I think it's important for people to realize that Shawn MIchaels wasn't always the greatest wrestler that ever lived. It really wasn't until the last few years of his full-time career that people started looking at him as a potential all-time greatest candidate. At least, from what I remember of the HBK chatter, it was around the time he had the first Mania match with Undertaker, and was rumored to retire, that the perception of him being the best ever grew. And honestly, I think that's because WWE actually started projecting him that way, to promote the matches with 'Taker.
I'm not saying it's not true. He very well may be the greatest of all time. But Daniel Bryan is still relatively young. HIs WWE career just began a few years ago, and he's really only been a main event player for less than two years. He's coming up on his first major program, with John Cena. I mean, working with CM Punk was major, yes, but as much as I love Punk, there's a whole different level of perceived success when a guy works a top tier WWE title program with John Cena, at the second biggest PPV of the year.
Back to what I was saying. HBK had the luxery of pretty much growing up into the WWF. He really didn't train for ten years on the indys before getting into the WWF. He spent 3-4 years in the AWA off and on, which is a respectable and normal amount, and then got his WWF contract and started working a tag team with Marty Jannetty. It wasn't until the early '90s where he really started breaking out. What I'm saying is, a lot of people think Shawn is this magical entity that was always the best, no matter what time he was in. Even when he was in the midst of his main event prime as the focal point of the WWE product - I would say between 1994 and 1998 - he was only ONE OF the best. There was also Bret Hart, Owen Hart, Davey Boy, and for a good long while Mr. Perfect cranking matches as good as, if not better than HBK.
When he came back, and won the world heavyweight championship, dropped it 28 days later, and then never won another major singles title again. Not that you need a title to be the best, but after he came back, however great he may have been, he was rarely THE guy. And arguably there were better wrestlers than him at the time (Kurt Angle, mostly).
So, what I'm trying to say is, if your arguement is that Daniel Bryan isn't like Shawn MIcahels because HBK is the greatest of all time, and was always in a league of his own, you need to rethink your opinion. In my opinion, they are similar, but only in that they are/were ONE OF the best in the WWE. Bryan is probably the best wrestler on the roster, but he'll be eternally competing with CM Punk, John Cena and Randy Orton IF he maintains his spot in the main event. ANd Shawn had to compete with Bret Hart, the Undertaker and a really shitty product for a few years in the mid-90s.
If Daniels has a point he needs to work on, it's his mic work. Its passable. Late '90s Bret Hart passable. But it's not great, and he needs a better talker to carry him through feuds. You know, outside of the "yes" and "no" chants. I recently rewatched the 3-way spot between Punk, Bryan and The Rock from Raw 1,000. It's cringe-worthy how out-classed Bryan is by those two on the mic.
