Kevin Nash Comments On Benoit, Guerrero, Punk & Bryan's Title Runs

[ITrippedTheShockmaster]

I read the Grantland article and found it sort of interesting to see what Kevin Nash is doing nowadays. While I've never been a fan of his, I do admit that he's played a big role in the business of professional wrestling over the past 25 years or so. He's been involved with some of the dumbest moves (Oz... need I say more?) to one of the most influential moves (nWo) in the business. I admit that I find him entertaining on the mic most of the time, but that he is indeed a political animal and his involvement with the Kliq got him into a lot of stardom he achieved in his career.

That being said, I think Nash's comments, while coming off as bitter, have to be taken into perspective.

Did Benoit and Guerrero winning the titles "kill" the wrestling business? IMO, no, but they did bring an end to the era of wrestling that Nash was used to working in - the era of the dominant big man being the focus of the company.

Think about it. Minus Undertaker, who is on a level all his own, look at the big men in the WWE right now - Kahli? Please. Brodus Clay and Ryback? Entertaining, but still very green. Big Show and Kane? Still entertaining, but obviously winding down their careers. Brock Lesnar? He's there for a paycheck, nothing more. Tensai? Bust!

Nash's heyday in pro wrestling was the 90s, when interest in pro wrestling was on a decline for the beginning of the decade. The characters in that time we just coming off of the bombast of the 1980s, and there was still that desire for the larger-than-life (both physically and in character) personality. The big men were seen as true giants and were booked as dominating monsters. Nash's WWF title run as Diesel came, as many have said, at a low point in the industry. When he left to WCW and was involved with the nWo formation, it sparked a revolution in the industry. Along with ECW, they pushed WWF into the "Attitude Era." Big men were still dominant, but you also began to see the rise of younger, smaller talent begin to take hold. The landscape was starting to change.

In that vein, I offer that Benoit and Guerrero's title wins offered another revolution in the industry - the move away from the big man to the more solid technical wrestler to lead the company. The torch was passed, so to say. So what if they weren't 7-foot-whatever and choke slamming or powerbombing everyone. They were entertaining, and the wrestling fans at the time wanted something new. Eventually, that trend toward technical expertise would fade away with the rise of John Cena as the face of the company in the mid-to-late 2000s, but the era of the dominant big man still seemed to be in the rearview mirror.

Now, with guys like CM Punk and Bryan Danielson/Daniel Bryan being brought back to the forefront, it shows the true cyclical nature of the wrestling business. It's like the music industry. One form of music takes the lead for about a decade or so, then it slowly fades when the market becomes oversaturated, allowing another genre to come up and take its place for a while. That genre then goes back underground until the masses get tired of what's en vogue and want a change. Will the big-centric mentality in the wrestling business come back? Who knows, but I wouldn't be surprised.

Personally, I think the Grantland story presents Nash as someone who appears to be moving on from pro wrestling to a film career (albeit with bit roles), but just can't let go of the fact that he's not the center of attention. Sounds like a similar story to a lot of former pro wrestlers.

 

[MMK]

I agree with Nash. Partially.

Wrestling didn't die when Benoit and Eddie became Heavyweight Champions; but Benoit and Eddie did.

Wrestling isn't about giving the best wrestler or athlete the heavyweight title. Thats for real sports. Pro wrestling is a show not a sport. It works best when everyone plays their role. The heavyweight title is for the larger than life characters such as Hogan, Rock, Austin, Warrior, Taker, Andre, etc. Benoit and Eddie do not fit that description. Nor should they. Thats what the IC and lightweight titles are for. Those titles are now meaningless because the guys who should be competing for them are in the heavyweight title picture instead, leaving the IC and US titles with the likes of jobbers like santino. Correct me if i'm wrong, but i do not think mayweather and paquiao compete for the world heavyweight title. I believe they have weight classes in boxing. So the mvp comment was irrelevant.

If to get to the wwe heavyweight title picture requires you to jack yourself up so full of steroids that you end up dead in your 30's, then was it really worth it? Benoit and Eddie may have never won a heavyweight title if they had spent their entire career in the WCW midcard division behind the likes of Nash, but they'd still be alive. They died in part because they bulked up to play a role they were never intended to play

 

[giblet55]

All of the responses to this thread both for and against Nash have been great. A lot of thought has gone into most people's responses. This is why I've been such a fan of Wrestlezone for all these years. Yea I rarely post, but I've always been more of a reader than a poster.

To follow up on what I stated earlier and what other people have stated, I still don't agree with Nash. I understand the comments on how some wrestlers were 'iconic' or 'larger than life'. For me, I think some of them appeared this way because I was still a kid when I watched them and everything seems larger as a kid. Not that Hogan, Warrior, and such weren't big, but they seemed huge because of my age. I'm not saying it was all age based because obviously these guys were bigger than today's stars.

I still get much more enjoyment out of watching old matches like Bret Hart vs. Mr. Perfect Curt Hennig than I do out of watching Hogan vs. anybody. I loved Hogan as a kid, but as I grew up I wanted more. As I got older I watched guys like Ric Flair, Sting, Savage, Steamboat, Hart, Hennig, and so on. I liked the way they moved in the ring, their styles, the finesse when they'd snap off a suplex or a russian leg sweep. I just loved that style of wrestling, so maybe I'm biased.

I see that same style when I watch Daniel Bryan and Cm Punk, so it entertains the hell out of me. It entertains me a lot more than watching Ryback destroy two nobodies and flex like a machine after the match. I was always a fan who appreciated what everyone in wrestling did because I feel they are all instrumental to the show and they all draw in different fans. I look at a show like a recipe, one missing ingredient and the whole dish is blah. You've got your comedy moments with Santino Marella, you've got your sexy moments with the divas, you've got your powerhouse moments with HHH and Lesnar, you've got your technical moments with Daniel Bryan and CM Punk, you've got your great mic moments with Jericho and Punk...everybody matters. I may look forward to one part of the show more than you do, but every second of the show should matter and should appeal to different fans.

 

[Pegusus Fill_T]

One thing for sure. Eddie and benoit did a good job as champs and drew good ratings during their reigns.

With Eddie as Champ the lowest he drew was 2.8 with the highest being 3.6. He drew over 3.0 for 15 out of 19 weeks. Even with the big man Brock as champ before Eddie, there were couple of occasions where Lesnar drew about 2.8 the difference only being that lesnar was able to hit 3.7 which is 0.1 more than Eddie. All in all, SD was not negatively affected with Eddie as champ even after Lesnar left.

With Benoit as champ, the lowest Raw drew was 3.2 while the highest being 4.2 With Triple H being Champ before benoit Hunter drew the lowest of 3.3 with the highest being 4.5 (And I really dont know why people complained about Triple H/Evolution power trip in 2003/2004)

All in all two small guys being champion did neither cause ratings to drop drastically nor did it hurt the prestige of the title. In fact JBL himself admitted that it was Eddie who helped him become a maineventer because people loved Eddie and JBL beating Eddie with Kurt reversing the decision coupled with JBL giving Eddie's mom a keyfabe heart attack gave JBL the push from being a midcarder to a maineventer with nuclear heat and a successful WWE champion.
Randy Orton beating Benoit was what solidified Randy as a legit maineventer. Yes, the Foley v Orton feud did cause Randy's stock to rise, but him beating Benoit after Triple H, HBK, Kane etc. failed, made him in fan's eyes a real threat.

Conclusion : I can't see how Eddie nor Benoit killed wrestling as champs. If Nash means real wrestling as in inring work, that would be like saying Rock and Stone Cold killed WWE ratings.

What killed wrestling? making people like Hornswoggle focal points of the show (remember the very unfunny midget court with DX??), using the title to push mid carders (Khali, Swagger - I don't hate them. But it was unnecessary) with Sheamus being the only successful experiment, Lack of storylines and build ups for PPVs with people having random feuds (ex: Kane v Randy) Those days even Steiner v Test Unforgiven match had a better build up than current WWE/WHC build ups. Nash is a douche and it's pretty sad to see someone I idolised as a kid making inane comments just to be relevant.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I can't buy into the pro Nash arguments because, like Nash himself, they overlook a few things. Nash is a huge mark for himself, yet he neglects to mention how his nearly year long run as WWE Champion is widely regarded as one of the worst in the history of the title. He neglects to mention that he wasn't really a huge draw during his run in WWE.

He also neglected to point out that the VAST majority of major stars produced have not been what Nash would qualify as "big guys". Flair, Steamboat, Race, Michaels, Savage, Hart, Hennig, Zybyzko, Gagne and numerous others are "small guys". Most of them are in the 5'10-6'1" range and generally weighed anywhere from 200-230 pounds during the peaks of their career. Also, for every "bigger than life" personality like Flair, Hogan and Savage; you had a dozen guys that were mostly "normal". Despite the propoganda some want to spread in regards to the Attitude Era & the 80s, not every wrestler was this ultra-charismatic mega star that had the face of a movie star and the body of a living god come to earth. The VAST majority of big stars in wrestling history don't fit Kevin Nash's mold of what makes a star, which in and of itself punctures one of many huge holes in his logic balloon.

Wrestling has had to evolve and change with the times. You don't change with the times, you go out of business. Just ask the Gagnes or Kevin Von Erich about that. When you cling to outdated ideas, you're dooming yourself. Gagne believed that the best wrestler should be World Champion regardless of whether the fans were into him or not and his company went under because of it. Fritz Von Erich wouldn't leave the boundaries of the Dallas territory to expand what was a thriving business and Vince went out & did it instead. Having guys with a physically impressive look & stature were more important in the 80s and 90s than they are today. Look at guys like Rob Terry, Ezekiel Jackson, Nathan Jones and Mason Ryan. All guys with incredible physiques and looks, but they have no ability in the ring or personality to speak of. A big reason of why wrestling has changed is because most of the best guys that've been coming into wrestling for the past decade are guys that are on the "small" side by Nash's standards.

At the end of the day, all that really matters is whether or not a wrestler is over with fans. Benoit was over with fans. He might not've been hugely charismatic, but he was heavily over all the same. Guerrero might not've been 6'5" and rippling with 275 pounds of solid muscle, but that never stopped fans from rallying behind him. Punk and Bryan might look, comparatively speaking "average", yet they're loaded with personality and the fans go crazy for them whenever they do their thing. A big reason for their success, and for the success thus far of guys like Punk, Bryan, Aries, HBK, Ziggler, Edge, Rhodes, The Miz and others is because they can actually wrestle. They can put on energetic, competetive wrestling matches. Some are better than others, of course, but just having personality and being a big guy won't get it done these days. Fans of today want more of an overall package of personality, charisma, athleticism and wrestling ability. They want someone who can be an athletic badass rather than someone that only looks like one.

I think that Nash knows that if he were a 30 year old man in pro wrestling today, he wouldn't have risen to the heights he once did back in the 90s. That's not to say that he wouldn't be a star, the man can cut good promos, but he wouldn't have the in-ring ability or athleticism to hang with a lot of the talent that's out there. It's kind of like Batista in which he said he left because he didn't like the direction the WWE was heading. He was liking the direction and the PG format just fine when he was headlining ppvs and wrestling for World Championships. I think he saw guys that have infinitely more ability either in the ring or on the mic, such as CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, Dolph Ziggler and a crop of younger guys that've come up or are on the verge of coming up to the main roster, and realized that he couldn't hang with them.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Now this is complete horseshit. To say Benoit and Guerrero were a dime a dozen, I', 100% certain you've discredited yourself from any argument. You obviously can't understand how truly amazing these two were technical, physically, and mentally.

Hopefully, one day if ever, we'll be able to see amazing technical wrestling again. Daniel Bryan can get there. But other than that, I challenge you to name 10 guys wrestling today who can be or are as good as Benoit or Guerrero, or even fucking Dean Malenko. You're an idiot. <3

I don't give a shit about how amazing Benoit and Guerrero were. The objective of professional wrestling is to make money. Benoit and Guerrero didn't. Guys like Hogan, Austin, and Rock did and Cena is currently doing. You can execute all the damn moves you want, but if you can't get the crowd to consistently come to see you then you aren't as big. That's why guys like Hogan and Austin are at the top and guys like Benoit and Guerrero are in the middle. If it was all about moves, then fucking guys like Regal and Malenko would have been huge stars. Guess what? They weren't. Deal with it.

 

[closet_fan]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You say that most people would say that their favourite Wrestlemania match was Hogan-Andre?

Well, a lot of surveys I have seen over the years seem to have one match listed consistently in the "best WM matches"- and that happened on the same night as Hogan-Andre- RICKY STEAMBOAT V RANDY SAVAGE!

In Ricky Steamboat's DVD, he says that WM3 got record numbers based on the promotion for Hogan v Andre, and that spurred him and "Macho Man" to put on an incredible match. He said that, the next week, there was a lot of people talking about "The Dragon" vs "The Macho Man" match, more than Hogan vs Andre.

I ask other people on this thread to say whether you considered Hogan v Andre or Steamboat v Savage to have been a more entertaining match at Wrestlemania 3. I think that the answer may surprise you, TheHorndog Says)

After I read the article, my first thought was Savage. I remember when I saw him in person at my first wrestling event, against Flair, I was shocked at how small he was. But he was just as good, if not better, than Hogan after he got his push.

Big guys don't mean much anymore. Ryback can't get over. Mason Ryan floundered, etc. Just because your big, doesn't make you good.

 

[xavyer]

To be honest, the reason why Kevin Nash was relevnt in the WWF(E) during his time as Diesel, is because Shawn Michaels put him on the map, and his feud with HBK made him relevant, but if it wasn't for Michaels, he probably would have been mid card, in my opinion wrestling died when Nash became a wrestler, right now he's a has been that refuse to accept the fact that no one gives two hoots about him, he can't wrestle anymore, not that he ever could, he didn't even had a fraction of Eddie's or Benoit's talent, and i agree with someone else on this thread, Punk or Bryan have more talent on their left testicle than Nash in his entire life, he's just like Steiner, pissed off at the world for their reality, and their reality is that no one gives a damn about them anymore.......

 

[Workrate]

Kevin Nash is an idiot and I don't know why people continue to give any credence to anything he has to say about wrestling or anything else.

Here's the thing: in professional wrestling's long and winding narrative, Nash has played a tremendous role. You can feel however you want about him, but he was one of the key cogs in changing the way wrestling companies operated as a business and bringing it to new heights. He's right when he says that he and Scott Hall paved the way for getting today's wrestlers guaranteed contracts and significantly more money. There's a lot of very, very good things that he's been a part of that we simply cannot deny and I'm not entirely sure anyone has ever tried to deny him that.

Now, having said all that, the guy is a self-centered wingnut who gained more from politicking than he ever did from possessing talent. Give credit where it's due: he reached the top and wielded a ton of power. He may have got there through politics, but he got there. Not many guys can say that. But along the same lines, there's a plethora of other guys who have got to where they are without taking that road. Maybe they haven't accumulated as much money as Kevin Nash has, or been a part of a landscape shaping series of storylines as Kevin Nash has, but it's not as if he's the only person to ever reach the top, and there are certainly a whole gaggle of wrestlers who've done it without being a condescending ass. Again, good for him. But there's a big part of Nash, as a person, that feels unjustly disrespected. He plays the "big daddy cool" role, but has anyone ever read or watched an interview where it didn't seem like he had a chip on his shoulder? And that's where my gripe comes in. If you're going to be so brazen about how you got what you got, why do you expect to be showered in respect? Fans respect Nash's accomplishments, but not his work or the means by which he achieved them. Fans respect guys like Eddie Guerrero, Chris Jericho, Daniel Bryan, and CM Punk because they've reached great heights through great efforts and, by and large, without knowingly stepping on as many heads as possible to get there. (Note: Chris Benoit's name is omitted because he isn't so much a respectable figure anymore, and I'd much prefer to just leave his name out of the conversation entirely, even though his name was evoked as a linchpin in Nash's comments.)

Times change. An old wrestler who so clearly had only shallow qualities going for him to begin with -- size, looks -- spouting off about height and weight have ruined the business is a bit embarrassing for him. Wrestling, like literally everything else in the world around us, needs to constantly be evolving. It's how we went from writing letters with feathers to typing on typewriters to sending e-mails; it's the reason we have a phone that performs the function of 15 different devices. He can say all he wants that guys like Punk and Bryan and Guerrero and Jericho don't sell, but the proof is in the pudding. They do sell. Do they sell as well as premier guys sold in Nash's heyday? No. But it isn't because they're small guys. Small guys like Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart and Randy Savage and Ricky Steamboat and Ric Flair and so on succeeded in Nash's heyday too. The fact is that times have changed. In Nash's case, they've passed him by. There's no legitimate competition within the business now. The WWE's preeminent competition is MMA, which is real competition rather than scripted soap opera storylines built around predetermined matches. If you recall, when Hall and Nash first walked into WCW in 1997, the majority of people believed it was all legitimate. The internet existed, but it wasn't something we all used every single day. We didn't have smart phones and social media. Back then, wrestling was special because it hadn't been completed exposed and every detailed wasn't being spoiled a week or two ahead of actually happening. There's a whole hell of a lot that's contributed to "the death of wrestling" (which, uh, isn't dead yet, Nash), but it has just as much, if not more, to do with the course of time than it does with any specific set of wrestlers.

Of course, all this ignores the negative of Nash's career. The finger poke of doom. The backstage dick-swinging that he and Hulk Hogan brag about that led to future world champions like Benoit and Guerrero jumping ship. Things like that are all just dominoes that led to WCW's demise, which eliminated competition within the business, and the rest is history. Nash can say whatever he wants, but the fact of the matter is this: if wrestling is dead, he directly contributed to the disease that killed it. He gave a hell of a lot to professional wrestling, but he absolutely took. And hey, way to go. He got paid and he's living the high life now. But throwing around the occasional bullshit quotes wherein he throws widely respected athletes under the bus isn't going to get him the respect he feels like he deserves. He's already burned that bridge. Those of us know who better, we read or hear comments like these and laugh. Money can't buy credibility.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Kevin Nash is an idiot and I don't know why people continue to give any credence to anything he has to say about wrestling or anything else.

Here's the thing: in professional wrestling's long and winding narrative, Nash has played a tremendous role. You can feel however you want about him, but he was one of the key cogs in changing the way wrestling companies operated as a business and bringing it to new heights. He's right when he says that he and Scott Hall paved the way for getting today's wrestlers guaranteed contracts and significantly more money. There's a lot of very, very good things that he's been a part of that we simply cannot deny and I'm not entirely sure anyone has ever tried to deny him that.

Now, having said all that, the guy is a self-centered wingnut who gained more from politicking than he ever did from possessing talent. Give credit where it's due: he reached the top and wielded a ton of power. He may have got there through politics, but he got there. Not many guys can say that. But along the same lines, there's a plethora of other guys who have got to where they are without taking that road. Maybe they haven't accumulated as much money as Kevin Nash has, or been a part of a landscape shaping series of storylines as Kevin Nash has, but it's not as if he's the only person to ever reach the top, and there are certainly a whole gaggle of wrestlers who've done it without being a condescending ass. Again, good for him. But there's a big part of Nash, as a person, that feels unjustly disrespected. He plays the "big daddy cool" role, but has anyone ever read or watched an interview where it didn't seem like he had a chip on his shoulder? And that's where my gripe comes in. If you're going to be so brazen about how you got what you got, why do you expect to be showered in respect? Fans respect Nash's accomplishments, but not his work or the means by which he achieved them. Fans respect guys like Eddie Guerrero, Chris Jericho, Daniel Bryan, and CM Punk because they've reached great heights through great efforts and, by and large, without knowingly stepping on as many heads as possible to get there. (Note: Chris Benoit's name is omitted because he isn't so much a respectable figure anymore, and I'd much prefer to just leave his name out of the conversation entirely, even though his name was evoked as a linchpin in Nash's comments.)

Times change. An old wrestler who so clearly had only shallow qualities going for him to begin with -- size, looks -- spouting off about height and weight have ruined the business is a bit embarrassing for him. Wrestling, like literally everything else in the world around us, needs to constantly be evolving. It's how we went from writing letters with feathers to typing on typewriters to sending e-mails; it's the reason we have a phone that performs the function of 15 different devices. He can say all he wants that guys like Punk and Bryan and Guerrero and Jericho don't sell, but the proof is in the pudding. They do sell. Do they sell as well as premier guys sold in Nash's heyday? No. But it isn't because they're small guys. Small guys like Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart and Randy Savage and Ricky Steamboat and Ric Flair and so on succeeded in Nash's heyday too. The fact is that times have changed. In Nash's case, they've passed him by. There's no legitimate competition within the business now. The WWE's preeminent competition is MMA, which is real competition rather than scripted soap opera storylines built around predetermined matches. If you recall, when Hall and Nash first walked into WCW in 1997, the majority of people believed it was all legitimate. The internet existed, but it wasn't something we all used every single day. We didn't have smart phones and social media. Back then, wrestling was special because it hadn't been completed exposed and every detailed wasn't being spoiled a week or two ahead of actually happening. There's a whole hell of a lot that's contributed to "the death of wrestling" (which, uh, isn't dead yet, Nash), but it has just as much, if not more, to do with the course of time than it does with any specific set of wrestlers.

Of course, all this ignores the negative of Nash's career. The finger poke of doom. The backstage dick-swinging that he and Hulk Hogan brag about that led to future world champions like Benoit and Guerrero jumping ship. Things like that are all just dominoes that led to WCW's demise, which eliminated competition within the business, and the rest is history. Nash can say whatever he wants, but the fact of the matter is this: if wrestling is dead, he directly contributed to the disease that killed it. He gave a hell of a lot to professional wrestling, but he absolutely took. And hey, way to go. He got paid and he's living the high life now. But throwing around the occasional bullshit quotes wherein he throws widely respected athletes under the bus isn't going to get him the respect he feels like he deserves. He's already burned that bridge. Those of us know who better, we read or hear comments like these and laugh. Money can't buy credibility.

All I see is a whole bunch of words equating to a whole lot of nothing. If Punk sells and is such a huge draw, then why hasn't he been in a main event that doesn't involve Cena? John Laurinaitis has even had top billing over CM Punk.

The average guy looks at Cena or Austin and thinks to himself, "That guy can and probably will kick my ass." What do you think he would say if he looked at someone like Punk and Bryan? He would probably say that even his girlfriend can kick their ass which most did say when Miz was champion. I've stated before that these wrestlers people have thrown out there to disprove Nash weren't big draws. HBK had that charisma and personality that carried him far above what most thought he would be because of his size. Benoit and Guerrero to a lesser extent didn't have what HBK had. Fans didn't gravitate toward them like they did to HBK or Bret Hart. They just had that something in them that most guys don't have.

 

[boywithbluehanger]

I agree with Nash to a degree. The biggest problem the WWE has had since the departure of the Ruthless Aggression Era is the lack of "John Cenas". One of the reasons why he truthfully gets bashed as much as he does isn't really just because of the stagnant nature of his character but the fact that he spent so much time being the only person at the level of quality that he is. WWE for years failed to find someone worthy of being his rival. (And it's worth mentioning, I CAN'T STAND CENA!) He's got the muscle mass, the mic skills, and the push by Creative. They tried with Batista but there was still that undeniable force holding him back by splitting the two up for such a long period of time when there should have been a back in forth between he Cena, and Orton.

 

[Workrate]

All I see is a whole bunch of words equating to a whole lot of nothing. If Punk sells and is such a huge draw, then why hasn't he been in a main event that doesn't involve Cena? John Laurinaitis has even had top billing over CM Punk.

The average guy looks at Cena or Austin and thinks to himself, "That guy can and probably will kick my ass." What do you think he would say if he looked at someone like Punk and Bryan? He would probably say that even his girlfriend can kick their ass which most did say when Miz was champion. I've stated before that these wrestlers people have thrown out there to disprove Nash weren't big draws. HBK had that charisma and personality that carried him far above what most thought he would be because of his size. Benoit and Guerrero to a lesser extent didn't have what HBK had. Fans didn't gravitate toward them like they did to HBK or Bret Hart. They just had that something in them that most guys don't have.

John Cena is 6'1" and 250 pounds, which makes him two inches taller and 30 pounds heavier than Chris Benoit, taller than Jericho by an inch and heavier by 20 pounds, shorter than CM Punk by an inch, and only 20 pounds heavier than Eddie Guerrero. So I would argue that, aside from muscles, John Cena is a "small guy" by Kevin Nash's definition too, yet he is dominating the main event scene. Also, Punk being left out of the main event was obviously a creative decision. Have you not been watching Raw? That's the whole crux for the transformation his character is currently undergoing, that he's been the champion for nearly a year and hasn't been treated with the respect a champion deserves. It's not that difficult to keep up with.

If we're talking about look and personality, it's all subjective. I don't see anything wrong with how Daniel Bryan or CM Punk look or behave. I like it. It's no different than thinking brunettes are hotter than blondes. If that was Nash's point, that Eddie Guerrero didn't have a definitive look or personality, well, I don't know what to tell you. I think he's wrong. I think every guy Nash put down and pretty much all of those that are comparable have perfectly fine looks, attitudes, voices, whatever. Your mileage may vary.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

As has been mentioned prior, Kurt Angle was the recipient of a major push a few years earlier...and while Kurt had good charisma, his counterpart...Brock...was atrocious on the mic. And so how else would you be billing the main event of Mania XIX other than a match between two pure wrestlers??? And so how is that different than Mania XX?

Nash is smart...really smart actually, so he knows that the business evolves. I wonder if this is sour grapes for him not having a longer run with WWE last fall. Punk and Bryan might not be bigger than the refs, but they sure do have a ton of charisma. People today WANT to see Punk and Bryan with world titles...not big monsters like The Big Show or Ryback or even Kane...who get over in part because of their size. Punk and Bryan get over...it's just in a different way. In a way that seems to be more compelling to a contemporary audience.

 

[Infinity]

Fingerpoke of Doom killed an entire company, and he's blaming Benoit and Guerrero for killing... wrestling? Seriously?

How does he defend HBK getting the strap then? Hell, knowing the shitty attitude Nash has, he'd probably throw Shawn under the bus and bring up the notion that WCW was beating them in ratings around the time of his later reigns.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

Nash should, first hand, know that the business evolves. Look at who were getting title runs in the 80s and 90s: Hogan, Warrior, Savage, Sid was in the main event for a time. Rick Rude was getting a good billing, as was Perfect and Davey Boy.

But Kevin Nash came into a bigger spotlight as those kind of figures were finding their way out of the WWF. The steroids scandal that Vince found himself in ultimately affected the way in which Vince viewed the talent he was marketing. He realized that he couldn't keep throwing roided up guys into the main event without receiving legal/political backlash. That's why Shawn was champ, some say that's why Bret was champ (Bret was champ material regardless, imo), Bob Backlund's resurgence, Undertaker, etc. These guys did not look like bodybuilders. Yet, here comes Kevin Nash: a HUGE guy with a pretty solid physique that wasn't taking steroids. In a land of lean guys, Nash truly was a giant...and that's why he won the WWF title.

And here we are in the year 2012. People have been dying from steroid abuse for years and years and years in the wrestling industry. Vince can't think that he can continue to do good business if he finds himself with another Chris Benoit tragedy. Another one of those might spell doom for WWE. So who better to push? A guy who vocally does not use drugs or alcohol and a professed vegan? Seems like a good plan to me. Do I think that steroids caused the Benoit tragedy? Absolutely not...but the media will do anything to cry steroids.

So, if Nash were really using his noggin...he would realize that guys like Punk and Bryan may just be getting world title reigns for the same reason that he got his first.

 

[deslok]

I think the business has suffered since then. It was a great mark out moment when Benoit won. To HHH, submission? I know it is worked, but I never saw it coming, and it was great.
Problem now, we've had Cena beat HHH, questionable money in the bank winners, and now Punk and Bryan. I just don't buy either of them at this point as more than midcard champions. What do they do that is so much better than like a Jericho, a HHH in his prime, a Batista even? Sure they can work, but do they inspire awe to buy a wrestlemania for their match only. I think that is what Nash is saying. We know big Kev, sometimes his mood goes a bit for the juggular.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

I think the business has suffered since then. It was a great mark out moment when Benoit won. To HHH, submission? I know it is worked, but I never saw it coming, and it was great.
Problem now, we've had Cena beat HHH, questionable money in the bank winners, and now Punk and Bryan. I just don't buy either of them at this point as more than midcard champions. What do they do that is so much better than like a Jericho, a HHH in his prime, a Batista even? Sure they can work, but do they inspire awe to buy a wrestlemania for their match only. I think that is what Nash is saying. We know big Kev, sometimes his mood goes a bit for the juggular.

Triple H hates it when people steal his opinions. Or at least, his old opinion.


You're in the definite minority if you don't see Punk as a bonafide star in this business at this point. He was already there at Summerslam last year. They tried and tried and tried to get him heel last summer, failing each time simply because people wanted to cheer him. There's a reason that you see so many renditions of Punk's gimmick shirts in the stands every week.

Bryan isn't there yet, but he has all the tools to do so. He can work, and he has a great catchphrase that has definitely stuck with the audience.

Perhaps you should consider evolving, as well.

 

[The Crock]

Fingerpoke of Doom killed an entire company, and he's blaming Benoit and Guerrero for killing... wrestling? Seriously?

No, it really didn't. The Fingerpoke of Doom is one of the worst moments in WCW history, certainly, but it didn't "kill" the company. That's just an asinine notion. WCW was a money sinkhole, management was in the crapper, talent ran wild, talent was misused, and that's just a sampling of what ACTUALLY killed WCW. The Fingerpoke of Doom may have upset plenty of people, but let's not kid ourselves into thinking that this was the catalyst for the downfall of WCW. Too many people try to point fingers and lay the blame at Russo, Hogan, or Nash's feet -- there was a larger problem there. Any company that has a stagnant product and loses money is going to collapse, one incident doesn't change that fact.

How does he defend HBK getting the strap then? Hell, knowing the shitty attitude Nash has, he'd probably throw Shawn under the bus and bring up the notion that WCW was beating them in ratings around the time of his later reigns.

Shawn Michaels is faaaaar out of Benoit and Guerrero's league. They were good workers and enjoyable to watch, but Michaels was much better. Michaels was a larger than life character who could back everything he did up in the ring by using the mic. Michaels could draw emotion out of the fans doing the simplest things in the ring, like nobody else could. Even so, his title reign wasn't exactly the highlight of WWF's history (ratings sucked, as did the product, honestly). As a matter of fact, I've always argued that Shawn was better at chasing the title, than he was as champion. Regardless, that doesn't change the fact that Shawn shouldn't be compared to Guerrero and Benoit.

Anyway, I don't actually see anything wrong with what Kevin Nash said. The business hasn't been the same since WrestleMania XX. Nash has always been a straight shooter and while Benoit and Guerrero have their fair share of fandom (I love 'em both), that shouldn't obscure the fact that Nash isn't really all that wrong here. Smaller wrestlers don't have the same drawing ability that a larger guy has; I'm not saying the wrestlers have to be giants, either. Steve Austin, arguably the greatest to ever lace up a pair of boots, stands in at a whopping 6'1", so does John Cena. You'll have guys like The Rock and Hulk Hogan who are 6'5"+ too, but they're general outliers. Still, you put a Guerrero or a Benoit next to John Cena, and there's a definite difference in how you view them. It's a bit of an archaic thought that the "WWE mold" only calls for larger guys, but it doesn't change the fact that bigger men draw better than the likes of Guerrero and Benoit. None of this is to say that I don't support guys like Punk and Bryan today, or Benoit and Guerrero before them -- I just don't think that they're the types of guys you're going to build a brand around, regardless of how good they are.

 

[Arashi]

Nash is right somewhat. He's right about Benoit as he totally sucked at everything BUT in ring work. The guy just couldn't entertain outside of the ring and was never going to draw. Guerrero had it all though, he had a good look, style, great on the mic, and he could wrestle great.

As far as Bryan and Punk go, Bryan needs to be built up more to be considered great but Punk? The guy that knocked Cena off the merchandising mountain? Yeah he can draw, and do everything as well as anyone.

Size does matter just not as much as Mr. Nash believes.

 

[deslok]

Perhaps you should consider evolving, as well.

I'd say that sums up the problem with the fans. Noone is allowed an opinion any more in the matter of who they are able to cheer, because kayfabe as someone mentioned has been ruined.
I am perfectly able, as is Kevin nash, or anyone else, of having a different outlook, as well as knowing what wrestlers I want to see.
They both get great reactions, but they are not Hogan, HBK, Undertaker, or Ricky Steamboat.

 

[AndThat'sTheBottomLine]

My first reaction to seeing the comments on Twitter were that of the typical mark: outrage, anger, and shock. I wanted to lash out at him but I decided to cool my jets and wait. I watched multiple guys like Piper and Jericho, literally tear into Nash. I enjoyed every second of it. I see and agree with a majority of the comments made here but I have to disagree with the minority here. Eddie had it all. He had the look, personality, and in ring ability. Anyone that disagrees with this really ought to do some soul searching as to what they call a wrestler. Benoit might not have had the best personality, but he had everything else. He was the silent but deadly wrestler who let his actions speak for him. It's why people loved him. It's why you always saw rabid wolverine signs in the arenas. It's why people always cheered for him and when he came out, the crowd always went nuts for him. I know I did. There was no question of how good he was in the ring. And he, unlike Nash, was a good person outside of the ring right up until his brain turned to mush. Nash doesn't like it when people get bigger than he was, at least that's the impression I get from him. It's not all about the lumbering big guys who can't wrestle, you have to be talented because while WWE is an entertainment industry, WRESTLING is what lies at it's core. Even Cena is a better wrestler than Nash. Face it people, CM Punk, Daniel Bryan, Chris Jericho, Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit, and others, are better all around than Kevin Nash could ever have hoped to be. His career was abysmal and he should just fade back into obscurity where he belongs.

 

[IT Factor]

Quite frankly, Kevin Nash is an idiot. He was the contributing cause[along with Hogan and Bischoff] to WCW's demise and now that WWE isn't using him and he's no longer relevant, he decides to conviently make controversial comments. Notice how that didn't happen before, when he thought he was going to come back to WWE and ride CM Punk's coattails? He did it before with Shawn Michaels and he desperately wanted to do it again with CM Punk. WWE didn't want anything to do with Big Lazy so he takes to Twitter to make moronic comments about Guerrero & Benoit. I, as a wrestling fan, take issue with damn near everything he has said. First off, Benoit & Guerrero were way more talented on their worst in-ring days than Nash in his prime[which wasn't so prime, by the way]. Nash was the stereotypical big man who only got his spot because of his ass kissing and political manuevering. Take away all of that and he'd have been just another big man failure in WWE. Secondly, both Benoit & Guerrero are dead. It breaks alot of unspoken rules in wrestling to trash someone who is dead, let alone two of wrestling's best in their history. Last, but not least, is the comments he made about CM Punk & Daniel Bryan. Look, Big Lazy this is not 1990. Nor is it even 1995. It is 2012. He might wanna wake up and realize that WWE and the entire wrestling business has evolved so that wrestlers and entertainers of all sizes are accepted so long as they have the skill and talent to back up their pushes. I find it ironic and sickening that Nash even had the balls to say any of that considering his past history with Benoit and Guerrero. Didn't he once call Benoit and Guerrero "vanilla midgets" in WCW? Well, those vanilla midgets had more wrestling talent in their index fingers than Nash has ever had. The fact is, CM Punk got hot during the summer of 2011 and Nash couldn't wait to jump on that bandwagon and make money. He also once said on Twitter that he'd wanna bring back the nWo and have Punk pick the members. Again, irony. He didn't mind CM Punk as long as it brought him another paycheck. He now feels the need to not only trash CM Punk and Daniel Bryan[which is bad enough] but then he mentions how Benoit & Guerrero ruined wrestling. Right. If anything, Nash and his buddies were a contributing factor towards all the bad things in wrestling past and present. The mere fact that he has to take to insults others is pretty telling how desperate the guy truly seems to be. It's really quite pathetic and Nash should know better. You hear that? It's the sound of Nash burning his bridges with WWE, his career being dead, and all fans losing what little respect for him all at the same time. Way to go!

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Quite frankly, Kevin Nash is an idiot. He was the contributing cause[along with Hogan and Bischoff] to WCW's demise and now that WWE isn't using him and he's no longer relevant, he decides to conviently make controversial comments. Notice how that didn't happen before, when he thought he was going to come back to WWE and ride CM Punk's coattails? He did it before with Shawn Michaels and he desperately wanted to do it again with CM Punk. WWE didn't want anything to do with Big Lazy so he takes to Twitter to make moronic comments about Guerrero & Benoit. I, as a wrestling fan, take issue with damn near everything he has said. First off, Benoit & Guerrero were way more talented on their worst in-ring days than Nash in his prime[which wasn't so prime, by the way]. Nash was the stereotypical big man who only got his spot because of his ass kissing and political manuevering. Take away all of that and he'd have been just another big man failure in WWE. Secondly, both Benoit & Guerrero are dead. It breaks alot of unspoken rules in wrestling to trash someone who is dead, let alone two of wrestling's best in their history. Last, but not least, is the comments he made about CM Punk & Daniel Bryan. Look, Big Lazy this is not 1990. Nor is it even 1995. It is 2012. He might wanna wake up and realize that WWE and the entire wrestling business has evolved so that wrestlers and entertainers of all sizes are accepted so long as they have the skill and talent to back up their pushes. I find it ironic and sickening that Nash even had the balls to say any of that considering his past history with Benoit and Guerrero. Didn't he once call Benoit and Guerrero "vanilla midgets" in WCW? Well, those vanilla midgets had more wrestling talent in their index fingers than Nash has ever had. The fact is, CM Punk got hot during the summer of 2011 and Nash couldn't wait to jump on that bandwagon and make money. He also once said on Twitter that he'd wanna bring back the nWo and have Punk pick the members. Again, irony. He didn't mind CM Punk as long as it brought him another paycheck. He now feels the need to not only trash CM Punk and Daniel Bryan[which is bad enough] but then he mentions how Benoit & Guerrero ruined wrestling. Right. If anything, Nash and his buddies were a contributing factor towards all the bad things in wrestling past and present. The mere fact that he has to take to insults others is pretty telling how desperate the guy truly seems to be. It's really quite pathetic and Nash should know better. You hear that? It's the sound of Nash burning his bridges with WWE, his career being dead, and all fans losing what little respect for him all at the same time. Way to go!

You know, I hate to keep this bringing this up but I just can't help myself. Benoit and Guerrero did NOT draw. What was the main focus of Raw during Benoit's title reign? I'll give you a hint. It wasn't Benoit. It was HHH and HBK. Smackdown was shit before Guerrero was champion, was shit when he was champion, and was shit after he lost the title.

You mention Punk and how he got hot. Wake me up when he consistently main event PPV's because he sure hasn't done that yet. Guys like Hogan, Austin, Rock, and Cena have drawn while better "wrestlers" like Benoit, Guerrero, and Punk have not. I don't give a fuck about if it's an unspoken wrestling rule about trashing someone that has passed on. If they sucked, they sucked no matter if they are alive or dead.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

I'd say that sums up the problem with the fans. Noone is allowed an opinion any more in the matter of who they are able to cheer, because kayfabe as someone mentioned has been ruined.
I am perfectly able, as is Kevin nash, or anyone else, of having a different outlook, as well as knowing what wrestlers I want to see.
They both get great reactions, but they are not Hogan, HBK, Undertaker, or Ricky Steamboat.

I just mentioned how WWE tried to make Punk heel, but the crowd cheered him instead. People both cheer and boo John Cena on a nightly basis. How does that make it so no one has an opinion on who they are able to cheer?

 

[a member of wwe universe]

You know, I hate to keep this bringing this up but I just can't help myself. Benoit and Guerrero did NOT draw. What was the main focus of Raw during Benoit's title reign? I'll give you a hint. It wasn't Benoit. It was HHH and HBK. Smackdown was shit before Guerrero was champion, was shit when he was champion, and was shit after he lost the title.

You mention Punk and how he got hot. Wake me up when he consistently main event PPV's because he sure hasn't done that yet. Guys like Hogan, Austin, Rock, and Cena have drawn while better "wrestlers" like Benoit, Guerrero, and Punk have not. I don't give a fuck about if it's an unspoken wrestling rule about trashing someone that has passed on. If they sucked, they sucked no matter if they are alive or dead.

Just want to make some point. Throughout this thread, Ive noticed people have the tendency to use "draw," "money," or anything financial related to discredit benoit and guerrero as main eventer. I believe there should be an hierarchy of categories when it comes to labeling the maineventers.

Now to discredit guerrero and benoit of being a maineventer by saying they were not a DRAW is not fair. They may not be THE MAIN DRAW but they did draw something and sure as hell was credible as maineventer, world champion among the eye of wrestling fans.

There should a heiarchy of something like this:
1.austin rock hogan cena
2.hhh hbk hart
3.angle punk lesnar
4.y2j guerrero benoit

HOWEVER I MIGHT BE OFF TOPIC since the focus is about "drawing power"


Demise of Smackdown 2004
There were many factors contributed to the demise of smackdown 2004 and the championship reign of guerrero was not one.

1-a guy name Bradshaw, aka JBL who had no credibility to step in the mainvent and became wwe champion for one freaking year. So we went from Brock lesnar to JBL??? Come on any die hard fan would have a heart attack easily.
2- The face of smackdown, Lesnar, left after mania, Kurt angle was injured, Big show was injured, Taker was on part time schdueles. Overall the mainevent picture was on thin ice.

Benoit's title reign 2004
Benoits reign is like the current cm punk's reign. hhh/hbk was cena and benoit was punk. The entire hhh/hbk feud have occupied benoit's spot. I doubt vince ever had any faith in benoit so maybe thats why. ANYHOW what i will say though is Benoit was red hot from late 2003 all the way to wm20. The guy was over and got reaction just as much as cena. Benoit was never the given the chance to run the ball ever again after his loss to orton.