goodhelmet

I knew HHH was going to win this thing going away. Voting for Orndorff allowed me the moral high ground in objecting to his being in the tournament.

Davey Boy Smith -His best matches smoke Piper's. He was involved in some really great angles (Hart Foundation '97, chasing the Dream Team, vs. Brother in laws.) Has had about as many of the top matches in the fed as many of the other greats (Austin, HBK, Bret). Piper, on the other hand was horrible in the ring, took part in god-awful boxing matches, a horrible angle w/ Bad News Brown, a bad return in 2003... and those programs with Bret and Hogan. Sadly, Piper's best contribution came before 1995 with the Jimmy Snuka coconut angle.

Rick Martel

JBL's best match was better than Foley's best match. Every other intangible goes to Foley. Foley

Eddie Guerrero- The easiest vote so far.

Once again, I refuse to choose HHH, esp. when he has hurt the business more than he has helped it. If he had channeled more of his energy into making RAW must-see TV and not in making him the focus of every single RAW then this vote may be different. Paul Orndorff

The Rock

HBK

The Hitman

I'm over it

I piss on his grave and have faith in the human spirit as people came to their senses and did not vote a Hardy Boy over Steamboat. Am I gloating? Yes. Do I think Steamboat will get creamed in the next round? Depends who he is matched up against.

YOu don't count

No, you see, Scherer just wanted to check with his own sources before trusting that unreliable dirt sheet. Gotta keep the journalism credible

I'll second HTQ's sentiments on Ebessan. He had a couple of matches in ROH this year that were comedy gold. His gimmick is almost spot on to what Damian was doing in the '95 JCup.

Part of the tension is clearly from the fact that I wasn't finished editing my post and I realized that without the "Not", it sounded incredibly pretentious of me. Also, for the last two or three go-arounds, I think it has been more of a war of words rather than a real argument so I agree... time to let the voters decide.

You sure did make some strong assumptions about me based on one argument and despite having talked to me extensively many times. And this is where we disagree, which I have stated all along. That isn;t how that match played out at all but whatever.

I have been getting them on Fridays the last couple of weeks. So you scan it and it comes out as a word document?

Completely off-topic but HTQ, did you get the Observer in the mail today? If so, how do you get this stuff on the computer?

Read the post again. I had already begun editing it before you were finished with this post. I will when I get home... and after you give me a list of Matt Hardy matches worth seeing. I want to marvel in the greatness that is Matt Hardy. Bullshit Agreed but it was also a title match... and the best way to hurt Savage in this instance is to take away what matters most to him... his belt.

I am too which is where we disagree. You give more credit to the Brainbusters and Matt HArdy than I think they deserve. I give more credit to STeamboat and Show than you think they deserve. My argument has not swayed you and after that list of fueds, your argument def. has not swayed my opinion one iota. Half of those feuds in your list had embarassingly bad writing and acting leading up top the matches. The dog poo is only one example. You clearly weren't watching the same match as me. It was hardly a Flair-Steamboat headlock test of wills type scientific match. Screw it. I'll watch it again once the discs arrive from Nik Johns. I haven't seen a Jericho-HHH match yet better than Steamboat-Savage. Not a one. When did I mention mic skills? The only time I think I have mentioned mic skills was the Tito-Benoit matchup and I was being facetious. If I did elsewhere, it was probably a valid point.

And yet, not one Matt Hardy match on there. Also, half of those matches are not better than Savage-Steamboat. Please, take the challenge. Also, a feud is not based solely on matches. Isn; that what you have been arguing with me about all this time? It is based on the progression, or play, of the characters involved. That is why Hogan and Heenaan can have a great feud, yet never have a match. It is also contingent on the outcome. If a feud has an unsatisfying ending, it hurts the feud... such as 3/4 of the feuds in your list

Agreed on Austin, not on Owen. I'm calling Buls**t on this one. Michaels had one good match with Foley. It wasn;'t even a feud. Foley says it was just thrown together. The Shawn-Taker feud was all because of the HBK-Bret feud. It was nowhere near as good as Steamboat-Savage. With no payoff... since there was never any doubt that Rock was the better man. Possibly No, they had a great match... not a geat feud. A great feud would have seen JBL losing the belt back to Eddy. Give me a friggin break. Not really. They had some memorable matches... mainly because we aren;'t that far away removed from them but Rock never got the payoff he deserved to end it once and for all. Also, it is hard to get behind a HHH feud when his character is so horrid. If you can get behind him, better for you. Yep, because Jericho picking up dog poo made for great television. And Jericho getting squashed effectively in every single match makes for a great feud. Now, Jericho-Stephanie had a good feud. Jericho-HHH? No way in hell. Agreed... at least initially. If you mean the Foley career ending feud, I could argue it is comparable to Steamboat-Savage. This was also due to Foley's God-like promos during this time. Um, no. No. Please explain the events surrounding DiBiase-Savage because besides the Mania 4 match, they have nothing. No Now you are just throwing shit on a wall to see if it sticks What was this feud over again? Agreed, at least pretty damn close. You are delusional. This feud sucked even if the matches were pretty decent. It had the potential to be a great feud and like so many WWE ideas oday. it was wasted potential. No way. --Do you mean the overbooked Russofied BS we were subjected to that was only bearable because of the insane charisma of both Foley and Austin? No way. Once again, no. In order for this to be a feud, Benoit would have had to actually be seenasa threat and during their mini-feud, he never was. Even if the falst start-restart finish was supposed to make him appear so. Well, no shit. One happened 20 years ago. One happened 5 years ago. This is debatable. He probably had many more good-great matches. Alot of the feuds you mentioned above were crap. Some had good matches, some had the potential to be awesome but in twenty years, no one will give a shit about 4/5 of them... unlike Savage-Steamboat which has continued to be praised. This is also a time when squash matches were featured on TV and we didn;'t get PPV caliber matches on television on a regular basis. I'll take the challenge and look for some MSG shows from Steamboat's era. I am sure there are some matches worth seeking out. So now we are giving credit to matches that have had a negative impact on the way wrestling is percieved and approached? We'll see. A personal preference for sure. I would rather see a **** performance than see a few three star (debatable if they even reach that level) matches carried by better workers. When was the last time you saw it? I watched it last year when I reviewed it for SNKT and my thoughts were reinforced. When I get on DVD from Nik Johns, I'll be sure to watch it again.

I'm still looking for the definitive Matt Hardy match or angle that defines his career in WWF. You say, Steamboat had the Savage feud and what else? What else did he need? The feud lasted nearly a year. It was one of the best feuds the WWF has ever produced. Ever. I saw Steamboat and Roberts tear it up in Pheonix in '86. I still remember. Again, a good angle and feud. You could use this same argument for Big Show and Arn Anderson. Sub in Hardy and Steamboat. ie... you're Anderson had a great year in the WWF Big Show was mediocre for most of his WWF career Steamboat had a great year or 2 years in WWF Matt Hardy had a mainly mediocre career in WWF. Steamboat's first run is better than anything Matt HArdy has produced from an angle or match standpoint. Also, for the hell of it, why don't you give us your thoughts on Savage-Steamboat? I reviewed it for SNKT and went in fully expecting to bash it. Instead I came out a bigger fan of that match than ever, even though it is not close to five stars. Sometimes being great means more than being consistent.

For the Matt Hardy voters, please explain his appeal. Is it the spot-fu tag action when he was a Hardy Boy? Was it the mediocre feud with Kane or his brother? Was it simply the V1 gimmick? Matt Hardy has been consistent in his career there... consistently mediocre.

Screw star ratings. What is their rank in the army of suck?