Originally Posted by Tyrion Lannister
Admirable, but fucking BORING and overrated, and he makes decent wrestling fans suffer because of it. If only a real talent had his commitment, but of course, it's always the losers, because real talents don't NEED to work that hard.
There's no such thing as a decent wrestling fan.
KOBossy, if you weren't impressed by even one of those matches in any capacity I'd say it's fair you won't be catching up to the D-Bry freight train of fandom any time soon. You either see things or you don't, and that goes for fans of just about any field.
With regards to the Kurt Angle comparisons, however, there's two sides of the fence with many things you said. Angle is not nearly the novice some people make him out to be but his views of wrestling I think are mostly a result of WWE indoctrination. That has it's good points and bad points. It was in his words that wrestling is mostly about getting the big moves in. He did that a lot, and his offence is a lot more visually impressive in many aspects compared to a 5'8 scrapper that Bryan's been defined as, but that's where a lot of this lack of in-ring consistency comes into the discussion. On the mat one second, run up to the top rope to Angle slam opponent in some high-octane-rush-of-adrenaline-that-wasn't-there-previously the next. Playing possum as they say, perhaps? Nah, wrestling machine
The guy has always been, to some people, a bundle of energy without room for simplicity. He's always going, going, going. His run in TNA has been quite revealing in how a weekly run-through and PPV overload of finishing moves has reduced them to signatures instead. Last time I watched you'd nary hear a pop for the Angle slam in the Impact Zone, nor would the Ankle Lock be received as little more than a lead-up until the grapevine was locked in.
You talk about those matches as being a showcasing of his talents as babyface-in-perilous situations, yet Angle has mentioned how Austin's in-ring general-esque guidance shaped that match into one of the best of his career. Lesnar's an interesting situation, because I've always seen him as a guy whose monstrous image, freakish athleticism worked in his favour in ridding himself of the nagging complaints that Angle's received in his career by onlookers. There's no taking away from Angle's athleticism, drive (to the point of fault, with reference to his dismissal from WWE), or contribution to a wrestling era. I'm someone who thinks Angle's quite underrated by many and think his involvement in high-profile matches made them as regarded as they are. The Danielson vs Angle debate is something that isn't settled just like that, though, especially considering Danielson is a more travelled figure in the world of professional wrestling.
And did the OP make a crack about his weight? That's what bulking looks like naturally. Benoit, on the other hand, was roided out of his frame.