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

[Tenta]

Yeah, I'm not going to lie, I absolutely expected this one to be close, for the simple reason that people see Randy Orton, and will be like, "OMG, he's the best wrestlerz going today!"

Sad fact people; the only of Randy Orton's wins that measure up to anything Terry Funk has done for the business is Triple H, and John Cena. Even then, he's lost plenty of times to these guys to prove that he isn't nearly as dominant as the WWE would portray him. He's a good wrestler in a watered down version of the WWE, people. He's quite possibly the worst champion this side of The Undertaker, and for that matter, always seems to come up short in the big matches, when it's most important. His loss to Triple H at Wrestlemania absolutely cemented his legacy in wrestling: a good hand who will never be seen as the face of the company, and when push comes to shove, he will come out of a big time match with the loss. And the instances in which he does win big matches, he immediately jobs right back to the person he just beat, nullifying any importance placed on the previous victory. Beating John Cena would be a great feat, if he didn't continuously job right back to him within a month, losing the WWE Title in the process. And, for that matter, while Triple H, Cena, Batista, The Undertaker, etc. have all beaten Orton clean in the middle of the ring, in a one on one match the same can not be said for Randy Orton. The closest he's ever come was beating Triple H at last year's Backlash, in a six man tag team match.

Terry Funk, meanwhile, is a legend who, unlike Orton, has a legacy as a fantastic champion, and one of the legitimately greatest wrestlers in the history of professional wrestling. Many people say that Randy Orton is the next Steve Austin: I say that Terry Funk was Austin before Steve Austin was even sperm. Terry Funk has the very rare ability to both play the sympathetic face, and the crazy heel. As a matter of fact, Terry Funk may very well be the greatest heel of all time. His promo's make Randy Orton's robotic voice sound like robotic coils of dog turd, and he puts on matches that Randy Orton could never even think to top. Do you think that Randy's match with Mick Foley was hardcore? How about you take a good look at what a real hardcore legend is capable of...

[YOUTUBE]d7llquRz5ik[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]65bjJSe3eig&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

But Tenta, it's a wrestling match

Great, which makes it even worse that those that have really watched Terry Funk know that he's actually a better technician than he is a hardcore wrestler. His matches with Jack Brisco were always great, even his match with Dory Funk was a great match to watch, from 1981. But perhaps his best work came with Ric Flair, in 1989, in one of the first matches my father ever let me watch with him. It was a tape in 1994, and sure, it was a bit grainy, but it was the greatest match I've ever seen, bar none. The man can work a good match with anybody.

And as for promos? Terry Funk may be the best interview in the history of wrestling. The way that mean speaks sends quivers down grown men's spines. He can cut a promo like no one else, and can cut effective promos, both as a heel and a face. While Orton's promos are so generic, you pray for something, anything else to happen to cut him off, Funk puts absolute raw emotion into whatever is left of his body. Take a good listen to this promo that caused me goosebumps that have yet to subside.

[YOUTUBE]cFfNWJaSTwU[/YOUTUBE]

Say what you will, but Randy Orton is the most overrated wrestler in wrestling today. He is merely an ok wrestler in an otherwise poor talent pool. Funk, however, wrestled at a time when the absolute best were around. Race, Flair, Steamboat, Brisco, Foley; you name it, the man has worked with them all. He's more varied than any other wrestler of his time, and has put more heart and soul in this business than any else ever has.

Don't be a sheep, and vote for the better portion of a mediocre era. Vote for one of the greatest, in an era of greatness. Vote for Terry Funk.

 

[Dr. Stinger A. Zoidberg]

Randy Orton

Now, Im not going to bash Terry Funk or anything like that. I happen to like and respect Terry Funk. However, other than tearing his body up in countless hardcore matches, He really has never impressed me. Orton on the other hand is a true star. Multiple time World Champion, countless victories over HUGE stars. Foley, Trips, Cena, Rock, Hogan, Batista, and Taker. To be quit honest, Orton has by far been more impressive than Funk has ever been.

 

[Tenta]

Randy Orton

Now, Im not going to bash Terry Funk or anything like that.

You know, once you say that, you're actually more geared to bashing, right? Just making sure you're aware...

However, other than tearing his body up in countless hardcore matches, He really has never impressed me.

You, sir. You are the exact reason why I hate a portion of this tournament.

Why? Because you see all of Funk's recent shit, and you think, "oh, he's only a hardcore wrestler." You, you, are actually the type of fan I'd like to see removed from this process; the fan that speaks out of his ass, and doesn't bother to do the research. Have you seen any of Funk's matches past 1998, by chance?

Oh, and let's just take a look at your rock hard defense of Orton.

Orton on the other hand is a true star. Multiple time World Champion, countless victories over HUGE stars.

And then, just as quickly, he winds up losing to that same star, what, a fucking month later? You're also referring to a time in which the Heavyweight title is passed around like water. More championships, less time between reigns, and less patient fans.

Foley,

Yes, because beating an old, out of shape version of a muppet is a quality win

Trips,

You mean the same Triple H that also continuously owns him on a regular basis, especially in their fued defining match, at Wrestlemania 25?

Cena,

See above, substitute Wrestlemania 25 with Bragging Rights.

Rock,

Refresh my memory; what pay per view did this happen again? Wrestlemania 39: Attack of the Matches that never actually happened.

Oh... You're referring to his match, in a 3 on 2 handicap match, at Wrestlemania 20, against a Rock who hadn't been in the ring in eleven months, and that same old and out of shape muppet?

This is the future of our forums.

Hogan,

Oh, nevermind, this was the match that occured at Wrestlemania 54: Attack of the Matches in Which Stinger Confuses the Result of, and Looks Like An Ass. Yes, that was clearly a five star pay per view.

Batista,

You mean while also jobbing to him on a frequent basis, as well?

and Taker.

Just. No. The only time Orton's ever beat Taker was with his Father's help. And, he lost the blow off match to that feud, too.

To be quit honest, Orton has by far been more impressive than Funk has ever been.

Actually, no, he really hasn't.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

Randy Orton will one day be as good as Terry Funk. I'll say it now and get it out of the way. Orton is a master of ring psychology and a great talker when needed. He's also too cocky and can get out of his game when facing someone above his level. I also know that Orton's not above hitting an RKO for a pin and the victory.

But Terry Funk is the first and the last in this match up. Funk can take Orton to school or to some barbed wire. Sure Orton's been in those matches before and all that stuff, but the match is a regular bout and Funk at his peak would stretch Orton and beat the piss out of him. Orton doesn't take punishment well. And Funk won't stop beating on him until he's out for a three count.

Vote Terry Funk. Next to Stan Hansen, he can beat ANYONE in this tournament.

 

[thepalaceprince]

RKO RKO RKO!!!! Give me orton hes athletic strong deceptively quick and hes a sadistic psychopath. The rko is the difference maker for me its can be hit out of absolutely no where and its so powerful 1 and your done. Just look at their photos orton looks like a world class athlete funk looks like my mechanic no contest man its all viper in this contest.

 

[FromTheSouth]

Orton, right now, is one of the ten best in the ring in the history of the WWE. You can discount him for working in this era, but his ring psychology is bar none the best in the business. Not a single move looks out of place. For this reason, Funk stands no chance. Funk needs an opening, and Randy never provides one. If this were a hardcore match, I would give Funk the edge, but there comes a point when voting for someone because they were old school becomes ridiculous. Randy is ten times the wrestler, one hundred times the athlete, and just as ruthless. Orton wins this match and I think it's a glorified squash.

 

[Blade]

Terry Funk was pretty good when he was NWA champion. But then he did all the hardcore matches. And people seem to get blinded by how amazing it was to have a 50 year old getting the shit beaten out of him with barbwire and explosions. And then there was Chainsaw Charlie. Yeah. He's had such a fluxuating career, it just seems frustrating. The only thing he hasn't done is gone to TNA and do crap there. Which I'll admit is a good thing.

Orton, on the other hand, has been getting better and better for about 8 years straight. Youngest World heavyweight champion ever. Beaten everyone there is to beat from Cena and Batista to Triple H and Undertaker. And yet he's only entering his prime now. Look at the reactions he gets, he electrifies the crowd. He's amazing at storytelling plus he made both Kofi Kingston and Jack Swagger look awesome. At the moment, he's on top form and it's pretty difficult to find a flaw in him right now.

In a match, Orton would win, too. It's not a hardcore match, so all that stuff is completely irrelevant. Terry Funk would use his old school style, but Orton would be able to deal with. Firstly, he's Bob Orton's son, so he'd know or at least could be taught loads about the old school style. When Orton needs to, he can go at an incredible pace, like he did against Kofi so Funk wouldn't be able to keep up. And lastly, well, he's the legend killer. And he's beaten bigger legends than Funk. So I just can't pick Funk here.

 

[Da Prophet]

I really do enjoy watching both men in the ring and when I was wathing some all ECW match's I got to love Terry Funk.I have always loved the 3 way dance that him and Stevie and Sandman hand at ECW first PPV.And the fact that he won that match and then beat Raven for the title was great and exciting.Event an old man can still wrestle as he showed on that night.

Orton on the other hand has showed over the time he has been in the WWE that he can put on great match's.Orton has been world champion multiple times and has defended his world titles in a winning effort at Wrestlemania.He has taken out the most powerful family in wrestling (McMachon).He has pinned Mick foley in a Hardcore match, he is the youngest world champion in WWE history.So Randy gets my vote here just over Funk.

 

[JGlass]

When Orton needs to, he can go at an incredible pace, like he did against Kofi so Funk wouldn't be able to keep up. And lastly, well, he's the legend killer. And he's beaten bigger legends than Funk. So I just can't pick Funk here.

He beat legends that were WAY over the hill. If we're going prime vs. prime, Funk is about one thousand times better in his prime than anyone Orton beat with possibly the exception of HBK, whom Orton beat by using brass knuckles.

Going even further than that, Orton's style of wrestling always struck me as reactionary. He's the type of guy who will wait to figure his opponent out and then adapt to whatever he thinks can beat his opponent, and his match with Kofi is a good example of that. Problem with Funk is, he is one of the best technicians and brawlers to ever step in the ring, and I don't know if a change of game plan can overcome that.

It would be a close match, but there's no way, at least at this point in his career, that Randy Orton goes over Terry Funk.

 

[FunKay the Inevitable]

I like Orton, he's the single most over guy in WWE at the moment but and this is a BIG but, I voted Funk. Terry Funk is opne tough son of a bitch. This guy is crazy as hell too. Funk survived a barbed wire match with Sabu, he had an amazing I Quit match with Ric Flair who he tried to kill literally kill him with a plastic bag. Funk can take punishment and he can dish it out, some punt isn't going to take him out: Vote Funk

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Terry Funk was pretty good when he was NWA champion. But then he did all the hardcore matches. And people seem to get blinded by how amazing it was to have a 50 year old getting the shit beaten out of him with barbwire and explosions. And then there was Chainsaw Charlie. Yeah. He's had such a fluxuating career, it just seems frustrating. The only thing he hasn't done is gone to TNA and do crap there. Which I'll admit is a good thing.

Orton, on the other hand, has been getting better and better for about 8 years straight. Youngest World heavyweight champion ever. Beaten everyone there is to beat from Cena and Batista to Triple H and Undertaker. And yet he's only entering his prime now. Look at the reactions he gets, he electrifies the crowd. He's amazing at storytelling plus he made both Kofi Kingston and Jack Swagger look awesome. At the moment, he's on top form and it's pretty difficult to find a flaw in him right now.

In a match, Orton would win, too. It's not a hardcore match, so all that stuff is completely irrelevant. Terry Funk would use his old school style, but Orton would be able to deal with. Firstly, he's Bob Orton's son, so he'd know or at least could be taught loads about the old school style. When Orton needs to, he can go at an incredible pace, like he did against Kofi so Funk wouldn't be able to keep up. And lastly, well, he's the legend killer. And he's beaten bigger legends than Funk. So I just can't pick Funk here.

Yet another bullshit reason that Orton will win just because this isn't a hardcore match. Funk has performed many great non-hardcore matches in case you and others weren't aware. Orton can teach him all the old school style he wants but Funk will take him to school in that ring plain and simple. I'd say it before and I'll say it again. Who are the hell are these legends that Orton has beaten. The only legend I would remotely consider to be bigger than Funk is Flair and he still wrestled four years after losing to Orton and that was in a steel cage. He lost to Hogan which everybody seems to forget. Are you saying that HHH, HBK, and Undertaker are bigger legends than Funk?

I really do enjoy watching both men in the ring and when I was wathing some all ECW match's I got to love Terry Funk.I have always loved the 3 way dance that him and Stevie and Sandman hand at ECW first PPV.And the fact that he won that match and then beat Raven for the title was great and exciting.Event an old man can still wrestle as he showed on that night.

Orton on the other hand has showed over the time he has been in the WWE that he can put on great match's.Orton has been world champion multiple times and has defended his world titles in a winning effort at Wrestlemania.He has taken out the most powerful family in wrestling (McMachon).He has pinned Mick foley in a Hardcore match, he is the youngest world champion in WWE history.So Randy gets my vote here just over Funk.

That's the problem right there. You're only focusing on his matches in ECW and not even considering what he did all over the world. Where are these great Orton matches I've been hearing so much about? The last "great" match I've seen Orton is where he wasn't being carried by some like HBK or Cena was in 2004 against Edge where he l-o-s-t.

True he did retain his title at WM 24 but couldn't get the job done the next year when he had all the momentum in the world. Edge pinned Foley in a hardcore match two years later but Blade said this isn't a hardcore match which makes it irrevelant.

Orton is the epitome of "average" to me and Funk will prove that in the ring.

 

[CH David]

This is a tough choice. I love Orton, and have for a while. He does a great job using psychology in the ring, which is one of the things I look for in the ring. However, this is Terry fuckin' Funk. Before he was the hardcore legend, he was still a great wrestler. He racked up numerous titles in the NWA, in a time when the territories were huge and being the champ was awesome. I have until Saturday for someone to sway me one way or another, but right now, I am leaning towards the Funker.

 

[Blade]

Yet another bullshit reason that Orton will win just because this isn't a hardcore match. Funk has performed many great non-hardcore matches in case you and others weren't aware. Orton can teach him all the old school style he wants but Funk will take him to school in that ring plain and simple. I'd say it before and I'll say it again. Who are the hell are these legends that Orton has beaten. The only legend I would remotely consider to be bigger than Funk is Flair and he still wrestled four years after losing to Orton and that was in a steel cage. He lost to Hogan which everybody seems to forget. Are you saying that HHH, HBK, and Undertaker are bigger legends than Funk?

Clearly you misunderstood what I meant by "this isn't a hardcore match so all the stuff is irrelevant." It's irrelevant, ergo I'm NOT using is as a reason for who we should vote for, see? People have talked about who would win in a hardcore match. But I'll ask you again to draw your attention to the word IRRELEVANT. I was not making an arguement one way or another for who would win a hardcore match because it's (all together now) irrelevant!

Also, Orton has beaten Foley and the Rock. They're (or at least Foley) legends. But who we consider legends and how big of legends they are is completely subjective, I don't want to get into a debate about whether or not The Undertaker is a bigger legend than Funk. That's for another round.

But I've given my reasons for how I've voted and I've yet to see an argument other than "Yeah, but Funk would wrestle better!" for why I voted the wrong way.

 

[D-Man]

I'm going to fairly and subjectively judge this contest based on the Terry Funk of the 1970's versus the Randy Orton of today. After all, I feel that would be the best way to pair these two against each other in their primes.

Fuck the fact that Randy Orton is white hot right now. Fuck the fact that Terry Funk spent his remaining ten years in the business as a hardcore psychopath. And fuck the fact that Terry Funk is now old while Randy is still young. This match would be unfairly judged if you didn't choose the correct personas or time periods in which to choose these men to do battle against each other.

Please keep in mind that Terry Funk's success came from him being one of the greatest in-ring competitors of the 70's WITHOUT the bullshit "smoke and mirrors" of a hardcore environment. So everyone should stop using "hardcore" as any type of basis for an argument to favor or decimate Terry Funk's career. Terry Funk had a pure, grounded, bare-knuckle, toe-to-toe, tough wrestling style that was based on his mastered skills of utilizing basics and the purest forms of professional wrestling. I will always love him because of this. For anyone to judge him based on ANYTHING that has to do with hardcore wrestling is a travesty.

This is a great pairing because Randy Orton is very similar to Terry Funk when it comes to in-ring work. Based on Funk and Orton's primes (that I mentioned earlier), they are both grounded, calculated, toe-to-toe, and pure in-ring competitors. Neither man is high flying. Neither man is a technical genius like men such as Bret Hart or Chris Benoit. But these guys will stand right in each others' faces and go at it like we've never seen.

Now that I've gotten that out of the way, I still cannot see Orton losing this match.

With all due respect to Terry Funk, his greatest years were during a time of an obsoleted style of professional wrestling. And where Funk's style left off, Randy Orton picked up. Both of their grounded, basic styles of wrestling seem dead-even until everyone realizes that Randy Orton has taken his father's style (which was VERY similar to Funk's of the 70's) and put a modern twist on it that consists of more calculation and brutality that came from the simplification of basic wrestling maneuvers. Funk mastered the basics... Orton put his spin on them, modernized them, revolutionized them, and continues to do so.

So, to put it plainly, I just see Randy Orton as a modern man's Terry Funk. So, if they faced off, I think it would be a matter of "out with the old, in with the new."

I have to vote for Randy Orton.

 

[Ferbian]

Second mistake. If you have that mindset then you really shouldn't be voting at all because you're not looking at the whole man's body of work which is much greater than Orton's. Orton lost the title two times in almost two months. That's real impressive right there.

Sure I know Orton's contribution to the world of wrestling isn't as big as Terry Funk's, but as I stated, I've never seen Terry as more than a Hardcore wrestler, certainly a little better than what Mick Foley could bring out, but not enough for me to consider him any better than Randy Orton, who's on a roll right now, and has been doing great for a long period of time, always having put on some firm matches if you ask me, as opposed to what I think of Terry, who I don't really think highly of outside of a hardcore match.

That's why I voted for Orton.

 

[ScreaminNormanSmiley]

Sure I know Orton's contribution to the world of wrestling isn't as big as Terry Funk's, but as I stated, I've never seen Terry as more than a Hardcore wrestler, certainly a little better than what Mick Foley could bring out, but not enough for me to consider him any better than Randy Orton, who's on a roll right now, and has been doing great for a long period of time, always having put on some firm matches if you ask me, as opposed to what I think of Terry, who I don't really think highly of outside of a hardcore match.

That's why I voted for Orton.

how can you only see funk as only a hardcore wrestler after reading the other posts? funk started wrestling in the sixties and didnt start being mostly a hardcore wrestler untill the ninties. he won the nwa title against jack brisco and held it over twice as long as ortons longest reign. he has had five star matches, something orton has never achieved. he has beat legends all around the world, not just in one company, and when he beat legends they were in there prime, not over the hill like orton did. ortons good but hes not at the level of funk yet.

 

[Blade]

he won the nwa title against jack brisco and held it over twice as long as ortons longest reign.

Why should reign length matter?

Here's something to think about: Neither The Rock, Kurt Angle or Steve Austin had a reign longer than Orton's late 2007/ early 2008 reign. Are they better than Orton? Yeah, probably. Hell, Flair's two WWE titles reigns combined don't add up to that Orton reign.... Meanwhile, JBL's reign was 3 months longer than Orton's, yet most would say Orton is far superior.

Amount of titles won and the length of the reigns have very little to do with how good you are as a champion.

he has had five star matches, something orton has never achieved.

That's purely subjective. But I would say that Orton is better on the mic and has had less bad matches in his day. Not to mention that Funk wrestled for 30+ years, meanwhile Orton is only starting to come into his prime.

he has beat legends all around the world, not just in one company,

Yet Terry Funk couldn't make it in the WWF, the biggest (and arguably best) wrestling promotion in the world. Yet Orton has been very successful there. Just sayin'.

and when he beat legends they were in there prime, not over the hill like orton did. ortons good but hes not at the level of funk yet.

Ok, this is possibly the dumbest statement I've seen. Legends aren't legends when they're in their prime. Yeah, they're future legends, but you can't say Funk defeated legends when they were in their prime and Orton apparently hasn't. Orton has beaten Cena, Batista, Triple H, Undertaker, Edge and Jericho. Again, prime is subjective based on when they entertained you the most, butr all of those guys are certainly future legends.

 

[Ferbian]

how can you only see funk as only a hardcore wrestler after reading the other posts? funk started wrestling in the sixties and didnt start being mostly a hardcore wrestler untill the ninties. he won the nwa title against jack brisco and held it over twice as long as ortons longest reign. he has had five star matches, something orton has never achieved. he has beat legends all around the world, not just in one company, and when he beat legends they were in there prime, not over the hill like orton did. ortons good but hes not at the level of funk yet.

For the most of it because I feel the proper element of Terry Funk was the hardcore matches, that's why.
Also you have to consider the fact that of all matches to bring Terry back into the WWE with, he was brought back to fight Mick Foley and others (Tommy, Beulah, Edge and Lita I believe?) in.. wait for it.. a hardcore match.

And again, yes I know Terry has accomplished more about title reigns etc. but that doesn't mean I'm not gonna think Randy is gonna pull this one off, I simply don't see Terry doing this, also we have to remember, while many may consider this to be a prime vs prime match, I can't say I haven't voted influence and memorable stuff over prime vs prime, and Randy still has many years to do big things in this business, who's to really say by 4.. 5 years perhaps that Randy hasn't done more for this business than Terry, we don't know yet.

 

[Suneeboy]

This is a tough, tough call. I really want to vote for Funk. The posters in this thread have done a great job and providing the youtube video evidence is a nice touch. You can’t discount either guy, and whoever wins doesn’t matter. The crowd will stand up and clap regardless. When it all comes down to it here we are not talking about accomplishments and lore. We are talking about who would win in a match between these two men. Randy Orton or Terry Funk. Randy Orton can dish out punishment, and Terry Funk can take punishment.

But I have to go against the grain of many of the posters in the thread. Those who voted for Orton need to present their argument to the group here, because I’m going to look like an outcast.

You have to look at it this way though, Funk has never matched up with a guy like Randy Orton. His more brutal matches in which he received a ton of punishment, were over exaggerated hardcore matches, where body tolerance in kayfabe is upped to another level. A chair shot can win a traditional match, but a chair shot in a hardcore match where the ropes are made of barbed wire is just like a chop to the chest. A barbed wire bat can knock a guy out and win the match, but if it’s a hardcore match you don’t expect it to end the match. So don’t take punishment tolerance into account with the hardcore atmosphere getting the props that it gets. Hardcore kayfabe tolerance for punishment is completely different than regular match tolerance.

Now, Randy Orton wins here. It will take a lot to put Funk out for the 1, 2, 3 but when it’s all said and done Funk will be put out by Orton. Randy Orton is fast, calculating, powerful, athletic, deceptive, and very precise with his attack. Funk while not always a brawler, doesn’t have a defined style, and is more of man’s man type of wrestler. Orton is far too smart in the ring to get caught up in a “fight”. Funk doesn’t have enough to put Orton out for the count, but on the contrary Orton has enough to put Funk out. Funk takes the beating of his life, as does Orton, but in the end the RKO and Punt get the win.

The thing is Orton is not a brawler or a technician. He is an assassin. Terry Funk has a shitload of heart and could POSSIBLY win, but he can't pull a win out in the biggest kayfabe tournament on this board, against the cold killer that is Randy Orton. I just don't feel like that's how it should go.

Who wins in a 1-on-1 non-gimmick wrestling match on a stage as big as the Staples Center in Los Angeles? Randy Orton. As an e-bookie I would also book him to win, because he is going to sell more tickets as the tournament progresses. We need him in this tournament because he can create more entertaining matchups in the later rounds. All it takes is ONE PUNT and he’s done.

Funk has the accomplishments, but in the end you have to give the win to Orton. It is the right thing to do.

 

[PsychoBlack]

my vote has to go to funk ive seen alot of his NWA matches and hes just amazing compared to when i was in a kid and saw him in WCW orton just isnt as impressive to me they both have prestigious names in wrestling but funk has to go over in this one the punt wouldnt be a factor and terry could be one of the few ppl to avoid an RKO so that takes away both of randys finishers

i vote for funk

 

[Cena's Little Helper]

I've never understood the love for Orton. The only things separating him from Matt Morgan are (marginally) better writers, six inches in height, and a tad more grace in the ring.

I'm voting for Funk, and I suggest that you do the same. In addition to being a great in the heyday of the NWA, Funk's middle-aged, second prime as a hardcore wrestler was nothing short of badass.

 

[ScreaminNormanSmiley]

Why should reign length matter?

Here's something to think about: Neither The Rock, Kurt Angle or Steve Austin had a reign longer than Orton's late 2007/ early 2008 reign. Are they better than Orton? Yeah, probably. Hell, Flair's two WWE titles reigns combined don't add up to that Orton reign.... Meanwhile, JBL's reign was 3 months longer than Orton's, yet most would say Orton is far superior.

Amount of titles won and the length of the reigns have very little to do with how good you are as a champion.

its not everything i agree, but if you can hold it that long against the greats funk was against it certainly makes it more impressive.

That's purely subjective. But I would say that Orton is better on the mic and has had less bad matches in his day. Not to mention that Funk wrestled for 30+ years, meanwhile Orton is only starting to come into his prime.

its not subjective its fact, funk has had five star rated matches and orton hasnt.

Yet Terry Funk couldn't make it in the WWF, the biggest (and arguably best) wrestling promotion in the world. Yet Orton has been very successful there. Just sayin'.

during funks prime it wasnt. just sayin.

Ok, this is possibly the dumbest statement I've seen. Legends aren't legends when they're in their prime. Yeah, they're future legends, but you can't say Funk defeated legends when they were in their prime and Orton apparently hasn't. Orton has beaten Cena, Batista, Triple H, Undertaker, Edge and Jericho. Again, prime is subjective based on when they entertained you the most, butr all of those guys are certainly future legends.

you say i made the dumbest statement youve ever seen than call batista a future legend? thats the pot callin the kettle black.

 

[X]

Wait...Blade...did you just make the claim that Randy Orton is better on the mic than Terry Funk?

Excuse me for a moment.

Okay, now that I'm done laughing continuously until blood pours out of my fucking eyeballs, allow me to say that you are wrong here Blade. Wrong. Wrong, wrong wrong wrong a thousand times WRONG. Randy Orton is one of the absolute worst mic-men I have ever seen and I thought that was pretty well known and widely accepted as fact, not opinion. The man couldn't muster emotion in his voice if you held a gun to his child's head, could he be more monotonous and robotic in his promos? I like Orton quite a bit, but better than TERRY FUNK on the mic? What? Are you fucking kidding me? Clearly you can't be very familiar with Funk's actual body of work or you'd know there are few men who can cut a more passionate and emotional promo than Terry Funk, whether he be one of the best heels (if not THE best heel of all time) in the 80s cutting brilliant promos on Jerry Lawler in Memphis or Ric Flair in Atlanta, or his later days in ECW and his emotional comeback to win the ECW title in 1997, the man is one of the greatest to ever pick up a microphone and no less than Mick Foley, who we can all agree is another legendary promo cutter, has said that Funk is the BEST ever on the mic. Not one of, THE best. And you're telling me Randy Orton, who's picture you'd find in the dictionary under the terms "robotic, monotonous and seemingly inhuman", is better? Get the fuck out of here with that Blade. I like you dude, but that's just...wrong. Just flat-out freaking wrong and I don't know how you think otherwise.

Randy Orton could be as good as Funk one day. Key word: as good. Not better. Right now he's not even on Funk's level though, it's far too young in his career to say he's superior to a legend like Terry Funk, in fact the only people you could really make an argument for being superior to Funk are men like Ric Flair, Harley Race, in other words the absolute most elite of the elite---AKA not Randy Orton. At all.

I think alot of you are voting for Orton on what you think he'll become in the future and that's bullshit if you ask me. He has potential to be legendary, sure, but that potential has yet to be fulfilled and at this point in time he is not half the wrestler Funk was. Funk should be winning this and it really shouldn't be as lopsided as it is, and it really saddens me to see how lopsided it is. I thought we had a better wealth of intelligent old-school guys on here but I guess not.

Vote Funk. Because he's better than Orton in every aspect of professional wrestling, and I will GLADLY argue that with anyone who wants to step up to the challenge.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

ORTON is winning this? Whaaaat?

Look, I love Orton as much as anyone on the site, and maybe, just maybe, during NEXT year's tournament I could see him winning this, but goodness now?

The fuck exactly has he done? A couple of Mania ME's true enough, but he is hardly even close to being one of the all time most decorated wrestlers in fucking HISTORY, with mulitple primes and facets to his game.

Orton is nowere near even the same LEAGUE as Terry Funk, in practically any part of pro wrestling. This is a sad, sad day.

 

[Blade]

its not everything i agree, but if you can hold it that long against the greats funk was against it certainly makes it more impressive.

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.

its not subjective its fact, funk has had five star rated matches and orton hasnt.

So Dave Meltzer's opinion is fact now?

during funks prime it wasnt. just sayin.

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?

you say i made the dumbest statement youve ever seen than call batista a future legend? thats the pot callin the kettle black.

Your statement was dumb because it was so contradictory. My statement is dumb because you disagree with my opinon. Fact of the matter is Batista is a future hall of famer, is one of the most over guys of the last 10 years, has had some great title reigns and some great matches under is belt. But that's for the Batista matches.


And yes, X, I happen to love Orton on the mic. I find he plays his character extremely well. Yeah, Funk was a great talker but I found him to be a little bland, with no discernable gimmick. He just didn't stand out much to me.