|
|
Post by Head Booker on May 17, 2008 8:04:21 GMT -6
how can you state Lashley isn't/wasn't a very good wrestler when compared to Lesnar...especially when the two share similair wrestlin' backgrounds...the difference is actually in the hype machine WWE put behind each men... Brock came in as the menacin' unstoppable monster heel whereas Bobby came in as a powerhouse face...when lookin' at it Lashley could fall under the right wrestler/wrong gimmick...if he would have stayed a heel like when he was in OVW everyone's opinion of him would be totally different now...
Tate
|
|
|
|
Post by Sir Chris Cairns on May 17, 2008 9:01:52 GMT -6
Is there like a general dislike for power wrestlers here? I understand WWE pushes them down our throat, but you get bad powerhouses like Batista, or - "I''m Gonna Running Lariat You To Death" Ultimate Warrior and Lex Lugar, then you get very good powerhouses, like Big Show, Brock Lesner and Goldberg. Yes, Goldberg! Big ego, pushed too soon and not very likeable (would've made a great monster heel in my opinion), but the guy had a great range of devestating moves, and a good pyschology, I feel. His stuff looked real, he looked real, he was good to watch. Unlike, say, a five knuckle shuffle, a people's elbow, or even Mr. Sock being shoved down your mouth. I'm going off on a tangent, but I always wonder why people like Goldberg and Big Show (who himself often looks real, raw and does some good moves), are labelled untalented, slow and lazy. Just because they're big and can't do a moonsault of a ladder, or whatever.
I liked Brock and, for the brief time I saw him, liked Lashley too. When I saw him, he kinda did have a mouthpiece in the form of Donald Trump lol.
Billy
|
|
|
|
Post by Rico on May 17, 2008 9:36:07 GMT -6
like Tate said, if Lashley was a heel then he would be see as a good wrestler. Most powerhouses aren't faces, Lashley was good in the ring, I liked him. Though didn't care too much for his promo but he was still good none the less. IMO he's better than Batista and on the same page as Lesnar. The two were very similar in the ring, with the exception that Lesnar was this powerful, unstoppable heel.
Lex Luger, I wouldn't put him in the same catagory as Batista and Warrior, I like Luger, his Narcisist gimmick was good, he played it very well, and he had a great person in Mr. Perfect to work with. Then when he changed to the All American, he was still decent.
Big Show, for a big man should never be put in the same catagory as Batista, Warrior, Vis or any of the other sloppy powerhouses. I'd put him up there with Taker, Bam Bam, Vader etc...he knows how to work, and he does damn good with what he has.
Goldberg..........meh!...not even going to go there.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icon Lord Leon Corbin on May 17, 2008 11:03:39 GMT -6
I'm going off on a tangent, but I always wonder why people like Goldberg and Big Show (who himself often looks real, raw and does some good moves), are labelled untalented, slow and lazy. Just because they're big and can't do a moonsault of a ladder, or whatever.
Big Show can and has done moonsaults before. |
|
|
|
Post by Rob on May 17, 2008 11:37:50 GMT -6
Yup, very true. The only reason people don't generally know that is because workers were too afraid to take the move. Pussies  |
|
|
|
Post by Sir Chris Cairns on May 17, 2008 11:52:48 GMT -6
Okay, bad example. I went with it because it's one of the only fancy moves I know the name of without the use of a wrestling dictionary lol.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icon Lord Jon Kellar on May 17, 2008 13:03:51 GMT -6
Why Bobby Lashley didn't get over can be put down to the following: When Brock looked angry he looked psychotic and scary....  When Lashley looked angry he looked constipated....  |
|
|
|
Post by Icon Lord Leon Corbin on May 17, 2008 13:13:35 GMT -6
Ahahahahhaaaa!!! 
|
|
|
|
Post by Rob on May 17, 2008 13:18:35 GMT -6
Hehe nice one Jon.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vernon Vanderbilt on May 17, 2008 13:31:40 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by Rico on May 17, 2008 15:24:28 GMT -6
LOL........oh man....
but I have a question....why didn't either last longer than 4 years in the WWE?
|
|
|
|
Post by Icon Lord Sean "Magic" Fiery on May 17, 2008 17:42:04 GMT -6
I can easily remember Lesnar having more talent displayed in a 10 minute match than Lashley ever did in his whole term in WWE. Lashley just looked sloppy, his moves looked weak and exaggerated, his bumps were horrible and his presense wasn't good at all. Lasnar obviously had a better grip on wrestling, acting, and having an overall better personality. Maybe it's just bias? Give me an exciting Lesnar who can display a great match over a boring Lashley who was a mere Goldberg/Lesnar ripoff. All judged by his WWE run, however... But if that's any indication of how he is as a wrestler in general, then I'm sticking with my opinions. Lesnar didn't last more than 4 years because of his NFL "career" path. And we all knew how that fell apart Lashley... Well... TNA can have him. |
|
|
|
Post by Rico on May 17, 2008 18:37:51 GMT -6
I'd take Lashley over Lesnar.....I just like Lashley's speed, which was something Lesnar didn't have...but you can say that one has this and the other doesn't....but I will never call Lashley a Goldberg/Lesnar rip-off....they were all different.
I never cared for Goldberg simply because WcW just made him this unstoppable person without even having him to do much....the winning streak was tooooooooo exaggerated. I always looked at Goldberg as the type of wrestler that forgets that he's all part of a storyline, and while in the back, he gets pissed when he has to lose to someone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icon Lord Sean "Magic" Fiery on May 17, 2008 19:26:42 GMT -6
He is a Goldberg/Lesnar ripoff. They molded them together to get his gimmick and style. The way he carries himself just SCREAMS Goldberg and Lesnar. His entrance even resembles Lesnar's a LOT... Same with his taunts, movements, etc. Everytime he jumped onto the apron was expecting pyros to explode just like Lesnar's did. Then his moveset and style is Goldberg through and through... Easily notible. Power slams, spear, some suplex variations. It's hard to not notice that as obvious as it all is. Lashley was never original, which is a huge reason why I don't think he was a big success.
|
|
|
|
Post by Icon Lord Leon Corbin on May 17, 2008 19:30:32 GMT -6
Have to also remember WWE love to go with things they know works...
|
|
