Home | Search | FAQ
Displaying 1-13 of 13 messages in this thread. |
| Posted By | Discussion Topic: Why do you hate the "big" guys? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
OA.com's Bodyguard Anger problem? What anger problem? I hate the fucking mud! USA | posted on 04-05-2002 @ 8:27 AM |    | |||
| O&A Board Regular Registered: Jan. 01  | After seeing so many people happy with the news that Kevin Nash would be on the shelf for up to 7 months, I was wondering why. This is in no way meant as a critisism. I'm just trying to understand why a lot of people hate the big, non-wrestling wrestlers. I can agree with you to a point that they are slow and can't wrestle worth a shit, but the bottom line is they aren't there to show off their aerial abilities. They are in no means meant to be Jeff Hardy or Billy Kidman. They are there because they are huge and the persona they exhibit is one of a huge monster that is supposed to be feared because they look like they can kill you. For example, people like Kevin Nash, Sid, Hogan, Undertaker, Kane, Andre, Big Show, & Goldberg aren't meant to put on a wrestling clinic. They are there to destroy people with power moves. Why then does everyone get on their case because they can't wrestle? Leave the wrestling to the smaller to medium sized guys and leave the destruction to the monsters.
| ||||
| TeenWeek what's a status? | posted on 04-05-2002 @ 8:40 AM | | |||
| O&A Board Regular Registered: Oct. 00 | i dont hate the big wrestlers Heck I might be the only person on the board who likes the Rock. Nash is best cutting promos, not wrestling though.  | ||||
| JackDan1974 | posted on 04-05-2002 @ 10:27 AM | | |||
| O&A Board Regular Registered: Jul. 01 | For me it is becasue they do not work as hard as the guys who actually wrestle for 15 minutes. I mean if you are 6ft 10, or bigger, and over 270lb how much effort is for you to just pick up a guy about 180 to 220lb and throw him around. Look at Benoit, or Jericho who actually do wrestling moves, or RVD who is going all out the entire time he is in the ring. I just think these smaller guys give allot more of themselves to the product, then these giants who are there just there becasue they where born, and grew to be that big. This message was edited by JackDan1974 on 4-5-02 @ 10:33 AM | ||||
| Hello! Hello! Diamond Dust! Hello! | posted on 04-05-2002 @ 11:00 AM | | |||
| Psychopath Registered: Feb. 01 | I don't hate "big guys." I DO hate Kevin Nash with a passion, but there are big guys I like. Infact, the Kane character has always been one of my favorites and Glen Jacobs is probably the best big guy with wrestling ability to be in the WWF in a long time, though I will admit last year at this time when he was main eventing was excruciating, but I blame that more on his "brother" than him. And Brock Lesner is my new God. I have no ill will towards Rikishi either, though his character has become SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO stale, I don't like him being on TV that much because of it. But, if they found something better for him to do than dance and rub his ass in guy's faces alot, I'd probably like him. The Big Show I hate. Can you fucking blame me, though? Same goes for the Undertaker, but I WILL say he has become 10 bilion times more bearable as a heel as his face character was the most "ponderous fucking ponderous" thing to be on my TV set EVER, but I just don't like some of the no selling he does when his character NO LONGER has invincibility as part of the gimmick anymore and all the political B.S. you hear about him turns me off to him. Same goes for the Hulkster, brother, though scarily, I'm tolerating him ALOT more than in WCW with this WWF run. That's just about all the other big guys I can name that are important so let me explain to you about why I think Kevin Nash is a waste of flesh: You ever see a baseball player that sucks ass, but he hits a big postseason homerun and all of a sudden, he's made out to be 10 billion times better than he ever was? For example, Scott Brosius. Yankee fans might want to kill me for desecrating a former Yankee, but I don't see any tears being shed for him leaving, do you? He was awful. But the fuck hits a couple big post season homers over the years (to his credit), none bigger than Game 5 against the D'backs, and all of a sudden alot of people (especially nationally who didn't see him strikeout 162 games a year) think he was a bigger, more integral part of the Yankees than he really was. Yeah, he was a great defensive 3B, but that and $1.49 still won't get you on the subway in today's offensive minded (especially in the AL) baseball scene. So, he sucked balls in every year not called 1998, and he's made out to be a big loss for the Yanks because he hit a bunch of homers in October. Kevin Nash is Scott Brosius. He has NEVER drawed and has always been the least drawing champion in any federation he's been. Less people than you think care about Kevin Nash. But he was involved luckily in the greatest angle of all time at that point (the nWo) and he became popular because of the angle, or the Game 5 WS homer of wrestling. But, as soon as the nWo died down, did people flock to see Kevin Nash anyway? NO! Nobody cared about Nash, nor ever will. They cared about the nWo, not the individuals involved. They cared about WWF guys invading WCW. You put the Undertaker and Bret Hart in Hall and Nash's place, the nWo angle would have been even bigger because they'd also have good characters (Taker didn't suck at that point) and guys who have drawn in the past anyway showing people cared about them without a cool storyline to follow them. So, then WHY isn't a good draw? Well, the man is good at cutting promos, but his matches are so bad, nobody wants to see the payoff to his storylines. Nobody will pay money to a PPV to see a Nash feud blown off because they know the paoff will be underwhelming and result in a bad match. Look at all the big main eventers of the past few years: Austin, Rock, HHH, Foley, Angle, HBK, Sting, Bret Hart, Ric Flair, etc. Do ANY of them outwardly suck in the ring, or are even not STELLAR in the ring at times (and i'll defend Rock on this, too) When you suck THAT bad as a wrestler, you have to have a special charisma like I will admit Hogan possesses to pull that off. To make people want to see your match even if it might suck on paper. Nash doesn't have that special charisma. He just does a few funny jokes and acts cool. That's somewhat charismatic, but it ain't anything we haven't seen in wrestling time and time again with billions of heel characters. And yet, people think he's a major drawing card when it has been documented in the WWF's worst finanical year with him as champ and his booking starting the downward spiral to a bottomless pit in WCW, that NOBODY cares about Nash. And yet, people thnik people do. Just cuz he gets a pop doesn't mean he can draw. It just means they like seeing him on TV. People buying his shirts and buying PPVs cuz he's on it. THAT is drawing. Nash doesn't draw. But people think he does. He is Scott Brosius. THAT is why I hate Nash. "Losers always whine about 'doing their best'. Winners go home and fuck the prom queen." | ||||
Nay. We are but men. ROCK. The man with the plan. | posted on 04-05-2002 @ 3:00 PM | | |||
| O&A Board Regular Registered: Oct. 00 | quote: To me, watching a ten minute match of resting, weak moves, and no-selling the opponent is just BORING. That's what you have to endure before the power move hits and the match is done.  | ||||
| HyBriD FN Moron is an indian giver!! I had my cool status for about 10 min. then it was gone. GONE! G.O.O.F.B.A.H.G.S. Agent WD40 Licensed to Kill My spoon is TOO BIG. (finally) Hanger-on to the JYDs for LIFE I INVENTED ORANGE MOTHERFUCKER This status is sponsored by: P®oJë©T M@¥hέm | posted on 04-05-2002 @ 3:05 PM | | |||
| O&A Board Regular Registered: Sep. 01 | quote:i second that  | ||||
| rageparty 123...Not so bare anymore since I got a number underneath my name again I also have an imaginary girlfriend. | posted on 04-05-2002 @ 4:33 PM | | |||
| O&A Board Regular Registered: Aug. 01 | I don't hate big guys, but when they wrestle little guys they can't keep up with them. They make the good wrestlers look like shit. But I like seeing pwoerful moves like the Press Slam, Chokeslam, Tombstone, Powerbomb especially. I'm the only one on the board that probably doesn't mind Sid, even if he knows only 3 moves, and I don't hate Taker as much as everyone else... This message was edited by rageparty on 4-5-02 @ 4:36 PM | ||||
| Bloody Anus P.L.F. Portugese Liberation Front- Liberating Status' everywhere from the Tyranny of Portugal HYBRID THINKS I'M A GENIUS | posted on 04-05-2002 @ 10:51 PM | | |||
| O&A Board Regular Registered: Jul. 00 | quote: The ONLY reason that I watch wrestling is, well, to watch wrestling. Moves moves moves moves moves!!! I don't hate just the "big guys" because they can't wrestle, I hate anybody that 1)is in a wrestling ring who can't wrestle or 2)who does the same 3 moves all the time. Unfortunately this encompasses 95% of the WWF lockerroom.
| ||||
| diceisgod I ALWAYS LOSE. | posted on 04-05-2002 @ 11:20 PM | | |||
| O&A Board Regular Registered: Dec. 01 | I think the whole notion of "big" guy wrestlers died with Andre. They rarely face off against one another nor are featured or promo-ed as the "big" wrestlers of the past such as King Kong Bundy, Big John Stud, Kamala, etc. The so-called "big" wrestlers of today usually are thrown into the mix with all the other wrestlers. They job to people half their size and often lose. Thus the mystique of the big guys has been lost. When promoters pit wrestlers such as Nash against smaller quicker wrestlers, they look bad period. So it looks like they aren't giving the effort or just don't care (and some might not). I think if big wrestlers are to go over and become a big draw promoters need to exploit their largeness. But this whole idea might be beaten to death already. There will never be another wrestler with the popularity and drawing ability as Andre had without exploiting this angle. Either that or they need to find someone who can keep up with the little guys. However, I don't feel someone with that kind of size or ability would waste it on professional wrestling. They'd probably play football. I for one would love to see that. A seven foot, 500lb linebacker. Holy fuckin shit!!! | ||||
| Se7en | posted on 04-05-2002 @ 11:49 PM | | |||
| Psychopath Registered: Oct. 01 | They are there because they are huge and the persona they exhibit is one of a huge monster that is supposed to be feared because they look like they can kill you......They are there to destroy people with power moves. The problem I feel that most big men have is twofold: ability and booking. Ability is something that is hard to overcome. Obviously, a guy like Big Show isn't going to be impressing us with his magnificient ability to chain wrestle. He's good for using power moves, and little else. Unfortunately, this seems to be the case with MOST big men - either all they are capable of doing is power moves, or otherwise that is all they were trained to do. I can see the latter happening a lot. You get some guy, like Albert for example - 6'8", 300 lbs, and how is he going to be trained? He'll be trained as a power wrestler. They probably won't bother teaching the kid advanced technical moves. And who knows, even if they did, maybe the guy is only good at doing power moves. The result though, a blend of talent / teaching, usually is a wrestler who is slow (and not methodically so), and who is limited in move set and ability. Couple this with the fact that most big guys are trained to no-sell their opponent's offense, and you could have the formula for a bad worker. Now the other problem can be more easily overcome, and it can really work sometimes - booking. I'd say Goldberg and Undertaker are the best examples of booking done right. Goldberg was presented as a monster who destroyed his opponents, and it got him over HUGE. Undertaker has always been presented as a no-selling beast, but I'd say that now, it's all coming back to bite him on the ass as his ring ability (never stellar to begin with) has detiorated and yet he's still trying to pass as this shit-kicking roughneck. Both times, the booking worked. In other cases, as with the Big Show, it hasn't worked....mainly because the ability of the men is just too poor for the casual fan to really take to the wrestler. That's not to say that the booking is always logical.....I'd say that Vince's homo love interest in the big men has worked against the WWF many times. Pushing a couple big guys (like Undertaker / Kane) as monsters is okay; having a half-dozen guys on the roster with essentially the same type of monster gimmick (Brock Lesnar, Nash, Undertaker, Kane, Big Show, & to a lesser extent, Rikishi & Test) is bad. And it seems that guys like Vince are loathe to portray the big guys as anything other than power wrestlers; outside of an occasional match that Kane has with someone like Kurt Angle, there's very little technical work done or allowed by the big men. Basically, for a big wrestler to really succeed (and by that, I mean become recognized for the good worker that they are), they need a good combination of the two factors, with ability favored. Best example I can think of - Vader. Vader is, IMO, one of if not THE best big man of all time. He had fantastic ring ability, and was successfully & believably booked as a monster in America and beyond. So that's my take. I think most smart fans value the non-big wrestlers more because they're better workers & entertainers, and for the simple reason that the big guys are very limited in what they can do in the ring, whether it's limited by their own ability or by their booking.  "Being a bastard WORKS." --Spider Jerusalem | ||||
| krahzee | posted on 04-06-2002 @ 11:56 AM | | |||
| Psychopath Registered: Mar. 02 | I as well do no hate big men as much. Are some of them lazy, slow pieces of shit? Yes. Still, some of them actually do posses some talent. Take a guy like Kane. Kane has a great deal more technical moves than he displays any give week. Why doesn't he use them? It's simple. While the smarts may pop for great chain wrestling, the average fan pops for things like punches and finishers. Think about it. What moves from Kane do the crowd pop loudest for? When he is punching the crap out of someone in the corner, chokeslamming them, and when he sits up after being laid out. The only time he gets a huge pop for techincal moves is when he uses a technical wrestler's moves on them ( see Angle's ankle lock). From what we have seen of Lesner, it's the same thing. This guy is capable of doing cruiserwieght shit off the ropes, yet all we have seen of him so far is slams, suplexes, ect. Cruiserweights rely on these moves to make victories over the "Big Men" believable. If you have big men doing the same moves, and being as good with the arial shit, why would you need the cruiserweights anymore? | ||||
| Beans Malone | posted on 04-06-2002 @ 11:59 AM | | |||
| Psychopath Registered: Mar. 02 | If were talking COCK sure the bigger you are the better but since were talking wrestling the bigger you are the more useless you are. Hogan leg drop finish ..Give me a Break...  | ||||
| krahzee | posted on 04-06-2002 @ 12:11 PM | | |||
| Psychopath Registered: Mar. 02 | I'm not saying that the bigger wrestlers are better. But, what if the WWF trained every new big guy they get to do arial shit like Kidman. Why would anyone watch him anymore. By keeping the big guys to limited power moves they: 1) Keep the risks of injury to thier top (bigger) guys lower. Does anyone remeber why Micheals retired so young with a bad back? 2) Give the cruiserweights something that is unique to them....arial shit. These guys are never the top of the card. If you lose one or two of them they are replaceable. | ||||
Displaying 1-13 of 13 messages in this thread. |