Jump to content
DVDVR Message Board

Best Mediocre Wrestlers


notoriusvig
 Share

Recommended Posts

For a second there, I thought OSJ was ripping on Buddy Rose and then I was going to have to fight him in the face. When I think of territorial stars, my favourite is probably Buddy. He had it all as a cowardly heel and one of the smartest workers of his era. Whereas Bock was the refined, egoist, Buddy was the quintessential dastardly antagonist. He did nothing to make the fans like him, and yet his matches were riveting and the crowd loved to hate him. So many heels either do all the cool shit and aren't heels for long or they're matches are intentionally boring. He nailed that balancing act poifectly.

Did he play a babyface earlier in his career? Because I have a hard time seeing Playboy as a good guy (different thread, I know).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Oyaji said:

For a second there, I thought OSJ was ripping on Buddy Rose and then I was going to have to fight him in the face. When I think of territorial stars, my favourite is probably Buddy. He had it all as a cowardly heel and one of the smartest workers of his era. Whereas Bock was the refined, egoist, Buddy was the quintessential dastardly antagonist. He did nothing to make the fans like him, and yet his matches were riveting and the crowd loved to hate him. So many heels either do all the cool shit and aren't heels for long or they're matches are intentionally boring. He nailed that balancing act poifectly.

Did he play a babyface earlier in his career? Because I have a hard time seeing Playboy as a good guy (different thread, I know).

Buddy turned face in Portland at one point. The ring filled with the people to cheer for him.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Execproducer said:

He can rot in prison, but there is no denying that Zumhofe was over like rover. As hard as it is to imagine today, a dude with Randy Savage hair, wearing an Elvis jumpsuit and coming out to the ring to Crazy Little Thing Called Love with a big ass boombox had people on their feet.

Over doesn't always mean "Good". Hell in Zumhoffe's case over doesn't even mean Mediocre. There was a reason Buck was only ever over in the AWA and surrounding areas and used as enhancement everywhere else.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How bad was Buck?

On the DVDVR AWA 80s set, Kris and Dylan put a Buck vs Mr. Electricity Steve Regal match on, not because it was any good, but because they had watched so many of their matches together and they felt like the rest of us deserved to be punished too.

Jerks.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, J.H. said:

Over doesn't always mean "Good". Hell in Zumhoffe's case over doesn't even mean Mediocre. There was a reason Buck was only ever over in the AWA and surrounding areas and used as enhancement everywhere else.

James

I was more commenting on the idea that the Milkman got hotter crowd reactions. Maybe in an alternate reality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, notoriusvig said:

I don't remember seeing Buddy Rose wrestle much in the WWF but I do remember his vignettes.

Pretty much everything he did in Portland that made tape (often his own) is on youtube. Literally every single match is worth watching. He was a heel ace in a weekly territory. He had to carry everything week in and week out against the occasional first rate talent, but a lot of guys who were second or third rate or washed up. You have to be really, really good to do that. He was. Other than Negro Casas, he's the most entertaining wrestler week in and week out in history. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why I did a best/worst et cetera on the first page. Because does "Best Mediocre Wrestler" mean MOST mediocre wrestler, or what? Do you demark wrestlers into the category of A=great, B=good, C=average, D=bad and E=awful, and we're looking to find the world;s most C+ guy? And who's to say the difference between a C+ and B-? It's subjective enough to begin with just dividing wrestlers in binary terms, good or bad. Plenty of guys are both rated and hated around here. If you add up all the hours you've spent in your life reading people arguing on this board JUST ABOUT THE MIZ, that's a whole good night's sleep you've missed there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, AxB said:

That's why I did a best/worst et cetera on the first page. Because does "Best Mediocre Wrestler" mean MOST mediocre wrestler, or what? Do you demark wrestlers into the category of A=great, B=good, C=average, D=bad and E=awful, and we're looking to find the world;s most C+ guy? And who's to say the difference between a C+ and B-? It's subjective enough to begin with just dividing wrestlers in binary terms, good or bad. Plenty of guys are both rated and hated around here. If you add up all the hours you've spent in your life reading people arguing on this board JUST ABOUT THE MIZ, that's a whole good night's sleep you've missed there.

Personally, that's why I use "replacement level" instead of mediocre. 

Rather than have binary levels of "who is good or bad" and "who is mediocre or not mediocre", Replacement Level seems to tie everything into that. It works as the "if you want to be a wrestler on a national scale, you must be better than THIS person to fit. If you are not better than they are, you probably don't belong on the national scene."

...and considering I will use VORP in wrestling as interchangable with "Value Over Mike Bennett"...there's my pick. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand, when you watch the InVasion PPV, every WWF wrestler gets a babyface reaction, and every WCW/ECW wrestler gets a heel reaction. Except X-Pac, because they can't help but chant how X-Pac sucks. He turned Billy Kidman babyface by accident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, AxB said:

On the other hand, when you watch the InVasion PPV, every WWF wrestler gets a babyface reaction, and every WCW/ECW wrestler gets a heel reaction. Except X-Pac, because they can't help but chant how X-Pac sucks. He turned Billy Kidman babyface by accident.

Being despised by the fans does not necessarily mean X-Pac was mediocre in the ring, though.

X-Pac was despised in 2001 to the point X-Pac Heat became a thing, but even then it was still kind of established "yes, X-Pac is a very, very good wrestler, but he went past "stale" and went to "petrified." It was less "you suck" or "you're mediocre", but rather "How can I miss you if you won't go away?"

If you don't think that changes X-Pac's mediocrity, just remember: In 2002 when he got fired from WWE and entered the indy scene, X-Pac was suddenly over with the fans. On the indy scene, consisting of the cringiest smarks of early-2000s indy wrestling, the same people who HATED him and started the boos...suddenly loved him.

Because even if the gimmick was stale, X-Pac was AWESOME. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On October 5, 2018 at 10:27 PM, El Dragon said:

I am not sure if he should be in the running for best mediocre or most mediocre, bu Shannon Moore is as mediocre as I can think of.

This reminded me of Moore and Chad Collyer engaging in a Best of Seven series in the HWA. That was a staggering display of perfectly serviceable and utterly uncompelling matches.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...