Originally Posted by Seven Sheps a-swimming
That grapevined ankle lock sure is useful when his entire offense is useful when his mainly suplex based offense works on the back leading up to the Angle Slam finisher. Why not just go straight for the ankle if NOBODY gets out? Like cmon, that's poor psychology right there.
How about the fact he needs to weaken his opponents to put them in a submission hold? Have you ever seen a real fight? Why does Anderson Silva go for takedowns when he could easily put someone in a key-lock? Maybe because in a real fight its not easy to put someone in a submission genius.
When did Aries use that in TNA? ROH isn't relevant to this argument b/c I'll admit that they overuse finishers but their fans eat that crap up (see Richards/Elgin from this year). Aries 9/10 times gets the pin with the brainbuster. His entire X Division title run more or less consisted of it.
TNA panders to 900 morons in the Impact Zone who dont pay to get in and who have been known to chant for the shape of a wrestling ring. Until Austin Aries develops a ring style where he draws money (like Kurt Angle), you cant even begin to compare the two.
Not a copout at all. Im already putting myself through reading this thread. I have no motivation to read another terrible review of a match from someone who doesn't know what he is talking about.
His best matches come with better workers like Austin or Taker or Benoit. In his first 6 months he wasn't in charge of structuring his own matches. I already said he's a great natural talent and as long as he's told what to do then yeah he's great.
Bullshit. Complete idiocy. I swear to God. Austin wasn't a better worker than Kurt Angle in 2000/01. Read Austin's book. Austin came back from major neck surgery. Angle lead the matches. That is fact. That isn't fiction, which most of your posts seem to come from. Nigel McGuinness said the biggest compliment he's ever had in wrestling is Angle allowing him to lead the match in 2009. He said it was a special compliment because everyone in the business knows the likes of Austin, Michaels, Undertaker and those guys allowed Angle to control the tempo of those classic matches he'd had in the WWF. You can make up a lot of stuff to strengthen your argument if you really want to, but it doesn't make you close to being accurate .
Please show me these great matches and tell me why they're great. Matt Morgan is atrocious so I really struggle to think they did anything worthwhile. In fact tell me what Kurts best TNA matches are. Surprised you didn't mention the Anderson match since Anderson is terrible and Kurt got him to a slightly above average match.
Why would I need to show you anything? You have admitted you dont rate him, so I'm not going to piss in the wind and try and prove something to you when you dont know what is good and what isnt.
Yeah it's his style. Davey Richards and the ROH guys (which you had a go at earlier with the Aries comment) use it too and I hate it. I said it might appeal to some but it sure doesn't to me. You can say it's great but it doesn't make you right either. There is no definitive "right" style of wrestling in a subjective sport like wrestling.
Difference is, Kurt Angle is one of the biggest stars in the last two decades and everyone who wrestled him or observed him (from Austin, to Nigel McGuinnesss, to Jeff Jarrett to Bret Hart to Ric Flair to Shawn Michaels to Paul Heyman) thinks he's one of the best they've ever seen. One clown on a forum doesn't have an opinion that holds any credibility when there are countless counter points to the contrary.
I've heard people say it. They think he's some great amateur wrestler so he has to be good at this too. If we're talking about his body of work then his best is very good, but his worst is absolute trash.
He's a great amateur wrestler who transformed into a tremendous onscreen performer. I just imagine you got confused (again).
Okay so what else did he do?
Watch the match and you will see what he did. Or watch the match with your blinkers on and fail to realise his contribution. If you replaced Angle with someone else in the match it wouldnt be half as good. Not only do you spout big opinions without the knowledge of how to put them in the context of an argument, you seem to be unaware of tag team psychology.
I said how it's done is what makes it different?
CM Punk's babyface run works because he's a great seller which babyfaces need when they're getting beaten down. Then he builds his comeback with the neckbreaker, knee to face etc and hitting the GTS. Great workers like Punk, Cena, Rey all know how to sell a workover and get the fans invested in their babyface comeback. Just like great heels like a Finlay know how to keep their offense interested and not just sit in rest holds forever.
You are confused? You are just listing the positives on their arsenal in some sort of bias one-sided charge to prove how shit Kurt Angle is. You are saying "CM Punk's babyface run worked" and "Rey gets fans invested in their comeback". Why are you mentioning this, when Kurt Angle has done this also? And done this in an era where he actually drew money? Did you miss 2000-2006, when Angle was one of the hottest acts in the business? Someone they put in a WrestleMania main event with a broken neck because he was irreplaceable? I get you have a hard on for Kurt Angle, but fuck me you are reaching with this argument.
Joe works well with Angle, absolutely. He slows him right down.
Slowed him down? You think Joe dictates the pace of a match with Kurt Angle? If you think that you must be dumber than I thought you were.
Again, show me a good Angle vs Morgan match.
Matt Morgan's only good match was at Bound For Glory 2009 where Angle had a match with himself. Morgan blew up and Angle dragged it back to something respectable.
Sure you could say that. You could also say the crowd in Ohio would also consist of half casuals. TNA hasn't exactly got a giant audience who are going to know who everyone is. It's the same when they came to the UK, most people came for Hogan and Sting, not Bobby Roode or James Storm.
WELL DONT PUT PEOPLE IN A POSITION TO BE OUTSHINED BY FLAIR THEN. Nobody forced them to do that.
He got his ass beat and worked a good match in my opinion. I really couldn't care less that some people cheered him. People have been cheering heels for years now.
Wait a second. You dont care about crowd reaction, but you just buried Kurt Angle for doing stuff in a match with no psychology? So its OK for Flair to outshine people doing his over the top nostalgia act, but if Kurt Angle does a suplex to set up a ankle lock he's a terrible performer? Inconsistent much?