Batista is now a better wrestler than Shawn Michaels

[ad21k]

I think I mentioned that...


Yup.

Using this line of thinking, obviously Batista is better than Shawn Michaels, as the WWE hasn't put a title around HBK's waist since '02.

Yes, usually the failures are the ones who are prominently featured in the major storylines, including the ones for the title.


Which, I suppose, is why he's only been World Champion 4 times, with his last reign ending approximately a year ago.

So?

When John Cena would go against heels back in 2006, he didn't get fans support. And yet, he was still the best thing in wrestling. Silly argument.

You mean besides the interesting feuds, good matches, and incredible charisma?

I don't know, why don't you ask the nearly 5 million people who tune in to Raw every week.

None of which were wrestling on Raw when I made this thread, and none of which are Shawn Michaels, which is with whom I was comparing Batista to.

I created it for discussion purposes.

And to point out that Batista is now a better wrestler than Shawn Michaels.

AAAAHAHAHAHAHA

HBK's matches with Jericho were average affairs. The feud with Jericho would have been completely boring with Jericho's incredible mic work, as HBK brought ZERO to that feud.

Batista vs. Cena trumps ANYTHING that HBK has done this year, including his overrated matches with Jericho and Flair.

Wrong. Last time Batista was given a decent run, Smackdown averaged a 2.7 TV rating. This was from September to December of 2007.

In comparison, one year later, in the same approximate time period, Smackdown now averages a 2.1 TV rating.


You're not even close to being accurate.

Let's see...

Good matches, good draw, moves the ratings needle, good charisma, exciting to watch...how can one not be?

I supose all those 5 million people who tune into RAW just watch to see Batista huh? The only way you can measure it is by level of reaction, and almost unanimously HBK gets a better reaction than Batista. So come off it everyone knows Raw's biggest draw is Cena, and increasingly in Cena's absence Orton whos apprences alone gave rating boosts. 4-time champion maybe but his last reign lasted a couple of weeks, which was my point the WWE don't trust Batista with a prolonged run in the main event picture, let-alone a midly significant title reign.

I did a bit of research about these ratings because I remember reading something about smackdown doing bad ratings while he was in the title hunt and I found the figures. So in what way is going from averaging a 3.0 rating at the start of 2007 to averaging 2.7 in anyway a sucess? Batista was the only wrestler who was a mainstay throughout main events throughout 2007 so he lost viewers, that isnt being sucessful. I also remmeber 2007 PPV buyrates being awful, that been said Batista's matches are never the reason people buy the PPV, they are rather an accompliant simply because Batista can't draw.

I think you know that HBK would be able to draw better than Batista because although he hasn't been in the title picture recently past expericance has shown that, whereas Batista has never drawn in large buyrates in any of the events he has headlined in the past. And it is my opinion that the reasoning behind HBK not been in the title picture is more is a concious decision to stay out of the main event scene to help put the younger wrestlers over rather than WWE not wanting him there.

 

[Slyfox696]

The only way you can measure it is by level of reaction, and almost unanimously HBK gets a better reaction than Batista.

False. You can measure things in a lot of ways, but the reaction of one crowd on one night is hardly a way you can do that.

4-time champion maybe but his last reign lasted a couple of weeks, which was my point the WWE don't trust Batista with a prolonged run in the main event picture, let-alone a midly significant title reign.

LOL

They gave Batista a several month run JUST LAST YEAR, and now they don't trust him? That's completely illogical. Once again, though, using this line of thinking, the WWF/E hasn't given HBK a prolonged run as champion since 1998. So, even using your theory, Batista still easily trumps HBK.

I did a bit of research about these ratings because I remember reading something about smackdown doing bad ratings while he was in the title hunt and I found the figures. So in what way is going from averaging a 3.0 rating at the start of 2007 to averaging 2.7 in anyway a sucess?

Averaging a 3.0 rating? Based off what? 2 weeks? Here are some ratings...

5-Jan-07 3
12-Jan-07 2.6
19-Jan-07 2.9
26-Jan-07 2.6
2-Feb-07 3.1
9-Feb-07 3
16-Feb-07 3.1
23-Feb-07 3.3
2-Mar-07 2.9
9-Mar-07 2.8
16-Mar-07 2.9
23-Mar-07 2.9


And note, that was during the Road to Wrestlemania. Oh yeah, and Batista was the World Champion during that 3.0 ratings time as well.

Batista was the only wrestler who was a mainstay throughout main events throughout 2007 so he lost viewers, that isnt being sucessful.

He didn't lose viewers, if anything, he gained/kept. Ratings always go up during Wrestlemania build-up, and lower during the last half of the year. But when you compare ratings now and last year, it's easy to see that Batista's ratings were FAR superior than what now.

I also remmeber 2007 PPV buyrates being awful

2007 PPVs averaged more money per show than any other year since 2002.

You remember wrong.

that been said Batista's matches are never the reason people buy the PPV, they are rather an accompliant simply because Batista can't draw.

Which is why Batista vs. Cena was THE number one match from Raw at Summerslam, right?

I think you know that HBK would be able to draw better than Batista because although he hasn't been in the title picture recently past expericance has shown that, whereas Batista has never drawn in large buyrates in any of the events he has headlined in the past.

HBK is arguably the worst championship draw in WWF/E history. Great point.

 

[Kyphael]

HBK is arguably the worst championship draw in WWF/E history. Great point.

But you must take into consideration the fact that Shawn Michaels, during his noted championship reigns (not 2002) was the top man in the company. He was literally carrying the WWF on his shoulders as champion, whereas Batista is a main event product of the brand extension era. WWE could maybe afford to put the title on him since they knew it wasn't their major championship anyway. Everyone is aware the World Heavyweight Championship is second fiddle to the WWE Championship.

As Champion, Batista could coast. He never had to worry about any competition from another company because there was none. In my opinion, that makes HBK's title reigns more meaningful. I mean sure, HBK was never a Hogan, Austin or Rock draw and he never will be, BUT, he drew enough to keep WWF's belly over water when they were facing overwhelming odds against WCW Nitro in the mid 90's. JR. said it best in the HBK DVD. He dreaded the thought of how WWF would have done during that time if Shawn Michaels was not as good as he was. He wasn't a cash cow but he obviously made just enough for them to stay in business until Austin eventually grabbed the ball and ran with it. Can anyone say the same for Batista?

 

[ad21k]

False. You can measure things in a lot of ways, but the reaction of one crowd on one night is hardly a way you can do that.

One Night? HBK almost always gets a better reaction than Batista, and not just a little bit better, significantly greater reactions. Just because its not statistical information like television ratings, doesn't mean it isn't important, it is useful as it helps gauge how entertaining a wrestler is, and how responsive the fans are to a certain wrestler. I would actualy be quite interested if there was some decible level data for various superstars reactions, to see who gets the loudest.

LOL

They gave Batista a several month run JUST LAST YEAR, and now they don't trust him? That's completely illogical. Once again, though, using this line of thinking, the WWF/E hasn't given HBK a prolonged run as champion since 1998. So, even using your theory, Batista still easily trumps HBK.

It was a 3 month reign on the B-show, which was neither exciting, nor entertaining when the shows two biggest stars (Edge/Taker) were out of action, and it didnt take WWE long to replace him as champion when Edge returned. Also WWE found CM Punk a better option than Batista to put the World title on this year, and we all saw what a failure that was. In relation to HBK, he has been on record a number of times in interviews as saying he isn't intrested in title reigns, and wants to help develop younger and less established talents.

2007 PPVs averaged more money per show than any other year since 2002.

You remember wrong.

Backlash
2005 0.81
2006 0.55
2007 0.49 (Undetaker v Batista, Cena v HBK v Edge v Orton)

Judgement Day
2005 0.66
2006 0.63
2007 0.61 (Batista v Edge, Cena v Khali)

One Night Stand
2005 0.81
2006 0.76
2007 0.47 (Batista v Edge, Cena v Khali)

Night Of Champions
2005 0.92
2006 0.84
2007 0.61 (Batista v Edge, Challange match)

Great American Bash
2005 0.58
2006 0.58
2007 0.58 (Batista v Kane v Khali, Cena v Lashley)

Summerslam
SummerSlam ‘05 - 650,000
SummerSlam '06 - 541,000
SummerSlam '07 - 537,000 (Batista v Khali, Cena v Orton)

Which is why Batista vs. Cena was THE number one match from Raw at Summerslam, right?

Yeh once, against the companies biggest draw...

HBK is arguably the worst championship draw in WWF/E history. Great point.

Almost all of his reigns came when WWE was competing against WCW with Hulk Hogan...

 

[Slyfox696]

One Night? HBK almost always gets a better reaction than Batista, and not just a little bit better, significantly greater reactions.

Completely false. NOBODY gets significantly better reactions than Batista, not even Steve Austin or John Cena.

Batista can pop with anyone. That's a silly statement on your part.

It was a 3 month reign on the B-show, which was neither exciting, nor entertaining when the shows two biggest stars (Edge/Taker) were out of action, and it didnt take WWE long to replace him as champion when Edge returned.

Which doesn't change the fact he was still champion, and ratings were still good. Which completely defeats BOTH of your points before. Why try to trivialize when you've already been defeated.

Also WWE found CM Punk a better option than Batista to put the World title on this year, and we all saw what a failure that was.

A better option? No, just a different option.

Just out of curiousity, just how often do you expect a wrestler to get a title? I mean, Batista has had 4 title runs in 3 and a half years. Just what exactly are you expecting.

In relation to HBK, he has been on record a number of times in interviews as saying he isn't intrested in title reigns, and wants to help develop younger and less established talents.

Only because his enormous ego couldn't handle another failure.

Backlash
2005 0.81
2006 0.55
2007 0.49 (Undetaker v Batista, Cena v HBK v Edge v Orton)

Judgement Day
2005 0.66
2006 0.63
2007 0.61 (Batista v Edge, Cena v Khali)

One Night Stand
2005 0.81
2006 0.76
2007 0.47 (Batista v Edge, Cena v Khali)

Night Of Champions
2005 0.92
2006 0.84
2007 0.61 (Batista v Edge, Challange match)

Great American Bash
2005 0.58
2006 0.58
2007 0.58 (Batista v Kane v Khali, Cena v Lashley)

Summerslam
SummerSlam ‘05 - 650,000
SummerSlam '06 - 541,000
SummerSlam '07 - 537,000 (Batista v Khali, Cena v Orton)

A bunch of numbers...what's your point?

I have provided you, on this forum (in the General Section) a complete listing of TOTAL BUYS for each PPV for the last several years. I include the buy rate, as well as the cost per PPV, and shows in 2007 averaged as much or more money than any since 2002.

You did nothing but waste your time, especially since you could have easily seen the facts, as I have provided to you.

Yeh once, against the companies biggest draw...

Good point. On the second biggest show of the year, they usually just put jobbers against the biggest draw to headline Raw's portion of the PPV.

Almost all of his reigns came when WWE was competing against WCW with Hulk Hogan...

Didn't seem to bother Bret Hart or Steve Austin.

 

[Milkyway!]

Completely false. NOBODY gets significantly better reactions than Batista, not even Steve Austin or John Cena.

Batista can pop with anyone. That's a silly statement on your part.

Thats going a little over board. No one competes with Steve Austin, not even The Rock. The only person that gets as big as Austin is Hulk Hogan himself.

A better option? No, just a different option.

Just out of curiousity, just how often do you expect a wrestler to get a title? I mean, Batista has had 4 title runs in 3 and a half years. Just what exactly are you expecting.

John Cena's had just as many title reigns, with a lot more time on his reigns. So while your correct, you can't really say that due to John Cena.

Only because his enormous ego couldn't handle another failure.

OH, OH! Maybe it's because Shawn is old and should retire like, 3 years ago?

Good point. On the second biggest show of the year, they usually just put jobbers against the biggest draw to headline Raw's portion of the PPV.

They dont really do that Sly. They usually put their two biggest names out there, didn't you know?

 

[OIL]

Completely false. NOBODY gets significantly better reactions than Batista, not even Steve Austin or John Cena.

Batista can pop with anyone. That's a silly statement on your part.

Batista is extremly popular with the fans, but to say he gets a better reaction than Austin or Cena is pushing it. Batista does indeed get huge pops, but compare them to Cena's first.. when he returned at the Royal Rumble it was louder than Batista's. When Cena returned at SS, it was louder than Batista. Most weeks on RAW, Cena out pops everyone else put together.

Now comparing him to Austin, blimey. Look back to everytime Austin comes back, his pops are insane. The fans go nuts, probably because they don't see him week in week out, but still. Looking back to when Austin was there every week, look back during 1999 when Austin was the top superstar. No-one in the world could get a louder pop.

 

[ad21k]

Completely false. NOBODY gets significantly better reactions than Batista, not even Steve Austin or John Cena.

Batista can pop with anyone. That's a silly statement on your part.

HA! you are deluded, Batista's pops are significantly smaller than any of the current main event stars on either show. And you have already awknowledged that he doesnt get the majority of fan support when he fights other faces in the company. To compare Batista to the two biggest wrestlers of the past 15 years is ridicolous.

Which doesn't change the fact he was still champion, and ratings were still good. Which completely defeats BOTH of your points before. Why try to trivialize when you've already been defeated.

No because I am not going to repeat myself again, I made the point about ratings, we disagree on our interpretation of them...

A better option? No, just a different option.

Just out of curiousity, just how often do you expect a wrestler to get a title? I mean, Batista has had 4 title runs in 3 and a half years. Just what exactly are you expecting.

He had 2 significant reigns as champion (his first 2). Since then his reign last year was trasitional title reign keeping the title for edge. And its barely even worth counting his 2 week reign this year as it futher emphasizes that WWE don't have confidence with him leading the company. Meaning that in the last year and a half he has only held the title for roughly 13 weeks.

A bunch of numbers...what's your point?

I have provided you, on this forum (in the General Section) a complete listing of TOTAL BUYS for each PPV for the last several years. I include the buy rate, as well as the cost per PPV, and shows in 2007 averaged as much or more money than any since 2002.

You did nothing but waste your time, especially since you could have easily seen the facts, as I have provided to you.

Firstly I'm new to these forums so I don't know everything about them. And they may have averaged more money and the costs may vary, however the fact is that in the events Batista had championship matches the buyrates were lower than in previous years, therefore there is no evidence that Batista can draw. The only example you used was Cena at summerslam this year, however it was only the RAw event and not the PPV main event, so WWE clearly felt Edge/Taker was the bigger draw, and Cena been the biggest draw in the company anyway can be relied on to draw no matter who he faces.

Good point. On the second biggest show of the year, they usually just put jobbers against the biggest draw to headline Raw's portion of the PPV.

Batista v Cena was a fresh feud thats all, and they had the confidence from Cena's past matches (Umaga, Khali etc.) that he can put on good matches with inferior opponents.

Didn't seem to bother Bret Hart or Steve Austin.

Hart is overated and most biggest draws as champion came when HBK or Austin were involved in the title picture with him chasing the title, Austin was WWE's answer to Hulk Hogan

 

[Slyfox696]

Batista is extremly popular with the fans, but to say he gets a better reaction than Austin or Cena is pushing it. Batista does indeed get huge pops, but compare them to Cena's first.. when he returned at the Royal Rumble it was louder than Batista's. When Cena returned at SS, it was louder than Batista. Most weeks on RAW, Cena out pops everyone else put together.

Now comparing him to Austin, blimey. Look back to everytime Austin comes back, his pops are insane. The fans go nuts, probably because they don't see him week in week out, but still. Looking back to when Austin was there every week, look back during 1999 when Austin was the top superstar. No-one in the world could get a louder pop.

This is a joke right? First of all, I never said that Batista outpops them, what I said is that no-one outpops Batista. Subtle difference, but an important one.

Second of all, am I the only one who actually watches wrestling anymore when Steve Austin comes on? The last time I saw him he got a VERY lukewarm reaction. In fact, I think I even noted it somewhere else on the board. Steve Austin doesn't get the reaction he did back in '98. What he gets now is not much different than what the majority of main-eventers get.

Including Batista.

HA! you are deluded, Batista's pops are significantly smaller than any of the current main event stars on either show. And you have already awknowledged that he doesnt get the majority of fan support when he fights other faces in the company. To compare Batista to the two biggest wrestlers of the past 15 years is ridicolous.

Since telling you that you are an idiot is considered flaming, I'll just think it instead.

You obviously don't watch Raw if you believe that steaming pile of Sith that you just put down.

No because I am not going to repeat myself again, I made the point about ratings, we disagree on our interpretation of them...

Yes, because I interpret them accurately and meaningfully.

Which is where we differ.

He had 2 significant reigns as champion (his first 2). Since then his reign last year was trasitional title reign keeping the title for edge. And its barely even worth counting his 2 week reign this year as it futher emphasizes that WWE don't have confidence with him leading the company. Meaning that in the last year and a half he has only held the title for roughly 13 weeks.

Transitional? You call a 4 month reign transitional? That's silly.

And his 2 week reign was merely a shock effect, not a sign of condemnation. Wake up and smell the coffee already. The only thing you're spouting at this point is ridiculous notions that don't even begin to have merit.

Firstly I'm new to these forums so I don't know everything about them.

That's fine, but they are still there.

And they may have averaged more money and the costs may vary, however the fact is that in the events Batista had championship matches the buyrates were lower than in previous years, therefore there is no evidence that Batista can draw.

Again with ridiculousness.

Spouting a ".58" means nothing. What you have to do is take the total buys and multiply that with the cost of the show.

Let's take Judgment Day, for example, because I saw you mentioned that before.

Judgment Day 2005 did 266,000 buys, at a price of $34.95. This is a total of approximately $9,296,700 in revenue.

Judgment Day 2006 did 238,000 buys, at a price of $34.95, for an approximate total of $8,318,100.00.

Judgment Day 2007 did 242,000 buys, at a price of $39.95, for an approximate total of $9,667,900.00.


So, let's compare 2005 and 2007. Which had the bigger buyrate? 2005 did, by about 20,000 buys. But which PPV did better business? 2007 did, because the cost was higher.

So, using numbers like ".63" means nothing, until you know the context in which they are used.

Batista v Cena was a fresh feud thats all, and they had the confidence from Cena's past matches (Umaga, Khali etc.) that he can put on good matches with inferior opponents.

A fresh feud they just happened to unleash at the second biggest show of the year, right?

Please.

As far as good matches, aside from Cena, has there been anyone in the WWE who has put on as many good matches since January 2007 as Batista?

Hart is overated

Who cares? Still drew better than HBK, and did so against Hulk Hogan.

and most biggest draws as champion came when HBK or Austin were involved in the title picture with him chasing the title, Austin was WWE's answer to Hulk Hogan

Actually, the WWF started drawing the best when Shawn Michaels left.

Since you bring it up.

 

[Crypt Keeper]

I find Batista to be a horrible wrestler. He cant sell moves good, he cant do moves good, and overall he has a crappy wrestling in-ring style. HBK is a legend and does everything good. How could you compare Batista to Shawn Michaels?

 

[Khalifa]

well it's quite easy actually. it's because he is. While you may think that shawn puts on good matches ( which he does) you have to say batista does this as well. welll for his size any way. do yuo expect shawn michaels to be doing the big power house moves like batista. or do you expect that batista should be doing high flying moves like michaels? no it's just not logical is it. Batista still goes to the top rope every once in a while but thats not the point. anyways Batista wrestlers like he is meant to be and that is to be a power house. much like the undertaker. what seperates taker and batista. they are basically both teh same except taker is bigger and can compete better in gimmick matches. you cant just say michaels is better because of what he does. you have to think what there style is and how they use it.

 

[Queers and Steers]

haha the feact that cena or batista even get mentioned in the same sentence with michaels is an outrage!!! batista and cene are two of the sloppiest wrestlers ever! and dont get me wrong i love daves character and post marine cena isnt nearly as bad. but the fact that grown man are buyin into the kayfabe hype of characters intended for kids is ridiculous michaels doesnt need the hype u simply just watch a hbk mania match of your choice and you know that your watchin the showstopper! last i checked the only classic matches batista ever had were with taker and cenas were with michaels coincidence i think not! ps does anybody ever remember who was in that ladder match with michaels at wm 10? i rest my case!! haha man some of u guys are jokes!

what u guys fail to understand is rather its 15 thousand fans in kentucky or 80 thousand fans in detroit nobody has ever went to a show that michaels headlined and left disappointed agrivated and ripped off. u cant say the same for hogan cena batista or any of these guys. especially cena (wwe championship challenge june 24, 2007) r Hogan (every match except vs hbk sslam05, the rock wm18) and batista was in the worst heavywieght title match in mania history ! well him and cena share that rank as the yboth stunk it up at wm21. guys just get real i love wrestling today as much as any era because of how big it is and how athlethic most of them are but comparing cena and batista to hbk is like comparing jessica alba to an ape1 btw orton is the greatest thing that this geeration will ever know of!!!

 

[eXtremely-Priceless2K9]

I think that batista will NEVER be as good in terms of skill as HBK BBBUUUTTT Batista is a HUGE draw and great powerhouse kill everything and be pushed to the moon type of guy

 

[The Madrid Slam]

That is ludicrous. There is no way that I would in my wildest dreams EVER consider Batista a better WRESTLER than Shawn Michaels.

While Shawn Michaels will go down as one of the greatest storytellers of all time (Even with all the controversy that surrounds him, and all the talk about his tremendous ego and backstage politics) and will be mentioned with names such as Bret Hart and Ric Flair. I can't say the same for Batista. I can't even say Batista at his peak could be considered one of the best brawling wrestlers of all time.

The topic at hand is his in-ring skill, so all points about popularity and yes, title reigns in my opinion are irrelevant. However the facts are that Shawn Michaels has held WWF/WWE Gold on 11 seperate occassions, while Batista has held it 7. I also feel Shawn Michaels today is still one of the most popular wrestlers.

Now as for where both superstars are in-ring, Shawn Michaels is no longer as great as he used to be. He's WELLLLLL past his prime. As is Batista. Shawn has been hit with criticism of doing the same routine night in and night out. Batista is also hit with criticism with a limited moveset. In my opinion both are incorrect statements.

Shawn has had amazing matches over the past few years, most of which are far more memorable than any of Batista's matches (Albeit those with the Undertaker). Shawn has won PWI best match of the year for the past 5 years (Posted Below) and has had other amazing matches in that span as well (2008 vs. Chris Jericho. WM 23 vs. John Cena, DX vs. Rated R-KO are just some of the few)

2004 - HHH vs. HBK vs. Benoit (WM 20)
2005 - HBK vs. Kurt Angle (WM 21)
2006 - HBK vs. Mr. McMahon (WM 22)
2007 - HBK vs. John Cena (Raw in London 4/23)
2008 - HBK vs. Ric Flair (WM 24)

 

[Slyfox696]

That is ludicrous. There is no way that I would in my wildest dreams EVER consider Batista a better WRESTLER than Shawn Michaels.

While Shawn Michaels will go down as one of the greatest storytellers of all time (Even with all the controversy that surrounds him, and all the talk about his tremendous ego and backstage politics) and will be mentioned with names such as Bret Hart and Ric Flair. I can't say the same for Batista. I can't even say Batista at his peak could be considered one of the best brawling wrestlers of all time.

The topic at hand is his in-ring skill, so all points about popularity and yes, title reigns in my opinion are irrelevant. However the facts are that Shawn Michaels has held WWF/WWE Gold on 11 seperate occassions, while Batista has held it 7. I also feel Shawn Michaels today is still one of the most popular wrestlers.

Now as for where both superstars are in-ring, Shawn Michaels is no longer as great as he used to be. He's WELLLLLL past his prime. As is Batista. Shawn has been hit with criticism of doing the same routine night in and night out. Batista is also hit with criticism with a limited moveset. In my opinion both are incorrect statements.

Shawn has had amazing matches over the past few years, most of which are far more memorable than any of Batista's matches (Albeit those with the Undertaker). Shawn has won PWI best match of the year for the past 5 years (Posted Below) and has had other amazing matches in that span as well (2008 vs. Chris Jericho. WM 23 vs. John Cena, DX vs. Rated R-KO are just some of the few)

Great post...wait, not it's not. Why is it not? Because you NEVER addressed the issue of RIGHT NOW. I'm not debating that Batista at his best is better than HBK at his. What I'm saying is RIGHT NOW, Batista is better. And I think the case has been made by myself, one that no one has proven false yet. Everyone talks about past accomplishments from 10-15 years ago, but I'm talking RIGHT NOW.

 

[The Madrid Slam]

Actually I did adress the topic of Right Now. The Present. While I did mention his accolades of his career, the question was RIGHT NOW. As you stated. To me, that will be from oh let's say...2007 onwards? Because if you mean Today, 2/14/09, I don't even believe he's medically cleared to wrestle. So what has Shawn done since 2007 to here, and what has Batista done since 2007.

Shawn hasn't won a major title besides I believe a single Tag Team title w/ John Cena. Batista has won several Word titles. Shawn in the past 2 years I can name about 10-15 great matches he's had. Batista I can name..maybe 4 or 5. Tops, and most of those are with the Undertaker.

I was a fan of Batista earlier, but in my humble opinion, I feel he sells horribly, and cannot carry a match as well as Shawn Michaels could. Almost every fan would rather see Shawn in Batista's place against any superstar IF they want to see a great in-ring match.

 

[TwistofRKO]

I'd have to agree that Batista is better than HBK right now, but only for the reason HBK is as old as a dinosaur. I don't even think Batista is top 5 in pops out of active wrestlers (Cena, HBK, Hardy, HHH, Undertaker), so that is a dumb comment. Batista is a terrible actor, doesn't sell that well, and is only as good as his opponent. Sure, he'll get cheered against JBL, JBL has no fans. During that two-week SS hype, Batista and Cena had their little "pop contest" and it wasn't even close, really. So we see what that says about Batista. He's entertaining enough to be in the title picture, but that's it.

There's a reason why they'd let this "huge draw" win the title, proceed to lose it on cable, and not give him his rematch clause. He's a gap filler for when another top dog is down. Not popular enough to carry the belt into a PPV.

 

[The Madrid Slam]

This is like the 3rd or 4th time that I've read HBK's age come into play. While I understand a few years make a huge difference, just remember that HBK is 43 and Batista is 40. If HBK is a "dinosaur", that doesn't make Batista too young either now does it?

 

[TwistofRKO]

There's a difference in wear and tear. HBK has done this for years as opposed to Batista, who hasn't been in it anywhere near as long.

 

[Christian Battlez]

The only good matches I've seen out of Shawn that didn't invlove John Cena since 2003 or 2004. Were at a Wrestlemania where he undoubtedly is always on his game. Except WM 22 that was just him beating up Vince. Batista has had progressively good matches but they all involved Edge unless someone (maybe Sly) would like to remind me of some. They're both crap to me. I find Batista more entertaining than HBK on the mic though. Shawn is like an old emo kid. He is always whining and shit about how his life sucks until recently. Big Dave is kind of a smartass which I like. Both pale in comparison to Cena/Edge/and Orton IMO.

 

[Buford]

Batista will never ever match HBK in terms of wrestling ability. I don't care when, but HBK is still one of the best around today. The person who started this thread, what has he done lately, he's had the MOTY every year with 2006 being the exception, along with the best match at Wrestlemania, again 2006 being the exception

WM19- vs. Jericho MOTY
WMXX- vs. Trips & Benoit
WM21- vs. Angle
WM22- vs. Vince (was pretty much stuck in a feud with Vince & Shane & Spirit Squad all year.)
WM23- vs. Cena (you can debate his Raw match too.)
WM24- vs. Flair (you can also put his matches with Jericho, especially the No Mercy match.)

I could name different matches if you'd like me to, but I'd be here all damn day.

 

[The Madrid Slam]

Even besides WM, and also in recent years HBK has had a lot more memorable matches. What memorable matches do we have with Batista? Just against Edge and Taker. That's it.

Even still, Shawn being almost 4 years Batista's senior, Shawn is still a better athlete in his current state than Batista in his current state. I don't even HATE Batista. But Batista can't sell, deliver or storytell as well as Shawn can. I don't even see how this is a debate.