Jimmy Jacobs

[W2BTD]

Those all sound far too barbaric to be entertaining.

 

This is really where the rubber meets the road with some of Jacobs stuff, particularly the Whitmer feud.

 

If you like bloody, violent brawls with crazy bumps and crazy weapons, Jacobs is very good at that and I get why you'd think he was great. To me those matches were an annoyance on ROH shows, because that's not what I came to see. And for me, Jacobs "straight" work just couldn't match up to the rest of the top indie stars at the time (or even now, to be fair) to make up the difference. And that's probably why Jacobs took on wacky personas (which is an area where he very much excels above most of his peers) and delved into violence. Even to this day, his Decade stuff is a drag on any show. He was just in the worst match at ROH ASE6 in Toronto.

 

If you are into Memphis or brawls or death matches or Bill Dundee, I suspect Jacobs is right up your alley in terms of modern indie guys. That's his wheelhouse, and he's done some very creative and innovative stuff in those types of matches over the years. And I will concede to being in the minority on the Whitmer feud, because at the time fans ate that shit up.

[NintendoLogic]

I like Memphis and brawls just fine. But that deathmatch/garbage shit can go fuck itself.

[Alan4L]

I am pretty squeemish when it comes to Deathmatch stuff (I try to avoid it) and I never found Jimmy's stuff to be overly grotesque or excessive aside from perhaps the IWA I Quit match they had.

 

Here's what I'll say on this. I think I'm in the middle ground here. I really really like Jimmy Jacobs. During 2006/2007 I thought his character work and his big matches were all great. He did a tremendous job overcoming his size disadvantage. I thought his brawls were awesome brawls and I thought his top "workrate" matches were awesome workrate matches. That said though, he was never my favourite guy on the indies. Probably never even top ten. Thus when you're talking about 100 greatest of ALL TIME, I'm sorry but Jimmy doesn't come close for me.

[anarchistxx]

He suffers in that his biggest feud and best matches were with BJ Whitmer, probably my least favorite worker of all time. Terrible look, no charisma, dull style, bad on the mic, no presence, the absolute epitome of generic indy guy.

 

I loved Jimmy with all the Lacey stuff, and ther MySpace videos etc, but really couldn't put him anywhere near a list like this, certainly not without seeing what he has done in the last six or seven years. Always figured he would get picked up by WWE as he had that hateable type aura that they could make use of, despite his size. In ring I don't see him as anything special, although he always had solid matches and was occasionally put in a position where he could have a MOTYC, usually involving gimmicks and props. He was/is actually a very solid tag worker, he and Whitmer had a very good match with Strong/Evans at Manhattan Mayhem.

 

Just in terms of people mentioned in this thread, Necro Butcher and KENTA would be way ahead on my hypothetical ballot though.

[El Dragon]

Going even further back into the way back machine, Jimmy Jacobs having 2 pages but not being brought up in the 2nd longest time on the entire boards is sure interesting. This is my 2nd write up on a wrestler in my top 100, and Jimmy is a good cross reference to my previous candidate I brought up in Matt Sydal. They both were one half of the major “Midwest Pairs” of the early 2000’s Indy scene (Punk & Cabana from Chicago, Alex Shelley & Jimmy Jacobs from Detroit, and Sydal and Delirious in St. Louis) whose early careers were heavily tied with each other. They also are almost polar opposites in terms of what makes there cases, and I enjoy the contrast.

 

Let me lead with Schneider in the very first post kind of nails it with Jimmy: 2000’s era Eddie Gilbert is a home run of a comparison, and if that idea appeals to you, you will probably enjoy Jimmy Jacobs. Undersized for his era, and not athletic enough to have a hope to stand out using that, he instead prioritized character development, his ability to be alert with current culture, sheer drive, and a willingness to bleed buckets to become one of the better wrestlers in a company that largely sold itself on more standard athletic contests. Fantastic comp given, and one that’s stuck with me since I first read it.

Lets talk strengths first. First off, in terms of early career, I think his Barbaric Berzerker run is genuinely under rated, and kind of is a large part of why I think Jacobs tends to get under rated historically: Jimmy could be quite compelling as an underdog babyface, which is a strength that largely is forgotten because so much of his work is with him as a heel. He’s a really good early Gen Next rival, and he’s Shelley feud is very strong. He also has multiple pretty damned good tag runs with different partners, and both primary tag runs (with Whitmer and with Black) have a match that tops out as one of the best tag matches for the company of the decade. So he’s got versatility imo: and established good tag or singles worker, as a face or heel. Good starting point, as I strongly value versatility. 
 

And then we get into the main part of the case: Jimmy as a bloody brawler is a damned good part of RoH, and he’s probably just short of Necro for the best brawler in the US of the 2000’s to me. The wars with Whitmer are legitimately great imo, and feel historically relevant. His ability to be a character that feels important to watch also is important to me. Nobody ever comes close to being that centralizing figure to RoH to me after Punk left, but Jacobs is by far the one that gave it the best shot. His character work and being able to use that in the context of his matches is quite welcome in an era we’re many other wrestlers struggled to do the same. Jacobs from about 04-08 is a really strong wrestler and someone who 100% deserves consideration in my book.

As for downsides, well, I said I was going to contrast him with Sydal, and I think he clearly connects with me at a personal level significantly better then Sydal, and I think his best performances are certainly more memorable. But the main strengths Sydal has (longevity, consistency, crispness) also happen to be the major flaws in Jimmy. The crispness doesn’t bug me personally that much, but It feels so long since Jimmy was held up as an actively great wrestler, and that’s with him being largely active for that time. I’m not sure if it’s case of body being shot, personal problems, or whatever else, but in an era of Indy wrestlers remaining good for 2 decades, Jimmy simply didn’t follow that trend. So he becomes a bit of a peak candidate, and while his peak was pretty damned good, I’m not sure how how well it can really stack up compared to other top 100 all time cases.

All that said, I do rate Jacobs ahead of Sydal because I value the ability to be memorable and connect at a high level over just being good for a long period of time. If Sydal was hitting great regularly, then we’d talk.

Jimmy Jacobs is currently my 77th rated wrestler, in between Shinsuke Nakamura (Ha, I know) and Becky Lynch. Currently, I have 2 major expectations for how I view Jimmy Jacobs. No.1: Jimmy Jacobs will most likely not finish inside my top 100. He’s a great wrestler, but being the Eddie Gilbert (or significantly more complete Raven, if you want another comparison) of his generation also has the similar downsides of Gilbert as well. That said, I expect him to make my top 150 (since my stubborn ass is doing a top 200). And No.2; Jimmy is kind of becoming a bit of a gatekeeper for me in the process. If you rank higher then Jimmy for me, you are someone I expect to be a significant player for a top 100 spot. If you are below, you either need to still be adding to your case, or I expect you to fall short.