First Round: Seattle - Ahmed Johnson vs. Buddy Rogers

Discussion in 'The Mexico City Region' started by klunderbunker, Apr 22, 2010.

?

Who Wins This Matchup?

  1. Ahmed Johnson

  2. Buddy Rogers

Multiple votes are allowed.
Results are only viewable after voting.
  1. klunderbunker

    klunderbunker Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    Messages:
    17,857
    Likes Received:
    3,359
    This is a first round matchup in the Seattle Subregion. The ring and arena are universal throughout the first round and the organization is not a factor. There is a 20 minute time limit. Vote using any criteria you like. Most votes in the poll at the end of the time period wins. In the case of a tie we will go off of the number of written votes. In the case of a second tie, both are eliminated.

    Location: Key Arena, Seattle Washington.

    [​IMG]

    Ahmed Johnson

    [​IMG]

    Vs.

    Buddy Rogers

    [​IMG]

    Voting is open for 4 days.
     
    #1
  2. 8thwotwATG

    8thwotwATG The Big Boss

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2008
    Messages:
    230
    Likes Received:
    21
    Finally, the original "Nature Boy" makes his way into this tourney, unfortunately for him it's against a bigger, faster version of the man who dethroned him in 1963. I pick Ahmed Johnson here only because I feel that if Rogers was squashed quick by Bruno, Johnson (who himself is admittedly not a technical wizard in the ring) may grab Rogers quick and powerbomb the bejesus out of him. Almost as strong as Sammartino, but faster and bigger,with a deadly moveset.(the aforementioned powerbomb.)
     
    #2
  3. Papa Shango

    Papa Shango Frontman of the WZ Band!!

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2007
    Messages:
    1,479
    Likes Received:
    302
    I'm surprised that Buddy Rogers is winning. I'm guessing people are just seeing "nature boy", and voting lol.

    Seriously though, does no one remember how dominant Ahmed Johnson was? He was the first African-American Intercontinental Champion, and for a time, was essentially the No. 2 babyface of the company behind Shawn Michaels. In fact, if it weren't for a string of unfortunate health issues, including severe kidney problems which put him out of action at the peak of his push, there is no doubt in my mind that Johnson would have won the WWE Championship. He was no Dean Malenko, but he was good enough that he didn't look like a complete putz in the ring with guys like Shawn Michaels, Owen Hart, The Legion of Doom, and The British Bulldog.

    Now, not to take anything away from Buddy Rogers. He was gifted, and very influential. And a two-time World Champion. But he's also the kind of guy who always lost to the powerhouse. Lou Thesz and Bruno Sammartino immediately spring to mind. Johnson shouldn't go too far. but in this match, Johnson would squash Buddy Rogers, easily. Couple of clotheslines,one Pearl River Plunge, and it's done.
     
    #3
  4. Mr. TM

    Mr. TM Throwing a tantrum

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2007
    Messages:
    2,996
    Likes Received:
    998
    I really dislike Buddy Rogers as a professional wrestler, although I really don't have an opinion on Ahmed Johnson. I think Johnson could have done pretty well if injuries hadnt taken him out for so long, and his leaving. but just like Lesnar and Lashley, the short reigns are hurting him here. So I vote against him, due to Rogers little long cup of joe in the pro.
     
    #4
  5. Tastycles

    Tastycles Turn Bayley heel

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2008
    Messages:
    2,911
    Likes Received:
    1,516
    Buddy Rogers, by many accounts, was a right place, right time kind of guy. He did have successes in the WWWF, but in all honesty he was not well regarded by the wrestlers and promoters of the time. Thesz and Bruno have both publically stated what a complete tool he was, which should say it all really. He held the WWWF title, but never defended it and was beaten inside a minute by the powerhouse Bruno Sammartino. In his NWA days he had been beaten by Bobo Brazil, another powerhouse, fairly decisively, Ahmed Johnson is also a powerhouse, so it shouldn't be hard to see which way this one should go.

    The only difference between these two men is that Rogers got his lifethreatening condition after having, and squandering his chance at the top while Johnson got his before. Rogers had the second shortest NWA title reign in the first 25 years of its existence, which is really saying something.
     
    #5
  6. TheOneBigWill

    TheOneBigWill [This Space for Rent]

    Joined:
    May 28, 2007
    Messages:
    7,619
    Likes Received:
    1,081
    Ahmed Johnson was on pace to becoming a World Heavyweight Champion until injuries hurt him. During his opening run, he was introduced as a powerhouse who FULLY bodyslammed a huge Yokozuna. (not a hip toss, a f*cking bodyslam!)

    He mauled through opponents, left and right. Had the Ultimate Warrior not left the company, and Ahmed not ended up on I.R. for most of his career.. I truly believe he would've held victories over Warrior and Shawn Michaels. He was making his way through the roster as quickly as possible, and its unfortunate that it was all cut short.

    He wasn't the greatest inside the ring, but damn was he the best version of a Goldberg style of wrestler you could find. He hit you hard, and finished you quickly. He had the stamina to go long if he wanted, but the beauty was he didn't truly need to. He took fights to guys like Yokozuna and Vader. He waged war with a Nation.

    Again, injuries shouldn't be considered in this tournament. Just what a man can do.. and Ahmed, free of injuries, can do a lot more than most people likely believe.
     
    #6
    Papa Shango likes this.
  7. Straight Edge Loyalist

    Straight Edge Loyalist Dark Match Winner

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    5
    PUNCHY!!!!!!!!

    [YOUTUBE]ZTN3ntW[/YOUTUBE]

    That video right there is enough for me to vote for the Sand Rippa himself, Ahmed Johnson. Oh, and the fact that I thought Ahmed Johnson was a force to be reckoned with before his career was cut short.
     
    #7
  8. Straight Edge Loyalist

    Straight Edge Loyalist Dark Match Winner

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2010
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    5
    The hell happened to my video?


    Anyway, to not make this appear as spam, I'll go into deeper detail as to why Ahmed will win. Ahmed Johnson was a freak athlete at his peak, which Buddy Rogers didn't see too much of in his heyday; while Ahmed faced off against all styles of wrestlers. Ahmed's athleticism and raw power would have destroyed the NATURE BOY. This match wouldn't last five minutes.
     
    #8
  9. gd

    gd Plump, Juicy User

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    2,711
    Likes Received:
    1,275
    I remember during the debate league that I learned how much of a dick Buddy Rogers was from Gelgarin. Not going to help him win my vote here, not siree. Ahmed Johnson was kind of like Lashely with his raw athleticism and blackness and all. I like Lashely, therefore, I like Johnosn. No Rogers would be able to handle Johnson. Hell, wrestling was probably segregated back when he wrestled. Wouldn't know how to prepare. Easy pick.
     
    #9
  10. Hulkamaniac

    Hulkamaniac Vote Hogan, Savage, Rocky and Thesz

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    530
    Likes Received:
    99
    Buddy Rogers, all the way. Ahmed Johnson is just another guy in wrestling history. I don't care what his potential was, I care what he actually was. He was a midcarder, and that's it. In a kayfabe tournament, he would lose, because he just never proved he could beat top level guys, while Buddy Rogers did. If we're going to give this to al lthe "most atletic guys", just call the tournament now. In a wrestling match, Ahemd Johnson couldn't hold Buddy Rogers jockstrap.
     
    #10
  11. Jack-Hammer

    Jack-Hammer YOU WILL RESPECT MY AUTHORITAH!!!!
    Staff Member Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    12,985
    Likes Received:
    3,813
    So, the arguments I'm hearing primarily are that Ahmed Johnson was a powerhouse that COULD have POSSIBLY been a huge star if not for one thing or another and Rogers was a complete tool. I find it odd that so many pick Ahmed Johnson because of the few things he did and the potential that he has when the exact same argument for voting Sheamus over Terry Gordy gets shit all over. Ah well. I'm not an expert on Rogers, but is it really fair to call the guy a tool just because he wanted to get as much as he could while he could? When he won the NWA World Heavyweight Championship, he was booked primarily in Vince Sr.'s territory. He didn't have a problem with it as he could easily make just as much working for Sr. as he could traveling all over the world and being on the road 350 days a year. Rogers may have been a dick, but he was a memorable one that did contribute a lot.

    Ahmed Johnson was a powerhouse, no question about that. The man was a fucking bear. In terms of sheer brute strength, Johnson is among the physically strongest wrestlers of the past 20 years. When he bodyslammed Yokozuna, I'm pretty sure that Yoko weighed in excess of 600 pounds at the time.

    Now, even though Buddy Rogers is a legend, I think I'm going to give my vote to Ahmed Johnson. The man's strength was a something to see in and of itself and I just don't think Buddy Rogers would be able to stand up to it. If someone votes Rogers, I've got no problem with that at all. I'd have voted for him too if Ahmed Johnson wasn't just this damn near superhuman freak.
     
    #11
  12. Muffin Top Merkley

    Muffin Top Merkley Be a man!

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2008
    Messages:
    547
    Likes Received:
    485
    One of my first memories of watching wrestling was seeing Ahmed bodyslam Yokozuna. Seeing that amount of strength and power, as a little kid, I couldn't believe what I had just seen.

    I'm not very familiar with Buddy Rogers, but I'm sure that Ahmed's power would be too much for Rogers to compete with.
     
    #12
  13. dd23beatlesfan1

    dd23beatlesfan1 Getting Noticed By Management

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2007
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    109
    I unfortunately wasn't able to vote in the 1st round of the tournament because I was not able to get my account logged into the site for some reason, but now that it's working, I definitely plan on participating from here on.

    It seems the 1st round is over, and I am thankful that the votes did not reflect the posts for the thread of this particular matchup. Because if I could've voted, I would've definitely supported Buddy Rogers here.

    Here's the deal. Yes Ahmed Johnson was a monster and bad-ass. Yes he had plenty of potential. Yes in a kayfabe match or especially in a real life fight, Ahmed would've probably destroyed Buddy. But I just could not have in good conscience voted for a man whose career lasted only a few years and whose biggest highlight was being the Intercontinental Champion over unquestionably one of the most important wrestlers in American wrestling history. Allow me to explain.

    First, my opinions on Ahmed Johnson. I liked Ahmed Johnson very much as a kid, like most people here have stated. I had been wrestling fan for about 5-6 years when Ahmed debuted. He had an awesome look, and was decent enough in the ring that he had interesting matches. Yeah you weren't watching Bret Hart or Dory Funk Jr.-esque technical classics, but for the part of the no-nonsense/smash-mouth style of wrestling Ahmed played this part well and always put on good matches of this type. Ahmed to me was like Goldberg. He didn't need an arsenal of a thousand moves to put on good performances, his look and intensity was enough to get him over. And make no mistake about it, he was over. He had potential and probably would've been World Champion, and a solid one at that. I think his moveset was decent enough that he would've been fine as a main eventer. Who knows, if his career lasted longer and he had been in the ring with more seasoned wrestlers he might've improved himself.

    His potential was great, but let's look at facts, what did he really accomplish? Not much. He was I-C champion, but so were plenty of other guys at the time. He feuded with the Nation of Domination which was a good, entertaining storyline. But his career in the WWE lasted about two years, then he had a brief run in WCW and was never heard from again.

    Good talent, tons of potential, but in the grand scheme of pro wrestling, he is a blip on the radar at best.


    Now let's look at Buddy Rogers. One of wrestling's most controversial figures ever. No doubt. Many have went on record as to how much of a dick and asshole he was in his prime. He was very much the Shawn Michaels (circa 1990's) of his era. One of the greatest performers in the world, a loudmouth, obnoxious prick, and a guy who could've (and did) had his ass handed to him by just about everyone in the wrestling business.

    But this matchup isn't about who was the nicer guy. It's about who was the better wrestler. The criteria for a particular persons's votes for this tournament from what I understand is to either a) who you feel was the greater/more significant wrestler; b) who would win in a kayfabe matchup; c) personal preference, etc.

    Whichever you choose. For this tournament I will mostly be voting on who I feel was overall the greater professional wrestler, and in this matchup, Ahmed Johnson couldn't lace Buddy Rogers' boots.

    Ahmed may have killed him, but again his place in wrestling history is nothing to Buddy Rogers. Buddy Rogers is one of the most significant and influential wrestlers of all-time, hands down. Buddy Rogers was the first "true heel" in the business. Yes, Gorgeous George was pretty much the first bad guy and wrestler with a gimmick. And anyone who has read any of my previous posts should know how much I respect and admire Gorgeous George. Besides Frank Gotch, Ed "Strangler" Lewis, Lou Thesz, and Hulk Hogan, he's probably the most important wrestler in American pro wrestling history. But Gorgeous George got heat from audiences for basically playing a gay guy, or a guy with "feminine qualities." In the early 1950's, that was fine, but in truth, his overness as a heel isn't exactly a wonderful example to set for heels and doesn't speak too positively of our society. A guy shouldn't be hated for being gay or having feminine qualities. Wrong or right, it worked for Gorgeous George and he changed the business forever, but ummm yeah, he's not exactly my idea of what a true heel should be.

    The first guy to examplify what a real heel is? You guessed it, Buddy Rogers. The guy that was the classy, sporty, articulate prick who acts like he's better than everyone. The popular, jock who gets all the girls and the money and who you deep down wish you could be. That is the arch-type for a wrestling heel, the kind of guy you hate and want to see get his ass kicked. Forget Ric Flair, Buddy Rogers started that. Buddy Rogers' gimmick set the standard and personified just about every major trait that a wrestling heel possesses. Not every heel is the playboy "I'm better than you" asshole of course (see Jake Roberts and the more recent version of Randy Orton, or early Undertaker), but there would be no real true heels in the business without Buddy Rogers. For that alone, his legacy and place in wrestling history is bigger than almost anybody's, certainly much more than Ahmed Johnson.

    In addition to that, much like Shawn Michaels in the 1990's, almost all of Buddy's peers hated him on a personal level, but few denied his abilities to perform and put on a show and draw in crowds. And few denied how much he affected the business. Especially as time went along. Buddy was a guy who changed the business. His peers like Lou Thesz and Bill Miller, guys who were renowked shooters hated Buddy not only for his principles and ummm, lack of professionalism, but also for what he was doing to change the business, by bringing more showsmanship and less technical skill and shooting. In his time he was ridiculed, but in his later years even Lou Thesz, Buddy's basic mortal enemy in the business conceded that Buddy Rogers helped to change the business and was a great performer and tremendous draw. And he was. Buddy Rogers was hands down one of the top draws in wrestling during the late 1950's and early 1960's. His appearances brought territories up from nothing attendance and money wise, which was why the NWA was up McMahon's and Mondt's asses to get Rogers booked with other territories and why he was made champion. Because he was a huge draw. Which is what they say makes a great wrestler. A guy who put butts in seats. Rogers did that and more. Until the wrestling boom of the 1980's, Buddy Rogers and Pat O Connor held the record for the highest attendance for a wrestling match in history. Largely because of Buddy Rogers and people wanting to see him lose. Everyone wanted to see him lose and get his butt kicked. That's the basis for modern pro wrestling and the existence of heels, and while there were those who created that idea before Buddy Rogers, no one did it better or solidified that concept more than Buddy.

    I just couldn't in good conscience vote for Ahmed over Buddy. Most of my voting will go to wrestlers who were greater wrestlers IMO, and much of my opinion on who was greater will depend on who I feel made more of an impact on wrestling. That's just how I judge and critique everything, pro wrestlers no exception. We're allowed to do that, so that's how I'll be voting in most cases once the rest of the tournament gets under way. This match would've been no different.

    I just decided to make this post because again I noticed everyone making cases for Ahmed Johnson, and I didn't read I don't think one really good case for Buddy, so even though he won (barely), I felt the need to make a case for him.

    Looking forward to joining in here for the rest of the tournament. :)
     
    #13
    Hulkamaniac likes this.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"