Wrestlers who were the biggest marks...

[iggymcfly 0]

This topic is exactly what it says. Which wrestlers were the biggest marks for themselves in history; getting way too far into their characters and starting to believe their own hype?

 

I'm not sure how long of a shelf life this topic will have, but it popped into my head, so I figured I'd make a post about it. I'll list mine in the first...err....second reply.

[TheFranchise 0]

Ric Flair - He lived his gimmick.

Ultimate Warrior - He even changed his name!

[iggymcfly 0]

1. Ultimate Warrior

The guy changed his freaking name.... to Warrior! Talk about taking your gimmick too seriously. I mean, it was a pretty goofy idea to begin with; he's such a tough warrior in the ring that he has to wear goofy bright face paint and run around like an idiot. But to listen to him talk about how he's adapted the gimmick into his real life, and found how important it is to become a "real warrior", it's just ridiculous. This guy needs some help.

 

2. Bret Hart

Another case of someone who forgot that he was playing a character. This is a guy who spent years going on numerous mainstream talk shows... to complain about how he had to turn heel, and how he got "screwed out of the win" in a worked wrestling match. Give me a break. He didn't become WWF Champion because he earned the title through physical strength. The writers selected him to win the belt, just like they were selecting Shawn in the fall of 1997. And his explanation for why he needed to win? Because he was a Canadian hero, and he couldn't let his country down. Like the whole country's going to crumple over and die if a referee announces a submission while he's pretending to fight somebody. Riiiight.

 

3. Bruno Sammartino

Sammartino can talk all he likes about how Vince has made wrestling "immoral", but what he's really pissed off about is that he broke kayfabe. For years, Sammartino ws presented as a legitimate athletic champion, and the fact that everyone knows he was just a performer just eats him up inside. I think Sammartino played the character so long that deep down, he felt like he was an athletic champion, and when Vince made the WWF all about entertainment and show, the change just made him want to snap.

 

These are the most grevious offenders. I thought about doing a Top 5, but really the others are mostly reformed and aren't really blatant enough to deserve listing in their own topic.

 

Honorable mentions go to:

Hulk Hogan, Vince McMahon, Dusty Rhodes, Chyna, and Shawn Michaels.

[caboose 0]

Bill Goldberg.

 

And eventually Steve Austin.

[Guest DVD Spree]

In fairness to Warrior, even though he is undoubtedly a Grade A loon, I'm sure the reason that he changed his name to 'Warrior' was part of his legal battle with Titan.

[Guest wildpegasus]

Wrestlers who the biggest marks for themselves are the guys who are extreamly hard workers for a long period of time. To do that you need an ego and it has to be humongous. You have to be a mark for yourself because if you're not you're going to be left by the wayside.

 

Guys and gals who would have to have superhuman egos in a land of big egos would be Kobashi, Benoit, Toyota, Hokuto, Lyger, Steamboat and Kurt Angle. That in itself is not a diss but more of a compliment to their work ethic which is funny because if somebody was so extreme in other aspect of their personality we'd probably have them locked up somewhere.

 

 

Bret Hart had an awesome quote that sums this up really well when Jim Ross asked him how the fans want to remember him. If someone could type that quote here I'd appreciate it.

[The Buzz 0]

Didn't Hart say something to the extent of "I just want to be remembered."

 

And as far as Warrior being a crazy sob..I have to disagree. Eccentric....yes. Crazy....no. He's an overly well-read man who's strong in his beliefs. If you look at his rise to the top of the sport he's just as cold and calculating backstage as Hogan, HHH, and any other top guy. He would to have been to get to where he was during the Hogan era, and you've all read the stories like I have. But I don't think he's loony toons by any means...he's just a guy with a huge ego who likes to ramble about his own personal beliefs of how everyone should strive to be a warrior.....ahh fuck ok maybe he is crazy. Atleast I tried.....

 

Now for my list.....

 

Ric Flair, Bill Goldberg, Shawn Michaels, Kevin Nash, Hulk Hogan, Ultimate Warrior, Bruno Sammartino, Scott Steiner, Jeff Jarrett, DUSTY RHODES

[Guest Fook]

Didn't Hart say something to the extent of "I just want to be remembered."

He also said something along the lines of "When the next great wrestler comes along, I want the fans to look at him and say 'He's great - but he's no Bret Hart.'"

[iggymcfly 0]

Didn't Hart say something to the extent of "I just want to be remembered."

He also said something along the lines of "When the next great wrestler comes along, I want the fans to look at him and say 'He's great - but he's no Bret Hart.'"

See, that's fine as far I'm concerned though. Wanting to be remembered as a great performer is perfectly normal and natural. However, when he goes on for years about how he was screwed out of a victory in a worked match... and actually believes it, that just screams that somebody's out of touch with reality.

 

As for Goldberg, I forgot about him, he probably should be in there around #4. Also, I think this is something that affects people that are on top in the business, more than good performers per se. Just getting that much recognition for one thing can start to play tricks with your head after a while.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Didn't Hart say something to the extent of "I just want to be remembered."

He also said something along the lines of "When the next great wrestler comes along, I want the fans to look at him and say 'He's great - but he's no Bret Hart.'"

However, when he goes on for years about how he was screwed out of a victory in a worked match... and actually believes it, that just screams that somebody's out of touch with reality.

 

Actually being fair for a moment here, he was meant to win the match, albeit by disqualification, so in that respect he was screwed out of a win he was meant to get. While maybe getting a little long in the tooth, it's still understandable that he'd be upset over 'losing', even though he really didn't, in his home country to the one person he hated more than any other. I don't think he'd be as angry over it if it had been, say Steve Austin or The Undertaker he had 'lost' to instead of Shawn.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Not to mention he had dedicated about 14 years of his life to this profession only to have his last day be "well, thanks for the hardwork buddy, we're gonna ruin you now".

 

HHH has to be the biggest mark for himself. You see it all over RAW.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

For me, the wrestlers who are the biggest marks for themselves are the likes of Triple H, Hogan, Rhodes, etc, who continue to push themselves to the moon, because they genuinely believe it’s for the best, even though everybody with an ounce of common sense can see that they need to step down from the top.

 

I don’t see Kevin Nash as a mark for himself, because he actually did know he shouldn’t be at the top; he just didn’t care. The difference between Nash and Triple H et al. was that Nash was aware of his time being over, whereas the others genuinely felt they should be on top, when logic and common sense said otherwise.

 

By the same token, I don’t think Shawn Michaels was a mark for himself, as I think he was another one who knew better, but just didn’t care, and wanted to fuck around with people anyway for the hell of it.

 

I don’t see Bret Hart as a mark of himself. A mark for his legacy, maybe, but not a mark for himself, if that makes sense. Bret was always willing, albeit reluctantly if the guy on the other side of the ring was Shawn Michaels, to put people over when the time was right, and, as WCW showed, was willing to do jobs to the point that it damaged his drawing power when it came to potential dream matches again Hogan and co.

 

I think Goldberg is more a mark for his ring persona and character than anything else. As Goldberg the wrestling character, he did get really anal over some things that he shouldn’t have, mainly in WCW, though sometime he did have a point with things he did that he shouldn’t have done. I think what Goldberg had a problem with, and it might have been overblown on his part, was how his wrestling character related to his real life self, and the charity work he did. Goldberg felt, probably wrongly, that what he did in wrestling affected how he was viewed in real life, and I don’t think he felt that people would be able to disassociate his wrestling persona from who he was in real life.

[Guest MikeSC]

I disagree on both Hart and Michaels.

 

Michaels WAS the best worker the WWF had when he was on top. He simply was. He was better on the mic than Hart and better in the ring than the rest of the roster.

 

And Hart did become a mark for himself. Anytime anybody EVER gripes about being screwed in a worked match is a red light that they have a problem. It is silliness personified.

-=Mike

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

Jerry Lawler.

[Guest MikeSC]

Hell, how has Jeff Jarrett not been mentioned yet?

-=Mike

...Lawler is one I forgot about...

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

I'm not sure if Jarrett is actually a mark for himself or not. He's one of those odd chases where he's usually always been pushed based on his relationships.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Michaels WAS the best worker the WWF had when he was on top. He simply was. He was better on the mic than Hart and better in the ring than the rest of the roster.

 

And Hart did become a mark for himself. Anytime anybody EVER gripes about being screwed in a worked match is a red light that they have a problem. It is silliness personified.

-=Mike

With Michaels, I'm not downplaying how good he was, but when it came time for him to drop the belt to Austin and move out of the top spot, he was a dick about it, even though it was obvious to everyone it was Austin's time on top. That's why I don't think Michaels was a mark for himself in that regard, because he knew he had to step down, it was just that his ego didn’t want it to happen.

 

As for Bret Hart, yes, on the surface, complaining about being screwed out of a win in a worked match can seem a little silly, but to try and simplify Bret’s feelings into him just being unhappy over losing a match he was meant to win is to ignore the background of everything that led up the match in question. As I had said, I don't think Bret would have complained as loudly about being screwed if it had been Austin or 'Taker he had lost to. Being, in his eyes, screwed in his home country played a key part in his problems with what happened, but so did the fact that he 'lost' to the one person he hated more than any other.

[Kapoutman 0]

I completely agree with Hunter's Torn Quad.

 

Bret isn't a mark for himself. He's just bitter because he was screwed by people he worked for during 14 years.

 

Also, take my first sentence out of context and it becomes a bit strange.

[Guest MikeSC]

Michaels WAS the best worker the WWF had when he was on top. He simply was. He was better on the mic than Hart and better in the ring than the rest of the roster.

 

And Hart did become a mark for himself. Anytime anybody EVER gripes about being screwed in a worked match is a red light that they have a problem. It is silliness personified.

                  -=Mike

With Michaels, I'm not downplaying how good he was, but when it came time for him to drop the belt to Austin and move out of the top spot, he was a dick about it, even though it was obvious to everyone it was Austin's time on top. That's why I don't think Michaels was a mark for himself in that regard, because he knew he had to step down, it was just that his ego didn’t want it to happen.

 

As for Bret Hart, yes, on the surface, complaining about being screwed out of a win in a worked match can seem a little silly, but to try and simplify Bret’s feelings into him just being unhappy over losing a match he was meant to win is to ignore the background of everything that led up the match in question. As I had said, I don't think Bret would have complained as loudly about being screwed if it had been Austin or 'Taker he had lost to. Being, in his eyes, screwed in his home country played a key part in his problems with what happened, but so did the fact that he 'lost' to the one person he hated more than any other.

Oh, Michaels became quite the dick around WM XIV (hell, he was a dick long before then). However, he has not been so since (the man really does job a lot. He's nearly at Jericho levels of jobbing) and he really didn't have anybody to be demoted on behalf of until Austin. I don't doubt that the man was a prima donna backstage, but most of his backstage antics came at a period when he was the legit top guy in the promotion.

 

As for Hart, yes, I don't doubt that he's upset about being treated poorly by his company. However, at a point, he has to let it go. You can say the WWE mentions it a lot --- which they do --- but it's impossible to ignore the fans still bitching about it whenever they go to Canada.

 

But he pulled the whole "I shouldn't job in Canada" crap which is insane. And he did a lot of to kill his heat with fans with what can only be described as, honestly, whining.

-=Mike

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

I completely agree with Hunter's Torn Quad.

 

Bret isn't a mark for himself.  He's just bitter because he was screwed by people he worked for during 14 years.

 

Also, take my first sentence out of context and it becomes a bit strange.

Stop the presses, but I agree with Mike.

 

It's time for Bret to let it go.

 

I also agree with Hunter's Torn Quad to an extent, that it's brought up to often on WWF TV for Bret to let it go entirely.

 

This is coming from the biggest Hart mark known to man. Vince was shitty to him and Bret has every right in the world to be pissed. But 'screwed' implied he would be unable to work again, or something to that effect. Vince was a dickhead, nothing more.

 

 

Warrior, Lawler, Goldberg and HBK to answer the thread.

[Jericholic82 0]

well Bret did have the whole best there is...... catchphrase for a long time, and he was a face. somehow that sounds heelish/ Im surprised Trips hasnt stolen that one yet.

 

 

 

but I dont know for sure who was the biggest mark. I really dont know these guys personally.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I don't think Canadian fans chant about Montreal to bitch about it anymore. I think it's now become more of a running gag, where they chant it just to rile up the promotion in general and specific people. within the promotion.

 

And Bret probably should stop talking about Montreal, and I also don't doubt that he'd like to stop talking about it too. However, it's a little difficult to do that when WWE uses Montreal in some fashion on a semi-regular basis, which invariably sees Bret get asked about it in interviews, which sees people bitch about Bret's bitching, and the whole thing continues on in one big vicious circle.

 

That said, you just know that with the Screwed DVD coming out later this year, the whole can of worms will be opened up again, and this time, it'll be hard to blame Bret for talking about it, when it's being used by WWE for commercial gain, and Bret will, quite rightfully for once, bring it up, if only to present his counter to what will undoubtedly be a heavily WWE-orientated spin on what happened in Montreal.

[Epic Reine 0]

I'm gonna throw Vince and Shane McMahon's names in here.

 

Both men pushed themselves heavily up the card and took up a lot of air time when both men totally suck in the ring. Both men truly thought them wrestling was a major draw and needed to be at the top, Shane moreso.

[Special K 0]

Apparently not anymore, but Taz used to be a HUGE mark for himself, which he admits himself.

[Some Guy 0]

Yeah, Taz was a huge mark for himself, watch his RF Shoot for proof. I really enjoyed the guy's gimmick and liked the Tazplexes, but he was a pretty crappy worker in general. He seemed to think he was the best in the world at that point. That said, he was money in the bank that WWF wasted in 2000.

 

Hogan wasn't so much a mark for himself as he was a mark for making money. If you can even call greedyness being a mark.

 

JJ is more delusional than a mark for himself. I think he reallt believes that he should be in that spot, when it is apparent to everyone else that he doesn't.

 

Dusty is a huge mark for himself. There is no other reason that he would book those two TNA bitches to be feuding over who gets to fuck him.

[CanadianChick 0]

I find Rob Van Dam to be a HUGE mark for himself. But I think that's more because he has a very, very big ego.

[Some Guy 0]

I hadn't thought about RVD. He would fit into the category. Watch his DVD and witness huge markishness for one's self.

[Masked Man of Mystery 0]

I'm gonna throw Vince and Shane McMahon's names in here.

 

Both men pushed themselves heavily up the card and took up a lot of air time when both men totally suck in the ring. Both men truly thought them wrestling was a major draw and needed to be at the top, Shane moreso.

I'd rather see Shane in the ring than any other Mcmahon, he's willing to take crazy bumps and you can't help but be impressed by the air he gets on the elbow drop

[Epic Reine 0]

Doesn't excuse the fact that he sucks as an in ring performer.

 

Hardcore Holly has a nice dropkick, does thta make him any good?

[Masked Man of Mystery 0]

Doesn't excuse the fact that he sucks as an in ring performer.

 

Hardcore Holly has a nice dropkick, does thta make him any good?

As far as I know, Shane doesn't have a reputation of stiffing people, and he had a good match with Test at Summerslam '99, which is one really good match more than Holly ever had.