Is John Cena a better worker than Kurt Angle?

[S.L.L.]

Also, WON star ratings when it comes to Angle are absurd. I don't know if it's because of legitimacy, or because Meltzer loves ACTION or what, but it's just nuts.

It's also absurd because people should be able to back up their own beliefs with their own opinions rather than pointing to someone else's star ratings like they were indisputable truth.

[Coffey]

If you just ignore the ratings themselves it is usually a pretty good indicator as a list of good matches though.

[Dylan Waco]

Maybe..but three of the matches in the Meltzer "top ten" I don't like at all.

[Jingus]

Regarding the Shane McMahon thing: I've got zero problem with him in the ring, or with any wrestler selling for him. When he first started out, he did indeed wrestle like a noob and got his ass handed to him by pretty much everyone. But that changed over time, because he kept having matches. How many times do you have to wrestle before you're still "not a wrestler" anymore? Same thing with Vince: when he was first getting beaten by Austin constantly, he was little more than a punching bag; but eventually he go to the point where he could hang with the competition, at least temporarily. Once these guys have been around long enough, they're no longer just some regular man-off-the-street, they're official full-time characters on this show and I don't see the issue with them having semi-competitive matches.

[Coffey]

Maybe..but three of the matches in the Meltzer "top ten" I don't like at all.

Which is fine, you can dislike them. But aren't you at least glad you watched them so that you can have that difference of opinion? I think it's a lot easier when you have a starting list like that than trying to go through a guys entire career.

 

I like the lists for that reason. Plus I like to see the "big" matches so I can debate them with others. For example, I didn't like the Punk/Cena MitB '11 match at all & liked the build-up & crowd more than the match itself but I was still glad that I watched it.

[ohtani's jacket]

I didn't know that Kurt Angle still wrestles.

[Loss]

Regarding the Shane McMahon thing: I've got zero problem with him in the ring, or with any wrestler selling for him. When he first started out, he did indeed wrestle like a noob and got his ass handed to him by pretty much everyone. But that changed over time, because he kept having matches. How many times do you have to wrestle before you're still "not a wrestler" anymore? Same thing with Vince: when he was first getting beaten by Austin constantly, he was little more than a punching bag; but eventually he go to the point where he could hang with the competition, at least temporarily. Once these guys have been around long enough, they're no longer just some regular man-off-the-street, they're official full-time characters on this show and I don't see the issue with them having semi-competitive matches.

He wasn't a wrestler. That's the issue. I can think of plenty of job guys that had way more matches than either Vince or Shane that never got any offense, and they were actually trained wrestlers. Wrestlers should be presented as far tougher than the guy on the street. If anything, Shane throwing a punch at Angle should be treated like Hawk reacted when JJ Dillon punched him in the first War Games. There is no reason for him to be booked stronger than a wrestling manager.

 

Being a regular character has nothing to do with being presented as a credible opponent for a main eventer. They never put Austin or Undertaker in a position to sell for Shane, which is my point. As a former WWF champ at the time, as someone who had just had a grueling series with Benoit that he won in the end, as someone who had victories over Rock, HHH and Undertaker, as someone who held his own against Austin, Shane had no business getting any offense in on Angle. There's no way to justify it. Shane would have been most effective if presented to be about as threatening as Andy Kaufman.

 

Shane was one of the guys who raised the bar in an unrealistic way, because he could take stupid bumps, then have weeks to recover. His overdone matches are one of the reasons it's hard to build and sustain heat in wrestling matches with no crazy bumps, blood or gimmicks attached. It can be done by people who know what they're doing, but wow, it's pulling teeth to get a crowd to respond to good wrestling even for good, experienced wrestlers much of the time.

 

King of the Ring 2001 was a major turning point for the show when you had Austin, Benoit and Angle all injured. The style had become unsustainable. Chris Jericho, the healthiest of those in top positions on the show, had a concussion. Since then, every effort WWE has made to tone down the style has been met with selfish outcries from fans who have no respect for the toll wrestling such a heightened style takes on one's body.

 

I'm rambling, but yeah, that's sort of my problem with Shane. I didn't even get into how counterproductive it is to present the in-ring as something that anyone can do with a little practice.

 

(I didn't mention Vince and Stephanie within this conversation, because in the matches they have had, they have usually wrestled like people who don't know what they're doing, instead of like people who think they can hang. I'm not a fan of Stephanie on air at all, but I'd debate anyone who argued that Shane was a more effective character, or that he understood his role more.)

[Johnny Sorrow]

I get what Loss is saying, totally. But what I'd do to make Shane believable was just create the story in my head that he wanted to be a wrestler, but Vince wouldn't allow it. But since he grew up around all the guys, he'd train with them and picked a few things up, and he was a High School athlete as well. But he wasn't that good and that's why he had to rely on falling from high places on people.

[Victator]

The Kane feud was even worse. Shane going even with Kane for three straight pay per views. Trying to kill his unmasking right out of the gate.

[Johnny Sorrow]

The Kane feud was even worse. Shane going even with Kane for three straight pay per views. Trying to kill his unmasking right out of the gate.

Yeah, but Kane stalking Shane in the Hospital was some funny shit.

[NintendoLogic]

Shane was one of the guys who raised the bar in an unrealistic way, because he could take stupid bumps, then have weeks to recover. His overdone matches are one of the reasons it's hard to build and sustain heat in wrestling matches with no crazy bumps, blood or gimmicks attached. It can be done by people who know what they're doing, but wow, it's pulling teeth to get a crowd to respond to good wrestling even for good, experienced wrestlers much of the time.

This reminds me of a review of Inception I saw recently that said that "we've entered an era in which movies can no longer be great. They can only be awesome, which isn't nearly the same thing." I think that perfectly sums up today's wrestling scene.

 

Anyway, I don't think Cena got good until about 2006. And I think that Angle's mechanics are being undersold in this thread. He's always had a really nice belly-to-belly suplex. And the matwork in the Eddy/Angle WMXX match is really good, some of the best I've seen in a WWE ring. Still, I'd give this to Cena without a second thought. Cena may be stale and formulaic, but he's shown that he can step outside the formula if need be (vs. Umaga, vs. Lesnar). Angle, on the other hand, has fundamentally flawed ideas about how to structure a match. I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but I like matches where big moments are built up to and mean something. In Angle's matches, they come out of nowhere and are forgotten ten seconds later.

[Loss]

I think this is really interesting when you compare Angle to wrestlers who were smart, but didn't do much athletically.

 

Is Kurt Angle a better worker than Jimmy Valiant? Is Kurt Angle a better worker than Junkyard Dog? Is Kurt Angle a better worker than Jake Roberts? Is Kurt Angle a better worker than Dump Matsumoto?

 

I don't think the answer is a definite "the other wrestler is better" in each of those cases, but I still think it's an interesting question that probably says more about the tastes of the individual than anything.

[Matt D]

Part of me wants to watch a bunch of WCW JYD and make an argument how he's better than Angle. But I have all this AWA to watch and then want to watch every Killer Bees match ever.

[Kronos]

I think this is really interesting when you compare Angle to wrestlers who were smart, but didn't do much athletically.

 

Is Kurt Angle a better worker than Jimmy Valiant? Is Kurt Angle a better worker than Junkyard Dog? Is Kurt Angle a better worker than Jake Roberts? Is Kurt Angle a better worker than Dump Matsumoto?

 

I don't think the answer is a definite "the other wrestler is better" in each of those cases, but I still think it's an interesting question that probably says more about the tastes of the individual than anything.

I have not seen enough from Dump, though she was certainly fun playing the less-interesting Aja Kong role. I will say that I can't think of anytime I ever watched Jimmy Valiant or JYD and didn't get bored in minutes.

 

But give me a healthy, reasonably sober Jake over Angle everytime. Jake may not have thrown 1000 suplexes, but the man understands how to perform. Rasslin is a performance art, after all. He could talk better than almost anyone. He could work to the crowd, generating honest to god heat. He knew how to stooge and mix up the pace. When he would finally throw a DDT, it meant something, bygawd. Damn he's fun -- I think I should hit up DM and YT later today.

 

Angle, on the other hand, is like a more skilled Davey Richards. He only knows one way to be -- superfast and superINTENSE. It works if everyone is working that format, such in as in late 2002. But to me, his best matches are with people who know better and can reign him in a bit. (Austin in 2001, for example, or Jarrett in 2009-11) He has no sense of proportion and very little ability to vary his style when he is in charge.

 

I wonder how his work with Sting holds up?

 

As has been mentioned, Cena has been able to carry people like Khali and a green Lashley to some good matches, while holding his own with others who he doesn't have to carry. Hell, his feud with mega-heel Batista a couple of Manias back just might be my favorite of his.

[Chess Knight]

I'd have Jake far, far ahead of Angle. Jake doesn't really 'bump', but I think he knows how to make his opponent look good while selling their move(s). On offense there's just no comparison; watch Jake work the arm of Ricky Steamboat. Hell, watch him work the eye of the Dirty White Boy. He looked drugged out of his fucking mind and had a better control (insert something other than segment*) than I've probably ever seen from Angle.

 

*

[RWOOD]

I also don't understand why some people are so opposed to Shane getting in so much offence at King of the Ring. Angle had wrestled two hard matches already that night, and in a wild, no holds barred fight it isn't too out of the question that Shane would be able to mount some sort of attack. It's certainly no more unbelievable than, say, Rey Mysterio having a competitive match with Big Show.

Of course it's worse. Rey is a trained athlete. Shane is a guy off the street. Untrained athletes should be tied in knots by Olympic gold medalists.

 

I also think, unless there has been a ridiculous sea change in the last couple of years, that Angle would be considered by a country mile the better worker by most internet fans (do we even use that term anymore? Are all fans internet fans now?). Just look at comments in YouTube videos and on most forums to see how hated Cena is, and how much of a scapegoat he is for the current product. Most people still think Angle to be a very good worker, if not the superworker he was perceived as in most smart circles circa-2005.

I suspect most people don't know Kurt Angle still wrestles.

 

He still wrestles a spotty brawling style with little selling except for the two count, similar to the climax of most WWF matches in the Attitude era where he learned how to wrestle professionally, right? I haven't really watched an Angle match in years.

 

Cena, on the other, I see all the time. I often find myself rooting for Cena all the time in situations where he is in the ring with a terrible worker or whatever and is able to pull off great stuff in the ring.

[Guest Nell Santucci]

It's funny how some WO columnists so readily dismiss Cena as a worker compared to Kurt Angle. By his standard, AJ Styles is a better worker than anyone on the WWE roster because of the high spots he can hit.

 

Comparing his candidacy to Angle is kind of tricky since Angle is in largely for his body of work. Cena by no means should ever be compared to Angle in terms of his in-ring ability.

http://www.f4wonline.com/more/more-top-sto...t-hall-of-famer

[cm funk]

Cena has had way more matches I really liked in the last 5-6 years than Angle has. I think I can count on one hand how many Angle matches have really impressed me since he went to TNA. Most of the stuff he does looks good from a technical and execution standpoint, good punches, good throws, and he's a really great athlete obviously......but the sprinty, high spot oriented, half dozen ankle lock attempt matches don't do anything for me, it feels like you're watching the same match every time, no matter who the opponent is.

 

Cena's execution of moves is not nearly as aesthetically good, but he works much smarter, more varied and more interesting matches. A match with Punk is different from a match with Orton, which is different from a match with Big Show etc. etc. The Lesnar match alone blew away anything Angle has done in recent memory.

[Russellmania]

If you look at their top 10 matches star rating wise.

 

Kurt Angle

vs. Shawn Michaels WM 21 (****3/4)

vs. Chris Benoit Royal Rumble 2003 (****3/4)

vs. Edge and Rey Mysterio No Mercy 2002 (****3/4)

 

vs. Jeff Jarrett Genesis 2009 (****1/2)

vs. Shawn Michaels Vengeance 2005 (****1/2)

vs. Chris Benoit Unforgiven 2002 (****1/2)

vs. Rock and Undertaker Vengenace 2002 (****1/2)

vs. Edge (Hair Match) Judgement Day 2002 (****1/2)

vs. Steve Austin Summerslam 2001 (****1/2)

vs. Mr. Anderson Lockdown 2010 (****1/2)

 

 

John Cena

vs. CM Punk Money in the Bank 2011 (*****)

 

vs. Brock Lesnar Backlash 2012 (****1/2)

vs. Edge (Last Man Standing) Backlash 2009 (****1/2)

vs. Edge/Randy Orton/Shawn Michaels Backlash 2007 (****1/2)

 

vs. Edge Unforgiven 2006 (TLC) (****1/4)

vs. Edge/HHH Backlash 2006 (****1/4)

vs. JBL (I Quit) Judgement Day 2006 (****1/4)

vs. Kurt Angle No Mercy 2003 (****1/4)

vs. Batista (Last Man Standing) Extreme Rules 2010 (****1/4)

vs. Randy Orton (I Quit) Breaking Point 2009 (****1/4)

 

The biggest problem is if you want a wrestling match, then Angle is your guy. If you want a main event, gimmick match, (LMS, I Quit) then Cena is your guy.

really late to this discussion, but this a pretty great illustration of how awful Dave's opinions are on match quality. How the hell are neither of the Cena/HBK matches among Cena's top rated matches?

[EricR]

Oh man that Anderson cage match was fucking terrible. That is being pimped as a top 10 all time Angle match!?

[Loss]

Dave still occasionally drops in passing how great that match was.

[EricR]

I remember a spot in the match where Anderson hulks up with his stupid gritted-teeth, spittle-spraying, nose-breathing grimace and flips Angle the double birds, and me and all my friends crying from laughter. One of the most eye-rolling moments I've ever seen in wrestling. And then I went on the boards the next day and a bunch of people were talking about what an intense, badass moment it was and I was baffled.

[NintendoLogic]

It occurred to me recently that Cena is more Angle-esque now than Angle ever was, so I decided to bump this. Honestly, I'm starting to think that a lot of people, myself included, owe Angle an apology. His workrate epics feel like paragons of minimalism and restraint compared to Cena's matches with Owens and Styles. Looking at what WWE main event style has become, criticizing Angle for being a spotfest worker seems rather quaint now, like old-timers in the 70s saying that Flair and Steamboat were all highspots and no psychology.

[Loss]

I think it's relative in the sense that people doing "stuff" that isn't expected is usually well-received. A heavyweight doing a rare typically cruiserweight move may not always be great, but it's more interesting at least than a cruiserweight doing a typically cruiserweight move. Cena has for sure gone off the deep end at times over the last few years. The Styles match was the culmination of years working themselves into a corner with all the false start main event pushes of countless guys through the years. Plenty of guys have beaten Cena, then ended up lower on the card when the feud was done. At that point, if the goal was to cement Styles as the top guy they had to go scorched earth to make the point, if only so people would actually believe it. It's not a match style I typically enjoy, but that's one case where I get it. I'm not sure there's another way at this point that beating John Cena can genuinely, permanently cement a guy as a headliner.

[BrianB]

I'd take Angle.I can see why others don't. As a go-go worker, Angle is definitely better than Cena has been the past few years imo. I don't object to the summerslam match with Styles though, and I think it was a great match, but that's because the work fit the story they were telling. All the other matches on the show with at least 2 finisher false finishes is another story...

 

From reading the old replies, I think people really are undervaluing how good of a talker Angle was in the WWE. Taking advantage of his ability to be so goofy probably hurt his drawing power, but it really led to some hilarious segments that hold up and date much better than plenty of other WWF/E stuff from that era. I'd be curious if putting up more of those old shows on the Network has changed people's opinions some on that topic.

 

 

I think it's relative in the sense that people doing "stuff" that isn't expected is usually well-received. A heavyweight doing a rare typically cruiserweight move may not always be great, but it's more interesting at least than a cruiserweight doing a typically cruiserweight move. Cena has for sure gone off the deep end at times over the last few years. The Styles match was the culmination of years working themselves into a corner with all the false start main event pushes of countless guys through the years. Plenty of guys have beaten Cena, then ended up lower on the card when the feud was done. At that point, if the goal was to cement Styles as the top guy they had to go scorched earth to make the point, if only so people would actually believe it. It's not a match style I typically enjoy, but that's one case where I get it. I'm not sure there's another way at this point that beating John Cena can genuinely, permanently cement a guy as a headliner.

 

I'd agree with that, but I'd add that a big part of the reason why there isn't another way is because ever since Cena got crushed by Brock at SummerSlam, he's transitioned more and more to that false finish kickout style, particularly all through his US open challenge era.