Brock Lesnar or Bobby Lashley ?

[BOSS Productions]

We remember both guys as wrestlers that could have been great if they had chosen to stay longer in their respective company. Both these guys were pushed the same way , squashed through the WWE roster and moved on to larger opponents. These guys are so similar when it comes to almost anything , the way they both jumped onto the apron before entering the ring , they both have amateur wrestling backgrounds, they both left the WWE while they were in their primes , hell both their initials are BL for pete sakes. With all that aside both wrestlers are remembered for their relatively short careers in Pro Wrestling and their success in the MMA world after Pro Wrestling.

Bobby Lashley: - Debuted 2005
- Finishers the Dominator and Spear
- Won United States title in 2006
- Won the first and only Extreme Elimination
Chamber
- Won ECW Title in 2006
- Participated in the Battle of the Billionaires in
2007
- Faced John Cena for the WWE Title in 2007
- Left WWE in 2008

Brock Lesnar: - Debuted after WM x8
- Finishers F-5 and Brock Lock (Late 2003)
- Won the King of the Ring in 2002
- Won the WWE Title in 2002
- Youngest WWE Champion in History
- Last Undisputed Champion
- Won the Royal Rumble in 2003
- Main Evented and Won his first WM in 2003
- Won the WWE Title for the 2nd time in 2003
- Participated and won the first Stretcher match in
in 10 years in 2003
- Won his first Iron Man Match in 2003
- Won the WWE Title for the 3rd time in 2003
- Left the WWE in 2004

Now , to get to the point of this thread which wrestler do you believe was better when it came to the following :

- In Ring Ability
- More over Crowd
- Mic Skills
- Strength
- Had the Better Matches
- Who you liked Better
- Something that makes the one Wrestler more superior than the other.

This thread is not about who had more success in the WWE because it was obviously Lesnar , this thread is to discuss who was the better wrestler in general.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

This thread is not about who had more success in the WWE because it was obviously Lesnar , this thread is to discuss who was the better wrestler in general.

Um...so the better wrestler was Lesnar. In pro wrestling, one's ability to make money and draw is what makes one "better" than the other. Lashley cannot even compare to Lesnar in this light. Now, there's a reason for that, as well. Lesnar was a better athlete, he was better on the mic, he had a phenomenal mouthpiece manager in Paul Heyman. Lashley held a 3rd rate world championship, never went over anyone top-notch, and his mic skills were abysmal.

Lesnar in a landslide.

 

[Megatron]

In Ring Abilty: Lesnar was much more versatile inside of the ring and could tell a story with his matches.

More Over With The Crowd: Lesnar was pretty much over with the crowd from the day he debuted til the day he left, save for the shitty WM match with Goldberg.

Mic Skills: Lesnar sounded much more intimidating then Lashley on the stick, who I believed always should've had some sort of mouthpiece.

Strength: Strength I believe is irrelevant, but I wouldn't know how to judge them anyways.

Had the Better Matches: While both had about the same amount of time inside of the WWE (Lashley a few months more), Lesnar had about triple the amount of great matches that Lashley had.

Who You Liked More: I always liked Lashley, but could never buy him as a serious ME since he didn't have a mouthpiece, which Lesnar had w/ Heyman for his first few months, who helped sell Lesnar as a threat. I loved Lesnar's dominance on SD and was really sad that he decided to leave after WM 20, since he had SO MUCH he could've done with the company. SO much untapped potential with him.

Something Superior Over The Other Wrestler: Lesnar was built up to be THE GUY in the WWE. This guys first six months were incredible, winning the KOTR and then the WWE Championship at Summerslam to become the youngest champion ever. Lashley had a decent run with the ECW World Heavyweight Championship, but that is nothing compared to the three time WWE Champion Lesnar.

To sum it all up, it's Lesnar, and it's not even fucking close. A real shame that he left right as he was about to hit his prime too, because he completely changed the outlook of the WWE at that time.

 

[GUMBO2ndcoming]

This is an easy one to me. As much as i like Bobby Lashely he will be nothing to the wrestling business in a few years. Everyone will always remember the way Brock came, saw, and conquered in WWE. He was actually quite entertaining and his match with Angle at WM XIX was a classic, is in ring ability tops lashley by a mile. So Lesnar!

 

[Mitch Henessey]

Lesnar. And it shouldn't even be close.

The bulk of Lashley's matches were boring, and dull. The only good match I can remember him having is the one with Cena from The Great American Bash, and the match with Umaga at Wrestlemania was mediocre at best. Lesnar on the other hand, was able to have a handful of good matches, and his reign as WWE champion was one of the most dominant title reigns in recent memory. His matches with Cena, Rock, Angle(the Iron Match from Smackdown) and Undertaker were all fine wrestling matches. Also, I found Lesnar's feats of strength to be far more impressive than Lashley's.

Lesnar also beats Lashley on the mic. Lesnar might not have been the greatest talker ever, but he at least was able to bring some intensity to his promos/interviews. When Lashley tried to be fierce, it just seemed very awkward. By the way, Lashley's ex-girlfriend proved to better than him on the mic when he was in TNA. She managed to get more of a reaction out of the crowd than he ever did., and that's just not a good sign.

People will always wonder how good/great Brock could've been if he had stayed in WWE longer. Most people don't give a shit about Lashley, and he will be forgotten as the years pass by.

 

[Rafather]

Lesnar had the whole package in wrestling and in mma. Lesnar rolled in the wwe, had everything needed for a main event pure bad ass. He was tossed into the deep end with the UFC and dominated every fight. His only loss was because the ref stopped the fight and then Mir got a lucky ankle lock.

Lashley has the size but nothing else. Even a face needs to look and sound like a powerful guy and he couldn't. With mma he has gotten bad out of shape people to fight and been hurt.

Lesnar hands down all around.

raf

 

[Chicago1989]

This one's a no-brainer right here. Brock Lesnar all the way!

Brock Lesnar had better matches, personality, mic skills, moments, and a better career than Bobby Lashley's. Even 10 years from now, we will still remember Brock Lesnar's reign of destruction whereas Bobby Lashley's career is completely forgettable.

 

[Marks "R" Us]

To me this is somewhat akin to comparing Hulk Hogan to "Made in the USA" Lex Luger. Both were fashioned in similar molds, one was able to get over and the other was just shoved down the throats of the fans. When Lesnar beat The Rock at Summerslam '02 he was actually getting cheered even though he was a heel, when Lashley won the ECW title he got booed even though he was a face. Lesnar was better in every category hands down.

 

[bigbootydaddyV]

Lashley is one of the biggest jokes i've seen... i NEVER got why the guy was kept around.. i mean he seemed like a nice enough guy i suppose but as a wrestler or MMA fighter i just don't buy it. He seems so slow moving around the ring, doesn't have that speed of lesnar, which is why he was boring in wwe and in mma and will never match lesnar's success. He has ZERO intensity when he talks so you can't buy anything he's selling. All he has are the big muscles and that bowling ball of a head... the guy was a waste of space on every roster he's been on and i'm actually glad hogan kicked him to the curb

 

[Ruthless-RKO]

Decent thread.. i'll give you that

Okay..breaking it down..

- In Ring Ability - I have to say I can't really pick one..they were both powerhouses...I'm going to go with Lesnar...he was lethal...

- More over Crowd - Lesnar gets this vote..I think when he won, even though he was a heel...I think the crowd popped more for him..but then again i think 2002 fans are much better than 2006/7 fans...just saying...

- Mic Skills - It's obvious Lashley gets this...Lesnar had a mouth piece to call him the next big thing...Lashley talked on his own...

- Strength - I have to Lashley...he put his opponent down to the mat with force...

- Had the Better Matches - Lesnar hasnd down!! great matches with Angle, the rock and eddie g...

- Who you liked Better - I din't like either of them..they sucked... lol...okay i liked Lashley better...

- Something that makes the one Wrestler more superior than the other - Lashley had a better body...

Brock Lesnar 3-4 Bobby Lashley (Hey their initials match..)

I think the body one decided it for me!!!

Bobby Lashley!!

 

[The Viper Orton]

- In Ring Ability : Lesnar had much more ring ability that he got pushed in a day where the rock and undertaker were wrestling and was never a doubt that he would succeed. (unlike sheamus for isntance, some had doubts)

- More over Crowd Well lashley was well with the crowd, but comon Lesnar got much bigger reactions from the crowd.

- Mic Skills Even most belive lashley was better, I never bought he was good on the mic. Even though Brock was pushed at the beginning without talking, when he started to he felt good, comfortable and very effective.
- Strength I cant belive some said lashley, Brock superplexed big show, so who do you think had more power?

- Had the Better Matches Lashley's best match was agaisnt cena (if he faced him), however brock faced hulk hogan, the rock, couple of memorable undertaker and kurt agnle matches, so lashley is no where near lesnar in this department.

- Who you liked Better: I liked brock better, because he had it all. For me brock is one of five who has the complete package. And the way he was pushed with paul heyman. Brock as a face was like stone cold, but only for smackdown, while stone cold was for the whole wrestling. (i went to far, didn't I?). As a heel, he was the type that would always destroy and only few succeed as heels doing that. (for me Batista didn't)

- Something that makes the one Wrestler more superior than the other.

What made lashley more superior was his looks, He had a perfect figure for a wrestler. However when lashley had his jump to the ropes like brock used to do, I immediately thought, Vince wants to make a lesnar ripoff, but he never succeed in making him BIG!! What made lesnar more superoir, is his special (lashley changed his every 2 weeks),his heelish monstrous figure (the tattoo helped), and every thing mentioned above like mic skills and pure strength

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

This is such an easy choice- Brock Lesnar every single day of the week

The guy was a wrestling machine, he had the amateur background, he had the size, the physique, the power game and was an animal in the ring. From the second he debuted, you knew he was something special. If Brock was still in the WWE now, he would more than likely be the face of the company, he had it all.

He had some great matches, against The Rock, Undertaker, Angle and had probably the best finisher of the 2000s


Now, Lashley looked the part, he had the amateur background too and was close if not equal to Brock in strength, but he didnt do it for me for some reason. He wasnt as good in the ring, he didnt get over with the crowd to the same extent as Brock, and I kinda felt like he was forced down our throats, plus he was appalling on the mic.

Plus, Lashley looked too friendly, Brock looked like a mean SOB

So I am gonna go with the pain, BROCK LESNAR

 

[Vash21]

Never really cared for Bobby Lashley. He was just another big guy in a group full of big guys.

Brock is an animal and belongs in a zoo. How anyone would even think of getting in an MMA ring with him is beyond me. Yea he tapped to Mir in his first fight. Since then he has been breaking guys. He reminds me of Mike Tyson before Buster Douglas.

Brock also had the edge thanks to Paul Heyman. With Heyman as a mouthpiece there was no way Brock wasn't getting over.

 

[Goliath Uterus]

Lesnar, and it's not even comparable. Lesnar was in better fueds, had better matches, held more (and better) titles, was better on the mic and had a better look (IMO).

Lesnar was slated to become the guy in the WWE, while Lashley was gonna be a upper midcarder, a possible ME, Lesnar was the guy they had run over Hogan, win the title at a younger age than anyone else (at the time), and be the last person to hold the Undisputed title. Lesnar was the company guy, Lashley was just another upper midcard wrestler.

 

[xxdef25xx]

For me hands down it was Lesnar. Bobby Lashley just honestly had the TOTAL PACKAGE of a chick with no tits.....like what reason did you get to even come back and attempt to be interested when you knew unless she got implants(personality) she was gonna be boring. He showed no real fire to his game and just overall was DULL. Lesnar however had it all Mic skills even when Heyman was gone he showed this funny side to him(fued with Angle) and also kept his intense side. Plus I just think he did a amazing job of going full force and making you feel the power behind his moves.

 

[Armstrong]

I'm in the minority here, but I can't stand either one.

Bobby Lashley is brutal no matter how you put it. He looks weird, he can't talk, and he can't wrestle(Professional wise that is.) He just has no value to a wrestling company, period.

Brock is pretty much the same. I always thought he looked like Crash Holly on steroids. I'm very happy that he's found success in MMA. This way, I don't have to suffer though any of his garbage in the wrestling ring.

If I have to choose though, it's definitely Brock. After all, he did superplex Big Show through the ring on Smackdown. Which was neat.