Would Shawn Michaels Make Your Personal Top 100?

[Matt D]

Honestly, Hennig's initial WWF run is hampered by the fact he's forced to work 1990 Kerry for a huge chunk of it. The Rooster match is good, the Piper match is borderline great, the Hart match IS great, and he's super broken down there. Also, around 90 a lot of the secondary footage (Boston, Toronto, Philly) dries up so there are less matches available than there would be otherwise.

[khawk20]

That's a reasonable point, though I don't think mid-late 80's AWA is the best example of a territory where guys were running lengthy programs v. opponents thus enabling them to cruise control to quality matches.

Not for nothing but the Rockers vs. Rose and Somers was a good 6 months of matches around the horn. By the time the wrapped it up, I would imagine they could have "cruise-controlled" their matches.

[Frankensteiner]

Honestly, Hennig's initial WWF run is hampered by the fact he's forced to work 1990 Kerry for a huge chunk of it. The Rooster match is good, the Piper match is borderline great, the Hart match IS great, and he's super broken down there. Also, around 90 a lot of the secondary footage (Boston, Toronto, Philly) dries up so there are less matches available than there would be otherwise.

I might be in the minority but I still thought Hennig was pretty great in the WWF. His 1993 face run is probably my favorite part of his stay there though. Have you seen any of that?

 

The other day I went through a list of his matches in that 1990/1991 period. From what I've seen, I liked the matches against Tito (SNME), Bossman (Main Event), Shawn (Road to WrestleMania special), Garvin (SummerSlam Fever), and Hercules (Toronto). He has 3 taped matches against Piper but I've only seen the MSG match and it was really good. Perfect did spend the first part of 1990 going up against Hogan and Warrior which maybe aren't the best matchups for him.

 

Also from this time, he has long-ish taped matches against Jake, Bulldog, and Valentine that look interesting on paper.

[JerryvonKramer]

I think the build to the Perfect-Luger match at Mania 9 is often neglected or forgotten as being quite great. Luger was good as The Narcissist and Perfect was just cool as a reasonably well-liked but still arrogant face. Face Perfect almost feels like a prototype for Pillman at times.

[Matt D]

I want to talk about the build to WM IX at some point, but I was going to do it on Jae's 1993 WWE note on DVDVR (http://board.deathvalleydriver.com/index.php?showtopic=54630). I hadn't seen it before and it really surprised me since I HAD seen the show before and I didn't realize just how deeply some of the undercard was built.

 

But I think i's great how the feud was Heenan using Luger as his replacement Flair.

[JerryvonKramer]

The 30-minute hype show on the Coliseum Home Video hosted by Sean Mooney does a wonderful job of summarising that build.

 

Believe that was Mooney's last assignment, but it's arguably his best and THE BEST 30-minute countdown show ever.

 

I watched Mania's 4-9 over and over as a kid, and I liked that 30 minutes of build more than the card itself.

[evilclown]

This is an aside, but I think you really hurt your cause when discussing someone like Shawn and using Dustin Rhodes as your comparison. It's been the "cute" thing to do for a long time in these circles, but it is a bad approach for any attempt to substantively discuss Michaels or reevaluate his place in history.

 

I understand the shock value of it. But when you use someone who wasn't especially well received at the time (or historically) by most fans, the strong points you make are lost. When you are preaching to the choir it may work. It doesn't work for any kind of discussion with anyone outside this narrow circle.

[Bix]

Dustin was only ever not well received because of the collective newsletter reader/writer hate boner for Dusty back then, which has thankfully subsided for the most part. The WONs from the early '90s heavily inflated how much of a push he had while discounting his work. If he just happened to be a tall guy WCW liked who wasn't Dusty's son, he would've been heralded as "the next Barry Windham" by the same people. By his last year in WCW it seemed like he was getting more respect, but the rumors of him unifying the world titles (which sound a little weird since he wasn't positioned close to that level) were still written up as this awful dreadful thing. It wasn't necessarily a great idea but he was over amd I think would've done fine in-ring at least

[Jingus]

Also, let's not forget that most fans know him best as Goldust, largely from his 96-99 run. In his younger heyday, most of his matches focused largely on various Sportz Entertainment shenanigans and weren't exactly ever put in the position to be workrate classics. (I still have recurring nightmares of his PPV match with Warrior: fifteen minutes of no-contact stalling, one clothesline, and then a DQ.) So yeah, most casual fans and the more casual smarks are gonna be rather bewildered when you claim that the eternally-hyped main eventer Shawn Michaels is actually inferior to that fat guy who used to dress in weird outfits and grope himself.

[evilclown]

Dustin was only ever not well received because of the collective newsletter reader/writer hate boner for Dusty back then

I think it was more a matter of "Greg Gagne-itis." Dustin just didn't have it. He's a fine wrestler, nothing more, and to pretend he was held back by the man doesn't seem quite right. The truth is, if he wasn't Dusty's son, no one with his look/physique/ability ever gets his spot.

[Matt D]

This is an aside, but I think you really hurt your cause when discussing someone like Shawn and using Dustin Rhodes as your comparison. It's been the "cute" thing to do for a long time in these circles, but it is a bad approach for any attempt to substantively discuss Michaels or reevaluate his place in history.

 

I understand the shock value of it. But when you use someone who wasn't especially well received at the time (or historically) by most fans, the strong points you make are lost. When you are preaching to the choir it may work. It doesn't work for any kind of discussion with anyone outside this narrow circle.

I can't even imagine having this discussion with someone who doesn't admit how good Dustin was. There wouldn't be enough middle ground to even begin to have a useful discussion. It'd just be frustrating for all parties.

 

Which doesn't mean you don't have a point. It's not what we're doing here, however. I think even the strongest Michaels supporters in this note respect Dustin's abilities and matches.

[Bix]

Dustin was only ever not well received because of the collective newsletter reader/writer hate boner for Dusty back then

I think it was more a matter of "Greg Gagne-itis." Dustin just didn't have it. He's a fine wrestler, nothing more, and to pretend he was held back by the man doesn't seem quite right. The truth is, if he wasn't Dusty's son, no one with his look/physique/ability ever gets his spot.

 

He wasn't held back by the man in terms of smart taste making or whatever, but he was unfairly treated like an Erik Watts type who had no business getting any kind of push. His spot was mid card guy who was usually the underdog. He basically had Windham's body type. Not as good a look overall, but he was a tall midcard guy who was a very good to great worker who was a great fit for WCW at that point.

 

(Also Greg Gagne was a very over tag team wrestler whose peers considered a great worker that was carrying a spot machine partner while being held down by his dad. He just got really out of place really fast when wrestling changed.)

[jdw]

Tito's career is a disappointment when it comes to matches.

Unless one actually likes the matches.

 

John

[Jingus]

If you guys were to name a few must-see Dustin and/or Tito matches to convince noobs that they were awesome, which ones would you pick?

[JerryvonKramer]

Why was Tito still wearing Strike Force gear in 1990?

 

Think he was just so aimless for most of his WWF career after his time as IC champ basically. Even the big feud with Martel never really got a big blow off or any sense of closure, almost like for years the only meaningful thing Tito had to do in the year besides tagging with Virgil and getting his ass kicked was go for Martel at the Royal Rumble.

 

I know Tito has a lot of fans here, but no matter how good he was as a fired-up babyface, if the booking just isn't there for you, what does any of it matter? Can't think of a single interesting thing Tito did after 1986.

[Victator]

A dude with Dustin's size and ability would of easily had a spot in the mid card. All things considered, he is an under achiever.

[Matt D]

If you guys were to name a few must-see Dustin and/or Tito matches to convince noobs that they were awesome, which ones would you pick?

http://board.deathvalleydriver.com/index.p...all&st=1860

 

Better than HHH!

[Bix]

If you guys were to name a few must-see Dustin and/or Tito matches to convince noobs that they were awesome, which ones would you pick?

Tito:

vs Savage (No DQ from Toronto, whole feud is really good)

vs Valentine (any if their IC Title or '88 matches)

w/ Martel vs Islanders (Boston match from DVDVR set)

vs Ron Bass (MSG match from DVDVR set)

 

Dustin:

w/ Steamboat va Enforcers (Clash 17)

vs Bunkhouse Buck (Spring Stampede '94)

w/ Windham vs Doc & Gordy (WCWSN title change)

vs Vader (Clash 19 & subsequent TV match)

[Matt D]

Tito vs Windham is super fun too.

[jdw]

If you guys were to name a few must-see Dustin and/or Tito matches to convince noobs that they were awesome, which ones would you pick?

What's the point in trying to convince noobs?

 

I just think this:

 

"Tito's career is a disappointment when it comes to matches."

 

Only works for one who doesn't like a number of Tito's matches. I like me some Tito matches.

 

I'm not even wading into the Tito > Shawn or Shawn > Tito notion because it doesn't interest me at all.

 

John

[Jingus]

What's the point in trying to convince noobs?

I talk to a lot of them. And believe me, for every one guy who's seen any of the matches Bix named, there's twenty more who've seen several of Shawn's big matches on WWE's DVD releases. Not too many younger fans know jack shit about the decades-old midcard careers of guys like Dustin or Tito.

[Ricky Jackson]

We do have a Tito thread, remember? http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?showtopic=15282

 

ohtani's jacket even reviewed a bunch of Tito's matches.

 

Why was Tito still wearing Strike Force gear in 1990?

That always bugged me. It made Tito look like a jilted lover who couldn't get over the fact that he had been dumped and was unable to move on.

[Chess Knight]

To someone who thinks Dustin wasn't anywhere near Michaels' level (and that's seen the Dustin I really love), I can only say different strokes. I'm not even sure I'd take Dustin over Michaels, but to say "you hurt your case" when bringing Dustin's name up or mentioning how well he was received at the time is pretty silly. Keiji Mutoh got really high rankings in the 1992 Most Outstanding awards IIRC, and I think for the most part the guy is a boring lump and someone like Larry Zbyszko absolutely demolishes him so much that it isn't funny, to the point where it actually becomes funny again.

[NintendoLogic]

It's a good run. How good is really what the debate is about as you noted before. I haven't watched the Shawn matches in a few years, but if we were putting together a 90's WWF Set from ppv I am positive both the Ladder Matches, HITC I (though I don't care for it myself), MindGames, GFBE, The Iron Man, v. Jarrett and probably even SS 97 would make the cut without much debate. That's eight matches and that is nothing to sneeze at. Beyond that you'd have at least the Action Zone tag from tv, but offhand I'm struggling to think of a tenth "home run" match that would be a definite pick. That's not really a knock on Shawn and there are a lot of others I could see getting strong consideration or that I would back myself (stuff like the Owen ppv match from 96 which I like more than most or the aforementioned Sid match which I may like less than others).

 

What I would say is that I don't think it is a uniquely transcendent run and that is where I think the real disagreement is.

If you were going to rank top 90s WWF PPV matches, the six-man from International Incident would be up there for sure. But yeah, we're pretty much at an impasse. You can point to his lesser-known PPV matches and various TV matches, but let's get real. The overwhelming bulk of his case is based on matches everyone has seen a million times.

 

Shawn being a little shit who can't get along with others is not something I think should be used as an excuse in a discussion like this. On paper Martel had better opponents, probably even in practice. But I don't think it was by a wide margin and Martel didn't have Patterson booking, props out the ass, et. I really consider it a wash in that category.

I agree that a major negative aspect of Shawn's legacy is the popularization of smoke-and-mirrors gimmick matches that blur the distinction between good workers and mediocre ones and shorten careers (and in a few cases, lives). But the vast majority of the matches Shawn worked during that period were straight wrestling matches (I know you've said that Mind Games is a de facto gimmick match, but I remain unconvinced). And the gimmick matches were built to logically. There was no "let's have a TLC match because it's my signature match" or "let's have a Hell in a Cell match because that's the theme of the next PPV." Guys like HHH and Edge were far more reliant on gimmicks, and I feel like their sins are being transferred to Shawn in a way that isn't entirely fair.

 

I think that's a really simplistic way of looking at it and I was as big a Hennig critic as you would find on the net until I started watching Portland/AWA. The expectations Vince had for heel work had a lot to do with how Hennig degenerated as a worker in my view, but that might be a separate topic in and of itself. I think the Mr. Perfect era comp to the initial Shawn heel run is pretty strong.

It's true that WWF heels were limited by the style, but Savage and Rick Rude were far more successful in that milieu. And I'm certainly not going to defend Shawn's first heel run. It's been pointed out in the past that HBK/Perfect at Summerslam was disappointing because it matched two big bumpers with no offense, so it ended up being like a boxing match between two counterpunchers. But Shawn was able to transcend that. Maybe Hennig would have as well if his body had held out, but you know how that goes.

 

As for comparisons to Dustin and Tito, I think they're both fine workers. I could see them both scraping the outer reaches of my top 100, but I haven't really thought about it systematically beyond the very top. Anyway, peak performance is by far my most criterion in evaluating wrestlers, and Shawn smokes both of them on that front. It's possible that they would have done better than Shawn if they had been given the opportunities he had, but I judge guys based on actual output, not fanfiction what-if scenarios. If you rate peak Dustin and/or Tito above peak Shawn, you probably see it differently.

[jdw]

We do have a Tito thread, remember? http://prowrestlingonly.com/index.php?showtopic=15282

 

ohtani's jacket even reviewed a bunch of Tito's matches.

Yeah, I'm aware of it. I wouldn't call it reviewing matches. It was just throwing out some quick comments of Tito's work with various opponents?

 

I have a thread where I reviewed about 40 Tito matches, in some detail. I didn't like all of them, but like a lot of them, and explained why. And in the matches that I didn't think as much of, explained why, or pointed out things that worked and didn't work.

 

Pretty sure others have as well.

 

John