Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only
Sign in to follow this  
JerryvonKramer

Arn Anderson or Sean Waltman

  

57 members have voted

  1. 1. Who was better?

    • Arn Anderson
      51
    • Sean Waltman
      6


Recommended Posts

Not trolling anyone, serious question. Who do you think was better? Arn or Waltman?

 

In my mind this is a total no brainer, but apparently not everyone sees it that way. What arguments does X-Pac have to even be in a conversation with an all-time great like Arn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Waltman at the absolute peak of his abilities might have been better. But Arn absolutely destroys him with longevity and the list of great matches he's had. I find them to be hard to compare though. They are polar opposites in almost every regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Arn, BUT I would listen to an argument for Waltman.

 

I think Waltman is historically underrated, and his worst moments and gimmicks seem to obscure the fact that at his best he was a brilliant talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll vote for Arn too, but I think this is closer than some people may want to believe. Actually Waltman in 1990-91 WCW would have been off the charts awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I always felt that his ladder match with Eddie Guerrero at Souled Out in 1997 was really underrated. I really like his tag team with Kane at the time. I thought he was probably the best WWF wrestler in 98. I thought his GWF suff holds up well too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did they ever get a chance to wrestle each other in WCW?

 

AA's career ended in January of 1997 and Waltman came in September of 96. It is a short window, but possible! The heat would have been nuclear if Arn Anderson came out of retirement to face him after the Four Horsemen "Spot" parody promo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waltman was great, and really shone in TV formula matches against a multitude of opponents, for me. However, he's against Double A, who shone even more in TV formula matches. For me, that was both their major strength. You could throw either of them out against pretty much anyone on TV, give them 6 minutes, and you've a decent match. However, i think Anderson shades him on that. I'd take Waltman over about 90% of pro wrestlers, but not in this one. And, for me, while Waltman was a tremendous worker he just doesn't have the CV consisting of sheer volume of standout matches that Anderson does. If Waltman ever had a run like Anderson's TV title runs though, where he's given a featured spot to put on solid 10 minute matches on company programming every week for an extended period of time though, and we could be having a different conversation,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waltman was the best WWF wrestler in 99, I think. It isn't saying a lot, but he was really good that year. The best at making those throwaway Attitude Era undercard matches seem meaningful. Great babyface worker, good heel worker too. I'll take Arn out of the two though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a weird thread. Would love to know what inspired it.

 

It's almost impossible to compare the two.

 

Waltman is definitely underrated, and in a way, Arn is overrated, just because he gets SO much love. I love Arn myself, but a new fan who has never seen either of them may wonder what the hoopla surrounding Arn is all about.

 

But like PeteF3 said, this is closer than you'd think.

 

Waltman was actually used as Vince's barometer to test how good another worker was. When Jericho had bad matches with Waltman, Vince said something like, "You can't even have good matches with Pac. You ain't shit!" I'm wildly paraphrasing and probably grossly misremembering the quote, but that was the basic gist of it. It's in one of Jericho's books (I think the second one) if you want to check for yourself.

 

Waltman's best was pretty damn good, but his worst is a slog to get through. Maybe he was always decent in the ring, but his character was SO stale for a while. Fair or not, that affected my enjoyment of his matches.

 

I think Arn wins this round because he has always been consistent - in the ring, as a character, everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a weird thread. Would love to know what inspired it.

See the thread for the latest WTBBP.

 

My argument for Waltman is that he is the greatest wrestler ever at timing high spots. His selling was absolutely top notch. Had an amazing move set and was great in a variety or roles.

 

Arn is great, but was more steady while Waltman brings the variety.

 

It's not a blow away win for Watlman, but I think it's damn close. Also he was pretty awesome from 1990 to 2002. That's not that short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't think of a better timed spot in the history of pro wrestling than Arn's spinebutser(especially the one on Taker). As for variety Arn has incredible bloody brawls, some of the best tag work ever, and plenty of great straight up wrestling matches on his resume.

 

Waltman would rank high on my best of the 90's list, and he was the best underdog high flyer around until Rey came on the scene. If Arn vs Waltman had happened sometime in the early 90's it would've no doubt been a great match. Just think if Waltman was in Bagwell's role in 1992 WCW it would've been an even more incredible year for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not a blow away win for Watlman, but I think it's damn close. Also he was pretty awesome from 1990 to 2002. That's not that short.

 

I'd argue that Waltman was stale long before 2002 - for at least a good year or two.

 

Also, his last six months to a year as a heel 123 Kid was pretty dull because he never won or factored into any storylines. I'm talking about when he grew the goatee and jobbed to everyone. While that lack of push certainly wasn't his fault, it is what it is. For better or worse, Arn was always pushed. (Granted, losing to Renegade is probably worse than anything Waltman was put through, but Arn was still a title contender or champion before and after that feud.)

 

Still, in general, you are correct - Waltman had pretty long stretches of greatness. I just think Arn had a longer stretch, and unlike Waltman, an uninterrupted stretch. Maybe it comes down to the push? Arn always had it - Waltman didn't. Is that fair? Maybe not, but that's life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other thing for Waltman that doesn't put him above Arn but should be mentioned:

 

If he's put in a slightly different era from his own, he could be a consistent singles main eventer. Can this really be said about Arn?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One other thing for Waltman that doesn't put him above Arn but should be mentioned:

 

If he's put in a slightly different era from his own, he could be a consistent singles main eventer. Can this really be said about Arn?

 

Can it really be said about Waltman? I don't see him main eventing in any era, even the current one. That doesn't make him bad - he's still great - but not everyone can be a main eventer. If he came around today or even ten years ago, there's no way he'd be picked ahead of Daniel Bryan, CM Punk, or even Rey Mysterio and Eddy Guerrero. Yeah, he was in WCW with Mysterio and Guerrero, but they all had comparable midcard pushes back then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heel 123 Kid had a pretty high profile program with Razor that was only two months before he departed WWF. It is nothing to really hang your hat on for him as an overall worker but I think it is unfair to say he didn't play into any big storylines in early 1996 as that program was positioned as third from the top and he had house show matches vs. Piper third from the top in March. Anderson was pinning Hogan in early 1996 but was seen as Flair's clear #2 by this point as he was winding down. In ring for 1996, I would say Kid has the edge rather easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waltman's career left a lot on the table in terms of booking, I'm not sure I see the same potential for Arn. From the inception of the 123 Kid gimmick, he could absolutely have been a main eventer within a year if pushed correctly. Instead, he was used as Vince's barometer, which isn't in-it-of-itself a terrible spot, but Waltman was an uber talent and deserved better. His match against Bret and the tag with the Kliq proved he could deliver top notch WWE main event-style matches. It's a damn shame he wasn't put in that spot more often. Once he left and became Syxx (and then X-Pac) all hope was lost, even if some of the work was still up to par. The Kid gimmick was gold though. He absolutely could have been as over as Bryan if booked right. Instead, the feud with Razor never had a blow off and they turned Hall face.

 

With Arn, the fans never would have bought him as a headliner partly because he was always second fiddle to Flair, even when they didn't work in the same company. "The Enforcer" was never gonna be World Champion. But of course he was great at everything he did in the ring.

 

Just for argument's sake, we should look at peak vs. peak, top five matches for both guys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Ziggler could be a WHC, I think Waltman could have, too.

 

 

Also, it wasn't too long ago that Jack Swagger was a World Heavyweight Champion.

 

Ziggler had far more credibility with the fans as a main eventer than Waltman.

 

Swagger wasn't credible or over at all, but if we use him as a barometer, we can make a case for pretty much anyone. Repo Man looks promising compared to Swagger back then.

 

It hasn't been until much more recently - Real Americans, Rusev feud, etc. - that Swagger has really become interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The WHC was basically a midcard title anyhow, more akin to the 80's/90's IC title.

 

Waltman absolutely should have been Intercontinental Champion in 1995. That Ladder Match at SS could have been him going at it with Razor instead of Shawn, who had no place holding a midcard title at that point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny this thread comes up when I was just watching 95-96 Raws and thinking about what Waltman's career would have been like if he wasn't injured.

 

Both guys were capable of great matches, but Arn was a top five promo of all time so that will give him the edge in my book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny this thread comes up when I was just watching 95-96 Raws and thinking about what Waltman's career would have been like if he wasn't injured.

 

Both guys were capable of great matches, but Arn was a top five promo of all time so that will give him the edge in my book.

Totally. When we talk about "who was better?" when discussing pro wrestlers , all aspects of being a pro wrestler should come into play. And while Waltman eventually became a pretty good promo, Arn's one of the elite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×