Should The Big Show now be considered 'The Best Giant' in wrestling history?

[HBKevin]

Andre was the bigger legend and persona by far, but Big Show is a better wrestler. People have already noted that Andre's growth hormone problem caused him serious weakness by the 80s, whereas Big Show had his treated.

At one time in his early years Show was able to do a moonsault, when he was a lot thinner, but still like 400 lbs. Andre never had that kind of athleticism, but he was an icon in his era and he had the ultimate rival in Hogan during a huge time for wrestling. It all just depends on their booking and the time periods they have lived in.

 

[harrythem]

If Big Show had kept up his early career promise then there's a good chance he could've ended up being a bigger star then Andre was. As it stands he was around during the hottest period in wrestling history and, because he couldn't be arsed to do anything except eat and smoke, he ended up becoming a joke.

 

[Shakin' Abe]

The Big Show IS the second best Giant in the history of Wrestling as everyone else tied for First! No seriously, The Big Show is a great talent. I hope he continues to squash the roster. While I don't want him to be a freak show like Andre was in the 70's, I want him to be the most dominate wrestler and then have to fight management to get a title shot and have a real run! None of this ECW or Smackdown stuff either. I'm talking Monday Night Raw gold!

 

[llennellV3]

I would say a tie between him and Andre. Andre has an Immense legacy, but who knows?! Maybe one day, many many years from now, after Big Show passes he will have just as big of a Legacy...Show is a nice guy, but no one has touched people like Andre so IDK.

 

[One to Remember]

first off alot of arguments here are just unfair. Hogan-Andre was an iconic moment but only because wrestling was hot. If there wasn't that match history would be no different and that era and its steam would have evaporated at the exact same time.. Not every moment can be iconic. I for one respect Paul Wight for being anti-cliche. Some of the people in this thread are just being nostalgia ****es...

I see where WCW was comin from calling the Giant Andre's son but I also saw t as a ominous sign. i mean like i always say if your a big guy and they make you wear the one strap you know your career is in trouble.. Paul would not had been able to advance his owncareer w/out stayin away from Andre's legacy.

As far as going head to head Andre in his prime would had fallen to the Giant of 1995 with ease.. Far more athletic, better training, better physically..

Andre had what was the epitome of raw strength, at one point Giant moved around like a cat duringhis WCW days, Andre never had that agility... in my opinion..

And then the pop culture gets thrown in. Andre is a celeb, a wrestling fan with common sense should always be weary of those type of guys in our sport. Another Dwayne Johnson on your hands.. But Andre was apart of another era, if you dont watch wrestler ur stilllikely to see fat head on a building or stop sign proclaiming to have a posse.. Big Show did not have those opportunities because WCW's management was trippin as always so he partook in many debacles there, and when he came to the WWF he really had no character built up, no personality that was permanent, and the attitude era was dominated by guys that were simply not him. If he had came in with pro WCW views that might be different. But I stil remember his assault on the titantron though. That was memorable and the ring breaking.

It would not be unreasonable to argue that Andre had Vince Sr. and Jr. owned and that contributed to his own development. The Giant/Big Show is from an era where you must draw quickly or your busted down by the brass, and writers dominate every movement. Big Show doesn't even have autonomy and Andre had independence in most territories, this is just way to unfair to the Big Show. Is not apples n oranges i think you all are just refusing to put things in context..

I don't even understand who mets criteria anyways. You got to be 7 foot, billed as 7 foot, 6'8, 6'10? WHO is and isn't a giant? Is David Hart Smith GIANT? Why is Kevin Nash/Diesel left out? Is Scott Hall a giant? Bam Bam Biggalo? Tiny Lister?!

Khali also has skills if WWE will hone him and let him do him. WWE never wants to do that though.

Big Show would kick Andre's ass but is really not even fair so I am neutral..

 

[billm75]

I think Andre gets the vote from me too. I love the Big Show, but Andre was first, he was in an era when people were still simply amazed to see such an enormous human being. With the way our species has progressed over the years, it's not all that unusual to see a 6 foot 10 or better athlete. I mean, look at the NBA, the NFL...huge specimens of humanity on display. Back in Andre's hay day, it wasn't something you saw anywhere else. Plus, wrestling wasn't billed as "entertainment" either. Alot of the current Era works against the Big Show's chances of reaching the heights (so to speak) that Andre did.

For their Eras, however, I give the nod to both. In the older days of wrestling, Andre, hands down. In the current Era, Big Show hands down. I don't know that Andre could have drawn as well in the current era, with the product they're putting out there now.

 

[Trivia247]

it would have to depend on what you consider the classficiations of Greatness for a "Giant"

Andre has world wide reknown, had a 15 year "Scripted" Winning streak.....
For most of us however wasn't old enough to see Andre in his prime.... I started watching back in 86 so i've seen him during his decline when his back was killing him... from 86-91 his matches were hit and miss, those matches you knew he was hurting he never ventured far from the rope to support him, nor would he go beyond the punch kick choke combos he was barely capable of...on good nights however, like say his match against Hacksaw, or even his 1987 appearance at Survivor series...he can actually hang a bit, bust out his Kinda suplex.....
Andre despite the declining wrestling capablity is a phenom that No one ever complained about jobbing too.. He was legitly called the Boss in the lockerroom and when he did let someone go over they looked like a million bucks doing it.

Big Show comparably speaking, is a far better wrestler for his size. He mixes the classic "Giant" moves with more a grappler and striker capable wrestler. However unlike the Andre Mystique, he is far easier to defeat, he was booked to be defeatable, which is actually a shame... Because it makes it that much more difficult too build him up to be a monster. Big Show has been with the company now for 11 years, has held number of championships been in majority of the big PPVs since his debut at the St Valentines day Massacre in 99..

What are the qualifications for Giant? Big and tall???
You got a number of wrestlers to also consider

Undertaker
Kane
Giant Baba
Kamala
Giant Khail
Giant Gonzales
Big John Studd
Ron Reese
Sid Vicious
Kevin Nash
etc


There are a number of Big Giants that have come and gone......

 

[Xemmy]

True Giants are what should be considered on this list. Guys Over 7 feet tall, and over 400 lbs. There aren't many of them. Big Show, Andre, Gonzales, and Khali are the only ones I can think of right off the top of my head.

Scratch of the last two, they're aren't significant.

When It comes down to the greatest Giant of all time it really does come down to Andre and his would be heir to the thrown.

Andre was the first, the measuring stick. Undefeated by pinfall for a decade and a half, and a major draw in every venue he was in. Big Show has better in ring skills and the only man to hold the World Heavyweight, WWE, and WWECW Championships. I think we know who's the greatest.
One significant accomplishment doesn't make you great.

Depending on his longevity, Big Show could potentially be the Greatest. I don't think it's likely. I think he's just going to have to settle for 2nd best. It's hard to beat the measuring stick and since in this category Andre's the biggest measuring stick of all time, it's not a real choice.