Int Region, San Fran Subregion, Round 1: (15)Brock Lesnar vs. (18)Antonino Rocca

[klunderbunker]

This is a first round match in the International Region, San Francisco Subregion. It is a standard one on one match. It will be held at the Cow Palace, San Francisco, California.

#15. Brock Lesnar

Vs.

#18. Antonino Rocca

​

Polls will be open for three days following a one day period for discussion. Voting will be based on who you feel is the greater of the two competitors. Post your reasons for why your pick should win below. Remember that this is non-spam and the most votes in the poll win. Any ties will be broken by the amount of posts of support for each candidate, with one vote per poster.

Also remember that this is a non-spam forum. If you post a response without giving a reason for your selection, it will be penalized for spam and deleted.

 

[The Brain]

Well, here comes the pain. Lesnar is the talk of the town right now and he's against an oldtimer that many people probably never heard of. This might be the biggest blowout of the first round. Not that I think Rocca is a pushover. I'm just saying what is going to happen once the poll opens. Rocca was good in his day but I don't see his style getting him very far against Lesnar. Lesnar is too strong and too intense. On to the second round for Brock.

EDIT: I just realized this match takes place in the arena where Lesnar dropped the title to Guerrero. Maybe I'll change my mind....Nah, Brock all the way.

 

[Gelgarin]

Err, not only was Antonia Rocca a bigger star than Brock Lesnar could ever have hoped to have been (in wrestling or MMA) but also pretty much his entire act was his ability to knock off bigger men using his quickness and agility.

Some dickwad is going to try and bring up Lesnar's MMA credentials, so I'll go ahead and prempt the idiocy by pointing out that Rocca worked in the days when a lot of people were still legitimate wrestlers and he did just fine. Fuck, this is the man who made Lou Thesz tap out with a torture rack. If you can go hold for hold with Lou Thesz on the mat then you can deal with Brock Lesnar.

Lesnar was dominant during his career; a career that lasted an entire five minutes and accomplished nothing other than getting the panties of a handful of smarks nice and moist. Rocca was more dominant during his career, holding the original WWE championship for over four years, and never actually losing it. Not only was Rocca's dominance more universal than that of Lesnar, it also lasted far longer. Rocca was WWE world champion for longer than Brock Lesnar was a wrestler.

Then there's the question of legacy. Err... no contest. Brock Lesnar is the dictionary definition of a flash in the pan star, around for all of five minutes, and has only retained his popularity on account of never having been around long enough to get stale. Now the next thing I'm going to point out is so important that I'm actually going to have to enlarge the font.

Antonio Rocca was the highest drawing wrestler in the world for ten whole years.

That's right; during his heyday this man even outdrew Lou Thesz. He held the record for most MSG main events right up until Bruno; and typically headlined shows even when NWA champion Buddy Rogers was also on the card. Rocca was ten times the draw that Lesnar was, ergo he was the superior wrestler.

But wait, there's more.

Did I mention how Antonio Rocca changed the business? You know all those high flying moves that people bizarrely credit Shawn Michaels with popularising? Rocca was the man who brought them over. He was the US's first ever high flyer, and pretty much that entire style today can be traced back to Rocca's influence.

Brock Lesnar's legacy on the business... well he appears to have popularised the idea that a wrestler could have corporate sponsorship in their ring fear. That's it.

I've been flaming people in every direction for voting the wrong way, mostly just because it amuses me, but this time I really mean it.

If you vote for Brock Lesnar in this match then you are a fucking idiot.

 

[IHW]

I think Lesnar will win here because of his combination of the following-

-Size
-Strength
-Speed
-Athleticism

Lesnar has it all.

Rocca was great, but Lesnar has an impressive ability to pull out impressive wins.

 

[Peoples_Champ]

Antonio Rocca was the highest drawing wrestler in the world for ten whole years.

Although I don't agree with flaming, Gelgarin convinced me with a few of his points. Rocca was one of the biggest draws at the time and was a legit superstar. He never left to play another sport or go to a different competition. He was a wrestling superstar in the truest sense of the word.

Brock is a champ and a big fucking deal, but if this is a wrestling match, I'd prefer to take the guy who didn't stink up the joint with Goldberg at Wrestlemania. Which I've provided for your reference (yes, that is a beyond-his-prime Steve Austin getting a bigger pop than Lesnar and Goldberg at their primes).

[YOUTUBE]U5JETjzLAEg[/YOUTUBE]

Rocca over Lesnar by KO

 

[The Gribbler]

Well, here comes the pain. Lesnar is the talk of the town right now and he's against an oldtimer that many people probably never heard of. This might be the biggest blowout of the first round. Not that I think Rocca is a pushover. I'm just saying what is going to happen once the poll opens. Rocca was good in his day but I don't see his style getting him very far against Lesnar. Lesnar is too strong and too intense. On to the second round for Brock.

EDIT: I just realized this match takes place in the arena where Lesnar dropped the title to Guerrero. Maybe I'll change my mind....Nah, Brock all the way.

I agree with you on the result here, Lesnar to win.

But I have a little trouble comparing the two, I mean they were in completley different times. Do we compare them as they were, Brock had all the advantages of modern technology and training, as well as all the developments wrestlers had made over the years.

Rocca had less to work on.

So do we say Brock was better and that be that, or do we say in the context of the time in which they wrestled Rocca was a big deal and a very good wrestler, while Brock was a more than above average wrestler that left before he had a chance to establish himself fully in WRESTLING history (not to discount his MMA work)

I go Lesnar, but it was actually a tough call.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

Gelgarin is wise for his age.


Also I know some part of Rocca's history. And actually another poster educated me about him in a post a few weeks ago. Clearly, Brock wins.

I'm sorry, but Brock was a very very dominating wrestler and in this world of wrestling he eats Rocca for lunch. I would harken the memory for RVD vs Brock at Vengeance 2002. Similar. RVD gets his counters and moves in but Brock powers out and F-5s the shit out of Rocca. Pins him. Then he picks up again and F-5s him harder because he made Brock sweat a lot. Thats how it goes.

 

[Hulkamaniac]

I love me some old time wrestling, but Rocca is running into a freight train here. Brock matches or exceeds all of Rocca's physical gifts, and is gigantic in comparison. None of the bigger guys gelgarin talks about Rocca beating can come close to matching Lesnar's combination of size, strength, speed, athleticism, and skill.

I would have voted for Rocca in a lot of matches, but this is a terrible one for him.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Lesnar is my top five list of most overrated wrestlers of all time. If he wasn't wrestling Angle or Benoit, his matches were pretty mediocre. People say he dominated in 2002. He beat up on tag team wrestlers, 2002 Hogan, the departing Rocky, and Undertaker who basically had to have his hand broken which I don't totally blame Lesnar for. Lesnar was constantly taken to the limit by guys like Angle, Benoit, and Guerrero and lost some of those matches. Why should I vote for Lesnar again?

 

[Tastycles]

Lesnar is my top five list of most overrated wrestlers of all time.

He is in my top 1. Lesnar is dog shit, and I don't understand why anybody liked him. The WWE ratings went from being 5-6 to being 3 while he was on top. Smackdown fell even further. Nobody in the mainstream is interested in his comeback, and he is already boring his way back to the main event. He must be the only main eventer since about 1985 who is totally incapable of delivering anything interesting in a promo. Even Randy. Orton's. Single. Syllables. Are. More. Interesting.

Already, you will have seen Lesnar totally avoid a microphone confrontation with John Cena. Why? Because John Cena would be made to look like The Rock had been put out to stud, mated with Ric Flair and then the thoroughbread offspring was on it's greatest roll in history, whereas Lesnar would be made to look like Dean Malenko talking about the different types of paint available to decorate safety railings in a paper factory. He is awful, and the only reason he has had any success was as part of a drive by the WWE to try and legitimise the wrestling. Most wrestlers debuting between 1999 and 2002 used their real names or an approximation thereof, and there was a focus on guys like Angle and later Lesnar being in the main event. But, it failed, miserably and the WWE lost half of it's audience despite having swallowed it's only serious competitor and the number 3 company in the country for good measure. So they put Cena in a Vanilla Ice costume, pushed Batista, a 40 year old man in shiny pants, and stopped the rot.

Here, Lesnar is against the biggest draw of the 1960s, a man who brought fans into the WWWF, not drove them away and a man responsible for a gradual shift away from every wrestler wrestling in the same dull arse fashion that Lesnar has brought back. Legitimate credentials meant absolutely nothing to Rocca, and they shouldn't to you.