Kevin Nash Says Wrestling Died When Guerrero, Benoit Became Champions

[It's Damn Real!]

http://www.wrestlezone.com/news/259...when-benoit-a-guerrero-became-world-champions

"When Benoit and Guerrero hugged [at the end of WrestleMania XX], that was the end of the business," Nash says. "Has business been the same since that WrestleMania? Has it come close to the Austin era? Has it come close to the nWo or the Hogan era? You put two fucking guys that were great workers that were the same height as the fucking referees, and I'm sorry, man. Are you going to watch a porno movie with a guy with a three-inch dick? Even if you're not gay, you will not watch a porno movie with a guy with a three-inch dick. That's not the standard in porno films. So you put a 5-foot-7 guy as your world champion."

I can't believe anyone, even someone as smart as Nash, would have the balls to not only say something this ignorant, but cling to such a dated and discriminatory standard that hasn't really existed since the early 90's.

Thoughts?

 

[FlairFan2003]

Nash as always is outspoken to get attention. Size is irrelevant when compared to talent. If Nash wanted to complain that Benoit didnt have the charisma to be champ that would be different, not only that but he'd be right. WWE knew he was right as Benoit dropped the title and went back to the mid card just a few months later. The list of guys who were not muscled up giants that were popular is a mile long. Edge, Hart, HBK, Flair, Steamboat, and honestly niether Benoit or Guerrero had that. Guerrero was close though, size not withstanding he could have had a long, successful career. Benoit, already in his 40s when he died, wasnt getting any better than the one dimensional, unable to cut a promo guy he was. If not for his superior athleticism I doubt he would have had as much success as he did.

Nash has never been fond of the smaller wrestlers, past interviews showing his disdain for athletic "spot monkey" types that dont entertain on the mic, cant sell in the ring, display little or no ring psychology. Nash made disparaging comments along those lines re: Benoit & Malenko in 1999. Personally I agree with him on this subject. However, I think the logic he used in this most recent interview is flawed. Fact is, the Guerrero-Benoit WrestleMania was a great "feel good" moment, the audience enjoyed it, and WWE didnt pin their long term fortunes on Benoit, he quickly dropped the title and Orton & Batista became the focal point, much more talented performers with more upside.

 

[TUFFY54]

I think Nash was partially right with what he said. I somewhat disagree with his thoughts on Eddie. While small, Eddie was incredibly charismatic and had a huge fan base with the latino crowd. He also had a good story going for him after turning his life around. He was a good choice for a transitional champion, but never a guy you would build your company around. As far as Benoit is concerned, I think he's dead on.

Benoit is probably the most overrated sports entertainer of all time. (I'm not even going to touch on the fact he killed himself and his family) Yes, I realize I didn't say wrestler. WWE is a sports entertainment company. You have to be entertaining. Beniot wasn't. He was great in the ring, but so were Jamie Noble, Joey Mercury, and a whole slew of other guys that never went anywhere because of their lack of personality.

Benoit never drew a dime as champion, or as a main eventer in WWE or WCW. I get tired of the revisionist history of this site. I was in high school when Benoit had his biggest run in WCW. He was NEVER a major player. I remember going to Nitro and PPV parties with 30 people and NO ONE talked about him. Beniot was a great technical wrestler and a good guy to put on a midcard match to get the crowd going in the middle of a PPV. He was never main event material.

Nash said that the WWE was never as big as it was during the Hogan, NWO, or Attitude Era when those guys were on top. Is that a lie? Of course it isn't. Lets take a look at the Mania's that bookended 20. Wrestlemania 19 had Hogan vs. Vince, Rock vs. Austin, and Lesnar vs. Angle. Wrestlermania 21 had Michaels vs. Angle, and the rise of Cena and Batista to the main event. Anyone will tell you that 19 and 21 were FAR more entertaining cards than Benoit and Guerrero's night in MSG. Hell, Hogans pop when he returned at 21 was bigger than Chris and Eddie's pop's combined.

A lot of people will try and say Nash in a hypocrite because his best friend is HBK, a smaller guy. The difference between Shawn and Chris is only the fact that Shawn is one of the greatest talkers and entertainers in wrestling history.

Vince McMahon has always said that you make your money in the wrestling business from the neck up. From the neck up, Chris Beniot had zero value. If he wasn't crippling himself by flying through the air and smashing his head completely unprotected, nobody cared about him.

People also claim that "Chris deserved that championship for his 15 years of service to the wrestling business". If thats the truth, where's the love for Mark Henry?

Unlike Nash, I don't think being small always means you can't be a main eventer. I love HBK, Angle, Jericho, Punk, and Bryan. However, those guys are all all oozing with charisma. Benoit didn't have a drop.

I have one question for all the Benoit fans that are currently having heart attacks and brain aneurysms from reading the Nash article (and likely my post as well):

If Benoit was so great as a world champion, name me ONE thing that was memorable about his reign from the day after Wrestlemania until he lost the belt at SummerSlam. And, if he was so amazing, how come he never got within a mile of the title after he lost it?

"This is never going to work. They men don't want to be him and the women don't want to fuck him" - Stephanie McMahon after WM 20 from the Benoit biography Ring of Hell.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I read Nash's comments a while ago and I couldn't help but laugh at them. I'm wondering if he was just saying stuff with the intention of causing controversy of some sort, whether he was on something when he said them or whether he actually believes what he's saying. It's hard to tell with Kevin Nash because sometimes he sounds like he's extremely intelligent and sensible while other times he seems like he's lost about 50 IQ points sitting on the toilet.

Benoit & Guerrero weren't the greatest champions, nobody's saying they were. But to claim that "wrestling died" when they became World Champions is pure nonsense. I also like the way that Kevin Nash glossed over his own failed World Championship reigns. He may have held the WWF Championship for close to a year back in the mid 90s but it was still pretty lackluster. It also took place during a time when the WWE was pretty weak overall in terms of quality. What about all the lousy reigns, and I use the term loosely for some of them, in WCW. The most memorable aspect of Kevin Nash's time as World Champion at any point is his career is the now infamous Fingerpoke of Doom. Now THAT was a true low point in the history of professional wrestling. But, since he's 7 feet tall and over 300 pounds, I guess that's somehow supposed to make him exempt from being a failure as a World Champion.

He also went onto criticize CM Punk & Daniel Bryan for not being "bigger than life", saying that people probably wouldn't know who they are if they weren't wearing the belt or have a gimmick shirt on. It reminds me of somewhat similar comments made by Batista. Like Batista, Nash seems to be saying that you have to have a certain look before you should be made a top guy in a wrestling company. Forget about whether or not you actually have ability in the ring & on the mic and if you're able to make fans care about you.

Nash's viewpoint, if this is legitimately how he feels, is a clear sign that he's a veteran that's very much behind the times. For several years now especially, wrestling has been evolving into something in which having a great physical look isn't enough to make you a real star. I agree that Benoit was short on charisma & personality, but he got over all the same. Benoit was the exception to the rule I think. Anyone who tries to say Guerrero, Punk & Bryan couldn't/can't wrestle or talk on the mic clearly has their head up their ass. I wouldn't take a dozen guys just like Kevin Nash for one guy like CM Punk, Daniel Bryan or Austin Aries. They could outwork him inside the ring any day of the week with both hands tied behind their backs on their worst day.

As far a this whole "bigger than life" stuff goes, so what? As long as people tune in to watch Raw & SD! each week, as long as hundreds of thousand or millions of people pay each month to watch ppvs, as long as anywhere from 5 to 15,000 people pay in order to watch you do your things at live events and as long as people take interest in whatever it is you're doing, then none of that "bigger than life" bullshit means anything.

Kevin Nash had a great look, no question about that. He was also definitely short on in-ring ability. What really made Nash a star was his ability to become very buddy buddy with the top brass of whatever wrestling company he worked for. He was a master politician in WWE, WCW and in TNA. He also glosses over the fact that the Monday Night Wars, the real life feud between WWE & WCW, fueled the record ratings both shows drew in the late 90s and early 2000s. He also doesn't mention that the ratings immediately started going down after WCW went under because there was no real life feud to fuel things. This was all while Austin & Rock were very much a part of things. This was still many years before WWE went PG and they were still doing all kinds of pretty raunchy stuff.

 

[HBsam31]

I agree with Jack Hammer in that Eddie and Benoit didn't have the greatest title runs, but the business has changed to where the bigger than life thing does not apply. Honestly what is the difference between Eddie and Benoit being champ and HBK and Bret Hart being champ. To say that the business dies because they held the title is really exaggerating. He comes off as a veteran who is out of touch. Nash is usually a smart guy, but I think he went a bit far this time.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

I'm not big on the size factor thing (though I do think it does apply in certain scenarios), but Hart/HBK were larger-than-life personalities. Guerrero and Benoit were absolutely not. Guerrero was sorta on the way to being one of those types, but Benoit was no where near it. There's a reason that the only two things most folks remember about him are his winning at Wrestlemania, and murdering his entire family.

Hart/HBK were probably the two most popular stars in the entire industry when they were feuding through the late 90's. I'm not sure Guerrero or Benoit were ever at that level, at least not for longer than a fleeting moment.

 

[braveh]

He is right and wrong. Very few short guys can get over and have enough of the it-factor so that they should "headline" a WM. Rey Mysterio at some point of his career had enough popularity and acceptance to claim that position. So it's not impossible like Nash says.

But definitely not Benoit and Guerrro. They were not charismatic enough, not over enough and they were short too! They had no business winning main events at a wrestlemania.

 

[Lowdown]

If Benoit was so great as a world champion, name me ONE thing that was memorable about his reign from the day after Wrestlemania until he lost the belt at SummerSlam. And, if he was so amazing, how come he never got within a mile of the title after he lost it?

Alright, how about his Iron Man match against Triple H for the HW championship. I know Eugene had played a factor in the outcome, but it was still a good match. As for Nash's comments, he's off base in saying that wrestling died at WMXX. Eddie and Benoit weren't top draws like Trips, Taker, and Austin. But he's diminishing the positives to what they had. I make no qualms about being a Benoit mark, especially when he was in WCW. Was Nash a top draw in WWF in '95 when he was champ? This is the same cat that was known as "Oz" at one point. Yes, personality and charisma are vital in wrestling. Eddie had that as well as in ring talent. Benoit's charisma was in the intensity he brought to the ring, as crazy as that may sound. How much personality did Goldberg have; and he was WCW's top draw for the better part of '98. I highly doubt that '04 was a down year. WMXX was a feel good moment. If Vince doesn't see championship material in someone, chances are he's not going to give them the strap. Look at WWE now. Cena has been the top draw for years; he's not the champ but still the face of the company. You don't have to be the top guy to be the champ. Just ask Sheamus and Danielson.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

Sorry, LD, but Goldberg looked like the fuckin' Rock in terms of personality compared to Chris Benoit. Benoit's entire gimmick was climbing to the top rope and drawing his thumb across his neck in a cut throat fashion. Otherwise it was like interviewing an angry, growling dog. He never had anything of importance to say, and when he did, he never said it to the point anyone should have cared about it.

I can honestly say, the only time I really ever saw a true personality with him was when Eddie died, and that came in the candid, raw and incredibly upsetting interview he gave backstage, crying and missing his friend.

 

[Pegusus Fill_T]

But definitely not Benoit and Guerrro. They were not charismatic enough, not over enough and they were short too!

Benoit, yes. But Eddie Guerrero wasnt charismatic??? Eddie Guerrero had emotion & passion and if Eddie Guerrero is not charismatic, lemme tell you no one in the current roster except John Cena and Y2J are charismatic. And yes, that means Eddie Guerrero was a much better mic worker than Punk. Punk needs 'pipebombs' to keep people relatively interested while Eddie had the ability to make people cling to every word he said whether has a heel trying to destroy his ex-friends family life or a face filling us with laughter. And not over enough??? Didnt you watch wrestling in the 2003-2005 period or are you just trolling. Eddie had the biggest latino fan base out of the entire roster (which is a big deal) and you could hear people chant Eddie during his matches or promos (when he was face and you know he was gonna cheat his way out)

 

[braveh]

Benoit, yes. But Eddie Guerrero wasnt charismatic??? Eddie Guerrero had emotion & passion and if Eddie Guerrero is not charismatic, lemme tell you no one in the current roster except John Cena and Y2J are charismatic. And yes, that means Eddie Guerrero was a much better mic worker than Punk. Punk needs 'pipebombs' to keep people relatively interested while Eddie had the ability to make people cling to every word he said whether has a heel trying to destroy his ex-friends family life or a face filling us with laughter. And not over enough??? Didnt you watch wrestling in the 2003-2005 period or are you just trolling. Eddie had the biggest latino fan base out of the entire roster (which is a big deal) and you could hear people chant Eddie during his matches or promos (when he was face and you know he was gonna cheat his way out)

I was the biggest WWE mark in the world 04-05. Forget about any comparision to CM Punk. Eddie was never as over as Rey Myserio has been at times. And Mysterio appeal mainly to children, younger kids and hispanics. Not the IWC loudmouths who try to dominate every raw/smackdown tapings. Mysterio still had stronger crowd reactions than Eddie.

Alright, how about his Iron Man match against Triple H for the HW championship. I know Eugene had played a factor in the outcome, but it was still a good match.

On a weekly basis we discuss whether wrestlers like Bobby Roode, Sheamus, HHH has the IT-factor. Benoit was so far below those guys in terms of charisma and it-factor that it's ridiculous.....and he was short too!

 

[justtxyank]

He is right in a sense, but I would argue with him whether it actually mattered.

Let's shift gears for a moment and consider: If BJ Penn defeated Jon Jones for the UFC Lightweight title or JDS for the Heavyweight title, would people think this was legit? Or would suddenly the UFC's credibility get called into question?

The reality is that if wrestling is going to be perceived as a legit athletic competition between guys then Chris Benoit can't consistently be beating guys who are significantly larger than him and hold the world title. He just can't. Wrestling requires certain suspension of disbelief when viewing it to accept it on a kayfabe level while watching.

Now, what I would argue with Nash on is that the audience that watched that way is basically gone. Wrestling's audience has been cut significantly, and in my opinion a large portion of that is because teen and adult males can no longer pretend in their head that they are watching something legit. UFC offers a better alternative for that portion of the fanbase. The portion that wants to care about wins and losses, titles, the history of it, etc.

 

[Pegusus Fill_T]

I was the biggest WWE mark in the world 04-05. Forget about any comparision to CM Punk. Eddie was never as over as Rey Myserio has been at times. And Mysterio appeal mainly to children, younger kids and hispanics. Not the IWC loudmouths who try to dominate every raw/smackdown tapings. Mysterio still had stronger crowd reactions than Eddie.

Remember when Eddie was champ, WWE was in the ruthless aggression era not the so called PG era. WWE wasnt marketed to kids but teens/young adults. Crowd loved Mysterio and still does. In fact right now the only guy to get a reaction as loud as Cena or Orton is Rey Rey. But in 2004 period, rey was a lovable mid carder while Eddie was the main focus. if rey was more over, trust me, Vince wouldve pushed Rey Rey before Eddie.

 

[Steve0904]

Nash is trying to make a point here obviously. The problem is he's articulated it all wrong. If he said it better more people would be less likely to jump on his back. You can't attack two people the IWC loves, and two people that are dead.

Having said that, I disagree that you have to be 7 foot 300 pounds to be world champion, and it is a bit hypocritical of Nash when there are lots of "small" guys that have been champions, some of which are the greatest wrestlers alive, but they all had personality. As others have said Eddie was close but Benoit not so much.

A long term Benoit reign would've never worked because he didn't have the mic skills. I think Nash is desparate for attention and/or bitter, but it doesn't exactly mean he's wrong on all accounts.

 

[dtroppe]

Nash is right on the money. Lets first mention that he knows more about pro-wrestling and drawing money in that business than any of us.

The biggest names in the history of the business have been big men. Hogan, Savage, Rock, Austin, Batista, Goldburg, Warrior, Lesner, HHH, Nash, Hall, Taker. These guys all had a great appeal to a massive number of fans.

There are exceptions to the rules of course- HBK and Rick Flair for example.

 

[DirtyD79]

Lets first mention that he knows more about pro-wrestling and drawing money in that business than any of us.

I always hate this argument. If you go to a restaurant and the food tastes like garbage obviously you're gonna want your money back or you'll make sure not to eat their again. You're not gonna assume it's your fault because the chef knows more about cooking than you do. You don't have to be Gordon Ramsay to know the food tastes like garbage and the place is so filthy a damn hobo wouldn't even take a shit in there.

You don't have to be John Cena to know a certain wrestler is not entertaining either. Are there good big men? Yes. Are there crappy small ones? Also yes. It's hardly a matter of who is bigger than whoever else. It's about who is more entertaining. Speaking of John Cena you'll notice he just has to wave his hand saying "You Can't See Me" and he gets twice the pop Sin Cara does even if Sin Cara did a million backflips. But in the same token you'll also notice CM Punk gets more of a reaction just sitting like an Indian in the middle of the ring than Lord Tensai gets slapping Sakamoto around. The difference? CM Punk and John Cena have charisma.

 

[Waylon Mercy]

Leading up to Wrestlemania 20, Eddie Guerrero was more over than Nash could ever dream of becoming. Apart from Stone Cold, The Rock and Hogan (at the height of Hulkamania), I have never seen anyone more over than Eddie Guerrero. His passion to entertain and put on the best show he could possibly muster was palpable. He gave off a vibe that very few wrestlers could duplicate or even come close to capturing.
Benoit, on the other hand, was madly over not because of his personality, but because of his work ethic. His passion spilled on to the canvas in a different way than Eddie, but nonetheless it was palpable as well. The crowds and fans had mad respect for Chris Benoit at the time. He was the epitome of "Ruthless Aggression", and he truly personified the moniker "Rabid Wolverine". For those of us who were old enough to remember, Benoit was the second coming of the Dynamite Kid. So, with that in mind, Nash's comments ring hollow. It's just a washed up guy who never had the "it" factor, but was lucky enough to ride the coattails of those who did. That Wrestlemania moment was one of the greatest moments I have ever experienced as a wrestling fan.

 

[dtroppe]

Apart from Stone Cold, The Rock and Hogan (at the height of Hulkamania), I have never seen anyone more over than Eddie Guerrero. .

You have to be joking guy. Many wrestlers have been WAY more over than Eddie. And I promise you Kevin Nash was more over than Eddie. You cant argue that fact. Nash was intrumental in the NWO-the most over stable in the history of professional wrestling. Lets look at a few guys that were more over than Eddie.

Rock, Stone Cold, Hogan, Cena, Savage, HBK, HHH, Batista, Goldburg, Warrior, Jericho, Taker, Nash, Hall, Flair, Lesner, Andre, Piper, Bret Hart, Sting, Foley, Hawk and Animal, VKM.

Most of these are massive men. You really can't say that Eddie was more over than anyone on this list. These guys are all proven money makers. Some of them spent very little time in wrestling and got way more over than Eddie and Benoit.