Guys who got away with being bad

[Ricky Jackson]

Brown was also pretty bad in late-80s Stampede from what I remember.

[BrickHithouse]

Was Bob Brown ever even slightly good? Did he ever reach the "heights" of, say, Ivan Putski or Great Khali?

[goc]

Was Bob Brown ever even slightly good? Did he ever reach the "heights" of, say, Ivan Putski or Great Khali?

Not sure. Definitely remember Brown not being thought of very well by any of the guys who talked about him back on the old 57talk with Gary Cubeta interviews.

[Matt D]

Was Brown the booker too?

[BrickHithouse]

He was booker for Central States, definitely. I don't know for how long or what years or anything.

 

From what the people around here tell me, it sounds like he booked himself as an indestructible force.

[BrickHithouse]

Is Bob Brown "the guy" for this category? Can we name it "The Bulldog Bob Brown Award"?

 

He worked from the 50's or 60's through 1996 in some capacity and died in 1997. That's a hell of a career, and a lot of people probably saw him once or twice.

 

He was bad enough that despite 5 or so decades, no one has yet to uncover even a decent match.

 

Brown has very strong case.

[rvd356]

I don't know if these guys fit in the category as it was outlined by the OP but some current guys:

 

Miz- he's been around for what 7, 8 years and still acts & wrestles like he did on his 1st day in the company. His WWE title feud with Lawler was cool because it was just so different plus I do like seeing "part timers" work, the matches were fun for what they were. His FCA match with Morrison was goodish too but only cuz I'm such a big Morrison mark. But the feud with Cena was awful & the Mania match was for my money, THE worst Mania main of all time. Atleast with Sid/Taker I was a big mark for both guys as a kid and it had a good ending. This guy seriously needs to become some big guys mouthpiece or just be the color guy for Superstars. I would like to see his match w/ Cesaro @ the Chamber '13 ppv though because I like Cesaro vs. Anybody.

 

Matt Morgan- I seriously have watched a ton of this guys stuff & again he still looks like he just walked off Tough Enough. Even his BFG 09 match w/ Angle was poor, a match that should have been an easy bout to impress. All he had to do was throwdown some high impact offense & Angle would bump like a madman(Kurt always cranks it up @ BFG). I recently watched Genesis '13 and him & Joey Ryan looked like SHIT. Absolutely 0 chemistry and it looked like neither guy had ever been in a tag match. Just a bad match.

[khawk20]

I understand that's past his prime, but I always think that if someone was a good worker, you see shades of that in them as an older worker.

Ok. I was curious if you'd seen him work in his prime and where you would have seen it as I don't think there is much out there.

[Matt D]

I think you learn a hell of a lot more about a worker watching him work post-prime than you do watching him in his prime. I realize that's an extreme notion, but for someone who thinks the most important aspect of a wrestler is knowing how to do the right thing at the right time, what he does when he can no longer use physicality as a crutch really shows whether or not he "gets it."

[JerryvonKramer]

I understand that's past his prime, but I always think that if someone was a good worker, you see shades of that in them as an older worker.

Ok. I was curious if you'd seen him work in his prime and where you would have seen it as I don't think there is much out there.

 

Just checked Cornette's garbage tapes to see if he crops up but he doesn't. Where was Thunberbolt Patterson actually based for most of his peak?

 

I think you learn a hell of a lot more about a worker watching him work post-prime than you do watching him in his prime. I realize that's an extreme notion, but for someone who thinks the most important aspect of a wrestler is knowing how to do the right thing at the right time, what he does when he can no longer use physicality as a crutch really shows whether or not he "gets it."

I think that's true of a certain type of worker, but it doesn't work for everyone.

 

Smart story-teller workers are going to age well.

 

Instinctual make-it-up-as-you-go-along workers like Flair not so much.

 

I'm not sure if it's true to say that Flair didn't "get it", he clearly did, but stripped of his endless stamina and half his moveset he wasn't even a shadow of the worker he used to be.

[Loss]

I think you learn a hell of a lot more about a worker watching him work post-prime than you do watching him in his prime. I realize that's an extreme notion, but for someone who thinks the most important aspect of a wrestler is knowing how to do the right thing at the right time, what he does when he can no longer use physicality as a crutch really shows whether or not he "gets it."

Unless he gets a concussion and has trouble thinking on the fly as a result. Mental acumen and physical acumen cannot be mutually exclusive. Wisdom comes with age, but so do a whole host of other positives and negatives. And wrestling is not about theory, it's about execution. We're not great workers simply because we can think of great ideas for wrestlers during matches. There is a physical component to it that can't be dismissed.

[El-P]

We're not great workers simply because we can think of great ideas for wrestlers during matches.

Yeah. Look at Raven.

 

But seriously, this kind of thinking also seems flawed to me. Tons of dull and mediocre workers know what and how to do things. It doesn't mean they do those things very well nor that those things make a great, exciting or compelling match. Hence the "he played his role right" talking point being one of the most overrated lately.

[Matt D]

I think most of that is bullshit.

 

It's easy to say on paper that you need to work the crowd. Very few people show that they know how to do it. The reason why "playing a role right" is such a touted thing right now is because so few wrestlers in the history of ever actually do it.

 

If 95% of wrestlers showed that they get it, then it wouldn't matter.

 

I think a massive minority ultimately show that.

 

The concussion issue is something I will give though. But those are generally exceptions and you can figure it out through watching them wrestling. Terry Gordy, for instance, I would not judge on his late career.

 

Also, wrestling is subjective. It's an art form, not a science. It's an art form, not a sport. Some people care the most about good punches. Other people care more about what a wrestler does. Some people care more about execution than others. For me, wrestling is symbolism. On the other hand, if someone throws a shitty punch but they're smart enough to realize that and not throw punches but do something else, then they can be just as good in the ring as someone that throws a great punch, ESPECIALLY if the latter is, let's say, Terry Funk and actually punching people. I'm not saying any asshole can throw real punches and have them look good because we've heard of really stiff guys whose stuff have looked like shit, but if you really punch someone, there's a good chance it'll look good.

 

EDIT: Mark Henry is one of the best guys when it comes to playing a role, and we can go into detail on this again if we have to. The way he knows how much to give at what point in order to achieve the best reaction, when to allow a hope spot, when to cut it off, when to jaw with the ref. I think there's a fine line between theory and execution here. He's able to use his weight in a way that he makes his stuff look great and that he works like a big man. I've seen other big guys execute stuff very well, but execute it wrong for the role they were supposed to play. Likewise, there's the story of JJ Dillon going out and and having a great match to impress the boys but then get yelled at because he was supposed to work like a chickenshit manager.

 

Hey! Johnny Polo vs Marty Jannetty on Raw is worked exactly like that. Levy works his ass off but he takes way too much of the match and hits way too much high end stuff (and he hits it well because he was so frustrated with his lack of wrestling at the time) and it destroys what the point of the match was supposed to be, which is funny when Vince talks about it a week later and his talking points have nothing to do with the actual reality of the match.

 

Nine times out of ten, I'd rather see someone do the right thing poorly than someone do the wrong thing well. That tenth time is Crusher and Baron vs Freebirds. Obviously, I'd rather see someone do the right thing well. (Or what I feel is the right thing performed what I think is "well" because again, subjective).

 

But all else equal, I'll take a guy with slightly better theory over a guy with slightly better execution anyday.

[Dylan Waco]

We're not great workers simply because we can think of great ideas for wrestlers during matches.

Yeah. Look at Raven.

 

But seriously, this kind of thinking also seems flawed to me. Tons of dull and mediocre workers know what and how to do things. It doesn't mean they do those things very well nor that those things make a great, exciting or compelling match. Hence the "he played his role right" talking point being one of the most overrated lately.

 

I rarely see this pop up much anymore. I think it is a perfectly valid talking point in a business that is almost entirely about role playing, but I really don't see this get talked up nearly as much now as it was a few years back.

[JerryvonKramer]

Let's try talking about Kamala and see how far we get without that line being used.

[El-P]

Not saying it's not valid, but it had been overstated at points to me. Maybe less so now than 3-4 years ago, I'm not following closely enough, but like Jerry said, it really depends on who is debated and for some guys it pops up quite quickly I believe.

[Matt D]

Not saying it's not valid, but it had been overstated at points to me. Maybe less so now than 3-4 years ago, I'm not following closely enough, but like Jerry said, it really depends on who is debated and for some guys it pops up quite quickly I believe.

We can look at Kamala at some point but who else?

[Dylan Waco]

Let's try talking about Kamala and see how far we get without that line being used.

I'm indifferent to Kamala.

 

What was your IRS argument again

[Graham Crackers]

Let's try talking about Kamala and see how far we get without that line being used.

It strikes me odd that someone who so often argues that micwork should be factored into our analysis of a wrestler's work wouldn't value a wrestler's ability to play a character. I'm not going to argue with you about Kamala because I already know your post-colonial guilt prevents you from being able to accept a savage gimmick but do you really think a wrestler being good in their role is just a line?

[JerryvonKramer]

I'm not against the "he was good in his role" argument, I was just responding to Matt D's comment that it's dying out. Kamala is a guy who seems to elicit it every time he is mentioned.

 

As I've argued many times now, I simply don't agree that Kamala was "good at his role" because he played it not like a savage beast but like a scared animal. He never came across like a legitimate threat. That's just my take on Kamala though, not the "role" argument itself.

 

Post-colonial guilt though, ha ha ha.

[ohtani's jacket]

Any wrestler worth their salt is good at their role. There's been hundreds of good workers in the history of professional wrestling. It's not some rare thing that only a few people get right. And the aging thing is nonsense. If all things were equal it would be a fair point, but they're not. Villano III is a broken down shell of a worker, if he can even work these days at all, but that doesn't mean he "got it" any less than Navarro or Terry or Solar or Casas or Panther.

[Dylan Waco]

The last few days have had Foucault and post-colonial guilt discussions. I have generally avoided interjecting my own academic interests/specialties, but starting to consider a thread outlining a mutualist critique of IP and how it relates to modern net piracy, or Mark Henry as modern personification of Robert F. Williams.

[Matt D]

I'm not against the "he was good in his role" argument, I was just responding to Matt D's comment that it's dying out. Kamala is a guy who seems to elicit it every time he is mentioned.

 

As I've argued many times now, I simply don't agree that Kamala was "good at his role" because he played it not like a savage beast but like a scared animal. He never came across like a legitimate threat. That's just my take on Kamala though, not the "role" argument itself.

 

Post-colonial guilt though, ha ha ha.

Watch more Mid South and Memphis and less 1992 wwf

[JerryvonKramer]

What was your IRS argument again

I know you hate Rotunda and you in no way intended this as an invite to discuss him again but:

 

My argument was that he was actually better in WWF because he wasn't allowed to sit in those boring chinlocks for 10 minutes at a stretch.

 

Now you mention it though, Rotunda is one guy, I think, who is a little slept on in terms of his ability to play a role and in terms of his micwork. He has a very whiny quality to his voice and somehow he made that IRS character work. And watching all the Varsity Club stuff it's been HIS promos rather than Kevin Sullivan's that have stood out. At a time when practically every other wrestler was doing shouty coked-up promos, Rotunda was doing these whiny, slightly nerdy even promos which actually made him a very effective heel for that time period. His out of ring stuff is probably better than his in-ring stuff.

 

All of that said, I've been pretty impressed with his 89 feud with Rick Steiner and then both the Steiner Brothers. He seems to stop doing all the boring stuff, rackets up the intensity and becomes a human suplex machine for a few months there. So my big caveat to all of the above is "except when he's wrestling Steiner in 89". That's easily the best stretch of his career in the ring.

 

Watch more Mid South and Memphis and less 1992 wwf

I've seen Kamala in Mid South and in mid-80s Crockett and now in AWA too and simply don't see what the fuss is about. He was always shitty as far as I can see.

 

"He played his role well", I don't agree. I really don't. Fuck it, Matt, let's take this to The Microscope, I promise I'll actually analyse some matches.

[Dylan Waco]

The best stretch of Rotundo's career were those fifteen minutes with Doug Somers in 1986