C.S. Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 I promise you this is not a troll poll reacting to the Jericho vs. Hardy and Bret vs. Perfect polls. But yes, this one does go in the completely opposite direction. Instead of fast-paced athletic wrestling technicians, this comparison focuses on two musclebound brawlers who relied more on charisma, looks, etc. Ultimately, both of them - more or less - ended up in similar positions on the card. At first, this poll would seem to slightly favor Warrior, but after thinking about it, I'm not so sure. I could see an argument being made for Sid too. They've both been in at least a few great matches, but their opponents (or Pat Patterson) are usually given the credit. I think this could make for an interesting debate, personally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El-P Posted May 24, 2015 Report Share Posted May 24, 2015 Warrior brought more to the table in the best matches he's been involved in (Rude, Savage), so he takes the cake for me. Sid can be funnier and could be a decent promo. But really, it's like choosing between aids and cancer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilTLL Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 Agreed. I'm heartily amused by Sid the character with his unbelievable aura and natural charisma (and his goofy Twitter feed), whereas Warrior the character is tiring after a pretty small dose. But Warrior has those two or three matches that are downright excellent, and I'm having trouble thinking of a single Sid match I've ever wanted to revisit, at least for good reasons. Sid is one of the most godawful in-ring workers of his era outside of squashes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.S. Posted May 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 Even though I created this thread and poll, I haven't made a final decision yet. My thoughts: Warrior + A few great matches (Macho, Hogan, etc.) + An awesome look, presence, and entrance - all unforgettable + It may not have lasted, but he was believable for the moment as the "next big thing" and "icon" vs. Hogan - that kind of status is very rare to achieve, even momentarily and fleetingly + Got in, made his money, and got out. I actually respect his business acumen and realistic view of what wrestling actually is. All of that, of course, goes against the grain of everything believed by people stuck in the "rasslin' bubble," which makes it even more of a plus for me. - Many not-so-great matches, of course - Bizarre out-of-the-ring rants, sometimes of a racist nature - His entire WCW run - holy shit, this was bad Sid + He was a Horseman. It's easy to say he was a bad one in hindsight or with revisionist thinking. But was he really? I'm not so sure. + Amazing presence, albeit unintentionally goofy at times. + The two Michaels matches still hold up at least, right? I remember them being fun enough. Any other hidden gems? + Good as both a face and a heel. - Tons of bad matches - Scissors, squeegees, and softball - Broken leg - not his fault, but it's burned in the memory of anyone who saw it Both * Main event/World Title runs * Headlined WrestleMania (Hogan vs. Warrior and Taker vs. Sid respectively (I guess Sid vs. Hogan too, if you want to count that - but ironically enough, Warrior was the real star there) * Headlined Halloween Havoc (Warrior) and Starrcade (Sid) respectively in an era where there was no one "top" WCW PPV * Mic work was "interesting," to say the least. Of the two, only Sid dipped into midcard territory after his first main event push - the Sid and The Kid run in the mid-'90s WWF where they were managed by DiBiase. Warrior remained a main-eventer for the rest of his career after his first big push in the late '80s. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 Really surprised to see Sid votes here. I honestly think the guy was garbage. Just a really bad worker who couldn't even be carried. Even worse, he had a weird knack of getting face heat as a heel and never tried to do anything about that. Happened in 1989, and again in 1992, and again in 1996. Does that say that he was a natural born babyface or that he was bad at his role and bad at generating the right kind of heat? I tend towards the latter. Crappy worker. And he almost put Brian Pillman out of wrestling through his sloppiness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 I love Sid. Always did. I don't care that he is a bad worker. He made an entire career in wrestling off of having "it." I can't explain what "it" is, but Sid had plenty of "it." He wasn't JUST a look because there have been plenty of big impressive looking guys that didn't amount to squat. Sid would make his entrance with those crazy eyes, say he was the Master and the Ruler of the World and I would have NO thoughts of changing the channel. But yea, he sucks in the ring and I can't think of any Sid match that I would really want to see. Warrior has better matches for sure. But I still think if you were going to give me a choice between a random Sid match/promo or a random Warrior match/promo I would probably take Sid. EDIT: Actually I just thought of the reason I'm going to hang my vote on: Sid came off as legitimately unhinged and dangerous (probably because it wasn't a work) and Warrior came off as unhinged and crazy but not really dangerous. More like the rambling crazy dude who you just get away from as quickly as possible. Sid is the crazy dude who you stand there and listen to until he's done with his rant because you aren't pissing him off under any circumstances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Badlittlekitten Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 I like them both but Warrior was the man growing up. Even the youngsters in my family today are spellbound when they see him. Coolest super hero in wrestling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.S. Posted May 25, 2015 Author Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 EDIT: Actually I just thought of the reason I'm going to hang my vote on: Sid came off as legitimately unhinged and dangerous (probably because it wasn't a work) and Warrior came off as unhinged and crazy but not really dangerous. More like the rambling crazy dude who you just get away from as quickly as possible. Sid is the crazy dude who you stand there and listen to until he's done with his rant because you aren't pissing him off under any circumstances. I was thinking of this same thing last night before bed. Sid, for all his faults, was genuinely believable as a tough guy, badass, dangerous, unhinged, whatever you want to call it. You would not want to run into that guy in a dark alley, period. Contrast that with today's wrestlers. If I knew nothing about Sid or Lesnar but had a gun to my head and had to fight one of them, I'd take my chances on Lesnar. And Lesnar is actually credible as a tough guy. I love Kevin Owens, Samoa Joe, Dean Ambrose, etc., but I'm not afraid of any of them. Bray Wyatt is even worse in this regard - I don't believe he's really anything like that. For whatever else you can say about Sid, he had an aura about him that said, step the fuck back, you don't want any part of this! Warrior never came across as dangerous, you're right, but I don't hold that against him. He was a career babyface once he got his big push, and career babyfaces I don't think really benefit from being dangerous. Before someone brings up Brody or whoever, I mean in a WWE/WCW "bright lights, big stage" type of environment. Even Mick Foley's rough edges were softened considerably by the time he got his big main event run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yo-Yo's Roomie Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 I feel like you could probably do a bit more with Sid, get more out of him. He had more long-term value. You could believably cycle him up and down the card, switch him from face to heel, plug him into a few different roles. Warrior was a bit more one-dimensional, and once you'd got what you could out of him, there was pretty much nowhere for him to go. They tried using him as more of a special attraction for his 96 run, and it mostly rendered shocking results. Plus Warrior is a piece of shit human being, so I'll go with Sidney. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Jackson Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 I thought Sid was cool...until I saw him wrestle. Zzzzzzzzzzz Warrior from 88-91 was fun with plenty of memorable matches and angles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goc Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 Plus Warrior is a piece of shit human being, so I'll go with Sidney. I think almost killing a dude with a pair of scissors is worse than saying offensive shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benbeeach Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 Even worse, he had a weird knack of getting face heat as a heel and never tried to do anything about that. Happened in 1989, and again in 1992, and again in 1996. Does that say that he was a natural born babyface or that he was bad at his role and bad at generating the right kind of heat? I tend towards the latter. We never use this as a mark against Stone Cold. Maybe Sid was just a visionary. . . . and that Michaels Survivor Series match ALMOST made me vote Sid. He germans Shawn on the top of his head and it's as good a monster over top face title switch as there is. Count me as one of those "likes it because you're not supposed to" guys. Can know everything about what constitutes a good worker, solid hand, solid match, look at Sid, think he's cool and just not care. He was definitely an "IT" guy. I like Warrior for similar reasons, but even HE'S not as polarizing as Sid. Warriors a guy who had the decent to good working ability, when push came to shove, right opponent, right story, right circumstances. Just didn't utilize because he didn't have to. Was at worst, carriable. I don't know what the hell the Sid ceiling/basement was. Don't even particularly care. Sid is wrestling for better or worse. *Fist Bumps* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yo-Yo's Roomie Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 I can kind of forgive a guy getting into a heated argument and turning to violence. The things Warrior's said betray something much darker, and his views are much harder to tolerate. Also, at least there's an element of humour in Sid's antics, looking at them from afar. People trashing Sid's wrestling skills like Warrior is fucking Volk Han. Warrior was the pits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bierschwale Posted May 25, 2015 Report Share Posted May 25, 2015 I don't think that anyone has ever been better at getting over just because they're there than Sid. He has an impossible and inexplicable magnetism. Wrestling's version of Chance the Gardener. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hawkeye12 Posted May 26, 2015 Report Share Posted May 26, 2015 Plus Warrior is a piece of shit human being, so I'll go with Sidney. I think almost killing a dude with a pair of scissors is worse than saying offensive shit. You know Arn stabbed him first, right? Sid just defended himself from a pretty cowardly attack (and I'm a fan of Arn the performer) Vader claims to have pretty much saved Sid's life in the immediate aftermath. And Sid was the one that was originally set to press charges on Arn. That said, I'll go with Warrior. Watching all of the old SNME through 1991, and other than a squash of the Super Ninja and a really poor match with Haku, Warrior has been largely decent against everyone, including Honky Tonk and Andre. I thought Warrior-Andre was better than Savage-Andre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.