Grimmas

Gable is pretty? Long hair in wrestling = pretty.

Discuss here.

It's 2016. There is no reason to have eye candy girls matches anymore. They haven't even done that in years. They are on the right track, as you see all the new hires in NXT are good or have potential. Also they don't freaking need models.

What do you mean by decent? I just checked Ticketmaster and I see offers for seats in Section E (camera left, stage right) and C. The ringside seats go up to 10,000 dollars per ticket? I am all for a brand split and I would perfer everyone I don't like to be on one brand with HHH and Stephanie so I can make sure to never watch that show. In order to accomplish this WWE will need to re-brand the women as mentioned above. Total Divas would need to be re-casted to include retired/non-wrestlers so they can be on the HHH/Stephanie brand and the other brand can be for the actual workers and NXT calls ups. Again, WWE can have its cake and eat it to. The new Total Divas would be: Rosa, Cameron, Eva, Summer Rae, Lana, Jo Jo, and of course The Bellas. I don't think you can have divas on one show and women on the other. One show can have actually wrestling the other the "divas" are there to do what? Have shitty matches? The "divas" show is only people on Total Divas? How would this work?

John Cena, Bock Lesnar, Dustin Rhodes, and AJ Styles are on for sure. Samoa Joe might sneak on.

Damn, now I have to go and watch a bunch of Hase, eh?

In early march there will be a webforum to be filled out with your votes. I will get it up as soon as I can in March.

He's fine, but nowhere near my list. Maybe a top 100 workers since 2010?

This is a really interesting point, that I never thought about. Explains a lot. Won't move Flair above Hansen or anything, but gives me some thoughts.

He did that in 07, after 4 years of being the worst wrestler in a major promotion. As Matt noted, sometimes watching someone post prime does not reveal much. How extensively has this claim that Ric Flair was the worst wrestler in a major promotion been vetted? Hyperbola by me. He wasn't good at all for a period, though.

He did that in 07, after 4 years of being the worst wrestler in a major promotion. As Matt noted, sometimes watching someone post prime does not reveal much.

Thanks Matt, that clarifies what I am trying to say better than I said it.

I don't like the sports comparisons, because wrestling is not just about being an athlete. I think the prime of a wrestler is a good starting point, but should not be the be all and end all.

For me depends how great the greatness was (I don't think Shawn was top 5 in the world at anytime outside of 97 maybe) and how they become crap. Jumbo was crap, because he was injured. He was also smart enough to work undercard comedy matches instead of epic main events at that time. That doesn't hurt him. Shawn was crap, because the style he tried to work. He probably could had put on epic matches still, but he would had to have adjusted his style. If he couldn't, then he should had not tried to put on 40 minutes HIAC matches with his friend.

My issue is, what if they turn out like Kurt Angle and go from really good to the dirt worst? If we did this poll in 98, Shawn Michaels would be on my list. Doing it in 2016 he is not, due to his awful run post comeback. This is why I'm not voting for someone in their prime. For me, the post-prime does nothing to diminish what he achieved before that which why HBK is making my list. I'm convinced that negatives over-index in our thinking. I think the post comeback proves he was not a smart worker and relied on his athleticism. I prefer workers who play to their strengths and don't look awful, because they are dumb. The Rockers were really good and I liked his original heel DX run. Don't like him at all as a babyface outside of Rockers run. Plus, personally, I dislike the person a lot. ​But we still don't know if CM Punk and Daniel Bryan would've sucked when they're 40. Why is retiring prematurely different than still being in your prime? They didn't prove they were stupid workers. Lawler, Funk, Tenryu, almost all luchadores prove you can be good and old if you adapt. Shawn wasn't that smart of a worker. Punk and Bryan may be stupid workers, but there is no evidence that a 60 year old Bryan or Punk would still be doing the same match as they were in thier prime.

Big difference is that Valentine didn't suck or anything, he was just slower, old and not put in good positions. If Valentine was out there doing main events that were awful, because he was trying to work really fast even though he couldn't, that would hurt him. Better example would be Jushin Liger. Liger is old now, but still puts on good matches. Why? Liger was smart enough to realize he shouldn't be doing SSPs when his body couldn't take it. If Liger in 2000s still wrestled like 89 Liger, then it would hurt him. Shawn was not that smart. It's all about how you adapt. Also, I don't think as much of his 12 year run as a lot of others do. If he just had that early run he would be on my list in the 70-100 range. However his comeback proved that he was only good because he was charismatic and a good athlete and he didn't understand a lot of things about wrestling. If his comeback was worked smarter, then there would be no issues. You can be older and still be awesome, if you adapt. However, if Shawn had 12 years as good as his heel 97 run, and then did that comeback then yeah he'd make my list now.

My issue is, what if they turn out like Kurt Angle and go from really good to the dirt worst? If we did this poll in 98, Shawn Michaels would be on my list. Doing it in 2016 he is not, due to his awful run post comeback. This is why I'm not voting for someone in their prime. For me, the post-prime does nothing to diminish what he achieved before that which why HBK is making my list. I'm convinced that negatives over-index in our thinking. I think the post comeback proves he was not a smart worker and relied on his athleticism. I prefer workers who play to their strengths and don't look awful, because they are dumb. The Rockers were really good and I liked his original heel DX run. Don't like him at all as a babyface outside of Rockers run. Plus, personally, I dislike the person a lot.

My issue is, what if they turn out like Kurt Angle and go from really good to the dirt worst? If we did this poll in 98, Shawn Michaels would be on my list. Doing it in 2016 he is not, due to his awful run post comeback. This is why I'm not voting for someone in their prime.

Well the restocking of NXT iis going on big time right now, so raiding NXT to make Smackdown a great show again wouldn't be a bad idea. It really depends, if Dunn/Vince are still running both shows then it will still be shit. If Vince/Dunn focus on one and the other had a different focus then it's a whole new ball game.

Depends. One man champion. US and IC on separate shows as their main titles. Keep them separate. They each have different feels and styles. It could work that way. Of course I have no confidence they would do it right. The only brand split I would want to see is an NXT invasion, leading them to take over Smackdown.

You think it's gotten out of hand, wait until WrestleMania weekend when some people are finalizing their lists.

I agree, they have not done well with Styles. No way the Styles Clash should had been kicked out of. No way they should be calling him a redneck rookie. No way he should had lost in his first month with the company.

Wow, this is going to be an amazing show.

Amateur hour Thanks for that constructive criticism.

Malenko was this really great wrestler in BattlARTS. Will fit right in with Danielson and Doug Williams. You just nailed one of TNA's issues of just throwing out people without building them up. I'm trying to eliminate as many bad TNA mistakes as possible.