Unpopular Wrestling Opinions

[Ozz]

Sting was nowhere near Undertaker's level, and the yearning for a match between the two was always ridiculous.

Barry Darsow was always awesome. Even, I mean especially, Repo Man & Hole-in-One Barry Darsow. As stupid as they were, they were entertaining. Maybe not Blacktop Bully, but I don't remember too much of that. God, I loved that stupid WCW low/mid-card in those days. Great memories of those days when the lower card was far better than the main event, and rivaled WWF.

Beefcake was a huge mid-level face up until his facial injury. After that he was all over the place, especially in WCW, but I think he gets put down way too much overall. He was a great heel in the 80s as well. FWIW I was a fan (hated him) in the Dream Team, he was one of my favorite non-"stars" as the face Barber, and after that I really had no interest. But for his time in the early 90s, I remember him being incredibly popular.

 

[koyvoo]

Maybe I should have said "THE most entertaining ever".

Here’s one then that’ll surely be unpopular but I personally fully believe it.

At the time, the week to week product was much better from Smoky Mountain Wrestling than it was from ECW.

 

[M.C.G. 31]

Going to guess this is a popular opinion. For both Cena/Roman, you take a stale forced babyface and you let them run wild for a few months and it immediately makes them HUGE stars/babyfaces again. Watch what happens with DB. He's playing such a great character that he is so exciting to watch again and it won't be long until the crowds just can't stop cheering for him.

Same with Roman. Turn him heel and in 6-12 months he will be the babyface WWE wanted him. He will be so loved as a bad ass.

Cena actually wanted to turn heel two times throughout his run. Back in 2005 when fans were booing him, and again during the Kane and Rock rivalries. He even made new music for the run but Vince nixed it.

Vince just doesn’t understand that more often than not you need to be a solo heel to get over as a loved babyface.

Austin, Rock, Bryan, were all heels before their big face turns. Cena was a heel and was loved in 2004 until he was matched up with Jericho/Christian and Angle in consecutive programs. Reigns was loved as a heel in The Shield until they forced him down people’s throats as the top face before he was ready.

 

[JackSlater]

Sting was nowhere near Undertaker's level, and the yearning for a match between the two was always ridiculous.

I agree with half of this. In terms of ability, Sting and Undertaker are pretty similar I think. In the context of their promotions, Sting was a bigger deal in WCW than Undertaker was in WWF/E. I agree that clamouring for Undertaker vs Sting was pretty ridiculous. People wanted it since the late 90s, basically for the most superficial reasons. If you went with Crow Sting vs Gothic Undertaker then you're not getting great promos as both were best playing the near-silent role, and in ring both were guys who generally came to the level of their opposition, but neither was great in that aspect.

 

[Shoalzie]

My hottest take...the internet has ruined wrestling.

Wrestling at it's best was when the surprising moments were actually surprising and unexpected. I'm watching '97 WCW and WWE on the Network and seeing Mean Gene or JR teasing a backstage story on the "Superstar Line" is the only rumors that should still exist. We know too much about what's going onto today and you're basically not surprised anymore. We end up watching a show already being disappointed. Why spend 3 hours watching Raw if you know most of what's going to happen?

There's too many outlets for wrestling fans to complain and spoil storylines. I like having a place like this to talk about wrestling but we shouldn't know what's going to happen next...I don't like storylines being leaked. I also think there's too many bloggers and reporters for wrestling on the internet. It's like if Hollywood reporters covered the actual characters on movies and shows and spoiled episodes and movie plots but cover not the performers as real people. The concept of reporting wrestling news is silly if you really think about it. Most of it is worked news unless we're talking about an injury or someone changing companies. Those are maybe the only two bits of information I'd want from a "reporter".

Also, promos should be done on TV, not on Twitter. Too much content is given away outside of main programming. You to have a reason watch week to week. If Becky wants to tear down Charlotte or Ronda or whoever, I want to see this stuff on TV. You have 5 hours of weekly TV and you have some of the best promos or "takedowns" occurring on the internet.​

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

My hottest take...the internet has ruined wrestling.

Wrestling at it's best was when the surprising moments were actually surprising and unexpected. I'm watching '97 WCW and WWE on the Network and seeing Mean Gene or JR teasing a backstage story on the "Superstar Line" is the only rumors that should still exist. We know too much about what's going onto today and you're basically not surprised anymore. We end up watching a show already being disappointed. Why spend 3 hours watching Raw if you know most of what's going to happen?

There's too many outlets for wrestling fans to complain and spoil storylines. I like having a place like this to talk about wrestling but we shouldn't know what's going to happen next...I don't like storylines being leaked. I also think there's too many bloggers and reporters for wrestling on the internet. It's like if Hollywood reporters covered the actual characters on movies and shows and spoiled episodes and movie plots but cover not the performers as real people. The concept of reporting wrestling news is silly if you really think about it. Most of it is worked news unless we're talking about an injury or someone changing companies. Those are maybe the only two bits of information I'd want from a "reporter".

Also, promos should be done on TV, not on Twitter. Too much content is given away outside of main programming. You to have a reason watch week to week. If Becky wants to tear down Charlotte or Ronda or whoever, I want to see this stuff on TV. You have 5 hours of weekly TV and you have some of the best promos or "takedowns" occurring on the internet.​

Is it the internet or is it that Vince and Co. have gotten lazy (or just plain bad))? Latest example...Sammy Zayn. You mention surprising and unexpected storylines...Nobody knew that Sammy was expected to make an appearance on RAW last week. It would have been great for him to do a run-in at WrestleMania or even on RAW. But instead, they show him backstage before a commercial break. Lame. This has been happening for a long time now.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

Here’s one then that’ll surely be unpopular but I personally fully believe it.

At the time, the week to week product was much better from Smoky Mountain Wrestling than it was from ECW.

I'm certainly old school. I grew up rushing home from school to watch Legends of World Class (later GWF) on ESPN. Loved Smoky Mountain Wrestling and the AWA. All that said...ECW blew the doors off of them when it was introduced. There was nothing like it.

Overall, wrestling was at its peak in the mid to late 90's. Has been declining since.

 

[koyvoo]

I'm certainly old school. I grew up rushing home from school to watch Legends of World Class (later GWF) on ESPN. Loved Smoky Mountain Wrestling and the AWA. All that said...ECW blew the doors off of them when it was introduced. There was nothing like it.

Overall, wrestling was at its peak in the mid to late 90's. Has been declining since.

I liked it a lot for a bit because it was so different from anything I was accustomed to at the time. It quickly felt that they were just going after cheap and pops after a while. There was less emphasis on storylines, and for me that’s a big part of it. There was nothing leading up to and building the crazy bumps. It was just the crazy bumps.

 

[Shoalzie]

Is it the internet or is it that Vince and Co. have gotten lazy (or just plain bad))? Latest example...Sammy Zayn. You mention surprising and unexpected storylines...Nobody knew that Sammy was expected to make an appearance on RAW last week. It would have been great for him to do a run-in at WrestleMania or even on RAW. But instead, they show him backstage before a commercial break. Lame. This has been happening for a long time now.

I'm not giving Vince or WWE a pass on all this...don't get me wrong. And it's not as if everything gets spoiled. I just don't to go into an episode knowing who is going to open or close the show. I don't want to know "who is reportedly backstage". Part of this is a personal choice. I like going on an internet blackout just so I can avoid spoilers. If people like talking about spoilers, that's fine...just keep it away from me.

The internet has allowed some very good things to happen in wrestling...namely the streaming services and to be able to learn about different performers and promotions. AEW is pretty much born out of the internet age but I still want to follow that promotion through their weekly TV shows and their wrestling events. I'm tired of the YouTube stuff at this point. I don't want to wait 5 months between Kenny Omega matches.

 

[Pilky01]

So much of the product today seems very much directed at internet "smarks".

Specifically I am thinking of Sami Zayn's "heel" promo from last week. That kind of promo does nothing for a casual viewer. If anything it just reinforces to the casual viewer that this stuff is dumb and you are lame if you care about it. That is a promo designed to "pop" r/SquaredCircle (which it did in spades), and literally nobody else.

Plus isn't he just copying Daniel Bryan's new shtick? Only doing it worse because he is just whining about wrestling whereas Bryan clearly has a bigger issue about the planet.

 

[Ozz]

I agree with half of this. In terms of ability, Sting and Undertaker are pretty similar I think. In the context of their promotions, Sting was a bigger deal in WCW than Undertaker was in WWF/E. I agree that clamouring for Undertaker vs Sting was pretty ridiculous. People wanted it since the late 90s, basically for the most superficial reasons. If you went with Crow Sting vs Gothic Undertaker then you're not getting great promos as both were best playing the near-silent role, and in ring both were guys who generally came to the level of their opposition, but neither was great in that aspect.

I agree Sting was a huge deal in WCW, but I never got it. At least most of the other top guys were, I don't know, more believable. I never really minded Sting but I also never cared for him. Not sure why.

 

[JackSlater]

Here’s one then that’ll surely be unpopular but I personally fully believe it.

At the time, the week to week product was much better from Smoky Mountain Wrestling than it was from ECW.

I don't know if it was better, but I've watched some Smoky Mountain Wrestling and it's better than you'd be led to believe. In terms of storytelling it's even very comparable to ECW. The Gangstas demanding to only need a two count due to affirmative action or several of the Tammy Fytch storylines for instance would have fit in perfectly in ECW. I heard someone, perhaps Prichard, once say that Cornette and Heyman are like two sides of the same coin. I can certainly see what he means.

My hottest take...the internet has ruined wrestling.

Wrestling at it's best was when the surprising moments were actually surprising and unexpected. I'm watching '97 WCW and WWE on the Network and seeing Mean Gene or JR teasing a backstage story on the "Superstar Line" is the only rumors that should still exist. We know too much about what's going onto today and you're basically not surprised anymore. We end up watching a show already being disappointed. Why spend 3 hours watching Raw if you know most of what's going to happen?

There's too many outlets for wrestling fans to complain and spoil storylines. I like having a place like this to talk about wrestling but we shouldn't know what's going to happen next...I don't like storylines being leaked. I also think there's too many bloggers and reporters for wrestling on the internet. It's like if Hollywood reporters covered the actual characters on movies and shows and spoiled episodes and movie plots but cover not the performers as real people. The concept of reporting wrestling news is silly if you really think about it. Most of it is worked news unless we're talking about an injury or someone changing companies. Those are maybe the only two bits of information I'd want from a "reporter".

Also, promos should be done on TV, not on Twitter. Too much content is given away outside of main programming. You to have a reason watch week to week. If Becky wants to tear down Charlotte or Ronda or whoever, I want to see this stuff on TV. You have 5 hours of weekly TV and you have some of the best promos or "takedowns" occurring on the internet.

You're not wrong. I don't think that it helps. Thinking back to the 90s, I can't imagine that I would have enjoyed the product more if I knew for instance what a piece of shit Michaels was or how the NWO was pretty much working to ruin WCW both in front of and behind the scenes. I say this even though I've been reading wrestling behind the scenes repots since the early 2000s.

So much of the product today seems very much directed at internet "smarks".

I agree here too. I actually think that WWE is less guilty of this than the wrestlers are, mainly because WWE is directed at one very specific 73 year old man. I think that it is a big risk for AEW given who is involved and how desperate they seem to be to cater to the loud, but relatively small, internet wrestling community.

 

[Shoalzie]

You're not wrong. I don't think that it helps. Thinking back to the 90s, I can't imagine that I would have enjoyed the product more if I knew for instance what a piece of **** Michaels was or how the NWO was pretty much working to ruin WCW both in front of and behind the scenes. I say this even though I've been reading wrestling behind the scenes repots since the early 2000s.

It's different going back to watch early attitude era/Monday Night wars episodes of WCW and WWF when you know a lot of the backstory now through podcasts and interviews explaining the behind scenes stuff. That era was so good though that I'm still interested in re-watching even though I know a lot of the results and so much of that stuff doesn't hold up today.

What's fun now is to watch stuff on the Network catch a podcast talking about that show or that angle almost like it's director's commentary.

I think about wrestling today and I wonder which storylines or which wrestlers are going to be the most interesting to talk about in 5 or 10 years? Was today's era of wrestling really that interesting or is there anything that's left to the imagination since kayfabe is dead and there's some much about the business today.

 

[Alex Jones]

It's different going back to watch early attitude era/Monday Night wars episodes of WCW and WWF when you know a lot of the backstory now through podcasts and interviews explaining the behind scenes stuff. That era was so good though that I'm still interested in re-watching even though I know a lot of the results and so much of that stuff doesn't hold up today.

What's fun now is to watch stuff on the Network catch a podcast talking about that show or that angle almost like it's director's commentary.

I think about wrestling today and I wonder which storylines or which wrestlers are going to be the most interesting to talk about in 5 or 10 years? Was today's era of wrestling really that interesting or is there anything that's left to the imagination since kayfabe is dead and there's some much about the business today.

The story of the endless Roman Reigns push is going to be a really interesting retell in a few years.

 

[JackSlater]

I agree Sting was a huge deal in WCW, but I never got it. At least most of the other top guys were, I don't know, more believable. I never really minded Sting but I also never cared for him. Not sure why.

I never liked Sting a much as I liked top WWF guys but I generally liked him. Surfer Sting was able to do the ever difficult white beat babyface role well while Crow Sting was a good reinvention, though he didn't have to do much. Sting wasn't exceptional in the ring or a great promo but he had really good charisma. Seemed like a WWF guy who was dropped in to WCW, but he managed to get over big time. I think it's possible that Sting actually is what Vince McMahon thought Ultimate Warrior and Lex Luger were and could have been huge in WWF.

 

[Falco Lombardi]

When discussing the best wrestlers, how much they drew is irrelevant. That would be like judging the quality of a movie based off its box office numbers, which is terrible.

 

[les Habs]

I would say that Sting was definitely at the Undertaker's level. Undertaker has him on longevity because after WCW it took Sting so long to finally get to the WWE.

For me Sting can be a bit underrated. Not spending much time in the WWE is likely the biggest reason for that, but also his limited (though underrated) work in the ring. Still his gimmicks worked. I don't love early Sting, though I did at the time, but the Crow gimmick and the Joker gimmicks were great. It's really too bad the Joker gimmick didn't happen in WCW instead of the lame Wolfpac nonsense.

 

[Morozov]

I agree Sting was a huge deal in WCW, but I never got it. At least most of the other top guys were, I don't know, more believable. I never really minded Sting but I also never cared for him. Not sure why.

Talking about Sting not being believable while comparing him to the Undertaker of all people seems a little odd. Quiet dude dealing to people with a baseball bat is a lot more believable than guy who draws power from an urn holding his parents ashes.

Obviously if we ignore that stuff Taker is one of the most believable guys because he's f***ing huge.

A large part of what made Sting believable is the old addage of what happens when you stand up to a bully. The nWo were the bullies, everyone was scared of them or joined them. But if you stand up to a bully what happens? They crumble, they aren't so tough because they don't have that mental edge. Sting stood up to them, so instead the bullies were scared of him.

 

[Ozz]

Talking about Sting not being believable while comparing him to the Undertaker of all people seems a little odd. Quiet dude dealing to people with a baseball bat is a lot more believable than guy who draws power from an urn holding his parents ashes.

Obviously if we ignore that stuff Taker is one of the most believable guys because he's ****ing huge.

A large part of what made Sting believable is the old addage of what happens when you stand up to a bully. The nWo were the bullies, everyone was scared of them or joined them. But if you stand up to a bully what happens? They crumble, they aren't so tough because they don't have that mental edge. Sting stood up to them, so instead the bullies were scared of him.

I'd long been unimpressed from the pre-Crow years, I guess.

 

[JTToilinginToronto]

If the Boogeyman had better in ring talent, he would have been a main eventer. Great gimmick and promo skills.

Title reigns should in general be longer and not be everyone "needs a turn" with the belt. It seems like both tag titles, both mid card belts and both women's belts have new holders each month. And it just devalues them so much.

 

[JTToilinginToronto]

Also forgot one:

Jericho is the best in the business of all time considering all aspects (in ring ability, promo skills, work rate, ability to change his gimmick to keep it fresh, was pretty safe, over af with the crowd his entire career, etc).

It's too bad he was kept from the WWE Title most of his career because Vince thought he was too small.

 

[ColePens]

I think Jericho is identical to HHH. They are not a money draw but they are the perfect guy to wrestle the money draw. He's so talented he can wrestle any guy but he's not the main draw himself. So I definitely cannot call him the GOAT.

 

[HandsomeHollywood]

Jericho is in my top 3 favorite wrestlers of all-time.
The guy is beyond valuable. Can effectively play heel or face, can slide up and down the card anywhere, can lose without it sticking to him much. One of the top talkers ever and pretty well rounded in the ring.
I don't think very many can match him in terms of his ability to adapt and reinvent himself across 3 decades.
The guy's a pro.

 

[JackSlater]

I rate Jericho among the best ever as a total package. Not the best but among the best. Don't care about drawing when it comes to such things. I think it's a fairly common opinion now but I've thought it for over a decade now.

I think that women's wrestling, at least among what we see in North America, is greatly overrated by internet fans. Perhaps I misunderstand the standards that people generally use but compared to the men the women are quite lacking. Even compared to women's wrestling in Japan in the 90s (Toyota, Kong, and company) it's not great by any stretch. I didn't really pay attention to the discussion around the women until I noticed people discussing the women's royal rumbles. It reminded me of the emperor's new clothes, as those were absolutely horrible matches but were described positively. Looking at the women who've gotten the most attention in WWE: Asuka is legitimately good, Flair has good elements (athleticism, presence) but is still pretty weak in other areas, Lynch has charisma but not much else, Rousey was not good and looked really awkward, Bayley is a big nothing, Banks is pretty bad, AJ Lee was bad outside of some mic work, Paige was bad. My sense is that people are generally comparing the women to the previous women they've seen (ie Trish and Lita, who were certainly worse than the current crop of women as wrestlers) and not the men (or people like Toyota or Kong) but I do find the way people rate the women very hyperbolic.

 

[HandsomeHollywood]

Kurt Angle being Jason Jordan's son wasn't a bad story at all.