|
|
Post by WRAITH on Jun 18, 2007 11:27:13 GMT -5
Im sorry I went to bed ... don't get me wrong I'm not saying TNA is better!! Im just saying they could be!!! You can't be serious and say HBK is better then Sting. Sting is one of the best wrestlers EVER!!! Angle is still the best wrestler of our generation. Last night show on paper looked awesome but it only came off ok.
I hate Lashley, he has horrible mic skills. He seems ok in the ring but I don't get why they are pushing him so much. Vince just likes ripped guys. In real life I think Benoit would kill Lashley. Just because you are stronger doesn't mean you win fights. The old cliche goes it's not the size of the dog, its the heart.
Right now WWF (it's WWF and I don't care what anyone says) is better, but TNA with their talent should be A LOT closer then they are. I love the TNA roster, I think they have a lot of good guys. Sting and Angle are both in the top 10 all time. HBK and Triple H are probably right there as well. But I guess it's a matter of wrestling taste I guess. I grew up loving Perfect, Rude and Dibiase. I don't like the roided up Barry Bondish guys. I like the whole package. Mic skills, ring psychology and look. Rude was ripped but he would DESTROY Lashley not only on the mic but in the ring in a real fight.
If you asked me, three WWF shows waters down the product and this brand split HAS NOT worked and they should just have one federation. TNA should be taking advantage of this instead of vacating the title every 2 months or something. What they should have done was have Samoa Joe walk in last night and just bulldoze people and win the title. Then have Joe just go on to obliterate people. Maybe create a television title for Christian and have him feud with AJ Styles. You have the right feud Sting vs Daniels but Daniels should have gone over. TNA has the pieces but it's like they have a five year old kid trying to put together this 1000 piece puzzle and he isn't doing it too well.
|
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncross on Jun 18, 2007 11:38:43 GMT -5
It's a FACT, TNA Wrestling is a second class citizen and they're far from getting any respect from those who are against them. I like the product, but the WWE is a well seasoned machine. The WWE does make mistakes, but thats the way it is... my choice is TNA, but I've returned to watching the WWE and they are still the top dog in the biz.
|
|
|
|
Post by dukedave on Jun 18, 2007 11:46:39 GMT -5
You can't be serious and say HBK is better then Sting. I'm serious. HBK is better now, was better then and better next year. I am going to put this to a poll. |
|
|
|
Post by jefft on Jun 18, 2007 11:48:47 GMT -5
In real life I think Benoit would kill Lashley. Just because you are stronger doesn't mean you win fights. The old cliche goes it's not the size of the dog, its the heart. Rude was ripped but he would DESTROY Lashley not only on the mic but in the ring in a real fight. You don't know much about Bobby Lashley before his pro wrestling days, do you? You can't be serious and say HBK is better then Sting. Sting is one of the best wrestlers EVER!!! And Michaels isn't? Hey, I'm a total Sting mark and think Michaels is one of the biggest jerks in wrestling behind the Ultimate Warrior, but HBK has consistently been in 4-5 star matches since he threw Jannety threw that plate glass window. He still sells better than anybody in the biz. He's a walking MOTY wrestler. Sting is a great face. Solid gimmick, solid mic skills, and in his prime was a VERY athletic and solid wrestler. More popular than HBK - sure...no way a better wrestler. Not many bigger Sting fans than me. |
|
|
|
Post by gatekeeper on Jun 18, 2007 11:55:02 GMT -5
You can't be serious and say HBK is better then Sting. I'm serious. HBK is better now, was better then and better next year. I am going to put this to a poll. HBK is DEFINITELY better than Sting. You know why? Because he wrestled for the WWE. If you were never employed by the best company, you can't be considered better. It's kind of like saying some CFL Quarterback is better than Joe Montana. Joe played in the best league so he's better. I used to love Sting back in the day. But HBK is better in the ring and on the mic, so I don't see where Sting is better in any capacity. |
|
|
|
Post by Aquinas on Jun 18, 2007 12:01:04 GMT -5
I'm serious. HBK is better now, was better then and better next year. I am going to put this to a poll. HBK is DEFINITELY better than Sting. You know why? Because he wrestled for the WWE. If you were never employed by the best company, you can't be considered better. It's kind of like saying some CFL Quarterback is better than Joe Montana. Joe played in the best league so he's better. I used to love Sting back in the day. But HBK is better in the ring and on the mic, so I don't see where Sting is better in any capacity. "Because he wrestled for the WWE" continues to be a lame argument. Then there's no point in debating anything. I think there are guys in the WWE who are undeniably crap. That doesn't mean they are still automatically better than anyone in TNA. When HBK was at the top of his game, WCW was the number one wrestling draw.....maybe not the entire time, but certainly for part of it. I know Vince is flawless to some of you guys, but that would tend to be a checkmark in Sting's column. Sorry, Khali isn't better than Samoa Joe because he's in WWE and Joe is in TNA. There are numerous guys in TNA who are superior to WWE. The NFL is a real sport. WWE is entertainment. An actor isn't automatically a better actor because he's on a higher-rated show. |
|
|
|
Post by dukedave on Jun 18, 2007 12:22:09 GMT -5
When HBK was at the top of his game, WCW was the number one wrestling draw.....maybe not the entire time, but certainly for part of it. I know Vince is flawless to some of you guys, but that would tend to be a checkmark in Sting's column. WCW was not number one because of Sting. They were number one because of the nWo which consisted of guys brought over from WWE. |
|
|
|
Post by Wildfire on Jun 18, 2007 12:22:25 GMT -5
I'm serious. HBK is better now, was better then and better next year. I am going to put this to a poll. HBK is DEFINITELY better than Sting. You know why? Because he wrestled for the WWE. If you were never employed by the best company, you can't be considered better. It's kind of like saying some CFL Quarterback is better than Joe Montana. Joe played in the best league so he's better. I used to love Sting back in the day. But HBK is better in the ring and on the mic, so I don't see where Sting is better in any capacity. I agree that HBK is better (I was never much of a Sting mark, actually), but the "he's not WWE" arguement doesn't work here.. in Sting's prime, WCW was the #1 company (its was a short time, yes, but that time was when Sting was around), so he did work for the best. To get back on topic, do you guys think Sting is one of those guys that refused to job to certain people, or is it just TNA's booking decisions? Sting could really go a long way in putting over TNA's homegrown talent, but he didn't really do so with Abyss, and now he seemed to be not doing it with Daniels... |
|
|
|
Post by Wildfire on Jun 18, 2007 12:25:03 GMT -5
When HBK was at the top of his game, WCW was the number one wrestling draw.....maybe not the entire time, but certainly for part of it. I know Vince is flawless to some of you guys, but that would tend to be a checkmark in Sting's column. WCW was not number one because of Sting. They were number one because of the nWo which consisted of guys brought over from WWE. Come on now Havoc.. who from WWE started there? EVERYONE who has starred in WWE (except maybe the Rock) started in the NWA/WCW or (going back further) from the territories... |
|
|
|
Post by Aquinas on Jun 18, 2007 12:31:12 GMT -5
When HBK was at the top of his game, WCW was the number one wrestling draw.....maybe not the entire time, but certainly for part of it. I know Vince is flawless to some of you guys, but that would tend to be a checkmark in Sting's column. WCW was not number one because of Sting. They were number one because of the nWo which consisted of guys brought over from WWE. I didn't say Sting made WCW #1....I'm saying it's just a pretty lame argument to say one person is better than another because simply because they are in the WWE. |
|
|
|
Post by dukedave on Jun 18, 2007 12:31:47 GMT -5
WCW was not number one because of Sting. They were number one because of the nWo which consisted of guys brought over from WWE. Come on now Havoc.. who from WWE started there? EVERYONE who has starred in WWE (except maybe the Rock) started in the NWA/WCW or (going back further) from the territories... The nWo was formed by Hall, Nash, and Hogan. All guys who became superstars while in the WWE. Don't even try to argue this please. I never said that they started in WWE. When they came over did people go, "Wow, look Hogan and Hall. Man they were great in the AWA. And look there's the guy that played Steel, Oz, and Vinnie Vegas. It's nice to see him again. I wonder where he's been." No they didn't. |
|
|
|
Post by Aquinas on Jun 18, 2007 12:34:08 GMT -5
HBK is DEFINITELY better than Sting. You know why? Because he wrestled for the WWE. If you were never employed by the best company, you can't be considered better. It's kind of like saying some CFL Quarterback is better than Joe Montana. Joe played in the best league so he's better. I used to love Sting back in the day. But HBK is better in the ring and on the mic, so I don't see where Sting is better in any capacity. I agree that HBK is better (I was never much of a Sting mark, actually), but the "he's not WWE" arguement doesn't work here.. in Sting's prime, WCW was the #1 company (its was a short time, yes, but that time was when Sting was around), so he did work for the best. To get back on topic, do you guys think Sting is one of those guys that refused to job to certain people, or is it just TNA's booking decisions? Sting could really go a long way in putting over TNA's homegrown talent, but he didn't really do so with Abyss, and now he seemed to be not doing it with Daniels... It seems to me it's a TNA booking decision -- they seem to collectively push the 'legends' or former big names over the younger guys. I think Sting elevated Abyss in that feud, even losing to him for the title. It would have been nice to see Abyss win more of the PPV matches down the stretch though, but still....I think the TNA powers that be have a big thing for pushing the big names over everybody else. |
|
|
|
Post by Aquinas on Jun 18, 2007 12:38:42 GMT -5
Come on now Havoc.. who from WWE started there? EVERYONE who has starred in WWE (except maybe the Rock) started in the NWA/WCW or (going back further) from the territories... The nWo was formed by Hall, Nash, and Hogan. All guys who became superstars while in the WWE. Don't even try to argue this please. I never said that they started in WWE. When they came over did people go, "Wow, look Hogan and Hall. Man they were great in the AWA. And look there's the guy that played Steel, Oz, and Vinnie Vegas. It's nice to see him again. I wonder where he's been." No they didn't. I don't disagree with that at all. What I find an extremely lame argument -- and I don't think you're saying it either -- is that HBK is automatically better than Sting simply because he spent most of his career in the WWE and because Sting spent his in NWA/WCW and now TNA. TNA could be equated with a minor league, but despite ratings and $$$, the NWA/WCW was not a scrub league in comparison. It's not ALL about money and ratings. I think most of us have our own opinions about talent, be it charisma or in the ring. And I don't think HBK is a slam dunk over Sting in that regard. Sting in his prime was a damn good wrestler and always great on the mic. Besides, as other have pointed out....WWE wasn't even on top when HBK was at the top of his game. |
|
|
|
Post by jefft on Jun 18, 2007 12:43:52 GMT -5
Well, the initial 'buzz' of the NWO was caused by 2 huge stars appearing in the WCW from the WWF, however the NWO 'took off' because Hogan (who hadn't been in the WWF for years at that point) turned heel. After that shock wore off, I actually tuned in to the NWO just to see what was going to happen with 'Sting-In-The-Rafters'.
|
|
|
|
Post by dukedave on Jun 18, 2007 12:51:40 GMT -5
I don't disagree with that at all. What I find an extremely lame argument -- and I don't think you're saying it either -- is that HBK is automatically better than Sting simply because he spent most of his career in the WWE and because Sting spent his in NWA/WCW and now TNA. No, you are correct. I did not say that. The Detroit posse - Swarm, Payback, and Joe, are usually the ones to say that. However, Sting's legacy could've been greated if he had not stuck to his oath to never work in the WWE. |
|
|
|
Post by Aquinas on Jun 18, 2007 12:55:31 GMT -5
I don't disagree with that at all. What I find an extremely lame argument -- and I don't think you're saying it either -- is that HBK is automatically better than Sting simply because he spent most of his career in the WWE and because Sting spent his in NWA/WCW and now TNA. No, you are correct. I did not say that. The Detroit posse - Swarm, Payback, and Joe, are usually the ones to say that. However, Sting's legacy could've been greated if he had not stuck to his oath to never work in the WWE. If he would have gone to WWE instead of TNA, he'd probably have gotten one of the big two titles at some point....and still be a prominent face in the mid to upper card, definitely. I used to admire Sting's principles on that, but seeing that TNA is not even close to morally superior to WWE, in hindsight I wish he'd have gone to WWE. Hell, even at 48, he'd probably still get a sweet run with WWE if he went now. A nostalgic feud with Flair would be awesome. |
|
|
|
Post by WRAITH on Jun 18, 2007 12:57:13 GMT -5
You know why? Because he wrestled for the WWE. If you were never employed by the best company, you can't be considered better. It's kind of like saying some CFL Quarterback is better than Joe Montana. Joe played in the best league so he's better. Ok ... wow ... if you know me, you know I give credit where credit is due and that is a great comeback. I just like Sting better, he won't ever go to the WWE so I guess we'll never know huh ... |
|
|
|
Post by Wildfire on Jun 18, 2007 13:20:58 GMT -5
The nWo was formed by Hall, Nash, and Hogan. All guys who became superstars while in the WWE. Don't even try to argue this please. I never said that they started in WWE. When they came over did people go, "Wow, look Hogan and Hall. Man they were great in the AWA. And look there's the guy that played Steel, Oz, and Vinnie Vegas. It's nice to see him again. I wonder where he's been." No they didn't. Hogan WAS a star in AWA, that's why Vince got him... was he far bigger in WWF? of course, but he was still a star. Scott Hall, I'd say he was far bigger as part of the nWo than he was as Razor Ramon, whose biggest claim to fame was getting X-Pac (as the 123 kid) over. I agree Nash 'came out' as Diesel.. but that just means Vince is a good scout of talent, which NO ONE will agrue with you about. |
|
|
|
Post by dukedave on Jun 18, 2007 13:25:39 GMT -5
Scott Hall, I'd say he was far bigger as part of the nWo than he was as Razor Ramon, whose biggest claim to fame was getting X-Pac (as the 123 kid) over. No, his biggest claim to fame would be his ladder match, against --------- da, da, HBK. That match is better than any Sting matches I can remember. |
|
|
|
Post by gatekeeper on Jun 18, 2007 16:59:51 GMT -5
Scott Hall, I'd say he was far bigger as part of the nWo than he was as Razor Ramon, whose biggest claim to fame was getting X-Pac (as the 123 kid) over. No, his biggest claim to fame would be his ladder match, against --------- da, da, HBK. That match is better than any Sting matches I can remember. Havoc is awesome! Great post brotha! And WCW only beat the WWF/E for a year and a half. That means that just about every other week, the WWF/E was on top of the ratings. And the only reason WCW got to that point was by trotting out old WWE guys. |
|
