Instant classics or Hard-Worked classics ?

[ABS]

I see how alot of people say they perfer seeing someone work his way to the top of the company some like Guerrero and Benoit who have a hell all out of Respect in the ring but yet they are no were near the level as the Instan classics such as Austin , Rock , Cena.

Guerrero and benoit ( Both R.I.P ) Worked their ass off to the the top but theyre not on the level of Austin , Rock , Cena who got to the top withink 2-3years. So do you think Instant Classics is a better way for someone to carry the company or be a better star than a Wreslter who worked his ass off for a long time to the top.

To me its if you want a bigger draw and make the guy popular , put him on the top within few years but to me the one who worked their ass off for years have my UTTER RESPECT.

 

[incrediblesim]

I think at all points in any walks of life you see people and think "Yeah- they have got what it takes" It's the same in Wrestling. You see guys like Austin/Hogan/Cena/Rocky and immeadiately they make impressions- therefore it is much easier for them to become over with audiences- and you can push them much quicker.

The thing with guys like Benoit & Eddie (RIP Both of Them) is that they arent as striking personalities as the other guys (Eddie to a lesser degree). Instead of being accepted by the audience for the role they play they have to make a place on the show for their role.

In all I think a hard-worked classic can always have the edge. The dudes worked his ass off to become the top guy and when he's there you feel more for the guy.

The danger with an Instant guy is that first impression sometimes don't last forever. Sometimes the fans turn on you as quick as they jumped on your bandwagon to begin with (Cena!!!).

 

[I_Like_All_Wrestling]

Cena may possibly be the biggest "instant classic" as you say, in wrestling history. He was handpicked to be WWE champ before he was even in OVW. I'm not sure about The Rock, but I do think he came up pretty fast.

Austin however did work his way to the top, he was wrestling more than 10 years before he even signed with WWE. Before he change his character and became limited by injuries Austin was a great technical wrestler.

None of them compare to Guerrero or Benoit though when it comes to "paying their dues." Those guys wrestled all over the world before they go their time, I'm honestly still surprised that WWE put a title on Eddie.

 

[FromTheSouth]

I think Austin compares. He got held down by nWo, had to do a program as a possibly gay tag team wrestler, and be television champ, the deathnell for title hopes in WCW, for quite some time.

Rocky, also, had to pay dues. He was completely rebranded after the fans hated his face run. He worked his ass off to make them keep hating him after his first heel run. WWE caught lightning in a bottle with him, and tried to run with it. Similar plan to Jeff Hardy, you know, until the drugs.

Cena is the one guy who was handed success on a platter. Benoit and Eddie and Y2J worked for quite a long time, and WWE sold their struggles quite well in the buildup to their title wins, but, by no means, were the guys on top during their time being fitted for gold right out of the womb.

 

[AnthonyMango/NoFate007]

I personally never seem to become a solid fan of someone that I feel is too rushed.

For instance, CM Punk. I don't want him to have the Money in the Bank right now, because I don't feel he's good enough for the main event. Sure, he's held the ECW title, but that's just a step above IC/US, and with horrible feuds, it may even be lower at times since it fluctuates so much and so often. I would rather see Punk go down and win the IC or US titles, maybe a tag team title, and work on building up to the big leagues.

When people are skyrocketed to the top, a lot of the time its filled with squash matches, which have no merit in my point of view. I don't care that Kofi has defeated James Curtis 3 times and "unnamed jobber" x a million. I don't care if someone is a huge guy and is the new monster, having him defeat jobbers doesn't make me think he's credible. Sometimes, though its rare, they do start off defeating other people of more noteworthy status, and then it actually does matter, but really when does a monster ever make his debut, challenge for a title, and actually win it?

The way I see it, you need a mixture. If someone shows that they're really over, really fast, put them in a feud for the IC/US titles. Once you give them 2 or 3 reigns with that, if they're still popular and not just a fad, then move them up to the main event. Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart both did the pyramid transition (tag team title, midcard title, main event) and they never needed a push "right off the bat". How many "right off the bat" people really last that long, anyway?

 

[michaelj817]

At the end of the day, regardless of what hardcore wrestling fans think, the guy/s that will be pushed to the moon are those who are in a position to draw the most money for the company at that particular time.

Steve Austin- right guy, right character, right place, right time, right everything. However, when the Stone Cold character took off in 96/97 most fans didn't know or could have cared less about his days getting held back in WCW. Steve Austin was that good...period. However, if Steve Austin broke into the WWE now, or 20 years ago instead of 12, he still would have been a star. Chances are that he just wouldn't have been the giant success story that he became in the late 90's. Fans only learned to respect him for his hard work to get to the top after he became huge. Does that earn him any less respect in my book? Hell no.

As for Rock, while he didn't "Pay his dues" for a decade before he became a star, he was that damn good. Look at anybody on the WWE roster today, and I dare you to show me a well rounded complete package such as Rock was. Except for the fact that he chose to leave, I see him as 2nd to only Hogan for overall entertainment value, and regardless of what a lot of people think, he could work too. While he may not have been a technical wrestler like benoit, he could work with anyone, make anybody look good, and his athleticism outshone almost everyone else in that era, especially for his size.

Benoit/Guerrerro- These men are different in the sense of how they gained their popularity to draw. As opposed to when Austin worked in WCW, Benoit and Guerrerro were both high profile cruiserweight style wrestlers at the height of the Monday Night War. Both were also part of a major coup angle when the Radicalz jumped to Raw one night after Benoit won the WCW Heavyweight Belt. The fans of this time period watched them grow and struggle as performers, and in essence grew up with them and their struggles in the business. Also around this time, WWE began their Tough Enough series which smartened up even the most casual fan or MTV channel surfer as to the sacrifices that must be endured to make it as a pro wrestler. This gave fans a better idea of what these performers go through, and allowed them understand, respect, and indentify those who worked extremely hard at their craft. Benoit, Guerrerro, and Jericho among them soared in popularity at this time.

Cena- Here is a guy who was super over as the US champ, and I for one remember being almost 23 years old, sitting 5 rows back from the ring at MSG at WM 20, and marking out when he FU'ed Big Show. I honest to god jumped out of my seat. That said, I am not a Cena hater, nor am I a huge Cena fan, but he has "it". Was it rushed? maybe. When I look at Cena, I see the closest thing WWE has to a breakthrough mainstream media star in the vein of a Hogan, Austin, or Rock. However, I don't think he is anywhere near being as over as he could be, nor do I think he has found his true character yet. To me he is missing something, and whatever it is could have been gained by allowing him more time to develop as a performer. Listen to his interviews; He sounds like a cross between Austin and Rock, and while he has the charisma, he is neither of those men, and instead should be seeking who he truly is as a performer. However, at this point, it is not his fault. Just as when Rock played up to the fans too much, it got annoying for me, Cena is told what to do by Vince. Whether or not Cena himself likes his character is irrelevant, and has more to do with what the big guy wants, so we all shouldn't blame JC for shoving too much of himself down our throats and rushing him to superstardom, but instead blame Vince McMahon.

So what's the difference between an instant and hard-worked classic? It isn't an ability to get over, as green or not, it has been proven that with the right gimmick anyone can get over. However, I think what separates those who gain success quickly and those who gain it over time is the endurance factor. Sure anyone can get over with the right support from the office, but how bad do they really want it, and when you get it, will you appreciate it enough to maintain it? Brock Lesnar is a perfect example of this. The guy had it all: he could work, he had the look, he could talk, and he also had the company behind him from day one being billed as "The Next Big Thing". For a while Lesnar was the Next big thing, until he got tired of it and didn't want it anymore. He is a perfect example of a guy who in an older territory system where spots were earned(or given b/c you were friends with the booker), would have been weeded out long before he ever graced a Main Event. Either that, or he would have had more time to develop as a person and accept the responsibilty that goes along with gaining a top spot and appreciating it for the big deal that it is.

 

[Afro-Ameri-Spawn]

I definitely wouldn't call Austin an instant classic. He has paid his dues for quite some time. He was trained by Gentleman Chris Adams and studied under some of the all time greats, men who it would be a shame to leave out of the pro wrestling hall of fame. By the time that he signed with the WWF, he was already a well recognized character in the sport of professional wrestling.

The Rock paid SOME dues before he got became the instant champ that he currently is. I mean he did the whole Flex Cavana thing for how long? Then he did the whole "island" gimmick and the Nation turn. And having to walk around with those bad sideburns and sing bad versions of Elvis songs should get him some kind of "dues" credit.

Cena probably would qualify as a instant classic, but I think that Batista would be a better example, as well as Orton.

But here's my opinion on the whole thing. I've been a wrestling fan ever since I was about 9 years old. I'm 33 now and I have always liked keeping wrestling fresh. Sure I applaud it when a Benoit or a Foley or a Guerrerro finally gets the big pay off after a long road. But I get bored seeing the same old thing along the way. The same finisher, the same base gimmick. The same person. I like seeing something new every now and then.

Back in 2004, I used love watching RAW, Smackdown, and Xplosion ever week. But you know what I used to REALLY love? I loved watching Steel Domain Wrestling(later the new AWA out of Minnesota) and NWA Wildside(out of Georgia) broadcasts that that aired on a local tv station. I mean this was action at it's best. I saw guys that I had to wonder if they would ever make it. And while a few guys did make it (Davari, Kennedy, and Jesse aka Ray Gordy), it was still a pleasure watching the guys who busted their asses week in and week out in front of small crowds without having any kind of major deal. It's hunger. You just don't find that down the line any more. But hey, that's just my two cents.

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

Cena is the one guy who was handed success on a platter.

WTF? 2 names blow that statement out of the water - BROCK LESNAR and KURT ANGLE!!!

- Lesnar won KOTR, the Undisputed title and beat most of the big names in his first year w/ WWE!
- Angle won every title except the Hardcore and Tag titles as well as KOTR in his first year as well!
- Cena had to wait 2 years before he even got a decent push at WM20.

An instant classic has to have something uber amazing for me to care in the long term personally. Lesnar's career thankfully ended b4 it got stale, sadly didn't end well. Angle became a top draw for his amazing ability and great mic skills, that just improved more and more as years went on, plus his willingness to be humiliated frequently helped also. The only guy i'm aware of who was pushed to ME status straight away that's lasted the test of time is THE UNDERTAKER!*
Guys like Orton, Batista and yes, even Cena who've been around a year or two before being pushed are better in my view because if after three or four years ppl still don't care regardless of what you do, you need to be let go or seriously repackaged. I do however think it's sad that guys like Guerrero and Benoit had to work so hard when they could outwrestle most of the big names we've seen in the last decade to get put in the top spot for 5 months each and then back down again. Makes their 20 year sacrifices not seem worth it compared to guys like Cena who've passed legendary title reigns for being good on the mic and being eye candy.

*- I'm sure i'll get another stupid gay joke thrown at me for mentioning Taker's greatness again, fact is, i'm still right. Taker rules all

 

[mikey_d_01]

Im not a taker fan but i respect him and i know he was in wcw etc previously but in terms of wwf, he was an instant classic, right off the bat from survivor series, to taking the title off hogan within his 1st year, for me that was the passing of the torch & to have someone beat hogan for the title in their 1st year when hogan was the biggest name by far in wrestling, says alot, at the time of that match the crowd in attendance was pretty split, 50% hogan / 50% taker, so that in itself proved that whether your heel or face, if the fans want to see it, its gonna happen! Taker = Instant WWE Classic

I think that instant classics are a good thing, if the crowd are into them and you have something building then why not, it helps the company, helps other talent, i dont think the veterans would be pissed, gives them more opponents to have good matches with, more buyrates for PPVs (more money for them) etc. But dont forget just because people are over quick with fans dont mean they are with the boys in the back, it can be years before a wrestler is respected by his peers, CENA was finally accepted after his classic match with JBL, and this was long past his lil white rapper gimmick.

Overall personally i prefer the long haul, you invest time in characters each week, so for me to see someone like eddie or benoit (before all the shit went down) was great, you see them struggle in wcw, especially eddie, who you never could of seen as wwe champ while he was in the LWO, makes all that viewing worthit to see him a champ after all those years, instant classics can fade quickly (lesnar), but legacies are built over time & stay with you!

 

[Davi323]

I would agree with you, mikey_d_01, up to a point. Undertaker started out as an Instant WWE Classic, but I think time has made him an everlasting one. He has earned his spot as one of the greatest WWE Wrestlers of all time, based on what he did after he was given the ball. If he didn't deserve his status then, and was given it to him on a silver platter, he has more than paid his dues since. Undertaker has my utmost respect for what he has done, and continues to accomplish in the ring. He was an instant classic who became a hard worked one. He was given his shot, and has held on to it through his own merits for almost two decades.

With that being said, I much prefer the guys who toil and sweat for years to get to "the spot". I have never judged my favorite wrestlers by the standards the WWE wants me to, I judge them based on what I see in the ring, not hype. Some of my favorite wrestlers of all time were never given the title, rarely main evented, but gave everything they could week in, and week out. I look at a guy like Ricky the Dragon Steamboat, and can't help but be in awe of his in-ring work ethic. He is much more memorable to me than a guy like Brock Lesnar, despite Lesnar's meteoric rise to the top. Steamboat never got above the Intercontinental Championship in the WWF/E, but, his feud with Randy Savage is one of the top 5 all-time greatest feuds to me.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

If you're asking the question of which would I rather see, its something I can't truly give an answer to because both choices are correct and proper. I have two prime examples of someone who worked their way to the top over the years. And someone who instantly came into the company and became the top guy within a matter of monthes.

Chris Benoit: Obviously, this would be the wrestler I see who worked his way to the top over the course of several years. Now, why do I see this as being a great thing? Because when Chris Benoit broke into the business, all he was, was an average guy with wrestling knowledge and skill. Nothing great, nothing stand-off-ish. There wasn't one thing about this guy that made me step back and say.. hes gonna be "it" someday.

So what Benoit did, was slowly but surely, earned my respect. He became a Professional Wrestler in-which I enjoyed watching week in and week out. While his character was still completely plain and very raw, it was his skills and ability inside the ring.. and it was placing him in the Four Horsemen, that truly got me to notice him as an individual.

His feud with Kevin Sullivan. His turn from the Horsemen and run as a Champion with the United States title, as well as the Television title & Tag Team title. All of this, including his countless feuds with stars the likes of Jeff Jarrett, Ric Flair, Dean Malenko, and more.. it made me WANT to see him succeed.. and in time, he did. He earned the fans respect, not because he was storyline written in to take it within a matter of monthes, or quick years.. but instead because he was all but written off.. and he refused to let that be.

Now on the opposite side of all this..

Brock Lesnar: Here's a guy that (in my opinion) feels simply because of his wrestling background/pedigree, that he felt coming into the business he should be the top guy, and the ultimate attraction. Lesnar's attitude was piss poor, but his skills were not.

This is the prime situation of a guy who debuted in a dominating fashion, and from the moment he debuted, he destroyed opponent after opponent, and within the matter of 2 monthes won the King of the Ring (some say the last true tourney of its kind) and in a matter of 4 monthes, became a World Heavyweight Champion, when it was considered "Undisputed" at the time. The guy, in a matter of under 5 monthes of debuting, became the top wrestler in the business, defeating the former "Great One" The Rock, to do it.

From this moment, Lesnar went on to remain undefeated until losing his first match in controversial fashion, by a double cross. He then went on to do something very few can say they've done, and thats win the KOTR tourney and the Royal Rumble, back to back. And he rounded out his rookie year, by winning his Second World Championship.

Now, this to me is pathetic and overkill. The guy in ONE YEAR "video gamed" his way through everything, and became the "best" with nothing left to do, at the end of one year. As a result, his attitude destroyed him, and he'd go one more year, winning yet another World Championship.. and feuding with Goldberg in his final match, at Wrestlemania.

Lesnar's wrestling career will never be forgotten, and it was only, exactly, 2 years long. And filled with everything "unlocked." He won both "high-named" events (KOTR/Rumble) and he became a multi-time World Champion. In 2 years. Thats almost unheard of.

Overall Thoughts: Benoit couldn't of done what Brock Lesnar did. And Lesnar couldn't of did what Benoit done. Each guy did the only thing they could've, they followed the logical choice for their characters. And thats why some guys can instantly debut and become a huge impact, right off the bat.. while others, need to give it years before becoming someone huge.

 

[Big Daddy Fool]

I think Austin compares. He got held down by nWo, had to do a program as a possibly gay tag team wrestler, and be television champ, the deathnell for title hopes in WCW, for quite some time.

Where the hell do you get your information. Austin was gone for over a year before the nWo was even though of. Umm not quite sure how the hollywood blondes were gay...the west hollywood blondes sure were so maybe you got those two confused. TV title i dont know how much of a deathnell it was. here are some wrestlers who won the tv title to go on to win the world championship

ric flair, ricky steamboat, sting, scott steiner, ddp, lex luger, booker t, benoit, jericho won the wcw title in wwe for what thats worth

so i fail to see your point about austin

 

[xmoshx]

id go with the hard worked classic or instant. it just seems more special when the finally when the big one for example no one though eddie was gonna be the guy to take the belt of brock and when eddie won that much that crowd went insane. when chris benoit won it at wrestlemania it was about finishing his 15 year or so journey to be champ. but when you have a instant classic like cena the fans are not always gonna cheer for him or in the case of brock and rock just got way to big in a very short time and end up leaving

 

[Miko]

hard worked classics all the way, i take instant classics at face value, big guys who get WAY over with casual fans because of their gimmicks (ability to entertain etc. . .) and for that reason they have their uses, but i care about the hard worked classics more, and watching some one who has worked their whole life finally take the title away from an instant classic is a truly great thing in wrestling, like when Benoit won at WM (although HHH and HBK were hardly "instant classics") or Eddie taking the title off of Brock, or Jericho beating Rock and Austin it was all wonderful and way better than some rookie who is over doing the exact same thing

 

[oddone]

ive gotta go with the guys that work their way up. the guys that have to work for it are typically the guys that stick around longer. lesnar, gone. rock,gone. goldberg, gone. the world title is supposed to be the top of the heap, if you get it within your first 2 years, what do you have to work for. there are certain people you can tell will win a world title quickly while others that deserve it just as much may go their entire career and never get a run. keneddy = world champ fo sho .jeff hardy= ill believe it when i see it. matt hardy= see jeff hardy