Daniel Bryan, Kurt Angle - Comparison

[LeviCook]

We all know how great of a wrestler Kurt Angle is, without a doubt one of the best. But as we always mention good wrestling isn't enough on it's own. You have to be entertaining, you have to be good on the mic, and you have to have the "it" factor. Throughout Kurt Angle's career he has had his fair share of entertaining moments. Some being very comedic and some being very serious. And i was thinking that's what really made Kurt Angle so great. He could have those very funny moments backstage but once he was in the ring everything changed. And this made me think, is this the reason why Daniel Bryan started to get over? Daniel Bryan is a great wrestler himself. But for the longest time we found him in pointless matches and not getting the opportunities that he obviously deserved. Once he finally tuned heel is when things started to change. He was able to show more personality and develop as a character on the mic while continuing to put on great matches. The "Yes!" chant has helped him get where he is today and get over with the crowd. Along with his antics involving belittling AJ. Although these things might have been serious they appeared to some as comedic and got more approval from the fans.

So my question is do you see the same similarity in Kurt Angle & Daniel Bryan?
Should Daniel Bryan add more of a comedic side to his gimmick?

 

[Foshinzo]

I think Daniel Bryan should just roll with what works. It's what Kurt did. If it worked to do the thing with E&C, he did it and he did well. If it worked for him to have a serious feud with HBK, he'd blow that out of the water. That was Kurt's strength, outside of the ring.

I think DBD just needs to be on screen. That's all he needs is good air time, and he's pretty well getting that. Most wrestlers, if they want to succeed, just need to work hard to get over with what they're given. A lot aren't given much and that's the writers' faults, but even if a performer is given a terrible story to roll with, they've just got to roll with it. DBD is being given something, and now he just needs to do his best to perform.

Honestly, though, I don't think DBD is any Kurt Angle, and he should just stay away from that. He is a kind of performer who can just be himself; that in itself is an advantage. I'm probably just being partial to Kurt because he was always one of my favorites (he still is, to a degree), but I don't think DBD has it in him to be as good. Still, he can be great, if he develops independently. The, "YES," chant works and it's branding. He's going in the right direction.

 

[TheLoneCharles]

You mean shouting "YES!! YES!! YES!!" is comedic enough in it's own right? LOL

For me, Angle and Bryan came up in much different ways. Angle was already a gold medalist and came in with the fanfare of Mark Henry back in the mid 90s. Bryan came up through the indies and Japan, comparing to the days when the talent would come up after years of refining their craft. Bryan has a large part of the fans respect because a good amount of fans already followed his indie career.

So I guess you could say Angle and Bryan are similar because by the time each made it to the main roster, they already had the respect of a good portion of the fans that were already following their careers. They were already stars in their own right. Throw in the fact that each has a good catchphrase and an easy to hate gimmick, not to mention they are almost always believable in the pain they inflict.

 

[silrock316]

We all know how great of a wrestler Kurt Angle is, without a doubt one of the best. But as we always mention good wrestling isn't enough on it's own. You have to be entertaining, you have to be good on the mic, and you have to have the "it" factor. Throughout Kurt Angle's career he has had his fair share of entertaining moments. Some being very comedic and some being very serious. And i was thinking that's what really made Kurt Angle so great. He could have those very funny moments backstage but once he was in the ring everything changed. And this made me think, is this the reason why Daniel Bryan started to get over? Daniel Bryan is a great wrestler himself. But for the longest time we found him in pointless matches and not getting the opportunities that he obviously deserved. Once he finally tuned heel is when things started to change. He was able to show more personality and develop as a character on the mic while continuing to put on great matches. The "Yes!" chant has helped him get where he is today and get over with the crowd. Along with his antics involving belittling AJ. Although these things might have been serious they appeared to some as comedic and got more approval from the fans.

So my question is do you see the same similarity in Kurt Angle & Daniel Bryan?
Should Daniel Bryan add more of a comedic side to his gimmick?

Sorry but this thread isnt very good as there is ZERO to compare Bryan to Angle. Actually i think its a shot at Kurt. Their comedy is completely different as Angle played the sissy heel better than any wrestler ive seen and their comedy is SO different. Bryan never makes me laugh where Kurt always did.

I just dont see it. Angle had the IT factor as you put it. What does Bryan do remotely do? Yes? Gimmie a break. They had Bryan lose in like 5 secs atWM and got lucky Yes caught on that night or imo, he would be an after thought. Please dont compare his limited humor to one of the funniest to ever do it.

 

[justinept]

Sorry but this thread isnt very good as there is ZERO to compare Bryan to Angle. Actually i think its a shot at Kurt...

A shot at Kurt? Yes, it might be a shot at Kurt Angle if he compared a one-dimensional comedic figure like Santino to Kurt Angle... but he's not doing that. He's comparing him to a former World Heavyweight Champion, a guy whose WWE Championship match at the upcoming pay-per view will mark the 6th consecutive month he has competed in a match for the one of the two major titles (that doesn't even count the TLC ppv where he won the title...)

Whether you like Bryan or you dislike him - and judging by the rest of your post, my guess is that you dislike him - you can't deny that this guy is currently one of the major players in the WWE landscape. It's hardly a knock on Angle for Bryan drawing comparisons to him. Does the comparison mean that Bryan is better than Angle? No. It simply means that he's comparable to him.

They are a part of a rare breed of superstar in the past 20 years that got over without a bodybuilder physique or a high-risk arsenal. The list of wrestlers that accomplished that task is short - Hart, Punk, Benoit are three others that come to mind. The two both rely on technical wrestling and story-telling, giving fans unique matches each week.

And both wrestlers provided some goofiness that allowed fans to chant at them despite their heel status. I'll give you one point, Angle was far goofier than Bryan is - but that doesn't mean Bryan doesn't make me laugh, too.

Angle had the IT factor as you put it. What does Bryan do remotely do? Yes? Gimmie a break. They had Bryan lose in like 5 secs atWM and got lucky Yes caught on that night or imo, he would be an after thought.

Please define the "it" factor, and tell me who has it. Did Steve Austin have the "it" factor? If so, then why did Stunning Steve Austin fail to get over as a singles wrestler in WCW; how come The Ringmaster sucked? Did The Rock always have the "it" factor or did he purchase a can of "it factor" at the corner drug store after fans chanted "Rocky Sucks" during the Rocky Maivia face run? Maybe Foley had "it." After all, everyone knows that Foley is Go(o)d, right. Let's just forget the fact that 10 months before fans started chanting his name, Dude Love was failing to gain any crowd reaction despite working a program with Steve Austin for the WWF Title.

I guess you could say that it's about a character connecting with the audience - but that's something that only happens when hard work and talent catches a lucky break. In the case of Austin, he went off script and delivered the Austin 3:16 line after winning the KOTR in 1996 - something he wouldn't have had the opportunity to do had Triple H not been punished for the MSG incident. In the case of The Rock, the WWE getting its ass kicked in the ratings each week by WCW forced VKM to develop an edgier brand of programming and allowed D'Wayne Johnson to be The Rock... Hell it even took luck for Mick Foley to finally become a WWE Champion. That sock puppet that catapulted him to the WWE Championship was supposed to be a one-off joke that just happened to catch on with the WWE fans.

So why are you so hard on Daniel Bryan for "getting lucky"? The wrestling geek - many of which flock to WrestleMania each year - have followed Bryan since his independent days. They've appreciated his matches and were genuinely pissed off when VKM booked him to drop the title in 18 seconds to Shaemus. As a form of protest, they chanted the same thing he'd been chanting since January "YES." It caught on. Was it luck? Sure. But every major star in the WWE over the past 25 years has relied on luck to get over.

 

[rge2010]

I dont believe Bryan has ever or will ever be in the same league as Kurt Angle. Angle got over huge in an era where he was fighting it out with Triple H, Taker, Rock, Austin, Jericho, HBK, Cena, Lesnar so on....he was always relevant.

Bryan is good, but I dont see him ever reaching Angles heights so the compairson is null and void imo.

 

[Defekt]

I don't think you can compare the two. Kurt has had his problems, but very few wrestlers have his level of drive, skill and charisma. Not to mention he came into wrestling with an Olympic gold metal, and was at the top of the WWE's roster after only a few years in the business.

Daniel Bryan is a good wrestler and entertaining in his own way, but comparing him to Angle is like comparing Sheamus to Hogan.

 

[Piss Bucket]

I would actually liken Daniel Bryan to a young Chris Benoit, I mean let's face it his moveset is similar, he does the Crossface, and the diving headbutt, and almost every variation of suplex in the book, just like Benoit did... One major difference though, Daniel Bryan probably won't go crazy and commit double homicide and then suicide.

 

[kokoBawesome]

Ugh... dont bring up Benoit! all your doing is upseting the little children that cant handle real life.

Angle used comedy because he was actually funny. You could tell from the first promo that he had a great sense of humor, Bryan hasn't shown himself to be that funny. If Bryan forces it than it'll backfire, but if he stays serious and relies on the fact that he may actually be one of the best in the world, he'll carve his own place in wrestling.

Besides, he's waaaaay ahead of Benoit at this point in his career. Hes already a world champion and can say an entire sentence.

 

[boywithbluehanger]

I see obvious similarities between the two. They both have had American related gimmicks at some point and they both came to the WWE after already being successful and praised for their technical ability. Also, they both have quirky additions to their WWE gimmicks. Kurt Angle would brag about his accomplishments and then after all the talk was through, he'd lie/whine incessantly about how he was screwed over. It made him seem as though he were a petulant child. This was comical because he was legitimately a wrestler before WWE yet you knew in the back of your mind that this man who is so petty is actually a force to be reckoned with. Coupled with the overuse of "It's true. It's true." to beat over your head any point he tried to make, he was definitely a quirky guy to still take seriously.

Daniel Bryan has a comedic schtick as well. Question and Answer Time with Daniel Bryan is a funny way to segway into his popular YES! YES! YES! chants by arrogantly answering his own simplistic questions.

 

[silrock316]

A shot at Kurt? Yes, it might be a shot at Kurt Angle if he compared a one-dimensional comedic figure like Santino to Kurt Angle... but he's not doing that. He's comparing him to a former World Heavyweight Champion, a guy whose WWE Championship match at the upcoming pay-per view will mark the 6th consecutive month he has competed in a match for the one of the two major titles (that doesn't even count the TLC ppv where he won the title...)

Whether you like Bryan or you dislike him - and judging by the rest of your post, my guess is that you dislike him - you can't deny that this guy is currently one of the major players in the WWE landscape. It's hardly a knock on Angle for Bryan drawing comparisons to him. Does the comparison mean that Bryan is better than Angle? No. It simply means that he's comparable to him.

They are a part of a rare breed of superstar in the past 20 years that got over without a bodybuilder physique or a high-risk arsenal. The list of wrestlers that accomplished that task is short - Hart, Punk, Benoit are three others that come to mind. The two both rely on technical wrestling and story-telling, giving fans unique matches each week.

And both wrestlers provided some goofiness that allowed fans to chant at them despite their heel status. I'll give you one point, Angle was far goofier than Bryan is - but that doesn't mean Bryan doesn't make me laugh, too.



Please define the "it" factor, and tell me who has it. Did Steve Austin have the "it" factor? If so, then why did Stunning Steve Austin fail to get over as a singles wrestler in WCW; how come The Ringmaster sucked? Did The Rock always have the "it" factor or did he purchase a can of "it factor" at the corner drug store after fans chanted "Rocky Sucks" during the Rocky Maivia face run? Maybe Foley had "it." After all, everyone knows that Foley is Go(o)d, right. Let's just forget the fact that 10 months before fans started chanting his name, Dude Love was failing to gain any crowd reaction despite working a program with Steve Austin for the WWF Title.

I guess you could say that it's about a character connecting with the audience - but that's something that only happens when hard work and talent catches a lucky break. In the case of Austin, he went off script and delivered the Austin 3:16 line after winning the KOTR in 1996 - something he wouldn't have had the opportunity to do had Triple H not been punished for the MSG incident. In the case of The Rock, the WWE getting its ass kicked in the ratings each week by WCW forced VKM to develop an edgier brand of programming and allowed D'Wayne Johnson to be The Rock... Hell it even took luck for Mick Foley to finally become a WWE Champion. That sock puppet that catapulted him to the WWE Championship was supposed to be a one-off joke that just happened to catch on with the WWE fans.

So why are you so hard on Daniel Bryan for "getting lucky"? The wrestling geek - many of which flock to WrestleMania each year - have followed Bryan since his independent days. They've appreciated his matches and were genuinely pissed off when VKM booked him to drop the title in 18 seconds to Shaemus. As a form of protest, they chanted the same thing he'd been chanting since January "YES." It caught on. Was it luck? Sure. But every major star in the WWE over the past 25 years has relied on luck to get over.

Oh trust me I dont throw the IT thing out there all the time. I use it for only a few people. I think only 5 superstars in the HISTORY of wrestling has had the IT factor. The Rock has IT. That IT is making him a box office smasher. Angle had IT. He was Gold medal winner for his country. He went to WWE and got to the top in the WWE and he is one of the best in TNA. He seems to always rise to the top of whatever he tries. To me, they are the ones that have IT. The ones that no matter what they do, they succeed. Bryan, while I like him, should not be in the same sentence as Angle. I dont mean to offend Bryan fans because I LIKE HIM ALSO but he is no Angle, not in ANY sense.

 

[midgensa]

I don't really like the comparison honestly. I don't see the "American" comparisons as Daniel Bryan is NOT an all-american athlete or performer or anything ... he just called himself the American Dragon.

I think that Kurt Angle was very much his own unique character. Other than his over hybridism (seriously, he is a face again now, but will go heel shortly as he always does) he does everything pretty perfectly. He cuts great promos, he performs expertly in the ring. And he has a level of charisma that is almost unmatched.

Daniel Bryan also has these things, but he is very UNIQUE and that is why he is getting over so much. His Yes! chants are somewhat funny and are definitely going to lead to no choice but a mega-face turn ... but he has his own style that is all his.

 

[Martin Gabriel]

Good post, Levi Cook.

To your first question, they're similar in that they both borrow from legitimate martial arts to make their styles flow with the gritty beat of true combat. When you watch Bryan or Angle, they don't rely on rest holds and pauses so much as practitioners of "traditional" American pro wrestling do. They stay on the opponent, make the application of any hold look like a genuine struggle and don't depend on the common tropes of American wrestling. They are among a rare few wrestlers who know how to take a staged form of entertainment and make it look like a legitimate combat sport. Punk-Bryan in particular is a great example of how selling and work rate can make everything seem less staged.

However, there are some significant disparities between Angle and Bryan also. Simply, I think Bryan's better. He's a better striker for one, arguably the best in WWE. Watch closely, while some guys whiff punches all the time or rely on forearms and kicks because they're easier to hit without hurting your opponent, Bryan can do them all and sell them perfectly. Bryan's also more athletic and usually applies a wider array of holds and moves.

As for the second question, I'd say he has one already and it can be reasonably compared to Angle's comedic side. When I remember Angle as a comedic character, I think of how he could do something silly and self-absorbed one moment, and then torture someone with an Ankle Lock the next. Bryan often praises himself humorously ("Once you go Bryan, there's no point in tryin'!") but comes off as fierce during a match. I'd say so far Angle was funnier though.

They also both managed to get a catchphrase to stick, though in Angle's case it was exclusively during his entrances and promos ("You suck!" chants were great) while Bryan's is over as fuuuuuuuuuuck. I think in the long-run, with Bryan being such an even-tempered dude (Angle's kind of batshit crazy), he stands a better chance of having a prolonged career with WWE that'll eventually outshine Kurt Angle's.

 

[berlinbrawler]

I don't really see the Bryan-Angle comparison. Daniel Bryan actually reminds me a lot more of one Chris Benoit. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who thinks that, but you'll never hear that comparison on WWE TV.

Should Bryan add more of a comedic side? Uff, maybe. They're going to turn him babyface sooner or later (the fans are already itching to cheer him), so maybe he'll add some facets to his character then. Right now his character is more of an aggressive, cunning, bitter troll and it's working great for him, so why fix what isn't broken?