ECW Region Finals: Edge vs. Steve Austin

[Tastycles]

I have forty five minutes before I have to go up. Minus the time needed for a shower... yeah, I think I got enough time.

Up where? Up west? Up North?

No, the ability to get the crowd involved on a massive level was what made him great. And to criticise his promos as "repetitive" is ridiculous; it sounds like it's coming from someone who's never watched a wrestling show in his life.

But this is where Austin was lucky. You know who the best heels on the mic are? The ones with power, always have been. JBL, DiBiase, and most importantly, Vince McMahon, they get the crowd riled up. All you had to do was insult them a little and the crowd would be onside massively. Want proof? X-Pac was one of the most over people in the attitude era when he spoke.

The Rock is unquestionably the greatest person on the mic in wrestling history, yet he was also easily the most repetitive. He had the versatility of a Little Britain sketch.

Except, it wasn't was it. The Rock may have been catchphrase heavy, but all of his promos brought something a bit different to the table. Like Ali G, if you will. Austin did this to, but the raw charisma wasn't there in as much abundance.

Besides, it's an irrelevant argument.

I'm inclind to agree.

On what basis? I mean, I haven't seen every cage match this decade, but I saw that match on the Edge DVD and it was pretty meh. Cage matches as a whole generally aren't great though.

This is true.

Fake edit: No, wait. Edge/Angle was definitely better. Definitely this decade too.

Alright, great.

Edge has terrible, terrible chemistry with The Undertaker. The only good match they had was the TLC, and that was only because it was incredible how much shit had to happen for Taker to actually lose the match, which, coincidentally, consumed about ten minutes of the match.

Edge may have terrible chemisty, but that isn't a reason for him to lose, after all, he did still beat Taker. I thought their WrestleMania match was reasonably good, to be honest,and I enjoyed the Summerslam one. On the other hand, one has to consider that Austin at his best wasn't exactly five star matches week in week out, was it?

Edge/Taker at Summerslam was just spot after spot after spot - and Edge never came close to putting Taker down. The WrestleMania match is only just a notch above Orton/Triple H, and I sincerely mean that. I only liked it because of old school Undertaker.

I've addressed this, but it doesn't really matter.

That doesn't really explain why Edge's best matches - in his Rated R Superstar Era - are against Cena, and yet Cena's best matches aren't against Edge.

Because the batch of heels this decade have been unquestionably better than the face. Edge has been a heel pretty consistently, so he has had to face people like Batista, Jeff Hardy and Rob Van Dam. Austin was able to face everyone good in his era. Cena has been allowed to face people like Angle, who are evidently going to be more capable of putting on decent matches. Edge's feud with Shawn Michaels is possibly the best thing that HBK has done bar Jericho the first time around since his return, but it was buried on the undercard of a Royal Rumble.

All I know is that his WrestleMania main events take an absolute shit over Edge's, but he was never in as many matches with ridiculous stipulations, I'll give you that.

Really. A cage match against a 50 year old man isn't ridiculous? A two on one ladder match against non wrestlers isn't ridiculous? A six man hell in a cell isn't ridiculous? Because it is where I'm standing from.

Firstly, Edge's ECW record is 2-2.


Secondly, you undermined yourself in your previous post here. Austin was not in his prime in ECW. That Steve Austin is a shadow of the one Edge is facing in this match. The match is also conducted under WWE rules, not ECW ones. It's a non-factor.

Non factor, granted.

Edge was booked to be an incredible heel. Cena might have been booed, but he was still the WWE's only bona fide main eventer by a long shot. Edge was given a dream feud to capitalise on with Matt Hardy, and he didn't. It wasn't until Cena made him look like gold and until he started using the most ridiculous heel tactics known to mankind that he actually got over.

Right, so what your saying is that he had to find his niche. Shall we now remember that Steve Austin spent 5 years in bigtime promotions being a complete nobody before he found his?

Yes.



How would you rate CM Punk?

CM Punk is more versatile than just a straight up brawler, and his kicks look better than Austin's which are so lame loooking that they wouldn't be out of place in a Layla El vs Kelly Kelly match.

Jeff Hardy's pussy-ass punches seem to knock Edge for six. All Jeff does is jump about and flail.

So Edge doing his job as best he can against an inferior worker is somehow counted against him. Austin got beaten up by Shane McMahon. That's all I need to say.

Why the fuck did CM Punk kick the fuck out of him then? Dude doesn't do anything but kick or punch these days. Well, there's the lift before he knees people in the face.

He does springboard moves and stuff too. Bulldog! Yes, he does a bulldog.

Stunner always works though. Not a problem.

Yes, if I recall Steve Austin is undefeated. Oh wait, no he isn't. Surely the stunner didn't work everytime then.

Yeah, but no he isn't. He beats the fuck out of people, but he's perfectly calm while doing.

Yes, because chasing the Undertaker around the arena with a shovel is the embodiment of calm isn't it? No it isn't, he wasn't calm at all.

I couldn't believe Edge could do it either, but here we are.

I have no idea what this is in reference to, but I reckon Edge could do it.

I really like Edge. I bought his DVD and one third of the reason I watch SmackDown is because of him. I just call it as I see it.

So am I, to be honest. Savage vs RVD vs HHH is the only match where I voted for my favourite rather than who I thought would actually win.

I'm not particularly bothered by Lesnar going out. True story. I would have liked him to have won, yeah, but I'm saying Austin would win here because Austin is leagues above Edge, no other reason.

When the world of wrestling comes to the end of the line, Steve Austin's name will be held in higher esteem than Edge's I imagine. However, that doesn't matter at all. Rey Mysterio's will be held in higher esteem than Great Khali, but it doesn't mean Khali wouldn't beat him.

Which most wrestlers do 75% of the time.

Really? I completely disagree.

Overall, your arguments are far-fetched and ridiculous. The vocabulary you use isn't fitting of a man that is barely capable of winning a third of his matches, and that's with him deploying some overly complex scheme.

This year's results alone would suggest that you are hyperbolic at best.

The video I provided was merely an example of the brutality Austin is capable of showing.

Ok. Edge brutalised Mick Foley when he was a commentator for no reason other than because he can. To say that Austin was at his prime as a heel is obviously wrong.

And this is supposed to give Edge an advantage how? Kane has lit people on fire and been lit on fire himself, yet Austin has been able to incapacitate him with a beating.

It's no less helpful than Austin's ability to beat a woman.

So unless your suggesting that we'll see a flaming table spot in this match, I think this argument is pretty stupid

I still don't see how Austin's ability with a chair is any more relevant.

If anything it shows how stupid he his, he's risking his own body on a spot that may have not only finished his opponent but him as well.

Or is itdisplaying a win at all costs mentality? You can look at it either way. I don't think either of these men has ever lost by being overly aggressive with a finisher.

And I fail to see how this makes Edge more sadistic than Stone Cold, like I said, if the match falls to the floor Austin will use anything and everything about his environment to inflict damage on Edge. The barriers, the stairs, the apron, the ringpost, hell Austin may even expose the concrete and give Edge a few slams on it.

Edge could and would be capable of all these things too.

It'll be all Edge can do but just survive.

It's what he does in a lot of his matches before pulling out an unlikely win.

this whole argument that Edge will do anything and everything it takes to win is ridiculous when Austin would be doing the same thing. The difference being that Edge will be looking for cheap shots, like eye poking, low blows, using the tights for leverage along with attempting to fight off Austin's constant barrage of attacks the entire match.

So, Austin will just be attacking and won't have to deal with Edge's barrage of heelish antics?

The fact of the matter is this: Austin was popular because he won against all odds against big mean McMahon. The reason that was important was because from losing the title in 1998 to WrestleMania XV, he was getting his arse handed to him on a weekly basis, with the odd minor victory peppered in.

This is one match against the man who along with Vickie has become the McMahon family of this generation, it stands to reason that while Austin may triumph in the end, he'd lose out here quite decisively.

Austin was in his prime in late 1998, and it was at that time when he was beaten in an important tournament by being screwed out of it. Edge wins matches by screwjobs, Austin lost a shitload of them by screwjobs, so it stands to reason that Austin would lose here.

 

[Uncle Sam]

Well, well, well greatings Tastycles. You could have just removed the bits that you agreed with me on. It would have made a shorter read. Me, I'm not even going to bother breaking down posts clause by clause any more. It takes too long and you end up arguing about pretty trivial things.

You seem to have missed the point on a few of my arguments. Likely because there wasn't the other half of the argument to refer to.

Let's see, where do I start? Ah yes, the "ridiculous matches" thing. Wait no, that's not really relevant.

Punk being more versatile than a straight up brawler. I agree, I think the term "striker" is more appropriate. However, jmt was claiming that Edge couldn't be phased by punches and kicks and I was showing that he very much would be. Austin's brawling abilities, on the other hand, certainly phased people who were also pretty used to being punched in the face.

As for Austin's kicks looking weak, I agree. Unfortunately, they still got the job done. Whether he was stomping a mudhole or kicking someone in the gut, his opponent always looked suitably winded.

As it is, I think the assertion that a man that has hardly ever beaten anybody anything close to cleanly in his prime and has never been able to work anyone into a rage can beat Austin cleanly or enrage him to the point that he just grabs a steal chair and starts whacking away in front of the referee is a ludicrous one.

To assert that Edge's moveset is particularly high impact or even that effective is not equally ludicrous, but still untrue.

To assert that Austin would be outmatched by Edge is silly, too, simply for the universal law that Edge is always outmatched by his face opponents. Wait, that's not universal. That's not universal at all.

 

[Nate DaMac]

I've been sitting back just watching but I had to jump in. What does Bret's Sharpshooter have over Edge's? Isn't this kayfabe? Even not in kayfabe, everyone's Sharpshooter is exactly the same, and the only way that one would be more painful the other is due to the ammount of pressure applied. Do you really think Bret applies more pressure? If so, what do base that on? Has Bret put you in the Sharpshooter?

 

[Uncle Sam]

I know that Bret certainly had a higher success ratio than Edge in using it. Has Edge ever made anyone tap out to his? I also know that in several interviews, Bret has talked about how nobody else does the sharpshooter properly.

 

[Checkmate]

This is a very, very interesting matchup. Austin was on his way out before Edge even thought of peaking as a singles star. Both men's primes are a good 10 years apart, but relatively easy to piece together. I'm also a big fan of both, which makes this all the better. Many points have been made, and I'd think it is far easier to make a case for Austin than Edge. Not that I'm siding with anyone just yet, but there are several points that are very relevant.

Austin would be the top face going into this matchup. He is a favorite to win, would be very over with fans, and has a smash mouth style that everyone has grown to love. Austin overcame many odds throughout his prime, mainly the numbers game. He is and was a loner, and his opponents came in groups. Yet, his career was very sucessful, as he claimed several title reigns dispite these disadvantages.

Edge, on the other hand, is an opportunist. His wins are controversial, and also against the odds. When everyone is betting against him, he wins, somehow. However, this usually leads most to under-rate his skills. He is very good at scouting his opponents, excels in underhanded tactics, and is a master strategist. While this doesn't always result in a win, he finds his way back to the top and to the title.

Matching these two up on paper, this is Austin's match to lose. He is perhaps one of the best ever, and has a style that is difficult to scout and counter. However, this doesn't necessarily count out Edge. Edge went toe to toe with the Undertaker at Wrestlemania and was able to match the Phenom move for move. Austin at times had his problems with the Deadman, so it isn't too hard to imagine Edge giving Austin a run as well.

Another point I'd like to make is the type of match. No, I don't mean straight wrestling, but I mean that this is a tournament. Edge's character is that which cheats to win all but the final match of a tournament such as this. Sure, he gets his at the end, but this isn't the end just yet. These are normally the times where his magical wins from nowhere seem to happen. Austin isn't immune to cheating, and this could be the factor that could win Edge this match. However, Edge isn't immune to a Stone Cold Stunner either, so this could swing either way in my mind.

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

I've been sitting back just watching but I had to jump in. What does Bret's Sharpshooter have over Edge's? Isn't this kayfabe? Even not in kayfabe, everyone's Sharpshooter is exactly the same, and the only way that one would be more painful the other is due to the ammount of pressure applied. Do you really think Bret applies more pressure? If so, what do base that on? Has Bret put you in the Sharpshooter?

I've been asking myself the same question, Nate, along with many others. I still have to read Will's post, but most of what I see in here is just utter ludicrousness.

Uncle Sam uses the phrase "grasping at straws" occasionally, and I think the term aptly describes almost all of the arguments that have been put forth for Edge so far in this thread.

Simply put, Austin is leaps and bounds better than Edge in almost every way imaginable. Not to toot my own horn, but the Edge fans here should really take a page from the Liger/Lesnar thread, and try to look at how Edge could capitalize on Austin's weaknesses. Austin can't really be psyched out, so, even if Edge is a master of mind games, his mastery is absolutely worthless here. So, I would concentrate on how Edge could use his physical advantages to beat Austin (should he have any).

 

[Fizzy]

I've been sitting back just watching but I had to jump in. What does Bret's Sharpshooter have over Edge's? Isn't this kayfabe? Even not in kayfabe, everyone's Sharpshooter is exactly the same, and the only way that one would be more painful the other is due to the ammount of pressure applied. Do you really think Bret applies more pressure? If so, what do base that on? Has Bret put you in the Sharpshooter?

Who has Edge made tap to the Sharpshooter? Nobody. Who has Bret made tap to the Sharpshooter? Some of the greatest of all time. It's like the Crossface. HBK and HHH can do it, but it will never be as effective as when Benoit did it. It's logic. EVery time another wrestler has used the Sharpshooter be it Rock or Edge it was used as a wear down move. Nobody can do it like Bret. He knows everything about the move, and unless Bret taught Edge how to make the move as painful as possible(which he obviously hasn't if Edge never made anybody tap to it) than it will never be as effective as Bret's.

 

[Nate DaMac]

So by that logic, Cena would be the master of the STF. Even though it looks like shit and looks very ineffective, he has beat several big names. The truth is the sharpshooter along with many other submission moves have been reduced to match filler. There might be two matches every year that end in submission. One could argue that the current generation of wrestlers have adapted to submissions and made them rather obselete(sp?). The Sharpshooter is a pretty mundane move that is very easy to execute. Instead of being a finisher, it is mostly a signature move these days.There could be absolutely nothing Bret knows about the Sharpshooter that nobody else does. Except maybe how to reverse the effects and blocking it. One could argue that Edge would be just as successful against opponents that Hart has beat with it. May sound ludacrious, but not any more than any of the arguments I have heard.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

After listening to all the arguments on both sides, I'm going to have go with Austin. Stone Cold in his prime rarely lost at all and if he did it was to superstars like the Rock, HHH, Kane, or Undertaker. Edge at his highest peak still wasn't as dominant at Austin.

Stone Cold may be a brawler but he won plenty a match with that style and he can display his technical side if he wants to. Two Rock Bottoms and a People's Elbow couldn't keep him down so I don't see how Edge's spear would. Edge could use the Sharpshooter if he wants to but Austin can use the Million Dollar Dream which will be more effective in my opinion.

Overall, I just think Austin is a better and smarter wrestler than Edge and he will come out victorious. Edge will come prepared but Austin will hit the Stunner for the win.

 

[Uncle Sam]

So by that logic, Cena would be the master of the STF.

Little known fact: the STFU is actually not an STF. I forgot what it is. But it isn't an STF, nor a variation upon the STF.

Even though it looks like shit and looks very ineffective, he has beat several big names.

Yes. Correct. Very good logic. Sensible. My kind of man.

One could argue that Edge would be just as successful against opponents that Hart has beat with it. May sound ludacrious, but not any more than any of the arguments I have heard.

Well, quite.

 

[X]

First, look at how and what the Attitude era surrounded. Duh, attitude. What exactly do you think the Rated R Superstar’s gimmick is full of? Aggression, attitude, intensity. Edge debuted in 1998, but never even began to shine in even the slightest bit, until the end of 1999, and mid 2000, right around the time the attitude was dying off.

The fact is, Edge is without question one of the most controversial, attitude filled Superstars this Industry has ever seen. And if he were in his Main Event prime, back during Austin’s era, I guarantee without a shadow of a fact, that Edge would’ve been World Heavyweight Champion - most reigns, of which, would’ve came by defeating Austin.

Okay, here we go, everyone has been awaiting the Will post. I'll try and take a crack at a debate with ya here.

First of all, I strongly disagree about how "controversial" Edge is. How is he controversial? Because he stole Matt Hardy's girlfriend? The whole wedding thing? Unless I'm missing something huge here, those two events hardly qualify him as "one of the most controversial superstars the industry has ever seen". Controversy is more along the lines of your Gorgeous George's and your Goldust's. Edge hardly qualifies on that level. He never had people forming mobs to physically harm Adam Copeland in real life.

Secondly, Edge's is hardly one of the most attitude-filled superstars ever. What attitude? The common heel tactics he uses? He's a great heel for sure, but hardly one of the best. And as a face he's as bland as it comes. He's got some attitude, sure, but compared to Austin he's practically the Brooklyn Brawler.

And thirdly, I highly doubt the Edge of today would even be a one time world champion in the Attitude era, let alone defeating Austin constantly. In fact, that defies all logic. Why would Vince put Edge over the most popular wrestler on the planet even once, let alone several times?

The Attitude era was filled with more deserving champions; The Rock, The Undertaker, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Mankind. Among guys like that, plus Austin, there wouldn't be very much room for a guy like Edge. Even at his absolute prime both in the ring and being over with fans, he wouldn't be a top tier guy in that era.

I respect Edge very much and he's one of my absolute favorite current workers, but he's just not ever going to be on Austin's level. Austin made wrestling cool. Edge, while having a great legacy, is not going to be remembered on the same level as guys like Hogan or Austin.

The Rock was Austin’s so-called “equal”, but whats that say? A guy who was cocky and smug, who barely knew any true wrestling technique and finished people off most of the time with a corny elbow drop, who was great on the microphone, so he was considered the second best (arguably first, at times) during this period?

First of all I think you're underrating Rocky's in-ring skills. He is not as bad as people seem to claim he is. He had several classic matches during the Attitude era, and even more during the last year or two of his career.

The Rock wasn't some clumsy mess in the ring or something, just because he padded out his moveset with a few fluff moves like the People's Elbow doesn't mean he wasn't a good worker. But this debate isn't about the Rock.

Edge is way above par for his mic-skills, and his in-ring work has rivaled that of Chris Benoit & Kurt Angle, so why wouldn’t Edge have become the Main Event heel of that era?

...Maybe I'm just a bit groggy from waking up, but did you just say that Edge was way above the Rock in terms of mic-skills? Because that's just ridiculious. Edge is above average at best on the microphone. How many Edge promos are going to be remembered in 20 years? None.

Look at the top heels back during that time; Mick Foley, (Mankind, Dude Love) the Undertaker, Kane & the Rock.

Foley was more often a face then a heel during the Attitude era, so we can probably discount him.

So you have a guy with multiple personalities, with his corniest one (Dude Love) being his best opposition to Steve Austin.

What? When was Dude Love ever the top opposition to Steve Austin? If you're counting the all of about one month or so during April-May 1998 then that barely counts. The only reason Dude Love was facing Austin was because he had McMahon in his corner. That was much more of an extension of the Austin-McMahon feud then it was Foley-Austin.

People praise Austin for being the leader during this time, and for what? Because he was better than a fat-ass in tye-dye, or because he lost to Kane one night, then beat him the next?

Funny how you've cherry-picked two of his worst feuds as though they were his most memorable or important. Everyone knows his feud with The Rock was one of the greatest of all time, better then any feud Edge has ever taken part in.

A month-long feud with Dude Love (which was really all about McMahon) and a short feud with Kane (which was really all about setting up Undertaker vs. Austin for Summerslam) hardly qualify as two of his most praised feuds.

Fact is, people claim the brand split is less valuable, but it’s actually reversed. The brand split has brought Edge MORE top talent and opposition, than Steve Austin ever could realize was coming for him.

And it's also spread that talent thin through three shows and introduced two more World titles into the mix. Logically, if there are 3 World titles to win, then that makes it easier to win a World title now then it was in the Attitude era when there was only one title. Basic mathematics and probability here.

Austin dealt with the likes of; the Undertaker, the Rock, Mick Foley, Triple H & Kane.

You forgot Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels.

Not bad when you think about what they are, today. But back then, the Undertaker was his biggest foe

What? Not at all. The Taker-Austin feud was very important but everybody knows that it was The Rock that was his biggest foe. That was the feud everybody wanted to see.

the Rock was undetermined on whether he was face or heel, Foley was more concerned with lava lamps and tye dye, and Triple H - well, once the Game finally rose, Austin couldn’t slow him down, or even stop him. (Austin dropped the Game, in a car from a pitchfork, and it didn’t even stop the Game from destroying Austin)

Why do you keep bringing up Dude Love as though it was Foley's longtime gimmick? Is this match taking place specifically in May of 1998? Foley was Mankind far more often then he was Dude Love.

And I'm also not sure about how Rock's tweener status makes him a less worthy opponent. In fact you haven't really explained why any of these guys weren't worthy opponents, instead you've made jokes about their gimmicks.

On the flip side, Edge has toppled names such as; John Cena, the Undertaker, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Mick Foley, Kane, the Big Show, Kurt Angle, Chris Benoit, Chris Jericho, Rey Mysterio. And a whole host of other names - that in retrospect, not just rival that of the Attitude era, but dwarf it.

Austin has defeated every single person that list apart from John Cena and Rey Mysterio, both of whom were never in the company at the same time that Austin was wrestling. So your argument for Edge having defeated a higher quality/quantity of wrestlers is that he's beaten the same people and a few that were never in the company during his tenure? How does that one work?

If Edge has managed to stay atop a stacked set of roster’s with those names on them, just imagine what he’d do against a less than stellar roster selection of about more or less 3 real Main Event threats, and the rest just comic relief. Edge was built for the Attitude era, about a decade too late. But if this were a decade sooner, make no mistake, Edge would be just as dominate - and it’d be, against Steve Austin.

Again you're bringing up Edge as though he were on the same level as Austin and the Rock in terms of charisma. He's just not man, maybe in your mind he is, but to the majority of other fans he's good, and not legendary.

Seriously, give me some great "attitude-filled" promo of Edge's that tops Rock or Austin.

So we all know how tough Steve Austin is, right? He’s the self proclaimed “Toughest S.O.B in the World Wrestling Federation”. Well, that’s what Jim Ross keeps repeating anyways. But is he, really? Back when he was in his prime, back during that era - a single chair shot could put Austin down for a 3-count.

Are you going to try covering that up, by telling me in all honesty, that chair shots back then were more impactful than they are now? Bullshit. A chair shot, is a chair shot. (Or so Jim Ross keeps repeating, these days)

So because Austin lost once to a chair shot, that makes him a pussy? Right. I don't judge a man's entire career based on the outcome of one match, and it's some serious reaching for you to.

Now don’t worry Austin lovers, I’m not here to question your Champion’s toughness by saying he’s not. The guy has come back from a lot, and that means something to me, it means he can dish it out, and take it. But the fact is, Edge isn’t the pussy a lot of you are trying to make him out to be. And just one of the solid facts of this, is the hardcore match he had against Foley. NO, not just the match he had against a guy who “was beyond his prime” (as I know everyone against Edge is licking their chops to say quickly) what I’m referring to, is the Spear to Foley, taking both men through a flaming table.

Look real closely at that spear. Edge goes FACE FIRST into the flames. Face first, into flames.. risking damage to himself, the likes of which Austin’s never even thought of encountering. This is also after he’s taken barbwire shots, chair shots, and everything else. Now Foley may have been beyond his prime, but barbwire and chair shots have no limitation or sense of “prime”. And definitely not a flaming table. So the next person who says Edge is a pussy and can’t take punishment or pain. The next person who tries to claim Edge isn’t tough, or resilient is clearly out of the mind and has no idea what they’re talking about.

Again, you're claiming that because of the outcome of one match, that definitively makes Edge tougher.

Did Edge ever break his neck during a match and still manage to both win the match and get up from it?

So, this is a regular one fall to a finish, regular rules match. Which means, brawling likely isn’t what it’s going to come down to, technical ability is.

Check again Will, this takes place in the ECW Region, meaning it's "extreme rules". So brawling will likely be a huge factor.

Take the likes of Bret Hart, Kurt Angle and Chris Benoit. Steve Austin has had trouble with all three, and he’s lost more than he’s won against the first two. On the flip side of this coin, Edge has never faced Bret Hart, however Edge does have more victories over Kurt Angle and Chris Benoit, than either of them have over Edge. Once again, in most of his matches against each, he’s wrestled toe-to-toe with them, or in some cases, out-wrestled them to gain the victory.

That's great if this was a technical match. It isn't. It's extreme rules. Honestly you could make some great arguments for Edge being better in a hardcore environment, but the technical argument doesn't really apply here. So I'm not going to respond to your next few paragraphs because they're all explanations of why Austin needs to cheat to win, when in this match everything is legal. So your argument, while great, is irrelevent here.

MAN your post is huge Will. I'm sorry that I didn't respond to all of it, but this post is already fucking massive so if you want to respond with some basic cliff notes of what other argument you made, feel free to do so. I apologize but man this post is huge. Don't hold it against me dude, I'm not trying to ignore any points you made.

 

[a0161613]

OK I will be voting Austin and as ma ny have said this is a hugely tough decision. Comparing the biggest name of the nineties and one of the best ever to the single best of this decade, one of the best heels ever. A truly awesome worker in himself.

I'm basing this off accomplishments, opposition and environment. I think Austin did more, against better talent in an era where he had to carry the company on his back.

Looking at Austins' prime, (after a severely damaged neck) he had to face in his prime Rock, just-out-of his-prime Foley, coming-into-his-prime HHH, a nowhere-near-his-peak Angle and an out-of-shape, yet kayfabe-menacing, Ministry-supported 'Taker. Not to mention McMahon on his back at every turn.

And yet while Stone Cold lost of the above, he won a lot more than he lost when it came to main eventing on the big occasions. Even when he lost he was usually screwed out it by Vince.

It actually beggars belief to think what he may have achieved without the neck injury.

But I have no reason to believe this wouldn't end like every McMahon Austin encounter, with Stone Cold on top in midst of a beer bath.

That is not to say Edge doesn't deserve a vote. He will have his supporters and rightly so. I just think against Austin, he came up against one of three or four guys who would beat him IMO.

Edge has matured into a superb worker, able to work with mostly anyone and carry any sort of match.

Personally I detest the way he has been booked to be the fool who wins his titles and yet loses them to make his successor look great. It is a great talent to have yet has been booked to ridiculous levels.

His gimmick is second to none, simple yet effective. Same with his mic skills.

In gimmick matches, he is practically unbeatable.

Yet in an era run by HHH and Stephanie, in the dliuted talent pool that is post-brand split WWE, he is on top of a stuttering company that lacks real push and direction. (I seriously believe he is too good for his time and would have excelled a rival for Rock and Austin in the Attitude era.)

This unfairly detracts from his ability. He is a highlight of a company which often lacks them. But in this encounter, against the best of his time, Edge won't quite get it done.

 

[Shock]

Little known fact: the STFU is actually not an STF. I forgot what it is. But it isn't an STF, nor a variation upon the STF.

It's actually a submission called an STS. Just sayin'.

Yes. Correct. Very good logic. Sensible. My kind of man.

You just proved everyone who naysays the Spear wrong. Even though it looks like shit and looks ineffective, it's beaten big names. Thank you.

I'll be making a post supporting Edge later on, although I feel like Will has made most of the best points, if not all of them.

 

[Uncle Sam]

It's actually a submission called an STS. Just sayin'.

There you go then. Not an STF.

You just proved everyone who naysays the Spear wrong. Even though it looks like shit and looks ineffective, it's beaten big names. Thank you.

I didn't say it was a bad move. Unfortunately, it's still got a very poor success rate against capable wrestlers. It's not even the best spear. I think Batista's has a better success rate.

 

[Bernkastel]

Ok. Edge brutalised Mick Foley when he was a commentator for no reason other than because he can. To say that Austin was at his prime as a heel is obviously wrong.

I never said Austin was at his best as a heel, nor did I imply it. If that's what you got after that video, then you missed my point entirely.

It's no less helpful than Austin's ability to beat a woman.

Austin ability to beat a helpless and defenseless woman shows what he's capable of doing when he gets a hold of a weapon, my point being that he would not hesitate to do some damage to Edge if he gets the chance.

I still don't see how Austin's ability with a chair is any more relevant.

It's not supposed to be, the core of my argument was that Edge's sadism and knowledge of weapon use would be nullified by Austin's. Both men are very skilled at using the whole ring and their surronding to inflict damage on their opponents

Or is itdisplaying a win at all costs mentality? You can look at it either way. I don't think either of these men has ever lost by being overly aggressive with a finisher.

It’s unnecessary, there’s a reason it’s called taking a risk. If Edge tries to take out Austin with a big spot and it doesn’t work, he’ll be finished. Austin will capitalize on the mistake and Edge won’t be able to recover.

Edge could and would be capable of all these things too.

Maybe, but my guess is that he’ll have his hands full trying to fight Austin off. This match won’t be a technical wrestling classic, it’ll be a brawl. I’ve only seen a handful of men trade punches with Austin and actually come out with the advantage. Edge is not one of these men, Edge will have to rely on dirty tactics in order to gain any type of advantage.

If Edge truly is that smart of a wrestler, he’d go out of his way to make sure Austin couldn’t get his hands on a weapon by getting rid of them and not trying to introduce them into the match.

It's what he does in a lot of his matches before pulling out an unlikely win.

And it’ll take just about every dirty trick in the book to beat Austin, unfortunately, one can only use the tights or ropes as leverage so many times before their opponent catches on

So, Austin will just be attacking and won't have to deal with Edge's barrage of heelish antics?

About the only thing Edge could do to gain the upper hand quickly would be to use an eye poke or a low blow, and he can only use those so many times before they stop being affective and just start pissing Austin off.

The fact of the matter is this: Austin was popular because he won against all odds against big mean McMahon. The reason that was important was because from losing the title in 1998 to WrestleMania XV, he was getting his arse handed to him on a weekly basis, with the odd minor victory peppered in.

This has nothing to do with the match at hand, seriously it’s only been about 3 years since Edge was solidified into the main event, before that he had been trapped in mid card limbo since the Attitude Era.

Austin became popular because put on matches that people wanted to see, just like Edge became popular because people wanted to see him lose.

This is simple face/ heel physiology here

This is one match against the man who along with Vickie has become the McMahon family of this generation, it stands to reason that while Austin may triumph in the end, he'd lose out here quite decisively.

Then explain to me why Austin’s influence with the audience still resonates to this day? The man still generates massive pops from the fans and crowds that attend WWE shows and PPV’s. The man has reached a Hoganesque level among the WWE Universe in terms of popularity yet doesn’t have nearly the backlash amongst fans that a Hogan or a Rock might have.

I’d expect some people to vote Austin in this match, just out of impact and popularity alone.

Austin was in his prime in late 1998, and it was at that time when he was beaten in an important tournament by being screwed out of it. Edge wins matches by screwjobs, Austin lost a shitload of them by screwjobs, so it stands to reason that Austin would lose here.

And how would Edge expect to screw Austin out of this match? By interference? If anything that would probably lead to Austin winning by DQ.

Would he pay off the referee? Yeah, if that worked, Ted Dibiase would still be in this tournament.

 

[Tastycles]

I never said Austin was at his best as a heel, nor did I imply it. If that's what you got after that video, then you missed my point entirely.

What was your point then if it wasn't that Austin was vicious. He has only displayed this vicious streak as a heel.

Austin ability to beat a helpless and defenseless woman shows what he's capable of doing when he gets a hold of a weapon, my point being that he would not hesitate to do some damage to Edge if he gets the chance.

But that is completely irrelevant. Edge is a former world champion, and Lita is a helpless and defensless woman, by your own admission. I'm sure he wouldn't hesitate to attempt to do the same to Edge, but Edge could fight back quite easily, to be honest, where Lita comes in. I could punch my girlfriend in the face, it doesn't mean I could go apeshit on Mike Tyson.

It's not supposed to be, the core of my argument was that Edge's sadism and knowledge of weapon use would be nullified by Austin's. Both men are very skilled at using the whole ring and their surronding to inflict damage on their opponents

Fair enough, the thing is is that arguments get lost in translation, I appreciate what your trying to say, but where Edge has attacked people known for their resilience when it comes to weaponry, and Austin has savaged a woman, it is clear who has the better credentials.

It’s unnecessary, there’s a reason it’s called taking a risk. If Edge tries to take out Austin with a big spot and it doesn’t work, he’ll be finished. Austin will capitalize on the mistake and Edge won’t be able to recover.

Yup, but my point was that Edge's risks aren't like Jeff Hardy's. He rarely if ever has lost a match by fucking up one, and that says a lot, doesn't it? Wasn't it a risk when Austin chased after McMahon at the Royal Rumble in 1999? He could have stayed and on, but he followed him, and ended up losing and getting beaten up. A mistake that cost him big.

Maybe, but my guess is that he’ll have his hands full trying to fight Austin off. This match won’t be a technical wrestling classic, it’ll be a brawl. I’ve only seen a handful of men trade punches with Austin and actually come out with the advantage. Edge is not one of these men, Edge will have to rely on dirty tactics in order to gain any type of advantage.

That's alright then, because that's exactly what he's done his entire career.

If Edge truly is that smart of a wrestler, he’d go out of his way to make sure Austin couldn’t get his hands on a weapon by getting rid of them and not trying to introduce them into the match.

Probably yes, but if they were introduced, he could more than hold his own.

And it’ll take just about every dirty trick in the book to beat Austin, unfortunately, one can only use the tights or ropes as leverage so many times before their opponent catches on

Really? Austin lost to Foley when the referee didn't count to three for him. One dirty trick, and he lost. I know it was drastic, but I still think it shows that Austin is susceptible to heelish traits moreso than most.

About the only thing Edge could do to gain the upper hand quickly would be to use an eye poke or a low blow, and he can only use those so many times before they stop being affective and just start pissing Austin off.

Yep,eventually his bollocks would magically turn into steel and be unaffected by anything Edge does to them.

This has nothing to do with the match at hand, seriously it’s only been about 3 years since Edge was solidified into the main event, before that he had been trapped in mid card limbo since the Attitude Era.

I seriously don't understand why people can hold this against Edge, but remain fine with Austin, who also took a lot longer to get established. And, Austin's midcard career was emphatically worse than Edge's.

Austin became popular because put on matches that people wanted to see, just like Edge became popular because people wanted to see him lose.

He became popular because he summed up the attitude of the audience. He was having exactly the same matches as The Ringmaster as he was when he was Stone Cold: he even had literally the same feud with Savio Vega over the two characters, but one as popular the other wasn't, it had nothing to do with his matches.

Then explain to me why Austin’s influence with the audience still resonates to this day? The man still generates massive pops from the fans and crowds that attend WWE shows and PPV’s. The man has reached a Hoganesque level among the WWE Universe in terms of popularity yet doesn’t have nearly the backlash amongst fans that a Hogan or a Rock might have.

Nostalgia. The Rock has backlash because he sold out. Hogan doesn't have backlash among the people who were young fans when he was around: that's why the older members on this forum like him loads. I guarantee that on wrestling forums in 10 years 19 year olds will sing the praises of Cena. It's the way it works.

I’d expect some people to vote Austin in this match, just out of impact and popularity alone.

If that's your criteria, I'm notgoing to deny that Austin is the winner, but I don't think it should be. If it was, there's literally no point in having anyone but Hogan in the tournament.

And how would Edge expect to screw Austin out of this match? By interference? If anything that would probably lead to Austin winning by DQ.

Well it's WWE rules. Vickie Guerrero has regularly influenced matches off her brand in that company in Edge's favour. It stands to reason that she'd do it again, doesn't it. Cena is the only guy who's popularity is comparable to Austin, and he's been screwed out of the title by Edge 4 times, The Undertaker's been screwed twice, it stands to reason that Edge could do it to Austin.

You seem to be forgetting that negative interference matters. Mankind won the world title when Austin screwed The Rock. It had nothing to do with his affection for Mick Foley. Edge won the WWE title when Matt hit Jeff. It's not as if Matt likes Edge. Austin has plenty of enemies who would happily help Edge.


One last point. This is addressed to the group as a whole. The tournament is now under basic WWE rules, it says so at the start.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I'm leaning towards Austin, though I suppose it's possible to change my mind.

Nobody can deny what Austin did for the WWF in the second half of the 90s and first few years of the 2000s, even though he really wasn't what he used to be after 2000. Austin could bring it in the ring, but I was more fond of his interview segments than anything else. Austin is a brawler, though he can also wrestle fairly well if he takes a mind to. He's tough, irreverant and never backed down from anyone. Austin does hold victories over some of the best and he's more than capable of beating Edge in nearly any type of match.

A lotta people bash Edge here and I don't really know why. He's one of the best heels going today in my book. And, in my view, Edge is the dirtiest player in the game. Fuck what Ric Flair says. Edge is someone that will do absolutely anything he possibly can to get ahead, even if that means being a man-****e. Edge is a good athlete, all around wrestler and he's proven to be both resilient and resourceful.

In a straight up, one on one fight, Austin would beat Edge. Edge is a better all around athlete than Austin and probably a better wrestler overall. Barring outside interference, or Edge maybe using a conchairto if the ref's been knocked out, I don't really see how Edge can win it. He'll give Austin all he wants, but I just don't see Edge beating Austin without help.

 

[Bernkastel]

What was your point then if it wasn't that Austin was vicious. He has only displayed this vicious streak as a heel.

Really?

[youtube]8DjGsVRPm2g&feature=related[/youtube]

Austin as a face, beating the crap out of Scott Steiner, pretty much because he was bored and wanted something to do.

Notice that he even gives Stacy a stunner, his whole reason for coming out was to stop Steiner from hitting her with a chair. He saves her, then gives her a stunner… because he can.

Austin was one of the first true examples of an Anti hero in WWE, he was a face, but acted like a heel.

But that is completely irrelevant. Edge is a former world champion, and Lita is a helpless and defensless woman, by your own admission. I'm sure he wouldn't hesitate to attempt to do the same to Edge, but Edge could fight back quite easily, to be honest, where Lita comes in. I could punch my girlfriend in the face, it doesn't mean I could go apeshit on Mike Tyson.

Lita isn’t totally helpless and defenseless; she would have at least tried to defend herself had she been 100% prior to being attacked by Austin with a chair. She had just wrestled a match and had been blindsided by HHH, there really wasn’t much she could to stop Austin.

If Edge gets into a brawl with Stone Cold (with will probably be inevitable considering that the majority of Austin’s matches turn out to be fights) and finds himself on the losing end of that brawl then he’ll find himself defenseless.

The only way he’ll be able to turn the momentum back to his favor would be dirty heel tactics.

Fair enough, the thing is is that arguments get lost in translation, I appreciate what your trying to say, but where Edge has attacked people known for their resilience when it comes to weaponry, and Austin has savaged a woman, it is clear who has the better credentials.

And Austin hasn’t? Kane, Undertaker, Mankind, Big Show… all of these men have found themselves on the losing end of a brawl with Stone Cold when the guy gets his hands on a weapon.

You’re acting as if Edge has some sort of 6th sense when it comes to using weapons, he doesn’t. Anyone can grab a chair and use it, and Austin, like Edge, is one of those men that won’t hesitate to use one if he can get ahold of one and use it to his advantage without being disqualified.

Yup, but my point was that Edge's risks aren't like Jeff Hardy's. He rarely if ever has lost a match by fucking up one, and that says a lot, doesn't it? Wasn't it a risk when Austin chased after McMahon at the Royal Rumble in 1999? He could have stayed and on, but he followed him, and ended up losing and getting beaten up. A mistake that cost him big.

There’s a difference between compulsively risking your body to try and win a match (which Edge has been known to do from time to time) and risking your body out of emotion. Austin rarely took risks that he didn’t need to take, about the only time he ever took these risks would be if he hated his opponent so much that he’d risk his own body to try and do more damage to his opponent.

An example of such a risk from Austin in this match would be exposing the concrete floor, which he’d probably do out of frustration. Yeah he’d probably use it to deal some damage to Edge but he’d run the risk of being slammed on it himself.

You’re not going to see Austin try for some fancy move off the top or go jumping over the top rope in this match, those types of moves have a bad tendency to backfire.

Probably yes, but if they were introduced, he could more than hold his own.

But he wouldn’t be able to utilize the weapons any more than Austin could.

Really? Austin lost to Foley when the referee didn't count to three for him. One dirty trick, and he lost. I know it was drastic, but I still think it shows that Austin is susceptible to heelish traits moreso than most.

That’s the fault of the referee though, who’s to say that the referee wouldn’t count for Edge in this match?

I think you’re grasping at straws at this point

Yep,eventually his bollocks would magically turn into steel and be unaffected by anything Edge does to them.

No, but if he had enough adrenaline pumping he’d be able to shake off the pain a lot quicker

I seriously don't understand why people can hold this against Edge, but remain fine with Austin, who also took a lot longer to get established. And, Austin's midcard career was emphatically worse than Edge's.

You’re the one that brought it up first, not me, by saying that since Austin wasn’t the number one star in business in 1998 mean’t that it should somehow hurt him in this match

It doesn’t

He became popular because he summed up the attitude of the audience. He was having exactly the same matches as The Ringmaster as he was when he was Stone Cold: he even had literally the same feud with Savio Vega over the two characters, but one as popular the other wasn't, it had nothing to do with his matches.

It had everything to do with his matches, his matches summed up the character he was trying to play. People got so involved with Austin’s matches, because his matches were the best representation of what the audience wanted to see during that time.

Do you honestly believe that the audience would have cared more about Austin of he had included a bunch of high risk moves and technical wrestling into his matches? No, in fact the audience probably would have cared less about Austin if he had done that.

Nostalgia. The Rock has backlash because he sold out. Hogan doesn't have backlash among the people who were young fans when he was around: that's why the older members on this forum like him loads. I guarantee that on wrestling forums in 10 years 19 year olds will sing the praises of Cena. It's the way it works.

Exactly, and it’s that nostalgia that will keep Austin insanely popular come years and years from now.

If that's your criteria, I'm notgoing to deny that Austin is the winner, but I don't think it should be. If it was, there's literally no point in having anyone but Hogan in the tournament.

It’s not my criteria, I merely said that some people (keyword being some) will vote for Austin based on his popularity and impact. But you’ve got to realize this and prepare for it, same with guys like The Rock, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Undertaker, and Hulk Hogan.

In tournaments like this, you can work to pursway some people but you can’t pursway everyone.

Well it's WWE rules. Vickie Guerrero has regularly influenced matches off her brand in that company in Edge's favour. It stands to reason that she'd do it again, doesn't it.

Oh well that makes tons of sense, let’s just go ahead and declare Edge the tournament champion because Vicky Guerrero will just screw over all of Edge’s opponents

You seem to be forgetting that negative interference matters. Mankind won the world title when Austin screwed The Rock. It had nothing to do with his affection for Mick Foley. Edge won the WWE title when Matt hit Jeff. It's not as if Matt likes Edge. Austin has plenty of enemies who would happily help Edge.

And vice versa

 

[Shocky]

Jeez, the poor attempts at trying to completely discredit austin and the level of competition he faced, and trying to put today's talent on an undeserving pedestal is pretty damn crazy. This era sucks. There is no dominant champion because there is no dominant wrestler. It has nothing to do with the level of competition, its that not one wrestler today is good enough to hang onto titles.

Again, it simply comes down to Steve Austin and the way he won his titles. Everythign Austin did in his career was against the grain, and against the sytem. Austin didn't work within anyones silly little System. Edge has made a career of pickign his spots, and being successful because he had the pull to be able to spring up at anywher. The problem is, when Edge is faced face to face with his opponent, he loses. Yes, you can be a 9 time champion in 3 years, but that also means you lose, and lose a lot, in a short period of time. Austin has had multiple lengthy title reigns, Edge's longest title reign is 4 months surrounded by multiple 3 week title reigns.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Okay, here we go, everyone has been awaiting the Will post. I'll try and take a crack at a debate with ya here.

First of all, I strongly disagree about how "controversial" Edge is. How is he controversial? Because he stole Matt Hardy's girlfriend? The whole wedding thing? Unless I'm missing something huge here, those two events hardly qualify him as "one of the most controversial superstars the industry has ever seen". Controversy is more along the lines of your Gorgeous George's and your Goldust's. Edge hardly qualifies on that level. He never had people forming mobs to physically harm Adam Copeland in real life.

So, wait.. controversy to you is acting gay? That's not controversial, that's just homophobic. And Edge is one of the most controversial Wrestlers of this era, and any other.

You need proof though, so here we go.

Yes, it begins with fucking his friend's girlfriend, and the fans reading the internet and more or less making Edge one of the most hated (real life hate) individuals in Professional Wrestling. It furthers with Adam Copeland (as Edge) practically shooting a soft-core porno on a LIVE addition of Monday night Raw, that included a nipple shot from Amy Dumas under the covers, indicating that clearly in some aspects what they were doing was more real that people ever thought. Let's not even forget the man walking around with half wood, in his underwear.

But if that isn't enough for you, you take controversy and double time it by taking a grieving widow of a Hall of Famer - then shocking the world, but making out with her several times on Smackdown, only to MARRY her through storyline and make people not just hate him more, but grow to make Vickie Guerrero one of the most despised female's in Wrestling history, ever.

His "Live Sex Celebration" also happened to be the highest rated show Raw had ever done in several years.. all because of his controversial acts. So, yeah, I'd say he's at least a bit more controversial than a couple fruit-cakes prancing around in Women's lingerie and brushing their golden blonde locks out.

Secondly, Edge's is hardly one of the most attitude-filled superstars ever. What attitude? The common heel tactics he uses? He's a great heel for sure, but hardly one of the best. And as a face he's as bland as it comes. He's got some attitude, sure, but compared to Austin he's practically the Brooklyn Brawler.

He wouldn't be a face in this contest. Even as a heel, Austin was horrible. (Using the Slyfox method of debating here) Austin received massive cheers from the audience, because they had bloodlust. Austin did everything in the book to receive boos, and never accomplished his goal. Edge has. Thus, Edge is a better heel than Austin ever was.

As for attitude filled, what's Austin done? Drank beer and poured the rest on victims? Destroyed tons of machinery with various vehicles? Cussed? Said "What" a lot? Oh, wait.. he ran in and stunned people. Yep, hitting your finisher on a ring full of people is definitely attitude.

Someone showed a video of Austin hitting the Hardys and Lita with a chair. So he has a vicious streak against lesser talented individuals and women. Edge speared Tommy Dreamer's real life Wife, in the match at One Night Stand, then proceeded to pin her by dry humping the fuck outta her. Thats not just a piece of attitude, but also contributes more to controversy.

As for Edge's attitude, you're talking about the guy who bloodied Ric Flair on multiple occasions, slapped and beat-up John Cena and his Father, laid Cena, Taker, Triple H, and various other major stars, out.

Anything Austin's done, Edge has countered - except for driving various vehicles, swearing and drinking beer. THANKFULLY - this match isn't being (or shouldn't be) rewarded for any of those things.

And thirdly, I highly doubt the Edge of today would even be a one time world champion in the Attitude era, let alone defeating Austin constantly. In fact, that defies all logic. Why would Vince put Edge over the most popular wrestler on the planet even once, let alone several times?

The Attitude era was filled with more deserving champions; The Rock, The Undertaker, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Mankind. Among guys like that, plus Austin, there wouldn't be very much room for a guy like Edge. Even at his absolute prime both in the ring and being over with fans, he wouldn't be a top tier guy in that era.

Bret Hart was barely involved in the Austin era. And when he was, Hart owned Austin more than Austin owned Hart. Shawn Michaels barely (if even) feuded with Steve Austin, and it culminated in a crippled man with a very broken back, giving the Championship to Austin at Wrestlemania.

While I can't argue that even if Shawn would've been healthy and stayed in the business that he wouldn't of still lost to Austin.. the fact is, you can't use Shawn as an argument for the Attitude era, because he barely had anything to do with Austin during Austin's greatest moments.

So, this leaves us with the Undertaker, (whom Edge has won Championships from) Mick Foley, (whom Edge has defeated in his element) Kane, (whom Edge has defeated) Triple H, (whom Edge has won a Championship from) and then Bret Hart and the Rock, whom Edge has never had the opportunity to face in his prime.

Albeit, (while I'm unsure to be honest) I believe Edge, as one-half of the Tag Team Champions.. has pinned and defeated the Rock, when he teamed with the Undertaker, back in 2000 to gain another Tag team title reign.

The overall point I'm getting at is, Edge would've been a Champion, because he would've been one of the most over heels. (not withstanding the Rock, and his NoD/Corp run)

I respect Edge very much and he's one of my absolute favorite current workers, but he's just not ever going to be on Austin's level. Austin made wrestling cool. Edge, while having a great legacy, is not going to be remembered on the same level as guys like Hogan or Austin.

Why would you figure that to be though? Because back then, guys like Hogan & Austin pulled their Company through a time when the N.W.A & W.C.W was competing hard against the W.W.F? Or because Hogan fell into Hulkamania, and Austin fell into a bible verse?

Look, I despise Hogan about more than anyone. But I actually don't mind Austin. However, the tireless argument that "He made the Company great during that period" is getting worn out and worthless.

I'm NOT arguing that Austin did or didn't make the business different and even better. But that doesn't prove or mean he'll win here, or any other time.

Austin's lost to countless individuals, ranging from jobbers, to mid-carders, to main eventers. So overall, I could honestly care less if the guy single handedly carried the Company out of bankrupcy, as it shouldn't matter in a kayfabe tournament match-up, arguing who the better WRESTLER is. (which even the Austin supporters, are mostly and mainly saying Edge is, mind you)

First of all I think you're underrating Rocky's in-ring skills. He is not as bad as people seem to claim he is. He had several classic matches during the Attitude era, and even more during the last year or two of his career.

The Rock wasn't some clumsy mess in the ring or something, just because he padded out his moveset with a few fluff moves like the People's Elbow doesn't mean he wasn't a good worker. But this debate isn't about the Rock.

For argument sake, because Rock truly shouldn't be apart of this - I'll believe you. (but for future reference, incase I go against the Rock at some point, I'm definitely going to need video proof of Rock being a credible Wrestler, and not just a nice promo cutter)

...Maybe I'm just a bit groggy from waking up, but did you just say that Edge was way above the Rock in terms of mic-skills? Because that's just ridiculious. Edge is above average at best on the microphone. How many Edge promos are going to be remembered in 20 years? None.

No, you're groggy from waking up. I'd NEVER compare Edge's mic-skills, to being better than Rock's. Rock made his name off his mic-skills, Edge couldn't top that.

Albeit, as for the lesser half of your argument, I'm sure I could find several promos that were famous for Edge. Be then aggressive, comedic, or personal.

Foley was more often a face then a heel during the Attitude era, so we can probably discount him.

If I were supporting Austin, I wouldn't if I were you. Foley helped prove Austin was more hardcore than people wanted to give him credit for. Austin took more punishment from Foley, when before that - the most Austin ever did was lose more matches than he ever won in E.C.W, and cut promos.

Austin wasn't even remotely vicious, or hardcore/violent, until he started fighting Dude Love/Mankind.

What? When was Dude Love ever the top opposition to Steve Austin? If you're counting the all of about one month or so during April-May 1998 then that barely counts. The only reason Dude Love was facing Austin was because he had McMahon in his corner. That was much more of an extension of the Austin-McMahon feud then it was Foley-Austin.

So wait, are you discounting Foley being a worthy opponent? Austin wouldn't of defeated Dude Love, if it wasn't for accidental help from the McMahon's. Foley had each match won, but was screwed over accidentally by a McMahon missing Austin, and hitting Love. So to say Love wasn't a worthy opponent, isn't just discounting Foley, it's majorly discounting Austin.

Funny how you've cherry-picked two of his worst feuds as though they were his most memorable or important. Everyone knows his feud with The Rock was one of the greatest of all time, better then any feud Edge has ever taken part in.

And I'm not trying to cherry pick anything. I single handedly went through Austin's entire first four title reigns. But just for purpose sake, because I did some research on this.. it's also become known that Steve Austin has only had ONE Championship reign last longer than 3 and a half months. And that came long after the Attitude era, during the InVasion angle.

While that's not saying Edge has had any better luck in his reigns. (which he has NOT) The argument proves that Austin isn't any better than Edge, when defending his title in big match situations.

And once again, Austin's defended, defeated and lost, to the likes of; The Rock, The Undertaker, Dude Love/Mankind, Kane, Triple H, & Mr. McMahon. During the attitude era.

Edge has defeated, defended and lost to the likes of; The Undertaker, John Cena, Triple H, Mick Foley, Kane, Rey Mysterio, the Hardys, The Big Show, Randy Orton & others.

You and others continue to support claims that the Attitude Era was better and filled with more competition, but I think you have it backwards.

A month-long feud with Dude Love (which was really all about McMahon) and a short feud with Kane (which was really all about setting up Undertaker vs. Austin for Summerslam) hardly qualify as two of his most praised feuds.

They were the only two feuds he had, in which he was ever truly dominate. So taking both away, proves that Austin isn't dominate, or victorious more times than he loses.

He's lost to the Undertaker more than won. If not, its been about even. (arguably) He's defeated the Rock, twice, for Heavyweight titles and I will give him that the Rock was his greatest rival.

But even on that, are you honestly going to sit there and tell me Edge, a better technical Wrestler (who's taken Angle, Benoit and others to their limits and won) wouldn't be as good as a guy, who's claim to fame was catch-phrases, and an elbow drop?

Rock's first title loss to Austin at Wrestlemania XV was arguably not even remotely debatable. No one felt Rock deserved to headline Mania, much like no one felt Edge deserved to be Champion over Cena, in 2006.

And it's also spread that talent thin through three shows and introduced two more World titles into the mix. Logically, if there are 3 World titles to win, then that makes it easier to win a World title now then it was in the Attitude era when there was only one title. Basic mathematics and probability here.

Okay, but look at the level of competition on each brand, when Edge WON those Championships.

2006: Defeated John Cena, with guys like Kurt Angle, Shawn Michaels, Randy Orton, Kane, Ric Flair, the Big Show, Rob Van Dam & Triple H all on the Raw roster.

2007: Defeated Undertaker, with guys like Chris Benoit, M.V.P, the Great Khali, Mr. Kennedy, Kane, Batista, & the Hardys all on the Smackdown roster.

So I'd hardly say he won the Championship with a piss-poor undercard of Superstars on either brand. And thats not even counting his 2008, or 09 title reigns in which he's won the title with even more names added to each list.

You forgot Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels.

Once again, I never forgot them.. I was helping Austin by not mentioning them.

Bret Hart defeated and tore Austin a new ass on countless encounters, including their Submission match at Wrestlemania 13 - in which Austin (the supposed toughest S.O.B) lost and couldn't even bloody Hart, whereas Hart tore Austin a new ass, busting him open, and applying so much pressure, it caused Austin to pass out.

As for Michaels, do you really want to argue that Austin beat someone credible? The guy had a broken fucking back, and still only lost because of a missed Superkick, and a very fast count by Mike Tyson - a guy that after the match was over, punched out H.B.K and put on an Austin shirt. (how odd)

And I'm also not sure about how Rock's tweener status makes him a less worthy opponent. In fact you haven't really explained why any of these guys weren't worthy opponents, instead you've made jokes about their gimmicks.

I don't think I've ever indicated the Rock wasn't an unworthy opponent. However, one guy doesn't equal the amount of talent Edge has dealt with and faced on a SPLIT brand.

Which proves that in the late 90's, the roster was pure shit with the exception of a handful of names. Whereas in this current situation with the brand split, each and every brand has a plethora of talent.

Again you're bringing up Edge as though he were on the same level as Austin and the Rock in terms of charisma. He's just not man, maybe in your mind he is, but to the majority of other fans he's good, and not legendary.

What makes Austin and Rock legendary? And how does any of that factor into who wins this (Wrestling) match?

Seriously, give me some great "attitude-filled" promo of Edge's that tops Rock or Austin.

Anything from the Matt Hardy, John Cena, or late Undertaker feuds.

Did Edge ever break his neck during a match and still manage to both win the match and get up from it?

Edge has broken his neck, yes. I assume it was also during a match. It took place around 2002, when Edge was set to team with Benoit & Lesnar to take on Team Angle. So it's entirely possible Edge did finish the match, and further more - won it.

Plus, I think it's a HUGE bit if you're really trying to tell me Austin won a match with a broken neck, but making it sound like he actually got up and did something.

Let's re-run that match. Owen breaks Austin's neck. Austin doesn't move. Owen taunts over Austin, then slowly stumbles over Austin, and lays there while Austin puts all his effort into making it seem like he'd just shockingly rolled Owen up.

HARDLY what I'd consider a huge comeback with a broken neck. It just actually shows you how fake and corny Wrestling was at that time, to stay with the same finish, instead of knowing something serious had happened - and Austin likely wasn't going to be capable of defending his title, to last second change the finish to having Owen win. (which, mind you, they gave the title right back to Owen, ANYWAYS)

Check again Will, this takes place in the ECW Region, meaning it's "extreme rules". So brawling will likely be a huge factor.

Uhm, No, it doesn't.

THIS MATCH IS CONTESTED UNDER REGULAR RULES!!! CHECK THE OPENING POST BY SHOCKY!

Sorry, xfear, that wasn't an aggressive statement meant to go toward you, just in general - as I've seen both Edge AND Austin supporters thinking this match is a gimmick match, or contested under hardcore rules. ITS NOT.

That's great if this was a technical match. It isn't. It's extreme rules. Honestly you could make some great arguments for Edge being better in a hardcore environment, but the technical argument doesn't really apply here. So I'm not going to respond to your next few paragraphs because they're all explanations of why Austin needs to cheat to win, when in this match everything is legal. So your argument, while great, is irrelevent here.

THANK YOU! You just single handedly with those two lines, more or less voiced that even you would think Edge would stand a much better chance in a single's match where technical ability would come into play.

MAN your post is huge Will. I'm sorry that I didn't respond to all of it, but this post is already fucking massive so if you want to respond with some basic cliff notes of what other argument you made, feel free to do so. I apologize but man this post is huge. Don't hold it against me dude, I'm not trying to ignore any points you made.

X, you're (to my knowledge) the only person with enough balls to even attempt replying to me.

I'm sorry my huge post has frightened and scared so many other Austin fans. I guess most of what I've said is just so true, that no one (besides you, X) wants to argue or dispute it.

Also, seriously, if ANYONE wants a quick rundown of what I've said.. here you go. I put that entire post in segments, highlighted by BOLDED WORDS making out each section. If the entire thing scares people, break it down and debate it one section at a time. I won't mind.

Thus far, the biggest Austin argument I've seen is; He's a HoF'er who has Vince's support and helped the Company by being the top guy in 97-98. Two years.. wow, another Lesnar like streak. And then what?

So in conclusion, we’ve figured out that Steve Austin might be a better Brawler, but that isn’t to say Edge couldn’t take the punishment from a couple fists and stomps. We’ve discovered that Edge wouldn’t just wrestle circles around Austin, he’d straight up defeat him if the match stayed pure Wrestling. We’ve learned that the Stunner is a nice finisher to have, if you can ever hit it, but turning your back to an opponent who looks for every advantage possible to win, is arguably the worst thing you can do. We’ve learned that accolade’s and accomplishments for selling more t-shirts WON’T WIN YOU A WRESTLING MATCH! And we’ve learned that over the course of 3 years, each.. Edge has come to defeat a vastly bigger group of Main Event level contenders and Superstars, than the W.W.F (at the time) even considered carrying during the Attitude Era.

So everyone, I give you everything you need to know, to start with, on why Edge is not just the prime option and choice to vote for.. But realistically, the ONLY choice to vote for.

VOTE EDGE!​

 

[X]

So, wait.. controversy to you is acting gay? That's not controversial, that's just homophobic. And Edge is one of the most controversial Wrestlers of this era, and any other.

Don't try and turn this into some homophobic thing, are you honestly going to sit here and argue with me that Goldust and Gorgeous George acting gay wasn't controversial? Wrestling fans tend to be very homophobic, and those two guys were extremely controversial.

Edge, controversial....just no. He's about as controversial as a dry fart.

You need proof though, so here we go.

Yes, it begins with fucking his friend's girlfriend, and the fans reading the internet and more or less making Edge one of the most hated (real life hate) individuals in Professional Wrestling.

A) The majority of wrestling fans at the time had no idea about the real life situation. The majority of wrestling fans are not the IWC guys like us, remember. And one of the most hated? Really? How? Where were the mobs forming to kick his ass outside of the shows? There was some controversy there obviously, but to rank it among the most controversial is absurd when 99% of wrestling fans have already forgotten about it.

It furthers with Adam Copeland (as Edge) practically shooting a soft-core porno on a LIVE addition of Monday night Raw, that included a nipple shot from Amy Dumas under the covers, indicating that clearly in some aspects what they were doing was more real that people ever thought. Let's not even forget the man walking around with half wood, in his underwear.

Sex? SEX is controversial in wrestling?! What are you talking about? Sexuality has been a staple of wrestling for YEARS. I suppose The Kat is one of the most controversial wrestlers of all time because she full on showed her tits at Armageddon 1999 then? Sex and wrestling go hand in hand, hardly controversial. Serious emphasis on the word "softcore". I've seen harder stuff in kid's movies. And the nip-slip was barely visible and wasn't intentional.

But if that isn't enough for you

It's not and I can't believe that it could be for you. Controversial, sure, but one of the ALL TIME most controversial wrestlers? No fucking way. C'mon you're smarter then that Will.

you take controversy and double time it by taking a grieving widow of a Hall of Famer - then shocking the world, but making out with her several times on Smackdown, only to MARRY her through storyline and make people not just hate him more, but grow to make Vickie Guerrero one of the most despised female's in Wrestling history, ever.

A) "Shocking the world"? That was really not very shocking, it was just another heel tactic. For something to be TRULY shocking and TRULY controversial it would have to transcend kayfabe. That storyline didn't. People weren't trying to take shots at Adam Copeland on the street for marrying Vickie. Most people didn't give a shit.

B) Vickie Guerrero isn't despised for marrying Edge. Vickie Guerrero is despised for being one of the most naturally annoying people in the history of the WWE. People hate her because they just don't like her, not because she's soiling her husband's image or something.

His "Live Sex Celebration" also happened to be the highest rated show Raw had ever done in several years.. all because of his controversial acts.

Again, sex is hardly controversial in the WWE and has in fact been a staple of WWE programming for well over a decade now. Not sure why ratings would matter here.

So, yeah, I'd say he's at least a bit more controversial than a couple fruit-cakes prancing around in Women's lingerie and brushing their golden blonde locks out.

Then you clearly need to be brushed up on wrestling history. Gorgeous George was one of the most hated and controversial figures in wrestling history, the man was literally physically attacked by fans on the street on several occasions because of his wrestling persona. Acting effeminate at the time in a manly-man's sport like wrestling was extremely taboo, and he shattered that taboo. He was probably the most hated man in the history of wrestling. The Goldust character was mentioned mainly because he just repackaged that same gimmick.

But seriously Will, you know I got tons of respect for you, but how can you possibly content that Edge is more controversial then Gorgeous George was? That kind of, well, ridiculious.

He wouldn't be a face in this contest. Even as a heel, Austin was horrible. (Using the Slyfox method of debating here) Austin received massive cheers from the audience, because they had bloodlust. Austin did everything in the book to receive boos, and never accomplished his goal. Edge has. Thus, Edge is a better heel than Austin ever was.

To quote the man in question himself, "What?!" Aren't you forgetting about his heel turn during 2001? Obviously at first he was still getting cheered after he turned, but within a good month, two monthes the cheers had seriously subsided. Besides, after being the most popular wrestler and most exposed wrestler on the planet for nearly 3 years there was no possible way he could possibly have not been cheered at all, not if he was the best darned heel to ever grace wrestling. Every massively popular face who turns heel is going to continue to be cheered man.

But that's besides the point because Austin made a great heel in 2001, especially during the Invasion angle. Depsite all the heat that angle gets from the IWC, you can't argue he was the most hated man in WWE by the fans at that time. His feud with Angle was great and he showed himself to be a very capable heel. I do however hate the fact that he produced the slogan "What?!" because that now will be chanted for the next 20 years by wrestling fans. Though maybe that's not such a bad thing since it's another clear indicator of his legacy. No one's going to remember an Edge slogan in 20 years.

As for attitude filled, what's Austin done? Drank beer and poured the rest on victims? Destroyed tons of machinery with various vehicles? Cussed? Said "What" a lot? Oh, wait.. he ran in and stunned people. Yep, hitting your finisher on a ring full of people is definitely attitude.

at·ti·tude (t-td, -tyd)
n.
1. A position of the body or manner of carrying oneself: stood in a graceful attitude. See Synonyms at posture.
2.
a. A state of mind or a feeling; disposition: had a positive attitude about work.
b. An arrogant or hostile state of mind or disposition

Are you really going to argue Austin didn't have an arrogant and hostile disposition? Edge has some attitude, don't get me wrong, he's a very good heel. But on an aesthetic level, Austin is far more intimidating and hostile. Edge looks like the kind of guy you have a beer with and talk about music. Austin looks like the kind of guy that would bash a barstool into your face if you looked at him the wrong way.

I'm rather shocked that you guys arguing for Edge are trying to use attitude/charisma as an argument in favor of Edge. Edge has never had millions of people eating up his every word out of the palm of his hand.

You want some controversy? How about the Pillman angle featuring the gun? To my knowledge a gun hasn't been used before or since in a wrestling storyline like that. That beats out any bra and panties show Edge had with Lita.

Edge speared Tommy Dreamer's real life Wife, in the match at One Night Stand, then proceeded to pin her by dry humping the fuck outta her. Thats not just a piece of attitude, but also contributes more to controversy.

That's hardly controversial. ECW was doing things ten times as risque during it's heyday. People forgot about the little humping within a week.

As for Edge's attitude, you're talking about the guy who bloodied Ric Flair on multiple occasions

Making someone bleed takes attitude? We all know Flair's head flap busts open with the crimson every time he gets a drop toe hold, not exactly a difficult thing to do.

slapped and beat-up John Cena and his Father

Beating up your opponent's family is a staple of the heel playbook man.

laid Cena, Taker, Triple H, and various other major stars, out.

Not sure how defeating someone takes attitude. He's taken many stars out, yeah, for sure. So has Austin.

Anything Austin's done, Edge has countered

How? What has Edge countered Austin in within the attitude department? If you're answer is the points you've brought up in the last few paragraphs that I've already addressed, then I disagree.

Bret Hart was barely involved in the Austin era.

When do you call the start of the Attitude era? Just curious, because it's generally considered that mid-1997 is the beginning of the Attitude era, and that the jumping off point may have been the match between Hart and Austin at Wrestlemania 13. Sure Hart was gone by November, but he was still around.

And when he was, Hart owned Austin more than Austin owned Hart. Shawn Michaels barely (if even) feuded with Steve Austin, and it culminated in a crippled man with a very broken back, giving the Championship to Austin at Wrestlemania.

I wasn't stating that Austin had great feuds or came out on top of them with those guys, the only thing I said was that if Edge had hypothetically been in the Attitude Era, HBK & Hart were among others that would be more deserving of the title then Edge would be.

While I can't argue that even if Shawn would've been healthy and stayed in the business that he wouldn't of still lost to Austin.. the fact is, you can't use Shawn as an argument for the Attitude era, because he barely had anything to do with Austin during Austin's greatest moments.

Again, you've misinterpreted what I said. In the part of my post you're responding to now, I was not even talking about Austin. We were talking about the hypothetical situation of Edge being a more deserving champion in the Attitude era, and both HBK and Hart were around for the beginning of the Attitude era when Austin began rising to the top.

So, this leaves us with the Undertaker, (whom Edge has won Championships from) Mick Foley, (whom Edge has defeated in his element) Kane, (whom Edge has defeated) Triple H, (whom Edge has won a Championship from) and then Bret Hart and the Rock, whom Edge has never had the opportunity to face in his prime.

I never mentioned Kane first off because his title "reign" was a joke and he never should have gotten the belt in the first place. But the other men that you include here that I did mention would all be more deserving of holding the WWE title then Edge would be at that time. You brought up the hypothetical scenario man, I'm just going on what you said. Look at how crowded that main event scene is already, and especially the surplus of top heels at the time. Edge wouldn't be the top heel in the company and he wouldn't be holding the belt either.

The overall point I'm getting at is, Edge would've been a Champion, because he would've been one of the most over heels. (not withstanding the Rock, and his NoD/Corp run)

Like I've said, Edge is a great heel. But there are guys that are just higher up on the food chain then he is. Say we were to transport the present day Edge to May of 1999. He would be the third biggest heel in the company, behind the Undertaker and Mr. McMahon. You can debate this if you want, but it's hard to argue. As good of a heel as Edge is, he just doesn't anger the fans in the way a guy like Vince can.

For Edge to have been champion in 1999, who would he have feuded with? Austin? Not a chance in hell, he was already busy with the Rock, Taker and McMahon.

If Edge were to win the title in that era it would've been an extremely short reign, as in a win the title at a PPV and lose it immediately the next night kind of deal. He would most certainly not be main eventing nearly every single PPV.

Why would you figure that to be though? Because back then, guys like Hogan & Austin pulled their Company through a time when the N.W.A & W.C.W was competing hard against the W.W.F? Or because Hogan fell into Hulkamania, and Austin fell into a bible verse?

To be honest you've worded this rather strangely and I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to ask me here. Why I don't think Edge will be remembered like a Hogan or Austin?

It's a lot simpler then you're trying to make it. Austin and Hogan weren't just wrestling stars, they were national celebrities. People who knew absolutely NOTHING about wrestling knew who they were. You ask some random non-wrestling fan who Edge is and they'll have no idea.

Look, I despise Hogan about more than anyone. But I actually don't mind Austin. However, the tireless argument that "He made the Company great during that period" is getting worn out and worthless.

I'm not trying at all to state that Austin was the sole reason for the Attitude era's sucess, that'd be unfair to all of the guys who busted their asses during that time. Hope I wasn't trying to give you that impression.

I'm NOT arguing that Austin did or didn't make the business different and even better. But that doesn't prove or mean he'll win here, or any other time.

It all depends on what your judging criteria is Will. But most if not everyone here takes impact on the business into consideration when voting.

Austin's lost to countless individuals, ranging from jobbers, to mid-carders, to main eventers. So overall, I could honestly care less if the guy single handedly carried the Company out of bankrupcy, as it shouldn't matter in a kayfabe tournament match-up, arguing who the better WRESTLER is. (which even the Austin supporters, are mostly and mainly saying Edge is, mind you)

A) Most of those losses occured during his first year in the WWF. People seem to forget that Austin defeated several top guys during his time in WCW, Ricky Steamboat among them. Edge on the other hand spent atleast his first year and a half or so as a jobber. Not sure why length of time spent as a jobber should be used to judge here.

B) This isn't a kayfabe tournament. The rules make no mention of any such thing, and are infact stated to be left up to each voter's discretion. But I understand you need to take a heavy dose of kayfabe into account to justly judge these contests. But if you're judging it as a totally kayfabe tournament, then your technical arguments go right out the window because this isn't a shoot wrestling match, it's a "Who would more likely go over in this situation?" tournament. That doesn't exactly signal a tournament to pick the best overall wrestler if you ask me.

C) As for who the better wrestler is, again, very subjective. Austin in his Hollywood Blondes days is pretty much on the same level as Edge in terms of technical wrestling ability. Personally I prefer Austin in that contest, but I could see how you could side with Edge. Nothing we can really debate here, you believe he's more talented in the ring, I believe Austin is. Can't exactly prove one of us wrong.

Albeit, as for the lesser half of your argument, I'm sure I could find several promos that were famous for Edge. Be then aggressive, comedic, or personal.

You know, I just realized that I really look like an Edge hater here. Not true, I love Edge. I grew up with his promos with Christian, and was more invested in their eventual feud then any other at the time. The promos they used to cut in 2000 with the photo poses and everything are classic.

I don't think they're on the level of guys like Austin and Rock, but he's great.

If I were supporting Austin, I wouldn't if I were you. Foley helped prove Austin was more hardcore than people wanted to give him credit for. Austin took more punishment from Foley, when before that - the most Austin ever did was lose more matches than he ever won in E.C.W, and cut promos.

I didn't mean discount him from the argument, but discount him from the list of heels that you brought up. Wasn't trying to diminish Foley's role in the era.

Austin wasn't even remotely vicious, or hardcore/violent, until he started fighting Dude Love/Mankind.

He wasn't violent? What about the submission match with Bret? What about the fact that he would attack random innocent people every Monday night? That was well before the Dude Love feud.

And I'm not trying to cherry pick anything. I single handedly went through Austin's entire first four title reigns.

What? No you didn't. You brought up Dude Love and Kane as examples and that was it. You failed to mention HBK or the Rock.

But just for purpose sake, because I did some research on this.. it's also become known that Steve Austin has only had ONE Championship reign last longer than 3 and a half months. And that came long after the Attitude era, during the InVasion angle.

While that's not saying Edge has had any better luck in his reigns. (which he has NOT) The argument proves that Austin isn't any better than Edge, when defending his title in big match situations.

But again, he one that title in a time when it was harder to become a champion. Again, this you can't really argue with me about, because it's mathematics. The probability of winning something is greatly increased when you multiply it by three. I realize Austin hasn't had many long reigns, but his reigns were during one of wrestling's most popular era's, compared to the significant drop in popularity over the last seven or so years.

And once again, Austin's defended, defeated and lost, to the likes of; The Rock, The Undertaker, Dude Love/Mankind, Kane, Triple H, & Mr. McMahon. During the attitude era.

Edge has defeated, defended and lost to the likes of; The Undertaker, John Cena, Triple H, Mick Foley, Kane, Rey Mysterio, the Hardys, The Big Show, Randy Orton & others.

You and others continue to support claims that the Attitude Era was better and filled with more competition, but I think you have it backwards.

The mistake in your logic here is that you're judging the quality of Edge's opponents on their technical skills, and not their popularity. Unless you're seriously judging this tournament as a tournament of REAL shoot fights and not professional wrestling matches, then their technical skills of his opponents are irrelevent. The fact of the matter is that there were atleast three if not more clearly superior choices who would be Champ if Edge was hypothetically in the Attitude era. Austin, Rock and Undertaker all would be champion before Edge would.

But even on that, are you honestly going to sit there and tell me Edge, a better technical Wrestler (who's taken Angle, Benoit and others to their limits and won) wouldn't be as good as a guy, who's claim to fame was catch-phrases, and an elbow drop?

See, I don't get this logic you're using here when referring to Edge being a more likely champion then those names if he were in the Attitude era. We are still talking about professional wrestling right? The kind that has predetermined finishes and is booked to appeal to the audience? Bottom line, if Edge was at the top of his game in 1999, he'd still be fourth, maybe third if you want to claim he's better then 'Taker in line for the title.

Okay, but look at the level of competition on each brand, when Edge WON those Championships.

2006: Defeated John Cena, with guys like Kurt Angle, Shawn Michaels, Randy Orton, Kane, Ric Flair, the Big Show, Rob Van Dam & Triple H all on the Raw roster.

2007: Defeated Undertaker, with guys like Chris Benoit, M.V.P, the Great Khali, Mr. Kennedy, Kane, Batista, & the Hardys all on the Smackdown roster.

So I'd hardly say he won the Championship with a piss-poor undercard of Superstars on either brand. And thats not even counting his 2008, or 09 title reigns in which he's won the title with even more names added to each list.[/quote]

Again, you can't argue mathematics. It is statistically easier to win a world title now then in 1999. You can't argue this.

Uhm, No, it doesn't.

THIS MATCH IS CONTESTED UNDER REGULAR RULES!!! CHECK THE OPENING POST BY SHOCKY!

Sorry, xfear, that wasn't an aggressive statement meant to go toward you, just in general - as I've seen both Edge AND Austin supporters thinking this match is a gimmick match, or contested under hardcore rules. ITS NOT.

Excuse me I have been corrected. I saw that this match was the finals of the ECW region and I went and looked at the ECW region's rules, which stated it was extreme rules so my mistake. I figured those same rules would apply for the finals of that round, but I guess not. I quite honestly don't understand why they don't, shouldn't they?

THANK YOU! You just single handedly with those two lines, more or less voiced that even you would think Edge would stand a much better chance in a single's match where technical ability would come into play.

Just because it's not extreme rules doesn't mean the match still wouldn't turn into a brawl. The majority of Austin's matches always devolve into a brawl at some point, and thats when he takes over and capitalizes.

X, you're (to my knowledge) the only person with enough balls to even attempt replying to me.

I'm sorry my huge post has frightened and scared so many other Austin fans. I guess most of what I've said is just so true, that no one (besides you, X) wants to argue or dispute it.

Also, seriously, if ANYONE wants a quick rundown of what I've said.. here you go. I put that entire post in segments, highlighted by BOLDED WORDS making out each section. If the entire thing scares people, break it down and debate it one section at a time. I won't mind.

Thus far, the biggest Austin argument I've seen is; He's a HoF'er who has Vince's support and helped the Company by being the top guy in 97-98. Two years.. wow, another Lesnar like streak. And then what?

ROFL on the Lesnar comment, I for one could not believe the support he got in this tournament. But you can't dismiss Austin's decade of great matches as a 2 year fluke or something.

I truly am sorry I didn't address everything you said in that last post, and honestly I didn't again here. That's a huge compliment to your posting skills though if you think about, that it was so massive and comprehensize that I couldn't physically bring myself to take the time to go through every one of them.

PHEW! Now...for the love of God man, make your response short! It just took me about an hour and a half to completely write that up (granted I took a break to watch a 10 minute webisode).

Man I wish I had been around for the start of the tourny.

 

[klunderbunker]

Ok, so we're talking about the ratings now? Alright. Edge's live sex celebration (which has to be the most overrated thing I've ever heard of, having just watched it less than 5 minutes ago), got a 4.3 in the ratings. Let's compare this to Austin's time on top since ratings are what matters now. We'll go with the time beginning the night after Austin won the title for the first time and officially became the face of the company to the Raw before he was run over at Survivor Series 99. This is a total of 81 Raws that we're considering. In those 81, 8, or about 10% were lower than Edge's, and considering this was with competition coming against it, that's even more dominant. Edge never once has carried a company in the ratings. To even try to say that he's as contraversial, attention grabbing or influential to the company as Austin ever was is absurd.

Austin > Edge in everything by a mile.

 

[Tastycles]

As we stare down the long road of ratings, I want to bring up a point here. Edge wrestles in a time when ratings aren't as high. Here's the facts:

Edge's segment registered 5.2, that's huge. In fact, it was the first time Raw went over 5 for almost 4 years. That is impact, by a controversial segment, and there is literally no way to refute that. The ratings for the rest of the show were lower, it was completely down to Edge.

When Steve Austin stopped being on Raw for 9 months, the ratings stayed constant. Now, I'm not saying he was less of a ratings draw than Edge, because I don't think that is true, but what I will say is that Austin's effect on the ratings is exaggerated, this much is true, and Edge was capable of making an impact with controversial acts, the facts speak for themselves.

 

[justinsayne]

So Edge knows how to use his dick and he's more controversial than Austin?!? please, that's the most absurd thing I have ever heard, I won't deny that Edge is mildly controversial, but that's it, just MILDLY, the Live sex celebration RAW was rated high because Cena was being built up as unbeatable, and just lost his title to a guy who wasn't even in the EC the night before, it was also the first time anyone had used the MITB title shot, and was done perfectly, people wanted to see what was gonna happen next that's why they tuned in, not to see Edge fuck Lita in the middle of the ring, any halfway intelligent fan knew it would never go very far, and as for the Vickie thing, that was contreversial, that was more just annoying and done in bad taste, the ONS match you brought up, again male heels who have been in intergender tag matches have used their finishers are women all the fucking time, it was nothing new at all

now lets look back at Austin, the first guy to ever attack the chairman of the company on national TV, the guy who was heavily involved in several gun agles, the most contreversial being the Brian Pillman one, the guy who helped get Vince save his daughter from the Ministry when they were at odds with each other, Austin also made an alliance with his sworn enemy just to become WWE champion, and there are soooo many more, Austin is faaar and away the one contreversial superstar when it comes down to these two

As for Ratings, Austin lead WWE through one of the highest rating periods in wrestling history, Edge is at his prime in one of Wrestling low points, Austin wins that one, thoug I fail to see why ratings should ever even be brought into this thing in the first place

And Merch sales, if anyone has tried to bring this up and use in favore of Edge (I honestly don't know havn't read all the posts), they're beyond delusional at this point if Merch sales were considered good criteria for this tourny then it would come down to Austin and Hogan every year, so we should just GTFO with that shit

Other than that their really isn't much I can say That hasn't already been covered by Xfear or Shocky, and done so in a far better way than I ever could, bottom line Austin is one of the most iconic wrestlers, he's the one of the two biggest names the industry to ever grace the square circle, he beat guys far superior than the guys Edge has beaten and I just fail to comprehend how anyone in their right mind could ever say Edge is better than Austin, Edge is nowhere Austins level and will likely never be

 

[Tastycles]

So Edge knows how to use his dick and he's more controversial than Austin?!? please, that's the most absurd thing I have ever heard, I won't deny that Edge is mildly controversial, but that's it, just MILDLY, the Live sex celebration RAW was rated high because Cena was being built up as unbeatable, and just lost his title to a guy who wasn't even in the EC the night before, it was also the first time anyone had used the MITB title shot, and was done perfectly, people wanted to see what was gonna happen next that's why they tuned in, not to see Edge fuck Lita in the middle of the ring, any halfway intelligent fan knew it would never go very far, and as for the Vickie thing, that was contreversial, that was more just annoying and done in bad taste, the ONS match you brought up, again male heels who have been in intergender tag matches have used their finishers are women all the fucking time, it was nothing new at all

I was just pointing out that he was controversial. Beating Cena was controversial, the way he celebrated was controversial. It's funny that the rest of the show rated 4.1, but the Edge and Lita segment was more than a whole point above that, isn't it? Literally about half a million more people tuned into that segment more than any segment for about 4 years, and you think that had to do with deposing Cena? No. Sex sells, and Edge sold it.

I am not going to argue that he is more controversial than Austin, but this argument began when somebeody said he wasn't controversial, which is obviously bullshit.

now lets look back at Austin, the first guy to ever attack the chairman of the company on national TV

Bret Hart was pretty fucking verbal towards Vince on TV at Montreal, don't you think? Also, While Austin took it to another level, even Hogan had issues with Jack Tunney.

And that's just the WWF, the nWo took a whole company on, which is far more controversial. Nobody ever threatened to sue over Austin, did they?

, the guy who was heavily involved in several gun agles, the most contreversial being the Brian Pillman one

The other being a fake gun angle. If fake guns are controversial, Laser quest is the most controversial place on earth. Anyway, Pillman had the gun, not Austin.

, the guy who helped get Vince save his daughter from the Ministry when they were at odds with each other,

Again, that's him just being there. The controversy was in the satanic wedding, not him escaping from it.

Austin also made an alliance with his sworn enemy just to become WWE champion, and there are soooo many more, Austin is faaar and away the one contreversial superstar when it comes down to these two

Austin probably is more controversial, but to say Edge isn't at all, which is what people are doing is bullshit. Edge marrying someone he doesn't love to become WWE Champion is far superior to making an allegiance for one night.

As for Ratings, Austin lead WWE through one of the highest rating periods in wrestling history, Edge is at his prime in one of Wrestling low points, Austin wins that one, thoug I fail to see why ratings should ever even be brought into this thing in the first place

I agree, the heels are never the people that pull in the ratings anyway, really, and Austin was in a hotter time with a much better supporting cast.

Other than that their really isn't much I can say That hasn't already been covered by Xfear or Shocky, and done so in a far better way than I ever could, bottom line Austin is one of the most iconic wrestlers, he's the one of the two biggest names the industry to ever grace the square circle, he beat guys far superior than the guys Edge has beaten and I just fail to comprehend how anyone in their right mind could ever say Edge is better than Austin, Edge is nowhere Austins level and will likely never be

Right, I completely agree that Austin is a bigger and better name in wrestling history. However, I vote based on kayfabe, it's what I've decided to do, and it is what a lot of other people have decided to do too. Kayfabe wise, Austin loses, because he regularly lost the first matches in feuds. He was regularly screwed, Edge is someone that screws, and I just think that is enough to suggest that in their first ever meeting Edge would win.