single wrestler. He is a weaker singles wrestler and lack of good mic work holds him back. In conclusion, yes he seriously underrated. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest godthedog Report post Posted April 1, 2002 i think he's the british bulldog for the 21st century. his stuff generally looks good i think, he's got an impressive physique, he's a good tag team wrestler; but he can't carry a match, he's got no mic skills, & his endurance is god awful (i don't give a shit how much ross said he was the best athlete in the wwf). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest blackjack4x Report post Posted April 1, 2002 I don't think he's as bad as his reputation suggests. He sucks on the mic and can't work a good singles match, but he's a decent tag wrestler and his size allows him to pull off some nice moves. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Kahran Ramsus Report post Posted April 1, 2002 The Smoking Gunns sucked. The New Age Outlaws were horrible. Billy & Chuck suck. What was your point again? And Billy was the weaker member in all three teams. Yes, even Road Dogg was better than Gunn. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
