First Round: Los Angeles - Randy Orton vs. Terry Funk

[Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra]

I don't know if anyone has used this arguement yet, but Orton has destroyed Matt Hardy and has beaten Jeff Hardy as well, both men were trained by the Funks, so why wouldn't Orton beat Terry if he has beaten two of his most popular pupils?

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

I don't know if anyone has used this arguement yet, but Orton has destroyed Matt Hardy and has beaten Jeff Hardy as well, both men were trained by the Funks, so why wouldn't Orton beat Terry if he has beaten two of his most popular pupils?

Because it's a terrible argument to make. You're basically saying that Jeff and Matt are equal or better wrestlers than Funk which is ridiculous. Funk was arguably the best heel back in his day and was a tremendous wrestler and all Orton is to me is mediocre. Orton has never done great against the best and the same result will happen here.

 

[Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra]

Because it's a terrible argument to make. You're basically saying that Jeff and Matt are equal or better wrestlers than Funk which is ridiculous. Funk was arguably the best heel back in his day and was a tremendous wrestler and all Orton is to me is mediocre. Orton has never done great against the best and the same result will happen here.

It really isn't, the arguement is saying Orton took out two of Funk's pupils so he has seen Funk's style before. I'm not saying either Hardy is on par with either Funk, but the Funks trained them so the Hardys have more than a few moves in their arsenal that were taught to them by a Funk, Orton squashed the Hardys, outside of the Royal Rumble but he still won there as well, so he would know enough to beat Funk.

 

[X]

It really isn't, the arguement is saying Orton took out two of Funk's pupils so he has seen Funk's style before.

And with that sentence you have officially shown us that your argument is in fact bullshit, and that you really don't know what you're talking about. Maybe your argument would make sense if Matt and Jeff Hardy wrestled the same style as Terry Funk---however they don't. Even slightly. Matt and Jeff received only your basic wrestling training from the Funk brothers, their style of wrestling, which includes all kinds of high-risk and creative maneuvers that they worked on themselves as kids in OMEGA, are absolutely nothing like the multitude of styles of wrestling that terry Funk has mastered. Oh yes, Funk wrestles more than one style. He can wrestle technical with the very best of them, he can brawl with the best of them, he can go hardcore, the only style he doesn't wrestle (ironically) is the Hardy's high-risk style.

So yes, your argument is in fact shit, and you are in fact speaking directly out of your asshole if you think that Matt and Jeff Hardy wrestle a similar style to Terry Funk.

I'm not saying either Hardy is on par with either Funk, but the Funks trained them so the Hardys have more than a few moves in their arsenal that were taught to them by a Funk, Orton squashed the Hardys, outside of the Royal Rumble but he still won there as well, so he would know enough to beat Funk.

Again---the Hardys wrestling style in the 2000s that Randy Orton "squashed" (not sure how 20+ minute competitive matches are called "squashes" now) is absolutely NOTHING like the style of wrestling that Terry Funk perfected in the 70s and 80s in his prime when he dominated the globe.

Your argument is bullshit, thanks for slipping up and providing me with the chance to expose said bullshit. Just be honest if you're voting for Orton that you're voting for him because you're a mark for him. Not that hard, we all are allowed to have a few mark votes in the tourney, I've admitted a few of my picks being wrong so far in this tournament already and we're only in the first round. It's fine to vote for someone just because you're a mark for him, but just be honest, don't try to come up with some bullshit argument that has more holes in it than a block of swiss cheese.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I think Randy Orton can very much beat Terry Funk. I know that plenty of people feel Funk should win this because of the old "he's a legend" logic. We all know Funk's a legend, we all know how important he and his family have been to pro wrestling. I think one reason why so many love Terry Funk on this forum, or any internet forum for that matter, is because of his association with ECW. Not to say that he doesn't deserve respect, but I also feel that Randy Orton is someone that gets shit upon too much because of incidents that take place outside of wrestling.

Randy Orton comes across very much like an asshole in real life. Reading some of the things he's done, said and all that, he probably is. However, the man's also a talented wrestler that's proven his versaility a lot over the past several years especially. Orton's stronger, faster, more athletic overall and has so many different ways he can hit the RKO. Orton has shown himself to be merciless inside the ring, almost cruel in some ways. If this were a hardcore match, it'd be hard for me to vote against Funk. I know Funk's done more than that, but that's what he's become more well known for in the last 15 to 20 years especially. That's just the way it is.

 

[Rhonda Rousey's Sports Bra]

And with that sentence you have officially shown us that your argument is in fact bullshit, and that you really don't know what you're talking about. Maybe your argument would make sense if Matt and Jeff Hardy wrestled the same style as Terry Funk---however they don't. Even slightly. Matt and Jeff received only your basic wrestling training from the Funk brothers, their style of wrestling, which includes all kinds of high-risk and creative maneuvers that they worked on themselves as kids in OMEGA, are absolutely nothing like the multitude of styles of wrestling that terry Funk has mastered. Oh yes, Funk wrestles more than one style. He can wrestle technical with the very best of them, he can brawl with the best of them, he can go hardcore, the only style he doesn't wrestle (ironically) is the Hardy's high-risk style.

So yes, your argument is in fact shit, and you are in fact speaking directly out of your asshole if you think that Matt and Jeff Hardy wrestle a similar style to Terry Funk.



Again---the Hardys wrestling style in the 2000s that Randy Orton "squashed" (not sure how 20+ minute competitive matches are called "squashes" now) is absolutely NOTHING like the style of wrestling that Terry Funk perfected in the 70s and 80s in his prime when he dominated the globe.

Your argument is bullshit, thanks for slipping up and providing me with the chance to expose said bullshit. Just be honest if you're voting for Orton that you're voting for him because you're a mark for him. Not that hard, we all are allowed to have a few mark votes in the tourney, I've admitted a few of my picks being wrong so far in this tournament already and we're only in the first round. It's fine to vote for someone just because you're a mark for him, but just be honest, don't try to come up with some bullshit argument that has more holes in it than a block of swiss cheese.

Who pissed in your Cheerios this morning, you usually a pretty laid back guy calm down bro.

I never said they wrestled the same style, I said that the Hardys being trained by the Funks, would have a few of his moves in their arsenal. Orton has beaten both Hardys, squashed Matt, I said outside the RR where Orton beat Jeff in a great match, but still won. I was mearly saying that Orton would have a game plan for Funk since he has seen a few thing Funk could have thrown at him, that's all.

 

[ScreaminNormanSmiley]

Back then was a very different time for wrestling, holding the title for a year was regular. The fact that Orton managed to keep the title in this day and age with Triple H And Shawn Michaels around, Jericho making a hot return and Jeff Hardy who was very hot at the time is also very impressive.

but having 3 title reigns that were less than a month isnt. also he lost the title to hhh how many times? also hbk didnt want the title but if he did im sure he would have gotten it.

So Dave Meltzer's opinion is fact now?

no but it is fact that orton doesnt have five star matches and terry does, just like i said.

Orton had incredible success in the WWE years before his prime and will probably be having success years after his prime. So why couldn't Funk?

but we dont know that yet, orton could get hurt and never wrestle again, or he could mess up real bad like he tends to do and not get another chance. you should not vote on what you THINK could happen later in a career because there is no telling.

I don't know if anyone has used this arguement yet, but Orton has destroyed Matt Hardy and has beaten Jeff Hardy as well, both men were trained by the Funks, so why wouldn't Orton beat Terry if he has beaten two of his most popular pupils?

people havent said that because its a terrible arguement. they were trained at DORY funk jrs school not terrys. they are brothers but not the same person, and who you train doesnt have anything to do with your career as a wrestler anyway.

 

[shattered dreams]

Orton has shown himself to be merciless inside the ring, almost cruel in some ways.

And Funk hasn't? IMO Orton is anything but merciless in actual matches while Funk is the epitome of it. Orton usually wrestles scared. He is only merciless in sneak attacks or gang beatdowns. Everyone knows Orton would beat the Funk that cannot walk after blowing himself up forever after his career should have ended but in this matchup that is not the Funk he is wrestling.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

Orton. He's my favorite guy out there today, so obviously I'm going to mark out for him in this tournament.

Funk was great. He has retired more times than Bret Favre and Michael Jordan combined, and I love it. It's amazing that he is still going strong, and has even wrestled this year. But I think Orton is just starting to come into his own as one of the most over wrestlers WWE/F has had in a long time. Funk could take a beating, but Orton can dish one out, and will show no mercy.

Orton all the way.

 

[X]

Who pissed in your Cheerios this morning, you usually a pretty laid back guy calm down bro.

I never said they wrestled the same style, I said that the Hardys being trained by the Funks, would have a few of his moves in their arsenal. Orton has beaten both Hardys, squashed Matt, I said outside the RR where Orton beat Jeff in a great match, but still won. I was mearly saying that Orton would have a game plan for Funk since he has seen a few thing Funk could have thrown at him, that's all.

Who pissed in your Cheerios this morning, you usually a pretty laid back guy calm down bro.

I never said they wrestled the same style, I said that the Hardys being trained by the Funks, would have a few of his moves in their arsenal. Orton has beaten both Hardys, squashed Matt, I said outside the RR where Orton beat Jeff in a great match, but still won. I was mearly saying that Orton would have a game plan for Funk since he has seen a few thing Funk could have thrown at him, that's all.

Oh Blue Cardinal please don't take offense to my insults and red rep. As everyone here can attest to, I've flamed and red repped just about everyone on here at one point or another, including my closest friends. I don't actually know you so I obviously couldn't correctly judge your intelligence, I just get a bit caught up in my arguments and end up insulting and red repping people because I'm a bit of a cunt like that. Don't take any real offense to it.

Just know that your argument was in fact very, very faulty though man. The Hardy's have never wrestled a style even remotely similar to that of Terry Funk in the 70s or 80s. Ever. Outside of your basic maneuevers like your headlocks and body slams (AKA stuff that every wrestler uses), their movesets could not be more different. It would be like if you were saying Rey Mysterio in 1995 wrestled a similar style to Andre the Giant in 1988. It simply isn't correct.

 

[X]

Who pissed in your Cheerios this morning, you usually a pretty laid back guy calm down bro.

I never said they wrestled the same style, I said that the Hardys being trained by the Funks, would have a few of his moves in their arsenal. Orton has beaten both Hardys, squashed Matt, I said outside the RR where Orton beat Jeff in a great match, but still won. I was mearly saying that Orton would have a game plan for Funk since he has seen a few thing Funk could have thrown at him, that's all.

Oh Blue Cardinal please don't take offense to my insults and red rep. As everyone here can attest to, I've flamed and red repped just about everyone on here at one point or another, including my closest friends. I don't actually know you so I obviously couldn't correctly judge your intelligence, I just get a bit caught up in my arguments and end up insulting and red repping people because I'm a bit of a cunt like that. Don't take any real offense to it.

Just know that your argument was in fact very, very faulty though man. The Hardy's have never wrestled a style even remotely similar to that of Terry Funk in the 70s or 80s. Ever. Outside of your basic maneuevers like your headlocks and body slams (AKA stuff that every wrestler uses), their movesets could not be more different. It would be like if you were saying Rey Mysterio in 1995 wrestled a similar style to Andre the Giant in 1988. It simply isn't correct.

 

[Blade]

but having 3 title reigns that were less than a month isnt. also he lost the title to hhh how many times? also hbk didnt want the title but if he did im sure he would have gotten it.

Like I said, Funk's years on top were a different time for wrestling. Nowadays, month long reigns are regular. But we can hardly blame Orton for how he's booked. Or are we keeping this strictly kayfabe?

Also, twice. Orton has lost the WWE title to Triple H twice.
The Rock lost the title to Austin twice, too. What's your point?

no but it is fact that orton doesnt have five star matches and terry does, just like i said.

Ok. Dave Meltzer thinks Funk is better. And? How should that affect my opinion, your opinion or the opinion of anyone else on this site?

but we dont know that yet, orton could get hurt and never wrestle again, or he could mess up real bad like he tends to do and not get another chance. you should vote on what you THINK could happen later in a career because there is no telling.

Yeah, and Funk could pull a Benoit, kill some people, have his name erased from the history books and be turned on by most of the IWC.
But if we look at all the potential situations, we could be going back and forth for days. The fact of the matter is Orton is well liked backstage by both his peers and the higher ups. He's in great condition and he has only ever had one major injury. So all situations point to Orton having a long and productive career in the WWE, bar some very unexpected occurance.

Also, he's stopped shitting in bags. Supposedly.

 

[ScreaminNormanSmiley]

Like I said, Funk's years on top were a different time for wrestling. Nowadays, month long reigns are regular. But we can hardly blame Orton for how he's booked. Or are we keeping this strictly kayfabe?

Also, twice. Orton has lost the WWE title to Triple H twice.
The Rock lost the title to Austin twice, too. What's your point?.

and he lost the world title to hhh earlier in his career, during his first title reign, remember how well that one went? he bombed, which is something funk never did during any title reigns he had.

Ok. Dave Meltzer thinks Funk is better. And? How should that affect my opinion, your opinion or the opinion of anyone else on this site?

it shouldnt completely sway somebodys opinion i agree. but it is a very exclusive list to get on and funk getting on it is very impressive. and i deffinatley dont agree with every five star match he gives and doesnt give out but i agree orton hasnt earned one yet but funk has.

Yeah, and Funk could pull a Benoit, kill some people, have his name erased from the history books and be turned on by most of the IWC.
But if we look at all the potential situations, we could be going back and forth for days. The fact of the matter is Orton is well liked backstage by both his peers and the higher ups. He's in great condition and he has only ever had one major injury. So all situations point to Orton having a long and productive career in the WWE, bar some very unexpected occurance.

Also, he's stopped shitting in bags. Supposedly.

and now your contradicting yourself. your saying we shouldnt look at potential situations, but your attributing what you think orton could do in the future to your vote, and that is in fact a potential situation. the future isnt set in stone so you shouldnt choose based on it.

 

[Blade]

and he lost the world title to hhh earlier in his career, during his first title reign, remember how well that one went? he bombed, which is something funk never did during any title reigns he had.

Very true, it bombed because of booking. One title reign, his first bombed and it was given to him far too early. Many first time title reigns bomb. But I believe Orton definitely made up for.

Also, you can't possibly know whether or not any of Funk's reigns bombed, he's won a-many and the only person who would know how successful any of them were is Funk. Although, I'd say Funk's ECW world title reign bombed. He held it, for what, a month? Did he even defend it?
Oh and you know where else Funk bombed? In the WWE. Twice.

it shouldnt completely sway somebodys opinion i agree. but it is a very exclusive list to get on and funk getting on it is very impressive. and i deffinatley dont agree with every five star match he gives and doesnt give out but i agree orton hasnt earned one yet but funk has.

Funk is on it, good for him. But take into account that Meltzer seems to hate WWE. He didn't give either Undertaker vs HBK matches a 5 star match, so I think that lately Meltzer has become a bit.... stupid. Not to mention it took Funk 20 years to have a match universally rated as a 5 stars, we can't compare him to Orton on that level. At least until Orton's been wrestling for 10 more years.

and now your contradicting yourself. your saying we shouldnt look at potential situations, but your attributing what you think orton could do in the future to your vote, and that is in fact a potential situation. the future isnt set in stone so you shouldnt choose based on it.

Ah, but I didn't attribute my vote to Orton being a future legend. This started because you brought up the point that Funk beat legends when they were in their prime, but he didn't beat legends because they weren't legends when he beat them.

 

[Straight Edge Loyalist]

Terry Funk. Terry Funk. Terry Funk.

He never bored me. His matches were rarely unwatchable. He has an immense passion for this art.


I cannot say the same for Orton, who I find to be fairly underwhelming and very fortunate to be in a very sub-par era.

 

[Hulkamaniac]

This is one of the most embarrassing results of the tournament if this stands. Terry Funk is an absolute legend who can wrestle virtually any style. He's just flat better at every area of wrestling then Orton. Booker T going over Bruno and AJ going over Bob Backlund are pretty terrible, but this one right here might take the cake. If you haven't voted yet, for the love of God, vote for Terry Funk!

 

[Muffin Top Merkley]

If these two match up twenty years from now, during Wrestlezone Tournament XXIV, then Randy Orton might have accomplished nearly as much as Terry Funk has in his career. But for today, Orton is no where near the level of Funk.

Funk should have won this because he is MUCH more than a hardcore wrestler. He is a legit tough guy that has both the ability to brawl and be very technical with his opponent.

Randy Orton would look dominate in this match because Funk would make him look dominate. Funk would take a beating from Orton, but then come back from that beating and deliver a beating to Orton that he will never experience.

Funk wins due to experience and versatility, both severly lacking by Orton.