Finlay vs Regal

[Grimmas]

Who is better?

[NotJayTabb]

For me, Regal. I love both in the ring, but Regal's got more range as an all-round performer. Not only is he the better promo, but he's able to portray so many different roles whilst still being the same character. He's as believable as the fired-up face defending a helpless Eugene as he is as the megalomaniacal GM/King of the Ring, yet still authentic stooging about in disgust dressed as Paul Birchall's pirate wench. No matter what he's doing, he's an entertaining presence on TV. Finlay just isn't as magnetic, despite being a surprisingly effective face in the role of Hornswoggle's protector.

[Jingus]

Regal. Smoother chain wrestler, more charismatic seller. Wider variety of movez. And he's so much better at outside-the-ring talking, acting, and general shenanigans than Fit that it's not even close. Finlay is better at delivering a particularly brutal beatdown, but that's the only thing I'd put in his favor.

[Tenese Sarwieh]

Regal is hands down the more complete performer that Finlay and I have love for both. Wrestling wise both are neck and neck but Regal blows it out the park with his facials, promo ability, and his levels of range. He can do it all.

[drew wardlaw]

One thing I'll say about Finlay is his grimace when he bares his teeth with the gap in it is really great. It's vicious when he's on offense and painful when he's selling.

[goodhelmet]

I love Finlay but this isn't close... Regal is the better wrestler.

[Coffey]

I'll bite & play Devil's Advocate: I'll take Finlay for the reason that he isn't "boring" in the ring. His matches are always action-packed with impact moves, where as Regal works a more slow, methodical mat-based match, that will not be endearing to all fans.

 

Had everyone else not already said Regal, I too would have probably taken him & I think he's the better over all pro-wrestler. I have, however, heard some friends of mine, that aren't as into wrestling as me, make similar comments around Regal being boring. The European style & a lot of the intricacies of the stretches & holds doesn't get picked up on by less hardcore fans.

 

Genuinely enjoy both though & would take either one over a lot of other wrestlers.

[El-P]

I'll bite & play Devil's Advocate: I'll take Finlay for the reason that he isn't "boring" in the ring.

 

He was pretty damn dull in New Japan when he toured in 93 or so, last time I checked.

[Loss]

Yeah, I've been really, really (really) underwhelmed with the Finlay I've seen before his WCW debut in 1996, except for his matches with Young David in the early 80s. I'm not prepared to defend the argument, but I wouldn't be surprised if one could be made that he really didn't become a great worker until he went stateside. Another thing -- it's not like people were always on the edge of their seats during Regal matches, but there are many cases of him winning over a tough crowd. Finlay was about as over in WCW as Van Hammer, sadly. Even if he was churning out solid work, it wasn't really connecting in a way that made it easy for fans to get into most of his matches. He seems like a guy who oddly enough peaked as an all-around performer in his late 40s while working in WWE. I love some of the matches with Benoit and Regal, and I really love the Booker T match at the '98 Great American Bash. But at a certain point, a guy has to get a decent reaction from his work for me to consider him great, and Finlay played to crickets too often.

[Coffey]

 

I'll bite & play Devil's Advocate: I'll take Finlay for the reason that he isn't "boring" in the ring.

 

He was pretty damn dull in New Japan when he toured in 93 or so, last time I checked.

 

 

Again, in speaking about the people I'm referring to, they're not even going to know that New Japan exists, let alone watched it. Ya know? Like if we're talking people that on watch RAW or saw Nitro, I imagine quite a few would pick Finlay over Regal.

 

But don't ask me to defend it, as I don't even believe it myself. Otherwise this thread was just going to be praising Regal again though.

[ohtani's jacket]

I like Finlay's early work from '81-84 more than anything Regal's done. He was an outstanding wrestler during that time frame. I would describe him as a superior version of the Dynamite Kid, or rather what the Kid could have been if he'd chosen to stay in the UK instead of moving to Calgary. He was such a dynamic worker in those days and much more gifted than Regal. When Regal first started, he wasn't at all gifted. Everything he's achieved was through hard work, whereas Finlay was a complete natural. He had tremendous wrestling ability which he used to form the base for a bumping, stooging heel who managed to remain tough as nails. It may be an unfair comparison since Regal was always a heavy while Finlay worked in the more workrate-centric mid-heavyweight division, but in those days Finlay was neck and neck with Marty Jones for the best guy in his weight class and arguably the best guy in Britain. Another feather in his cap is that alongside Skull Murphy he formed one of the only legitimately good tag teams in the UK and ushered in workrate tags the likes of which England had never seen before. For my money that makes him more of an all-rounder than any point in Regal's career.

It all went pear shaped for Finlay when he changed his look and began having Paula manage him on TV. He became a boring worker after that. He was no longer dynamic and lightening quick between the ropes, but slow, stodgy, and dull. He'd beat guys down, do his shtick with Paula and squash guys. At the same time, he was one of the most in-demand heels in the business and more over than any point in his career, but that ten year period from 1986-1996 is awful. Regal's early run in WCW is far superior to what Finlay was doing in those same years. After their feud in '96, I would rate them as even. I'm of the opinion that Regal didn't have that many great bouts in his career, so it's possible that they're fairly even when it comes to great matches after '96, though I was kind of disappointed in the Finlay/Mysterio feud when I watched it for the Rey thread.

Basically, I think Finlay was the better worker, but I don't like the direction his work took.

[Childs]

Yeah, I've been really, really (really) underwhelmed with the Finlay I've seen before his WCW debut in 1996, except for his matches with Young David in the early 80s. I'm not prepared to defend the argument, but I wouldn't be surprised if one could be made that he really didn't become a great worker until he went stateside. Another thing -- it's not like people were always on the edge of their seats during Regal matches, but there are many cases of him winning over a tough crowd. Finlay was about as over in WCW as Van Hammer, sadly. Even if he was churning out solid work, it wasn't really connecting in a way that made it easy for fans to get into most of his matches. He seems like a guy who oddly enough peaked as an all-around performer in his late 40s while working in WWE. I love some of the matches with Benoit and Regal, and I really love the Booker T match at the '98 Great American Bash. But at a certain point, a guy has to get a decent reaction from his work for me to consider him great, and Finlay played to crickets too often.

 

I agree with your larger point, but Finlay was damn good in early '80s WOS. I'm repeating an old OJ argument, but he really went to seed when he paired up with Princess Paula. And that led to him having an unusually weak mid-career for a guy who was great both as a young wrestler and an old wrestler. I will likely vote Regal higher in GWE because of his greater consistency, but I might prefer peak Finlay to peak Regal. Finlay's offense just felt so authentically violent that he sucked me deep into his best matches.

[Childs]

And I see OJ posted about Finlay and Paula as I was posting.