Sly, you can be a great entertainer and be a horrible in ring wrestler.
While I'm not one to argue that it's wrestling, isn't called sports entertainment?
Flair's matches were better than Hogan's.
From a technical stand point yes. You want that go watch a majority of the indy companies. Overall matches, from the build up, to the promos, to story told in the ring, Hogan was by far better.
I would rather watch a Flair match any day of the week, than to watch Hogan/Andre or something like that. Now did Hogan control the crowd better, was he a better talker, was he more popular? Yes!
Wait a second.... Let's think about this, Hogan could get a crowd more into a match than Flair could, right? He could get an audience more interested in a match than Flair could, right? Well dammit, I guess everyone turned their tv's off as soon as he stepped in the ring, because they knew he sucked.... No they didn't, back then people more cared about the story that was being told. Even today people are looking for compelling stories. What do Hogan and Cena both do? Tell compelling stories. Hate to break it to you, but Flair wouldn't be half the star that he is today if it wasn't for Hogan, just like every other wrestler.
Question, while both Flair and Hogan were wrestlers what else where they? Oh that's right, they were entertainers. You cannot deny that fact, and n that regard Hogan was by far the better entertainer. As a kid he got you hooked on wrestling didn't he?
What quality comes from their matches? On a scale from one to ten, how would you rate Orton/Cena at Breaking Point?
I love how pick one of the worst Cena matches from this year. And it wasn't that bad.... Yes it had a quick ending, but who's fault is that? Booking and creative, not Cena's.... Also if were going by that, name me a Orton match that was good this year? You still haven't done that.
maybe that's why people don't like you, because you make no sense.