Shawn Michaels

[JerryvonKramer]

I wonder if that is weirdly held against Shawn in a way that, for example, Steamboat being booed in 1989 because Flair was 20 million times cooler than the guy who brought his wife and kid to the ring. The former is taken as a knock on Shawn, the latter as a knock on George Scott and evidence for him being out of touch, or maybe Bonnie gets some of the blame, etc.

 

This didn't factor into my own final rating for HBK, but for some reason that babyface run seems to loom large.

[Benbeeach]

I think we all think Cena is great and has been for quite some time. He's got the oddest top face run of all time. It's weird, of course, but for something like this, seems like small potatoes.

And I watched the Wrestlemania XI main event for the first time since I was a child. What criticisms are there of Shawn in this match? It from what I watched seemed like a top 10 or so Nash performance. Shawn's "working for two" in a sense, but it isn't some demonstrative Hogan summerslam demonstration. Nor is he doing anything to elicit giant HBK cheers/Diesel boo's. It's a just a good, prime Shawn, working boots match. The jackknife was shitty, but outside of that...

[Grimmas]

Problem was that Shawn was the heel and he completely baby faced himself in that match, but working a style that would put the crowd in his corner.

 

Contrast that to a year ago when Bret faced Owen, and they were careful to not get Owen over as the face by doing what Shawn did.

[Benbeeach]

Problem was that Shawn was the heel and he completely baby faced himself in that match, but working a style that would put the crowd in his corner.

 

Contrast that to a year ago when Bret faced Owen, and they were careful to not get Owen over as the face by doing what Shawn did.

Ok, that I could see, but in the pre match build (just going by on the PPV itself) Vince doesn't talk up Shawn as some kind of chickenshit. Nor is a Sid bodyguard cheap shot spot booked. Could argue he could have done more heelish things...I don't know, more eye rakes or something, but it looked like a match where Shawn was supposed to look like a credible near equal. Vince talks of Diesel as being an underdog coming in, on commentary, of course due to Sid, but also due to Shawn not being some kind of push over. Shawn yacks off pre match and post match, and manhandles camera men (his pre comeback signature I'm a dick spot?) during the match. It's not like Shawn stays heel that much longer after this match. Maybe this was the point of transition? For what it's worth if Shawn is in some kind of grey area, in this match, Diesel is clearly the face, he "beats the odds" has the hulk up, cool power spots, plays it completely clean. I didn't get some kind of sabotage feeling from this match. Whether Vince and Pat could have booked it differently, sounds like a completely different argument.

 

And This was always kind of the way Shawn working heel, before 97. He doesn't work Razor the year before any differently really. He's a little more demonstrative of an asshole in that match, and other matches, especially post rockers break up, but he also does the athletic Shawn shit too. I can buy that in what up to that point had been the biggest match of his career he tries to play it as straight as possible (with the threat of nefarious tactics forever looming).

[Jimmy Redman]

I'm asking this in a cold medicine haze, and more as just something to throw out there.

 

Most of the talk on Shawn has been on his 90s run, since most people are happy to dismiss his 00s run out of hand and acknowledge his Rockers run as good. Well I've watched a fair bit of 90s Shawn lately, and I have to ask people who are down on him, what exactly about his 90s run doesn't hold up?

 

Speaking mainly of his 95-retirement run, since his early midcard heel run is a bit different. But I mean really. It just seems to me that everything that has been pimped as great still holds up as great stuff.

 

Both Razor matches. The Jarrett match. Great Owen matches in 95, 96 and 97. The Mankind match. Davey Boy matches. Vader at Summerslam is great aside from a 5 second tantrum. Bret in Montreal is a great brawl before Montreal happened. The Austin PPV match is a great match nobody ever talks about, plus the tag with Austin. The Undertaker matches. What are the Diesel matches but immense carryjobs of Nash? What are the Sid matches but immense carryjobs of Sid?

 

I think the only real controversial match of this period is the Ironman, since a lot of people have problems with that one (I actually love it, for the record).

 

It feels like to me that the main thing that shifted about Shawn's work during this period is not that it got any worse, but that people branched out of mainstream US wrestling and discovered a lot of people who were great too, and are still discovering them to this day. His 1996, for example, doesn't stand out as such a great year anymore now that we can compare it to the 1996 of people like the Pillars or Hash or Tamura or whoever else. That might mean that it shouldn't stand out, but I also don't think that means that the work is any less good. I feel like Parv talking about Flair now when I say that it's revisionism gorn too far, but that's kind of the impression I get. People talk about Shawn being an asshole or him being a lame babyface in 1996 or whatever, but I don't really see people offering any relevant criticism of his matches.

 

I want to point out as well, that I watched both ladder matches with the weight of every ladder match since in the back of my mind, and yet they still hold up as great and really blow away gimmick matches. I watched the first HIAC with the weight of every HIAC since in the back of my mind, and it still holds up as a great gimmick match spectacle. The idea of Shawn as an innovator of gimmick matches sounds like a line that WWE feeds people, but at the same time it's kind of true and I feel like the way that these gimmick matches hold up even now is pretty impressive. Even things like the Royal Rumble gimmick of holding onto the rope and dangling your feet, that's something else Shawn brought to the table that has been used in every Rumble since. He has an inherent knack of looking at a gimmick match and working it to it's maximum effect.

 

I'll have a lot more to say on post-comeback Shawn, I just wanted to throw that out there as my overall impression of his 90s run. It was really good with a bunch of great matches, some all-time WWE matches, it's a run that holds up watching it now, and I'm not sure what anyone's problem with it really is.

[Grimmas]

93-96 Shawn feels like the 4th best guy in the company (behind Bret, Owen, Waltman). I don't see how being the 4th best guy in a promotion that was really low in quality as a great resume.

 

Rockers are like the 8th best teams in the 80s, so that won't make him a definite.

 

Hate the comeback, so that just leaves 97-98. Is six months at a great level with some other solid years enough? No, especially since his comeback was such shit and the heel run in 91-93 was not really good.

[Loss]

I think it took a little while for Shawn to fully find his footing as a great singles worker, but he was there by 1994 anytime he wanted to be, and on just about every big show by 1995. The big strike against him has always been his offense -- he comes across as a dainty, if talented, wrestler. He did very well on my list, better than I might have expected him to do actually, so I don't say that as a major complaint. But more than his body of work or professionalism or other flaws, it's what keeps him below the very top rung for me.

[Grimmas]

I think it took a little while for Shawn to fully find his footing as a great singles worker, but he was there by 1994 anytime he wanted to be, and on just about every big show by 1995. The big strike against him has always been his offense -- he comes across as a dainty, if talented, wrestler. He did very well on my list, better than I might have expected him to do actually, so I don't say that as a major complaint. But more than his body of work or professionalism or other flaws, it's what keeps him below the very top rung for me.

You think he was better than Bret, Owen, and Kid from 93-96?

[Loss]

Bret, no. Owen and Kid might have been "better", but I don't think they were "greater".

[Grimmas]

Bret, no. Owen and Kid might have been "better", but I don't think they were "greater".

That is probably really fair.

[Loss]

I did make a new thread in the general folder explaining my use of those terms if anyone is interested. I didn't want to distract from this thread by elaborating here.

[Dylan Waco]

Speaking for myself, but I do think Shawn from 94-97 holds up for the most part. The problem is that it is not an all time great run in my mind, nor do I really think it's an all time great run just by the standards of the WWE/F. I don't necessarily agree with Grimmas' argument about Shawn being the fourth best guy there during that cumulative period, but I would say that I think his 92 and 93 is pretty middling all things considered.

 

It's probably not fair really, but what hurts Shawn most to me is that he peaked as a tag worker as far as what I consider high end wrestling, and I honestly don't think he was consistently at that level ever again.

[Matt D]

I have my criticisms of his tag work, even. He's making my list, but he's about sixty spots lower than Stan Hansen.

[Jimmy Redman]

I've been putting furniture together for what feels like the past three months, and in between I've been watching Shawn matches to keep sane. I'm still kind of delirious so I'm probably just going to ramble for a while. I apologise in advance. You know, considering how exhausted I am and how little patience I have for watching, the fact that he's kept me entertained this whole time is not an insignificant feat. The man's still got it.

 

So basically, you're all still fucking crazy.

 

I've moved onto Post-Comeback Shawn. My kind of Shawn. I'm pretty sure I thought he was the greatest ever before I ever saw a match of his pre-2002, and even after discovering all of the non-WWE I've discovered in the last six years or so, all of the different eras and styles and countries and workers and matches...I still feel the same, and I still feel the same mainly based on this run, from his comeback to his permanent retirement. His 80s work is great to show just how great a tag worker he is, and his 90s work is great to show how he works as a midcarder, how he works as a heel, works in different situations, and also adds a bucketload of good, great, all-time company matches to his resume. I think he has some insane longevity, because apart from a couple of patches (ordinary work in 91-93, inactivity from 98-02) the dude rocked from 1986 to 2010, which is almost 25 years. But for me, he'd be just another pimped 90s guy I'd be trying to give a fair shake to if not for his Post-Comeback run.

 

In terms of his comeback era, like...people say things like oh, he wasn't that good when he first came back, or oh, he wasn't that good in DX, or oh, he wasn't that good week to week on TV...let me tell you, I have watched a shitload of Shawn all at once this weekend, particularly from supposed down periods like 2002-03 or 2006, and I find all of those complaints to be nonsense.

 

Every time I see Summerslam 2002 I marvel at just how good he is the minute he returns. As if he'd not missed a day. The man was born to wrestle. Anywho that was a fucking awesome match that blew me away and had my dad of all people marking the fuck out at the insanity. I know it's polarising but I have no earthly idea why. Someone will have to spell that one out for me because seriously what the hell bro. That match rules. Shawn comes back like it was yesterday and just fucking Shawns all over the place, hitting all of his spots like he's working a testimonial to himself, Hunter kills the fuck out of his back, they go all out with the violence and the garbage spots, and then the feel good finish followed by the asshole sledgehammer from hell, which as a single moment is truly one of the best things Hunter has ever done. It's one of my all time favourite matches from before I became a fan. It's certainly the one I'm most attached to.

 

Shawn in 2002-03 is so interesting to watch for me. He's still in the process of coming back, and if he works later on like Living Legend Shawn, in this period he works for a long time as Returning Legend Shawn, and a lot of the things he does are based around sort of the idea, in itself, of Shawn coming back and doing them. Like, Shawn is always a "look at me!" worker, but there are distinct strains of it depending on when you catch him; at times like 2004 or 2007, it's "look at me - I'm the best fucking wrestler alive!" During DX runs it's "look at me - I'm having so much fun!" And from about 2008 to retirement it's "look at me - I'm going for the Oscar!") During that early 2002-03 period, it's "look at me - I can still do all this cool stuff!" For a guy still easing back into the schedule and what not, he sure as hell does a shitload of dives, planchas, moonsaults to the floor, springboard crossbodys, and so on. There's just that sense that he's proving something - whether to himself or to the crowd, or both - about his ability to physically hang, and still do the kind of things he prided himself on during his physical prime.

 

And then on the other hand, apart from all of the dives and flying he was doing, he was otherwise super stripped down offensively. Even by Shawn standards. I think partly it was because he was doing all the things he was used to doing the last time he worked full-time, but it was now 2003 and standards of offense had noticeably changed in the company in the interim. But even allowing for that, he was super minimalist in the ring. He'd be basic as fuck and work matches around headlocks, and pepper in all those dives to keep things interesting. In a weird way it reminds me of when John Fruciante rejoined RHCP in 1999 and had to learn how to play again from scratch, so on Californication he just played very simple stuff really, really well. This was Shawn playing very simple stuff really, really well while he found his feet as a guitar player again.

 

People talk about things like Jericho at WMXIX "not holding up", and I can see how they wouldn't hold up to scrutiny today because if you look at that match, as one example, there's like...nothing to it. You can't break it down and say this was cool, that was cool, etc. It's not a micro match. But at the time, experiencing it in real time as a whole match, you finish it feeling like you've watched a cool match. A lot of Shawn's stuff is like that, especially in this period. He's like the opposite of a Regal or a Cesaro or someone else who has great offense and is interesting on a really micro level for the moves they make. Shawn often has matches where you can't point to a lot of individually interesting moments or moves in the match, but after watching the entire match you get sucked in and when it's over you think damn, that was a great match. His matches are always greater than the sum of their parts. (I like the contrast to Regal, who is a great micro guy but who's matches are often less than the sum of their parts.) And as much as I value re-watch value as a quality (especially right now), I also think it's a testament to Shawn's ability to get more out of less, to get the absolute maximum out of the most basic stuff. That sounds like a weird comment on the surface because people tend to associate Shawn with excess, but like I said, dives aside, he really doesn't do a hell of a lot, but he still manages to craft all of these matches that come off as not only great, but epic and well built as well. In one match he manages to get a punch over as a legit nearfall. In another match he got people to bite on a chop. A Shawn Michaels chop. He can build and pace a match, and nail the basics, and create drama through his selling so that even the smallest things resonate as much as they possibly can.

 

People talk about Shawn and Hunter as a low point. I agree that at their worst they bring out the worst in each other. They also feuded pretty much nonstop from 2002-04 and created a lot of audience fatigue that diminished what they were trying to do, in the same way that Cena vs Orton was burned through as a match up after 2009, and any attempt to do it since then has been met with this weird anti-heat. It's not that the work they were doing was bad, it's just that literally nobody wanted to see it. So fatigue I understand, but it also doesn't faze me because I was new at the time and enjoyed the hell out of their overblown epic of a feud. Anyway, my point is that if you look past that fatigue, while they had some bad matches (Armageddon 2002, the interminable HIAC in 2004) they actually hit a lot more than they missed, and really looking at the good stuff it's one of the better match ups in modern WWE. Summerslam 2002 I've covered. December 2003 is an amazing title match, one of the best Raw matches ever. Last Man Standing at Rumble 2004 is one of those matches that gets slaughtered, but I watched it and let me tell you, I thought it was really fucking good. Again it's a match where they don't do a lot of stuff, but they get the most out of what they do, and it's a great kind of minimalist brawl, almost like an 80s brawl where there's nothing but punches, selling, blood and a couple of big spots. They have great three-ways with Benoit. Then there's Taboo Tuesday, which is just a fascinating watch knowing how injured Shawn was, and for how well they both work around it and incorporate it into the match, and manage to construct something so compelling with a guy who can't walk...it's certainly something. Add in all of the great tags vs Evolution, the first Elimination Chambers...they actually produced a lot of quality when matched up vs one another, even if the last thing you'd ever want to watch today is another Shawn vs Hunter match.

 

I talked about him working like he was on a comeback for the first 12 months or so, and then after that he moves into working like he's the GOAT. People make a big deal about WWE pushing him as the GOAT and people swallowing it or whatever, and I'm not dismissing that as a thing, but also want to explore the flipside to that, which is that Shawn, for his part, was really fucking great at working like the GOAT. He owned that label and made it work, and that's not just as easy as WWE saying it and people believing it. In order for something like that to stick people have to be willing to believe it as true. Just look at how crowds react when WWE tries to claim Cena is "one of the best of all time". They reject it, not because they hate the man anymore but because they disagree with the very idea. Crowds aren't always the mindless sheep that they're sometimes painted as, especially when it comes to legacy stuff like this. Shawn had to convince people he was the best of all time or else the idea would have been rejected. And convince them he did.

 

It's not easy to wrestle like you're the greatest wrestler ever all the time, especially when you're in the midcard or losing or not in a position to be featured as much as you'd need to come off as special. But whatever he's doing, he always comes off like he really is the greatest.

 

One important way in which he does so is by wrestling a lot bigger than he is. That might be another strange comment given that Shawn's thing is being a smaller guy and bumping his ass off. But he really doesn't wrestle like a small guy, even when he's facing someone he's giving up 100lbs to. When he faces bigger guys he's throwing jabs, trading holds with them, taking them down, shooting them into the ropes...even guys who would usually work as monsters vs a guy the same size as Shawn (Mark Henry, for instance, or Kane, Batista, Goldberg, etc.). He never appears to be outmatched. When a match opens up he's competitive at worst, and The Greatest of All Time Bitches at best, either way showing off just how good he is, until the inevitable turning point where the heat begins, whether that come from cheating, or a big guy finally catching him, or him injuring his back, or whatever else it may be. Shawn has always understood the importance of a babyface to have shine, and he certainly never skimps on it.

 

I've mentioned before about a couple of heels like Vader and Brock that they are so good on offense and have such a presence that they can afford to bump and sell big for the faces as much as they do, because they can get all that heat back immediately. Shawn is kind of like the inverse of that, where he's so good bumping and selling during the heat stretch that he can afford to get an extended shine and out-wrestle his opponents so much, because he can give all that heat back immediately.

 

One of the things that surprised me during this binge is that like, Shawn is one of those guys who gets criticised for his comeback, whether the predictability of the routine or the no-selling aspect of the kip up, but I watched a fucking boatload of matches, as I've said, like close to 20 matches all up, and I literally did not see the same comeback sequence twice. Every single match it was different. Sometimes he'd hit the flying elbow into the big kip up but sometimes it comes from something else, sometimes he'd kip up and then get cut off, he'd ALWAYS mix up what moves he'd use after the kip up (atomic drops, punches, clotheslines, chops, back drops, flying elbows, dives, scoop slams, in basically any combination), he might go straight from kip up to the elbow drop or kip up to superkick, he might go through a whole sequence uninterrupted, or extend it out where he'd get cut off and have to do it piece-by-piece. It was honestly the most impressive thing to me watching, because even being his #1 fan I'd always pegged him as a Five Moves of Doom guy, and I was pleasantly surprised at how incredibly varied his comebacks and the final thirds of his matches are.

 

One common denominator throughout all of it though, is that whenever Shawn does The Kip Up, not a flash one but the real thing, the lying spread eagle, body shaking, KIP THE FUCK UP and dancing around the ring kip up...that shit ALWAYS works. There is never a time when people don't go apeshit for him. He has that innate sense of timing to know when to hit it, and the ability to build a match so that that time comes when he wants it to. I mentioned it last time but he has a level of crowd control like few others.

 

One other thing that strikes me when watching Shawn is the ever present sense of his overwhelming...hubris. That's really the only word that comes close to describing it. He is an egotistical, bull headed, stubborn narcissist. Everything he does is done to show off, not only show off but to prove to the entire world that he really is better than everyone else. You can go into what this means about the man in real life, but I'm only concerned with what I see on screen. He's endlessly self aggrandizing. It's curious that in WWE, the land of cutesy, pandering babyfaces, Shawn was never really portrayed as a nice guy. He was always an asshole, but when he was a face he was just our asshole. Like, you look at the promos he'd cut as a face, even in the 00s, and they're full of cocky shit about him being better than everyone and could have come straight out of the mouth of any heel. His whole world, his whole character, his whole raison d'etre is to be the best wrestler, to prove himself as the best wrestler. He's wholly self-centred, and this comes through absolutely in the ring, when everything he does is him working as the presumed GOAT and trying his damndest to prove it.

 

WWE wrestlers tend to all have a certain amount of bone-headedness just due to the house style including things like "I must hit my finisher at all costs!" and "I've found a winning formula so I'm going to repeat it in every match!" and "If I'm in a gimmick match I need to do a big spot even if it kills me!" as dogma. With Shawn it comes through to the nth degree, but in a way that completely fits what he's going for. There's a great line during Shawn/Taker I where they've gone through all of the shit they've gone through, and then Shawn does a kip up and J.R. says something like "Shawn can't help himself, he HAS TO do the kip up", and that really is just him in a nutshell. He HAS TO do things his way. No matter how much his back gets worked over during a match he HAS TO kip up. No matter how much damage he's taken he HAS TO crawl his ass to the top rope and hit the elbow drop. No matter how big a risk it is, he HAS TO do a big dive off that ladder. No matter how much his annoying ass chops are going to enrage the Undertaker, Shawn is a guy who does chops damn it, so he's going to chop the fucking Undertaker. He just has so much fucking hubris that you know he's going to do these things no matter what, and it hasn't even occurred to him not to. It gives meaning and even logic to times when you think "You're fucking dead on the ground right now, why are you climbing the ropes?" or "Your back has been destroyed, why do you bother kipping up?" He's Shawn Michaels, he has to. He can't help himself. As a wrestler he shows more hubris than anyone else I've seen.

 

Early in this thread (I think) someone says something about the difference between performing and wrestling, and how Shawn is more of a performer. I agree with all of that, and I think it shows what kind of fan I am and how I maybe differ as a fan from a lot of you. I think the implication is that being a performer is a negative, or at least not as preferable as being a wrestler. Shawn isn't a tough guy, he doesn't have interesting or devastating offense, he doesn't project danger or legitimacy or grit. He's an entertainer, using his considerable physical and mental talents to put on the best show for the audience. That bothers some people. It doesn't bother me, in fact that's what I love about him. Wrestling is entertainment, and he's the entertainiest entertainer there is.

 

Fuck it's 3am. I'm going to pass out now.

[JerryvonKramer]

Much of that is reasonable Jimmy, but if you seriously push him for #1 how do you deal with putting him over Flair who ... Well, has a metric fuck ton of matches over 4 stars and hits all those performance over wrestling things you mention?

 

Never mind about the other 1-contenders, how about just Flair first? In many ways Shawn has a similar skill set to Flair but a much narrower range and depth of output.

 

I'll be honest that some of my personal anger against Shawn (this is also true of Bret) is the idea that he's put on a level with Flair when he just in no way had a resume that deserves to be treated as being in the same ball park.

 

If it just boils down to "I think 00s WWE is the best cos I grew up on it", that's cool for you but it doesn't really wash for a serious #1 argument that could persuade anyone else to vote for him there.

 

By which I mean, what you have described once you strip that out is a part-qualitative, part-quantative top 25 case, not a #1 case.

[Grimmas]

Jimmy,

 

I think his post comeback sucked and I watched it all. His offense was beyound horrible. His over acting was very grating. The build of the matches was ridiculous. He did have some stand outs, like the Jericho later series and the Undertaker WM matches. A lot of those other matches you praised I think are complete shit.

 

As for his early stuff? The Rockers was the highlight for me, outside of 96-97. I don't think his singles stuff was that good outside of a few good matches here and there. He was solid and everything, but nothing to build a case on.

 

So yeah, being a really good tag wrestler for 3 years and having two really good years in a singles while having 4 ok years and then a comeback of 10 years of shit is not a case to get someone on my list, let alone number one.

[Jingus]

Jimmy just described pretty much my exact views on post-comeback Shawn. I've never understood why some people are so down on that period of his career, no matter how many times I hear them try to explain it. I still think he's one of the very best in the world.

 

As for "what about Flair"? Let's be honest, Flair's last decade in the ring was pretty sad, and Shawn was smart enough to retire before he got to that point. He doesn't have that embarrassing epilogue of AARP League Rasslin' which taints Flair's career.

[Childs]

The problem with post-comeback Shawn was that he was presented as an all-time great and carried himself as such, but his actual wrestling looked like shit. I realize that's not a problem for a lot of people, and more power to y'all. But it bothers me every time I watch one of his later-period epics.

[Matt D]

For a great entertainer, he's really such a terrible actor.

[Jingus]

That's the thing, I don't think his wrestling looked like shit. At all. It's not "I know this looks shitty, but I don't mind". It's "I think this looks great". Of course he had a couple of things that didn't go well, like his look-ma-no-knees inverted atomic drop; but for the most part, I think his execution was flawless on most of his moves. I honestly don't see the problem, and every time I hear it explained I don't agree with the description of what's supposed to be so shitty.

 

As for acting? He's far above average by wrestling standards, which is all I can realistically expect from anyone. Guys the level of the Rock who have genuine thespian ability are so rare that I don't mind that the vast majority of wrestlers are really terrible actors, when compared to professional performers.

[JerryvonKramer]

Jimmy just described pretty much my exact views on post-comeback Shawn. I've never understood why some people are so down on that period of his career, no matter how many times I hear them try to explain it. I still think he's one of the very best in the world.

 

As for "what about Flair"? Let's be honest, Flair's last decade in the ring was pretty sad, and Shawn was smart enough to retire before he got to that point. He doesn't have that embarrassing epilogue of AARP League Rasslin' which taints Flair's career.

You rank Shawn above Flair for that?

[WingedEagle]

Apparently if I'm in the minority, but I thought Shawn a terrific actor. Especially for his environment. Always dug him. All that being said, I've almost come full circle on Shawn. I'd like to add a few more things in detail about him once the list is turned in, but essentially I started out thinking he'd be one of my highest ranked American workers, and couldn't see him falling below top 15-20 overall. Going back through some early comeback work I thought he was incredibly overrated. Not at all bad, but nothing to really make a case for as an all-timer. Really dug him the last few years (a bit in '07 and then lots of big matches going forward), but looking back the tag work, especially the AWA classics, bumped him well back up for me. Now he's not going to sniff the top of the list, but top 30? 40? That feels like a floor. But I also never had any of the vitriol for him that some did.

[Jingus]

You rank Shawn above Flair for that?

Just one reason among several. I think Shawn's lowest lows in the ring are overall nowhere near as bad as Flair's worst moments. In this case, ironically, Shawn's backstage selfishness works in his favor, while Flair's go-along-to-get-along attitude hurts him. Flair all too often let himself be placed in situations where he was inevitably going to look terrible, while Shawn's paranoia about protecting himself kept him from doing the same. If Vince Russo had ever pitched "...and then I'll feud with you, pin you, and shave your head!" to HBK, he would've told Vinnie to go fuck himself.

[Jimmy Redman]

Much of that is reasonable Jimmy, but if you seriously push him for #1 how do you deal with putting him over Flair who ... Well, has a metric fuck ton of matches over 4 stars and hits all those performance over wrestling things you mention?

 

Never mind about the other 1-contenders, how about just Flair first? In many ways Shawn has a similar skill set to Flair but a much narrower range and depth of output.

 

I'll be honest that some of my personal anger against Shawn (this is also true of Bret) is the idea that he's put on a level with Flair when he just in no way had a resume that deserves to be treated as being in the same ball park.

 

If it just boils down to "I think 00s WWE is the best cos I grew up on it", that's cool for you but it doesn't really wash for a serious #1 argument that could persuade anyone else to vote for him there.

 

By which I mean, what you have described once you strip that out is a part-qualitative, part-quantative top 25 case, not a #1 case.

 

On the last part, that doesn't bother me at all because I'm not setting out to try to convince anyone. I know arguing for Shawn is largely doomed on this board, and I'm not trying to persuade anyone else to vote for him at all. I'm just putting forth my own thoughts as to why I rate him so highly. We all have our own personal GWE failures - mine is not finding the words to talk about Shawn in any depth during this whole project, because I did threaten to, and plan to. But alas. I'm trying to at least get some thoughts down now even though it's too late, they just aren't coming in the form of a coherent argument. But at no point did I think I could set out to convince anyone to rate Shawn #1 through sheer force of argument. I'm good, I'm not that good. I just wish I could have presented my own case for him with more clarity.

 

On the Flair thing, this is inevitably going to descend into "agree to disagree" territory, because I do think Shawn has a metric fuckton of 4 star+ matches, and I do think Shawn has range and depth of output comparable to Flair. They're both tippy top, Top 10 guys for me, and the only key difference is that Shawn resonates with me more and I like his best matches better. A part of that is growing up with one and not the other, and I have zero problem admitting that. Sometimes in this project you discover new guys and rank them that highly without that attachment, like we both have with, say, the AJPW guys. And sometimes your guy is still your guy. Flair is your guy, he was going to end up on top for you no matter what. Shawn is my guy.

 

I'm going to do a stomper list for post-comeback Shawn now. I was never planning on doing a big match list, because everyone knows what the matches are, some people just think they're rubbish. Well I don't think they're rubbish at all, and I'm going to list them out just to demonstrate the kind of depth I think he has, why I can compare him to Flair in terms of output.

 

I'm not a star ratings person, but for simplicity I guess these are the ****+ matches, or matches just below that but with great Shawn performances. The ones in bold are the high-end, ****1/2+, "would I consider this match for my All Time Top 100?" type matches.

 

vs Hunter - Summerslam 2002

Elimination Chamber - Survivor Series 2002

 

vs Chris Jericho - Wrestlemania XIX

vs Chris Jericho - Raw 21.7.03

vs Randy Orton - Unforgiven 2003

Team Austin vs Team Bischoff - Survivor Series 2003

vs Batista - Armageddon 2003 (Batista's best career match up to that point)

vs Hunter - Raw 29.12.03

 

I've covered this early period in my last post, but one last thing I want to say about it is that so many times, Shawn takes a match to a place I don't expect. He has a title defense on Raw vs RVD just after SS 2002, and you look at "Shawn vs RVD face vs face match" on paper and think they're going to go all exhibition-y and moves-y. Instead, Shawn keeps it simple, takes the match and works over RVD's leg. I wasn't expecting that, but it turned out to be a nifty little TV match all the same. There are actually a lot of matches during this period that I wouldn't call great, but are really good and serve the purpose of what they're doing. He gets something good out of Flair in 2003 in their PPV match, for example, before that match descends into a weird cluster of a thing.

 

His performance at Survivor Series 2003 is incredible, one of the single best performances in a match I've ever seen. I think between that and the long Hunter TV match, by the end of 2003 he finally feels like he's back as a full-timer and starts elevating his game accordingly.

 

vs Hunter - Royal Rumble 2004 (Last Man Standing)

vs Chris Benoit - Raw 19.2.04

vs Benoit vs Hunter - Wrestlemania XX

w/ Foley, Shelton, Benoit vs Evolution - Raw 12.4.04

vs Benoit vs Hunter - Backlash 2004

vs Chris Benoit - Raw 3.5.04

vs Randy Orton - Raw 7.6.04

vs Kane - Unforgiven 2004 (One of Kane's best singles matches)

vs Christian - Raw 4.10.04

vs Hunter - Taboo Tuesday 2004

 

w/ Orton vs Edge & Christian - Raw 21.2.05

vs Edge - Raw 28.2.05 (Street Fight)

vs Kurt Angle - Wrestlemania 21 (I have always had HUGE problems with this match, but watching it now all of the hatred has gone out of my heart. Maybe the prevalence of kicking these days makes the kicking in this match not as egregious as it was at the time. I don't know. But I want to mention it because I think Shawn's performance in it is really fucking good. The first third of the match where Shawn tries to control Angle on the mat is easily the best part of it, and is a great demonstration of a lot of the traits I talk about. It's Shawn showing himself to be equal to the challenge of anyone, it's Shawn taking things in a different direction than you'd expect, and it's Shawn showing incredible amounts of hubris for daring to try to out-wrestle Angle. I think Shawn's performance and selling is really good throughout, even through the iffy parts and the never-ending ankle lock finish.)

vs Shelton Benjamin - Raw 2.5.05

vs Hulk Hogan - Summerslam 2005

vs Chris Masters - Unforgiven 2005 (Masters' best career match up until that point)

vs Carlito - Raw 17.10.05 (One of Carlito's best singles matches)

vs Angle vs Cena - Taboo Tuesday 2005

vs Rey Mysterio - Raw 14.11.05 (Eddie Guerrero Memorial Show)

Team Raw vs Team SD - Survivor Series 2005

 

vs Shelton Benjamin - Raw 23.1.06

Elimination Chamber - NYR 2006

vs Vince McMahon - Wrestlemania 22 (One of Vince's best singles matches)

w/ God vs Vince & Shane - Backlash 2006 (One of both guys' better matches. God's best match by default.)

DX vs McMahons & Show - Unforgiven 2006 (HIAC)

 

2006 is another year I scrutinised over the weekend. There's not really any high-end stuff BUT he was feuding with the McMahons and the Spirit Squad for 3/4th of the year so like fuck. For what it's worth his work against all of these goofs was still strong, even if there's not much that's noteworthy apart from what I put above. He was running uphill between all of the DX bullshit and his opponents being either barely trained or jobbers, but he still put in good performances in the matches and dragged them as far as he could.

 

DX vs Edge & Orton - NYR 2007

vs Edge & Orton - Raw 15.1.07 (Handicap Match)

vs Edge - Raw 22.1.07 (Street Fight)

Royal Rumble Match - Royal Rumble 2007 (I don't include a match like this unless there's a reason, and Shawn and Taker's finishing run was the clear highlight of this.)

w/ Cena vs Edge & Orton - Raw 29.1.07 (Five great matches in a month. Beat that with a stick.)

w/ Cena vs Taker & Batista - No Way Out 2007

vs John Cena - Wrestlemania 23

vs Randy Orton - Raw 9.4.07

vs John Cena - Raw 23.4.07

vs Cena vs Edge vs Orton - Backlash 2007 (There's another four great matches in a single month..)

vs Edge - Raw 14.5.07

vs Randy Orton - Survivor Series 2007

 

vs Mr Kennedy - Raw 28.1.08 (One of Kennedy's best singles matches)

Royal Rumble Match - Royal Rumble 2008 (This is one of my all-time favourite Rumbles and again, Shawn and Taker were the stars)

vs Jeff Hardy - Raw 11.2.08

Elimination Chamber - No Way Out 2008

vs Ric Flair - Wrestlemania 24

vs Chris Jericho - Judgment Day 2008

vs Batista - ONS 2008 (Stretcher Match)

vs Chris Jericho - GAB 2008

vs Chris Jericho - Unforgiven 2008 (Unsanctioned)

vs Chris Jericho - No Mercy 2008 (Ladder Match)

w/ Rey vs Miz & Morrison - Raw 17.11.08

 

The Jericho feud is fucking phenomenal from start to finish. It's kind of more than the sum of the individual matches because they don't have that one all-time, classic, five star match at any point. But they do have four matches that are all starkly different, and all tell the story of where they are in the feud while still being great matches in their own right. As chapters in the story they're perfect, and taking the entire angle with matches, promos and angles along the way, it's easily one of the best and most complete feuds of this century.

 

The ladder match stands out to me only as a kind of culmination of the entire thing, it's a great feud ender. People like Dylan think it's awful and Shawn is "the worst wrestler ever" in it, which I find completely and utterly dumbfounding. One of those "are we even watching the same match?" moments. It's a great ladder match in itself, a great blow off to everything they had done, and I think Shawn is the better guy in it too.

 

vs John Cena - Raw 12.1.09

vs Undertaker - Wrestlemania 25

DX vs Legacy - Summerslam 2009

DX vs Legacy - HIAC 2009 (HIAC)

DX vs JeriShow vs Cena & Taker - Raw 16.11.09

vs Cena vs Hunter - Survivor Series 2009

DX vs Harts - Smackdown 25.12.09

 

vs Rey Mysterio - Smackdown 29.1.10

vs Undertaker - Wrestlemania 26

 

Every year he has a slew of great matches. Every year (except 2006) has has at least one super dooper, classic match. And every year he has a bunch of good to really good matches that I haven't even gone into here. He has a ridiculous amount of quality, and for a guy who wasn't always wrestling every week on TV, a significant quantity as well. I think the only guy who'd have as many or more matches above that "would I consider them for my All Time Top 100?" cutoff would be John Cena.

 

And again, this is all just from 2002-10. You add in all of the 90s highlights, all of his 80s tag work...it's a ripper of a career spanning three decades and containing a fuckload of quality.

[Judy Bagwell]

Michaels is really hurt by three things:

 

1. His gimmick was "Greatest Wrestler Ever", and he was booked and promoted as such. In fact, wasn't he placed at #1 in their top 100 book that Larry Matysik hated so much?

 

2. Lots of people raised on WWE bought into and believed that.

 

3. He absolutely, definitively, based on any criteria you want to name, wasn't that.

 

So backlash is inevitable. The question is: has it come too far?

 

Personally, I find it really difficult to care about that question. If someone like a Loss or a Chad who has watched the bulk of the 90s stuff could point to 10 matches for me to rewatch at some point I'd be grateful, just as a referesher on 90s Michaels.

 

As for 00s Michaels, aside from possibly El-P, I might be the biggest HBK detractor on the board. I don't like the Taker matches, I don't like the Flair match. I pretty much despise the style. Any and all DX stuff (90s or 00s) makes my skin crawl with embarrassment at its total and utter lameness. I hate him on the mic. I dislike his face. I dislike his character work. I hate sweet chin music as a finisher.

 

Rockers-era Michaels I have some more time for, but I was more on Matt D's side of the argument for that cage match, and don't think it was particularly hard to stand out in the WWF tag scene of 1990. All-in-all I'm probably more down on Michaels than most. I actually like him best as a singles guy circa 1992-4 sort of time.

hes only hut by your opinion of him, if you cant enjoy the spectacle and greatness of those Taker matches well I worry about you son. His Heel work in 97-98 was awesome.92-94? way too green.