Re: Best Hair in Wrestling
Posted by MG on July 22, 2003 at 02:02:55: Previous Next
In Reply to: Best Hair in Wrestling posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 01:42:14:
Well, I'm not sure whether or not I like Edge, but I'd sure love to
have hair like his! I think that his is maybe the best in wrestling.
Re: Best Hair in Wrestling
Posted by hBK on July 22, 2003 at 13:44:12: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: Best Hair in Wrestling posted by MG on July 22, 2003 at 02:02:55:
Are we forgeting the person with the best hair period, The Showstopper, The Mainevent, The Icon, the sole creator of D-generation X, the man who created Triple h and Diesel's career, the HeartBreak Kid, Shawn Michaels. Well now it is weird, he is loosing his hair and it is so straight now, not sure what happened. He is the reason for me growing my hair. If anyone would look weird cutting his hair off it would be him. He has never ever had his hair short in his LONG LONG WWF career. Oh, and what is up with triple h's hair, his new hair style is horrible.
Shawn Michaels's Mullet
Posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 15:28:26: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: Best Hair in Wrestling posted by hBK on July 22, 2003 at 13:44:12:
Shawn Michaels... I think he had great hair from '95 to the later part of the 90s, and although his hair's not so bad now, I can't help but think back to the days of his imfamous mullet cuts whenever someone mentions his hair. I guess that's because that hair style comes from the period of Shawn's career that I'm most familiar with (a period whose highlight was the ladder match between Michaels and Razor Ramon at Wrestlemania X). Sure, Shawn had some great matches -and some great hair - before his injury took him out of wrestling for a good many years, but by that time, I stopped caring; I was too sickened with him and the WWF for the "screwjob" betrayal they perpetrated against Bret Hart.
Re: Shawn Michaels's Mullet
Posted by hBK on July 22, 2003 at 16:25:59: Previous NextIn Reply to: Shawn Michaels's Mullet posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 15:28:26:
For the love of christ will people let it go already. Bret screwed Bret. Bret would of went to WCW anyway, probably with the title, and pull the same BS madusa did with the women's title. Everyone knew about it, but they didn't say anything. IT WAS SHAWN'S JOB, just like it was earl hebners, and everyone else who cared about their job. He couldn't put his career in the toilet and go to WCW because he got fired for pity towards someone else. The Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels weren't buddies in the first place. Bret Harts is at fault for that, ever since 1992 they have had issues. Bret Hart also wasn't fitting in with the Attitude era that was beginning, and blamed shawn michaels greatly for starting it. DX (original 3 member and 5 member versions) was the greatest stable ever period. Bret had old man views and didn't want to realize, wrestling was changing. I realize Bret Hart is probably one of the if not the greatest WWF champions ever. Probably ranked over Hogan since Bret acually had talent. Oh, by the way, in terms of mullets, HBK did have the best looking mullet :) despite mullets being horrible in my opinion.
The Montreal Screwjob
Posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 22:33:18: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: Shawn Michaels's Mullet posted by hBK on July 22, 2003 at 16:25:59:
Bret was set to go to WCW, but - to avoid the possibility of his disgracing a WWF title the same way Alundra Blaze did - Vince McMahon and Bret Hart agreed to a compromise that Bret would not loose the match (I think it was to end in a draw), but he was to announce his resignation and forefit the title the night after on public television. Vince McMahon gave Bret his word that this would happen, and yet, the inverse situation turned out to be true. Vince McMahon flat out lied to Bret Hart, which was a particularly dispicable thing to do to him for his 'farewell' match.
Shawn Michaels may have just "done his job", but that doesn't make what he did okay (You could argue that much of the Nazi army was innocent since they were only "following orders" from Hitler). Even if worse came to worse and Vince McMahon would've fired Micaels if he didn't pull the screwjob on Bret, Michaels would not have "put his career in the toilet", as you say: Because WCW was owned by Ted Turner, Eric Bichoff could've afforded to pay Schawn Michaels a HELL of a lot more money to wrestle for his company than Vince McMahon could've for the WWF. If anything, Schawn Michaels would've improved his career (From a financial perspective, at least) by going to WCW.
I can see how some could excuse Michaels for pulling the screwjob on Bret because it was part of his job, but I am disgusted by the fact that Michaels denied the conspiracy he was involved in. Michaels directly lied to Bret Hart's face about having knowingly participated in the screwjob; the very least he could have done was to come clean with his actions after the fact.
You say "Bret screwed Bret" because he didn't want to conform to the product Vince was trying to sell in the 'Attitude' era. That seems like an odd thing to hear from someone from a long-haired community; how would you like it if someone told you that you were responsible for the mistreatment you received from some kids because you grew your hair out to a length that was contrary to their standards of acceptability?
Because wrestling is a business and Bret would no 'opperate' and Vince wanted him to, he had a right to replace him, but as a show of respect, Vince promised to agree to the compromise I mentioned earlier. Vince did anything but retain the respect he originally tried to demonstrate. I realize that something had to be done, but it could have been handled in a much more honorable way.
Re: The Montreal Screwjob
Posted by hBK on July 23, 2003 at 00:15:17: Previous NextIn Reply to: The Montreal Screwjob posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 22:33:18:
Come on, seriously, please do not tell me The Showstopper, The Mainevent, The Icon, Shawn Michaels would of been the same in WCW. Look at Bret Hart, I think the way he was treated in WCW was almost as bad as the Montreal Screwjob. How dare they make him come and go for the US title, a mid carder belt? He never gave off the feeling of a true maineventer even when he won the WCW belt, kind of like jericho in WWE. Felt more like "back up" maineventers. Vince told Bret WCW wouldn't know what to do with him, and he was right. Bret himself said it. If they did that to Bret, practically a wrestling god, especially to Canadian fans, what could of the showstopper expected. Plus he would have probably not been allowed to do some of his stuff cause it would be too "nasty" for WCW. Shawn Michaels could of recieved A LOT of money in WCW. If you think about it, if in around 96-97 the legend would of left to WCW, WWF would of been the one being bought out. He wasn't like nash, hall, hogan, etc. Why did the icon lie? He was told to do so, until recently. With his whole religion BS which is annoying because I want the real HBK, he felt the need to come clean. He even called Vince before to get his permission but since Vince didn't reply, he just went and did it. If you think about it, Triple H (a man who owes his entire career to hbk and should worship him) knew just as much as hbk. You can make the arguement that he is just as guilty as hbk. I am just tired of people who are still living in 1997 and are still blaming hbk and take credit away from his amazing career. Look at those fans in Montreal, that is sad, they still can't get over it. I wish hbk was the hbk i knew and would have taken a canadian flag and showed them exactly what he thinks. If they want to pick on somebody, pick on Hogan. He has spent his entire career stepping over people. Bret Hart needs to get over this hate towards Shawn. Shawn acually doesn't bad mouth him. How do I know? A friend of mine was part of the graduating class of the HBK academy that included Brian Kendrick. HBK did completely hate Sid (especially, look at the 97 Royal Rumble, he hit him with a really stiff superkick), The Rock (almost as much as sid because of stupid comments he made during a smackdown show backstage), Ahmed Johnson, and Jim Cornette (who he almost beat the crap out of for bad mouthing him with others). When it came to Bret Hart, he had nothing but good things to say about him. Bret Hart should just let it go, come back to the WWF, give his farewell speech, and show the man he is by shacking Shawn Michael's hand in the middle of the ring. Put an end to this never ending screwjob talk.
Ambivalance
Posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 31, 2003 at 18:27:43: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: The Montreal Screwjob posted by hBK on July 23, 2003 at 00:15:17:
"Come on, seriously, please do not tell me The Showstopper, The Mainevent, The Icon, Shawn Michaels would of been the same in WCW. Look at Bret Hart, I think the way he was treated in WCW was almost as bad as the Montreal Screwjob. How dare they make him come and go for the US title, a mid carder belt"
I didn't say Schawn would've been the same great preformer in WCW. In fact, I think he probably would have had his preformances wattered down in he switched federations. Neverthelss, I said Schawn would not have "thrown his career down the toilet" from a FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE. Think about it this way: Wrestlers advance their careers by working their way from independent federations (Where they are allowed great creative freedom) to major federations (Where they usually have much less creative freedom, but earn a lot more money), just the same way that a lot of musicians and bands leave sacrifice creative control for larger paychecks when they move from independent labels to the major labels. If Schawn had to go to WCW, his preformances would almost certainly have suffered from the company's limited vision, but his career would have been substantially enhanced in terms of the money he'd be making. The same thing can be said for any wrestler that joined the WWF as part of its alliance angle: Rob Van Dam, for instance, makes a lot more money in WWE than he could working for any other North-American based federation. Rob Van Dam's performance, however, has become severely wattered down, much like Schawn Michaels's preformances supposedly would have been if he'd joined WCW. Rob Van Dam COULD stick with independent federations and put on the same unbelievable performances that he used to in ECW (Just as Schawn could - and did - stick with the WWF, where his abilities would be encouraged rather than held back), but he performs in WWE to make substantially more money (Just as Shawn could have done if he left for WCW).
"I am just tired of people who are still living in 1997 and are still blaming hbk and take credit away from his amazing career"
Living in 1997, huh? Well, if that's the way you think, why don't you just disregard what many of the Nazis did under Hitler because that took place back in the 1940s? According to your logic, aren't we - as a collective society - iving in the past by not allowing ourselves to forget the attrocities that took place? How would you like it if someone beat the crap out of you and then told you that you ought to dismiss any and all of your reactionary impulses because your assult happened two seconds ago and you should quit living in the past? Why should a matter of years matter and not a couple of seconds (More importantly, who decides on this standardization? You?!?)?
If, by addressing the Montreal screwjob, I'm "taking credit away" from Schawn's amazing career, I'm taking credit away only where it deserves to be taken away. You know, the Nazis party truly did a lot of good for its country in rebuilding the German nation, but I don't know of too many people who refrain from "taking credit away" from the Nazis because of the genocidal policy they upheld. I'm NOT comparing Schawn's actions to the actions carried out by the Nazis in terms of SEVERITY; I'm using the Nazi example to illustrate how CREDIT IS A FLUCTUAL FACTOR and you can't give justly respect someone for their accomplishments if you aren't equally apt to mind their shortcomings.
Let me make one thing clear: Schawn Michaels had - and continues to have - a great career. I think that for the effort he puts into his matches and how that effort translates into performance, he is an amazing entertainer. Schawn Michaels is not such an admirable person, however. Can you make that distinction? There is a difference between who someone is as a preformer (based on what they can do in the ring) and who they are as a person (based on their honor and the dignity of their actions toward others). Schawn Michaels not only participated in the conspiracy against Bret Hart, but lied directly to Bret's face about having been involved in it; for having done that, I have little respect for Schawn as a person. The fact that I have little respect for Schawn Michaels as a person is completely seperate from the respect I have for him as a preformer. Can you understand that? It's not as though one can only admire someone completely or not at all. You, sir, seem terribly intollerant to the notion of any such ambivilance.
Re: The Montreal Screwjob
Posted by HappyPuppy on July 23, 2003 at 01:49:03: Previous NextIn Reply to: The Montreal Screwjob posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 22:33:18:
: Shawn Michaels may have just "done his job", but that doesn't make what he did okay (You could argue that much of the Nazi army was innocent since they were only "following orders" from Hitler).
You might be taking it a little too seriously when you start comparing someone getting screwed in a match to genocide. Lighten up. I'm siding w/ Michaels here, just 'cause he trained Spanky, and 'cause I never liked Bret Hart's stupid sunglasses.
The Principal of the Matter
Posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 31, 2003 at 16:56:23: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: The Montreal Screwjob posted by HappyPuppy on July 23, 2003 at 01:49:03:
: You might be taking it a little too seriously when you start comparing someone getting screwed in a match to genocide. Lighten up.
I didn't use the example of the genocide that Nazis carried out on Hitler's behalf to illustrate the severity of Michaels's actions. Rather, I used that example to illustrate the principal of the matter: We are ultimately responsible for the actions we take. If you can disregard Shawn Michael's participation in - and lies about not having been involved in - the Montreal Screwjob, you should disregard what many of the Nazis did since they, like Shawn, were only "following orders." The atrocities committed by the Nazis may have been much more severe than what Shawn did, but the principal of the matter nevertheless remains intact.
Re: The Principal of the Matter
Posted by HappyPuppy on August 01, 2003 at 00:43:53: Previous NextIn Reply to: The Principal of the Matter posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 31, 2003 at 16:56:23:
: I didn't use the example of the genocide that Nazis carried out on Hitler's behalf to illustrate the severity of Michaels's actions. Rather, I used that example to illustrate the principal of the matter: We are ultimately responsible for the actions we take. If you can disregard Shawn Michael's participation in - and lies about not having been involved in - the Montreal Screwjob, you should disregard what many of the Nazis did since they, like Shawn, were only "following orders." The atrocities committed by the Nazis may have been much more severe than what Shawn did, but the principal of the matter nevertheless remains intact.
Okay, so you've cleared that up for me. But what about the sunglasses?
Heh
Posted by nWo_Slapnut on August 02, 2003 at 21:44:41: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: The Principal of the Matter posted by HappyPuppy on August 01, 2003 at 00:43:53:
:The atrocities committed by the Nazis may have been much more severe than what Shawn did, but the principal of the matter nevertheless remains intact.
: Okay, so you've cleared that up for me. But what about the sunglasses?
*LOL* Bret Hart may be my all-time favourite wrestler, but you make a strong point that even I (one who regards him as "The best there is, the best there was, and the best there ever will be") cannot deny: Those sunglasses WERE pretty silly! Would you believe that they are now out of production, and the few that remain sell at $50 a piece?!?
Re: The Montreal Screwjob
Posted by Harsh on July 29, 2003 at 03:20:45: Previous NextIn Reply to: The Montreal Screwjob posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 22:33:18:
About that Jericho wheel in montreal, when shawn said he publicly apologised bret for all that had happened, is actually fasle. Chech out www.brethart.com for brets comments on the raw episode.
I am obviously with BRET here, coz all Shawn is now like a wrecked car trying to run as good it ever did. He doesnt ever want to let his guns down. With no fire power left he is expecting fans to love him for what he was and not what he is. By the way, Brets gogles were the best in the 90's!!!
The bottom line is SHAWN, dont try to be Heart Break Kid,
when you know that you are now just a Has Been Kid.
Burry your guns down coz they just cant fire anymore.
Re: The Montreal Screwjob
Posted by hBK on July 31, 2003 at 09:24:24: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: The Montreal Screwjob posted by Harsh on July 29, 2003 at 03:20:45:
There is 1 problem, he might have changed physically and in ring ability, but his name is still The Heatbreak Kid Shawn Michaels. Seriously, look at all the old guys out there (flair, hogan, nash, savage, austin, undertaker, piper, lugar, etc). Look at how people love Hogan despite watching him is like watching a slow motion clip. Shawn Michaels isn't even 40. He is just trying to finish what he couldn't due to his back injury. He knows he isn't as good as he was, but he is trying to give the fans the years he missed. This is what fans gotta like him for. HBK wasnt all about his in ring ability, but about giving it all he had despite how big he got. Right now, he is considered a legend, yet still gives it 100% in the ring. That is who he was and is so he is still the same in the most important aspect.
i will always support bret !!!!
Posted by hila on August 03, 2003 at 15:31:08: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: Shawn Michaels's Mullet posted by hBK on July 22, 2003 at 16:25:59:
the only thing that everyone know is that bret hart was screwd!
the truth is that no one really care what you think people but bret hart real fans those who love him for the great man he is will support him no matter what!i believe in you bret hart for ever!!!!!!!
Re: Best Hair in Wrestling
Posted by Carlos on July 22, 2003 at 23:06:48: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: Best Hair in Wrestling posted by hBK on July 22, 2003 at 13:44:12:
The Best hair in wrestling...hmmm this is a tuff question. Currently I would have to say Chris Jericho, Edge, and Rhyno. The best hair of the past would be Shawn Michaels circa 98, Bret Hart, and HHH circa 95-99(mid back era).
Re: Best Hair in Wrestling
Posted by Cactus Jack on July 22, 2003 at 11:22:37: Previous Next
In Reply to: Best Hair in Wrestling posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 01:42:14:
hard to say, i really like Edge, not just because he has cool hair but because he's one of my fav wwe wrestlers to watch (also RVD and Benoit) but i'm not that huge on current wwe to begin with, i'm more of a NWA and indy fan myself. Raven had some awesome looking hair back in his ECW days but then he put it in dredlocks and dyed it so many times it started looking nasty. when we went to NWA he cut it,straightened it and dyed it blonde, right now it looks like it's in the awkward stage
i know it looks weird but it actually fits his charictior
Mick Foley/Cactus Jack had some good hair back in the 90's, but later on it looked like he didn't take such good care of it, he shaved his head back in 2000 then let it grow back then cut it again, right now it looks terrible lol, actually Mick Foley has always been my favorate wrestler and he was the one who inspired me to grow my hair out as well as inspired me to be a wrestler
hard to say who's hair looks the BEST though, i guess i'd have to go with Edge
Cirus of ECW fame also had some good loking hair but i haven't seen him since his brief run in NWA in 2001 right after ECW closed, anyone know if he still has his hair?
Best Hair in Wrestling...great...
Posted by LucksKind on July 22, 2003 at 20:35:03: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: Best Hair in Wrestling posted by Cactus Jack on July 22, 2003 at 11:22:37:
Some of the best...I agree...
Re: Best Hair ...great...
Posted by LucksKind on July 22, 2003 at 20:36:38: Previous NextIn Reply to: Best Hair in Wrestling...great... posted by LucksKind on July 22, 2003 at 20:35:03:
Some of the best...I agree...
Re: Best Hair in Wrestling
Posted by T a r i k h on July 22, 2003 at 19:19:52: Previous Next
In Reply to: Best Hair in Wrestling posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 01:42:14:
The Undertaker shouldn`t have cut his hair.
Hulk would have looked great with long hair
Nash
Posted by thunderstruck67 on July 22, 2003 at 20:44:36: Previous Next
In Reply to: Best Hair in Wrestling posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 01:42:14:
I think Kevin Nash has a pretty good head of hair. Of course, Bret Hart, my favorite of all time always had pretty good hair. It was cool in that it was different, kind of thinner and straggly (is that a word?).
I was watching some old Wrestlemania tapes and HBK had the hugest mullett. I still to this day cannot stand that guy, never have.
I think the guy who has the best hair besides Nash, is Jericho.
Re: Nash
Posted by hBK on July 22, 2003 at 21:26:21: Previous NextIn Reply to: Nash posted by thunderstruck67 on July 22, 2003 at 20:44:36:
Yea, but you wish you had his hair after the mullet phase. Don't be jealous cause he got all the women. He had genuine attitude, hell he created DX. Oh yea the Hart Foundation had a lot of attitude.(lol) He was THE man and put on some of the most GREATEST matches in wrestling HISTORY. His back was nearly destroyed, yet he agreed to wrestle at WM 14 and continued the match despite the obvious tremdenous pain. A testament to his greatness. Jericho copied HBK on his hair by the way since HBK was his idol just like he was to many. Nash has great hair? Wow damn bro, look how burned his hair looks, come on open your eyes a little. No true old school wrestling fan can say something like that about HBK. Bret Hart is your favorite? What were some of his best matches? Besides the 2 he got owned by HBK of course. Did you just run into an old wrestlemania tape and decide Bret Hart was your favorite?
Re: Nash
Posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 22:52:31: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: Nash posted by hBK on July 22, 2003 at 21:26:21:
:Bret Hart is your favorite? What were some of his best matches? Besides the 2 he got owned by HBK of course. Did you just run into an old wrestlemania tape and decide Bret Hart was your favorite?
Getting "owned" by HBK does not make Bret Hart any less of a great wrestler. A quick reminder: The outcome of wrestling matches is scripted. Wrestlers are not necessarily great because they win matches (If that were the case, Hulk Hogan and HHH would be two of the greatest wrestlers ever for their stubborn take on jobbing); wrestlers are great because of the effort they put into matches and the way that effort translates into performance. Mankind may have lost Hell in a Cell against The Undertaker, but I think you'll be hard pressed to find an intelligent wrestling fan who would give 'Taker more credit than Mankind over the outcome of that match. I remember that as Mick Foley's definitive moment as Mankind; the fact that he lost the match is irrelevant to me in consideration of the fact that he nearly lost his life trying to put forth a memorable match.
You're being an ignorant biased fan.
Posted by thunderstruck67 on July 25, 2003 at 03:57:01: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: Nash posted by hBK on July 22, 2003 at 21:26:21:
Hey, I never knocked HBK's hair after the mullet. While disliking the guy's character and on-screen persona, I still respect what he did in the ring. His Iron Man match with Bret was one of my all time favorite matches. His ladder matches with Razor Ramon were simply amazing. I personally think he is an idiot for getting back in the ring, but I give him props for tapping out to Jericho on RAW...nobody else seems to want to lose to Jericho. The reason I can't stand the guy, is because he was a heel for so long...isn't that how it is supposed to work?
I haven't seen Nash in quite some time, the last time when he was back in WCW, maybe it's changed now. All the girls that I know who watch wrestling seem to adore Kevin Nash.
Some of Bret's greatest matches? Easy as pie...obviously you know about the Iron Man match at Wrestlemania XII, just because he was written to win, that match wouldn't have been nearly as good had either man not been involved in it. The fact that you say Shawn owned Bret in two matches just goes to show what kind of a fan you are.
vs. Owen (Wrestlemania X)
vs. Davey Smith (British Bulldog) (Summerslam 1992)
vs. Chris Benoit (Nitro)
vs. Austin (Wrestlemania XIII)
vs. Mr. Perfect (Curt Hennig) (Summerslam 1991)As for your last statement, I've been following Bret as a fan since I was a little kid. The reason I've always liked him is because he could carry anyone to a great match, he was Canadian, and was a true wrestler. In this day and age, that doesn't count for very much. If you watch The Rock vs. Austin, those matches are so awesome to most people, but they consist mostly of punching and kicking and are so predictable because they have so very few moves to their repertoire. Bret has inspired many great wrestlers of which I am a fan of today, even though I rarely watch wrestling anymore, such as Chris Benoit, Lance Storm, and Chris Jericho (who is a Shawn Micheals mark).
Re: You're being an ignorant biased fan.
Posted by hBK on July 25, 2003 at 14:33:08: Previous NextIn Reply to: You're being an ignorant biased fan. posted by thunderstruck67 on July 25, 2003 at 03:57:01:
All you had to say you were Canadian, there isn't a Canadian alive who doesn't like Bret Hart. Doesn't he have his own religion out there or something? j/k. Well okay, but come on, you can't tell me you didn't love what Shawn did with the Canadian flag. Those were some cool tricks. Especially what he did with it at Survivor Series 97.
National Hero
Posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 25, 2003 at 15:52:00: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: You're being an ignorant biased fan. posted by hBK on July 25, 2003 at 14:33:08:
: All you had to say you were Canadian, there isn't a Canadian alive who doesn't like Bret Hart. Doesn't he have his own religion out there or something?
LOL. Excellent point, HBK.
My buddy doesn't like him
Posted by thunderstruck67 on July 25, 2003 at 15:56:40: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: You're being an ignorant biased fan. posted by hBK on July 25, 2003 at 14:33:08:
The feud where Bret hated the USA and Shawn was hated in Canada was pretty awesome. I hated Micheals for all those things, but the whole thing was pretty good.
The Attitude Era
Posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 25, 2003 at 16:05:53: Previous NextIn Reply to: You're being an ignorant biased fan. posted by thunderstruck67 on July 25, 2003 at 03:57:01:
: reason I've always liked [Bret Hart] is because he could carry anyone to a great match ... and was a true wrestler. In this day and age, that doesn't count for very much. If you watch The Rock vs. Austin, those matches are so awesome to most people, but they consist mostly of punching and kicking and are so predictable because they have so very few moves to their repertoire.
I couldn't agree with you more. As a matter of fact, the type of "wrestling" that is valued now adays is exactly what I hated about the 'Attitude' era: Vince McMahon tried to do away with the technical wrestling that guys like Bret Hart used to exhibit and replace it with the 'badass' style wrestling of Steve Austin and HHH. Don't get me wrong: While the CHARACTER of Stonecold was indeed great, I always felt that his Attitude-era matches were monotonous and overrated on account of the fact that most of Austin's moves were no more sophisticated than a stomp to the back of his opponent. And just for the record, I do not have anything personal against Steve Austin. Like I said, I think his character was amazing, but I hate how overrated he was (as a wrestler) in spite of the fact that he pretty much abandoned the technical moves that he used to exhibit. True, he was lucky to escape paralysis, but that doesn't change the fact that he was terribly overrated for the matches (not the promos) he'd put on in the ring.
Edge Cutting his hair
Posted by hBK on July 25, 2003 at 03:56:46: Previous Next
In Reply to: Best Hair in Wrestling posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 01:42:14:
In an interview in Canada, he said he was going to cut his hair but didn't since Christian did it, and everyone else is doing it. He didn't want to make it seem like he is copying. He said he is going to wait awhile to chop it off.
Re: Edge Cutting his hair
Posted by Andy on July 25, 2003 at 06:21:21: Previous NextIn Reply to: Edge Cutting his hair posted by hBK on July 25, 2003 at 03:56:46:
: In an interview in Canada, he said he was going to cut his hair but didn't since Christian did it, and everyone else is doing it. He didn't want to make it seem like he is copying. He said he is going to wait awhile to chop it off.
In his column on the WWE site a few weeks a go he confimred he had cut his hair
Re: Edge Cutting his hair
Posted by hBK on July 25, 2003 at 14:33:03: Previous NextIn Reply to: Re: Edge Cutting his hair posted by Andy on July 25, 2003 at 06:21:21:
LOL, finally. I never liked his hair.
Re: Edge Cutting his hair
Posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 25, 2003 at 15:46:26: Previous NextIn Reply to: Edge Cutting his hair posted by hBK on July 25, 2003 at 03:56:46:
: In an interview in Canada, he said he was going to cut his hair but didn't since Christian did it, and everyone else is doing it. He didn't want to make it seem like he is copying. He said he is going to wait awhile to chop it off.
Somehow I'm not surprised (that Edge intended to do away with his hair).
Thanks for the info, HBK. By the way, that is one AWESOME picture (Well, video, sort of) that you incorporated into your post!
Re: Best Hair in Wrestling
Posted by hBK on July 25, 2003 at 03:58:20: Previous Next
In Reply to: Best Hair in Wrestling posted by nWo_Slapnut on July 22, 2003 at 01:42:14:
Edge will cut his long hair. He said he was going to cut his hair but since Christian did it, and everyone else was doing it, he didn't want to make it seem like he was copying. He did say he is gonna cut it later on though. He said all of this in an interview in Canada, TSN.