Is Shawn Michaels in your Top 100?

[BigBadMick]

The other one.

 

Seems massively polarising. Doesn't have the same 'brought in a style that I hate' stigma as Angle, unless you credit/blame him entirely for self conscious epics.

 

Do folks have a preference for pre- or post injury?

[Matt D]

Shawn will be in the last quarter of my list. If Kurt is a wrestling moron, then Shawn is very canny, but often uses his skills to the detriment of a match (but the benefit of himself) or has grand ideas that he doesn't have the dramatic range to execute.

[WingedEagle]

Easily. Probably top half but no longer a lock there.

[goodhelmet]

Yeah he will definitely be on my list.

[Sidebottom]

Not putting him in a top 100 seems like it would take more effort and concentration to nit-pick, rather than accept the obvious talents.

[Grimmas]

I don't know, to be honest. Shawn before comeback is pretty good and great at times. I hate post comeback Shawn.

[Parties]

Not even close to making my list, for all of the usual reasons people have been giving for the last 10-15 years. I don't like Rockers-Rose/Somers as much as many of you do. Ditto the Mind Games match with Foley or the Razor ladder matches. He was undeniable during his peak (say '94-'97) in terms of being an amazing pinball/bump freak. Even in his prime, his approach to structuring a match was glaringly bad and he'd awkwardly telegraph spots in order to do something flashy.

 

Only WWF match of his that could be among the 100 best matches in company history for me would be the Action Zone '94 tag, which is kind of a miracle showcase for all four guys, and has the advantage of including probably the best Hall and Waltman performances that I've seen.

[Gregor]

He was undeniable during his peak (say '94-'97) in terms of being an amazing pinball/bump freak. Even in his prime, his approach to structuring a match was glaringly bad and he'd awkwardly telegraph spots in order to do something flashy.

I've never seen match structure as a weakness for 1994-97 Michaels. His matches in that time frame pretty much always went face->heel->face or face->heel->face->back-and-forth, with his opponent in control for as long as or longer than Michaels. As a heel, he generally got knocked around a lot before taking control, but I can't recall a match in which it felt like he didn't spend a convincing amount of time on offense. As a face, he did have a stock comeback routine, and sometimes it made his win feel a little too easy, but most of the time he mixed things up for longer matches. I can see the argument that the structure of his matches was pedestrian or generic but not glaringly bad. That said, "structure" is kind of a vague term, so that might not even be what you were arguing; when I think of structural issues I think of the complaints people levy at Bob Backlund matches.

 

I'm genuinely struggling to think of an instance of him telegraphing a spot in order to do something flashy. His flashy bumps were generally off Irish whips, punches, and backdrops - not really stuff where telegraphing is going to happen. When he tried flashy offense it didn't always look good but more because of execution than because of an awkward, obvious setup.

[The Man in Blak]

I've been trying to keep an open mind with Michaels, especially as I've been checking out his early Midnight Rockers tag work, but he has such an uphill climb for me for so many reasons in and out of the ring.

 

Right now, my list has every member of the Kliq out of the Top 100, with Waltman being a guy that just barely missed the bottom of the list; I feel like that's sort of poetic.

[Cap]

I was always sort of down on Shawn. I find so many of his spots really contrived in matches and always have. However, this process has actually made me a little higher on him. He will probably make my list just on the strength of his body of work. He has some of my least favorite matches ever, but he has too many good performances to not make my list, honestly.

[thebrainfollower]

Yeah he will.

[Quentin Skinner]

Very easily on my list, have yet to figure out how high though.

[Coffey]

In my top 25.

[MJH]

The problem with Shawn's early heel work isn't the structure, but he was really fucking boring in control, especially in '92-'93; that he was such a great bumper, and so the shine/comeback was always fun, only highlighted how comparatively-dull the middle section was. That said, there's some really nice work if you know where to look (the SF handheld with Jannetty from Nov/Dec '92 comes to mind), but I don't think he was able to find a balance as a heel until '97.

 

That said, yes, he's on my list.

[KB8]

He'll be on my list, though not sky high. I love Shawn as a tag worker, and there's still a good handful of his '92-'98 singles matches that I like a lot (and Mind Games has been my favourite match ever for about twelve years now). Post-retirement I'm pretty whatever on unless he's in a tag match, but there's some singles stuff there I'd probably find enjoyable enough as well.

 

He mostly gets in for his tag work, though.

[JerryvonKramer]

Shawn Michaels
Basic (offense, selling, psychology) 1/3 3/3 2/3 = 6
Intangibles 6
Great matches 6
Length of Peak 86-97= 11 years = 7

+1 ability to work face

+1 ability to work tags
+1 ability to work gimmick matches
+1 ability to get over in multiple markets (AWA, WWF)

Ability to work different styles / roles = 4

1. Rose / Sumers, 2. , Orient Express, 3. Powers of Pain, 4. Brainbusters, 5. Ted DiBiase, 6. Rick Martel, 7. Bret Hart, 8. Razor Ramon, 9. Owen Hart, 10. The Undertaker, 11. Steve Austin, 12. Mankind, 13. Chris Jericho, 14. Kurt Angle, 15. Ric Flair, 16. Randy Orton, 17. John Cena, 18. Diesel

Variety = 18 opponents = 9

38

 

I hate Shawn Michaels.

[BigBadMick]

Cheers Parv.

 

Did you put Angle through the computer yet?

[Childs]

I just plotted out my latest version of the 100, and yes, he made it--No. 71. Higher than I expected, actually.

[Microstatistics]

Originally thought he would be definite Top 20 but now he is most probably in the 25-30 range. I actually really liked a bunch of his post-comeback matches (or atleast performances) which boosted his longevity case.

[Goodear]

He's in the 80s for me which doesn't say as much as you would think as I'm not ranking a lot of Lucha or Japan because the styles don't appeal to me very much. I think he's got a high level of talent with lots of solid matches both as a Rocker and as a single. He's also one of the leaders of the 'wins don't matter as much as stealing the show' movement which makes me want to strangle him until his bald spot covers his whole being.

[Eegah]

Shawn Michaels the person vs Shawn Michaels the wrestler has one of the biggest swings of anyone of all time for me. I dont buy the WWE machine rewritten history of him being the GOAT but by sheer good to great match output he will make my list.

[JazeUSA]

top 50 lock, top 25 strong possibility

[Grimmas]

top 50 lock, top 25 strong possibility

Why?

[soup23]

Shawn Michaels was one of the best tag workers in the mid 1980's - early 1990's. The AWA stuff has stood the test of time and I think just that portion of their output has them compared favorably with teams like Harts, High Flyers, Strike Force. The Rockers are generally established as one of the best in ring teams in WWF history and I think the evidence of work on tape bears that out. The December 88 Demolition and Conquistador match from LA are both really well done. The 1989 series with the Brainbusters featured a lot of repetition but it was an effective formula. 1990-1991 showed them working in great, unique matches when given the chance. The Rougeaus matches are a preference but it is a vastly different style of worked match than what the Rockers were doing throughout the other parts of the same year. 1996 is an interesting year. I have trekked Michaels through most of that year now and with the exception of Beware of Dog where he didn't realize the cameras was on, he has delivered in every single PPV match that year. I understand the argument of knocking Michaels for this year based on his character and failure in the box office, but then I would ask that you take the same consideration and knock Vader in WCW in 1993 for the same lack of box office performance. Comparing in ring output between those two men, I think Michaels comes out stronger in 1996. 1996 in ring Michaels has been one of the strongest years in ring for any performer in the US that I have chronicled through the yearbooks. 1997 has more attitude issues and annoyances but Shawn's Fall 1997 character is deplorable and epic in being a complete dick. It is one of the more effective heels in WWF history IMO and it really climaxed right up to WM 14. I bring this up to parallel that Shawn excelled both in character work and in ring in that gap no matter which parameter you are judging by. Even in 1997, he had a bevy of very good to all time matches with Taker, Austin, Davey and Bret. Comparing Shawn's 1986-1998 to someone like Arn Anderson's 1984-1996, I think Shawn comes out looking fairly good. He had arguably the best matches of a multitude of people's careers during that time including Buddy Rose, Pat Tanaka, Scott Hall, Kevin Nash, Foley, and UnderTaker. He worked as an up and coming babyface tag team star to a complete dick heel on top that needs to be knocked down a peg or 20. He was able to have vicious brawls that evoke realism (vs. Foley) and a horror movie (first HIAC).

 

His post comeback career has been critiqued and I certainly don't like portions of it, but those portions mainly involve an association with one guy, HHH. The HHH stuff feels bloated and uninteresting. Outside of that, Michaels has a lot of good stuff. I know Steven doesn't care about the Angle series but I found it enjoyable as evidenced in the top 100 discussion pods last year. The capper with UnderTaker produced two great matches even if they aren't the best matches of all time that WWE canon would have you believe. The Jericho feud both in 2003 and 2008 are both great periods. I thought he added a good bit to the trios matches with Benoit that HHH was involved with. The legends matches that Shawn had vs. Hogan and Vince were enjoyable enough and served their purpose. I will even justify, "I'm sorry, I love you" as a melodramatic moment that was supposed to end the career of the best wrestler of all time. Beyond that, Michaels has some fun underneath stuff. Watch the match vs. Chris Masters at Unforgiven 2005. I feel like Shawn is very effective in that match getting young talent over. I was as sick of anyone at hearing that Shawn was the best wrestler of all time by WWE and while watching this stuff in the past few years, I don't think he is top 10-20 in my eyes. However, when GWE started, I was thinking that Shawn would probably land on the back half of my list buried somewhere and I now see no way he won't make the top 40 of my list. Between the yearbooks, AWA set and following PTB Vintage Vaults, Shawn has impressed time and time again.

[Matt D]

He doesn't get credit for the 88 Demolition match. That was good despite him. He just wasn't as nearly as tough as Dynamite when it came to asserting himself in 88.