whats up with the big boys?

[LEGEND KILLER]

ive been a loyal WWE/F fan for years...i started watching back in the Wrestlemania 3 years....ive always been a fan of the "big boys" Andre The Giant, King King Bundy, Undertaker to a lesser degree, etc.

Nowadays we have The Big Show, The Great Khali, Umaga, and these guys are huge but not to the same level as the aforementioned....i remember when Andre or Bundy used to come out they would pretty much squash there oponents, and if a viable face took on them it would be an uphill battle for them...seems like today the "big boys" are mostly jobbers...I love Big Show but WTF he should be dominating the ranks of Raw...yes his skills arent where they need to be wrestling wise but he is a heck of a lot better than Bundy or Andre no offence to them personally....he is great on the mic too but they make him lose to people he shouldnt loose too...The Great Khali sucks....however imagine him debuting back in the 80's he would have been dominating just as Andre was...fact is Andre had no wrestling skill he was just a powerhouse....Khali is too..

So the question for all of you is...Do ya miss the fact that the "big Guys" would dominate the ranks? How would you book Big Show/Khali/Umaga?

.......and NO i dont wanna hear Khali/Show suck because IF they had been in the 80's era you would surely sing a different tune....and yes i know wrestling has changed....but Cena is billed as the newe hogan right??

thought.....

 

[LokiCobain]

I think the big difference is that Andre and Bundy were the "originals". Big guys everywhere always were liked, and their actual wrestling ability never mattered. People today aren't impressed anymore with a guy JUST being 8 feel tall, they need to have more than that. Umaga does, definitely. For his size, he has unbelievable quickness and endurance. If Khali and Andre switched places, we'd be mocking Andre today, so I agree with you there. I just think it's a lot harder for big guys to be "flashy", which translates into marketable, and now that wrestling is more a business than anything, it's going to call for more little guys getting the pushes, and what better way than over "insurmountable" (although after being surmounted by everyone, it's kinda hard to still think that) odds? Another guy I always liked that would've been huge back in the day is Mark Henry. I've always enjoyed what he brings to the table. He's not a terrible talker, he just gets winded. Probably the most under-used big man that I absolutely loved was Vader. It's a shame he didn't succeed as well as he should've in WWF.

 

[powerade]

I personally can't stand most of the big guys.....
Khali, Mark Henry, Big Show....they are all big turds
they can't wrestle or talk on the mic...

Their matches are always the same....dominate a guy with power moves, then get taken down and beat.

And I hate the whole big guy vs a little guy thing they love to do with Rey Mysterio and such....its boring.....I've always found the big big guys very boring

I don't count Umaga as a big guy, he is fatter than some but not a 7 foot guy who walks like frankenstien

just my .02

 

[The Todd]

The problem is in the olden days some people thought wrestling was real, so they had to have the big guys destroy everyone and people accepted it.

Now, people want to be entertained and a large proportion of the audience do not want to see Big Show squash everyone. If Show had destroyed Cena at Judgment Day and won it would have been a boring match. No one would have been entertained, except people who want to see Cena lose.

The majority of fans seem to want to see athleticism and fast paced wrestling, not slow stuff from giants who can't run. Them getting beat is more entertaining.

 

[Gr8One8]

The problem is that we're in an era of athletes being bigger, faster, & stronger. Look at the NBA, NFL, & MLB as a perfect example. Fans expect more from the "big boys" now. The fact is, the era of 80's wrestling is gone. I miss that time... the mystique, the overall appeal wrestling had to the fans. But it's gone. That's why the big boys like Big Show, Khali, and Mark Henry are viewed with disinterest today.

But I'm a wrestling fan. So I will keep watching as this sport slowly makes whatever transition that it will eventually make.

 

[D-Man]

Personally, I'm not a fan of the "Super Heavyweights (SHW)" or "Big Guys."

"Big Guys" were never dominating in the old WWF days. There were mainly used as a tool to make the champion look stronger by jobbing out at major PPV events. The guys that you mentioned (Andre & Bundy) never held a major title. They challenged for it, drew the buy rates for the PPV, and jobbed out like they were supposed to.

And to answer your question about the Great Khali being around back then, Giant Gonzales was almost the same thing. The only difference was that Khali has a SLIGHT coordination advantage over Gonzales. But, similar to Gonzales, Khali probably would've been used to job out to Hogan or the Undertaker.

Now, a lot has changed since then. It seems like WWE management changed and began to view big men differently when they allowed the Undertaker to go over Hulk Hogan. Then, over the years, the SHW's slowly began to win major titles. Which brings us to today...

It looks like the business has evolved into a sport where just about anyone could win a major title. Everyone from Khali, Big Show, Undertaker, Kane, and Diesel to Eddie Guererro, Chris Benoit, Jeff Hardy, and Rey Mysterio is capable of winning a major title despite their overbearing size or lack thereof.

Anyway, LEGEND KILLER, I don't miss the "big guys." I think they sucked back then and they haven't gotten much better now (with a few exceptions). And the big guys from now STILL wouldn't cut it back then because they all would have been forced to job out to Hulk Hogan and the Ultimate Warrior.

Fact of the matter is that Big Men are primarily used as glorified jobbers. Management will build them up in storylines to be absolute monsters, allow them to challenge the world champion, job out, and then get drafted to ECW (A.K.A. Kozlov, Big Show, probably soon-to-be Umaga) LOL.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Personally, I'm not a fan of the "Super Heavyweights (SHW)" or "Big Guys."

I recently held my monthly Superheavyweight staff meeting, and you know something? They don't like you either.

"Big Guys" were never dominating in the old WWF days. There were mainly used as a tool to make the champion look stronger by jobbing out at major PPV events.

But they MADE those major PPV events - Andre and Bundy headlined the first two Wrestlemanias, and did so against Hulk Hogan, who at the time was between 298 - 313 lbs in his own right.

"The guys that you mentioned (Andre & Bundy) never held a major title.

Except for Andre's WWF Title win over Hogan. But let's just overlook that, shall we?

Dammit, he snuck in there.

"They challenged for it, drew the buy rates for the PPV, and jobbed out like they were supposed to.

Right. Because they are and were great professional wrestlers. You've just proved MY point. Nice job, I think.

And to answer your question about the Great Khali being around back then, Giant Gonzales was almost the same thing.

Except that Khali has charisma and is infinitely marketable in foreign countries.

The only difference was that Khali has a SLIGHT coordination advantage over Gonzales. But, similar to Gonzales, Khali probably would've been used to job out to Hogan or the Undertaker.

Yes, it must suck losing to two of the greatest of all time, both I will remind you averaged over 300 pounds in their primes.

Now, a lot has changed since then. It seems like WWE management changed and began to view big men differently when they allowed the Undertaker to go over Hulk Hogan. Then, over the years, the SHW's slowly began to win major titles.

Yet another astigmatic, myopic statement that links greatness to Gold. So off base. PPV's didn't start occuring until 1985, and before that, it was me like Andre the Giant, Big John Studd, and Gorilla Monsoon who helped sell out Madison Square Garden.

Incidentally, a year before Undertaker went over Hogan, Big Van Vader had won his third IWGP World Heavyweight Title.

It looks like the business has evolved into a sport where just about anyone could win a major title. Everyone from Khali, Big Show, Undertaker, Kane, and Diesel to Eddie Guererro, Chris Benoit, Jeff Hardy, and Rey Mysterio is capable of winning a major title despite their overbearing size or lack thereof.

That's because of the availability of the product and the short attention span of the fan. Title reigns in the 80's and early 90's routinely lasted more than a year. Not any more.

Yet I find the argument that there are more titles now to be faulty. Rit ow you have the WHC, WWE, ECW, and TNA Titles that make up the 4 big ones. 10-20 years ago you had the WWF, WCW, NWA, and AWA Titles. Pretty even.

Anyway, LEGEND KILLER, I don't miss the "big guys."

Again, they do not miss you either.

I think they sucked back then and they haven't gotten much better now (with a few exceptions). And the big guys from now STILL wouldn't cut it back then because they all would have been forced to job out to Hulk Hogan and the Ultimate Warrior.

What is so wrong with losing to guys named Hogan, Warrior, and Undertaker? Or Hart for that matter?

And Hogan lost to Andre a few times. Hart lost to Yokozuna. Undertaker lost to Vader and Yokozuna. Earthquake almost took Hogan out completely. Bundy legit broke Hogan's ribs. It's Andre's presence - not Hogan's - that created Hulkamania as we know it today because it was Andre being slammed and pinned that mattered.

Who drew fans to the Intrepid on July 4th, 1993? Yokozuna did, because he had just killed Hulkamania at King of the Ring.

Regarding your sig, I will NEVER be schooled by the D-Man.

 

[StInGeR-HBK]

I like this thread. When I heard the Big Show was coming back, my initial thought was, "I can't wait to see how he dominates!" But instead he's been doing absolutely nothing. Same with Khali and Umaga. Khali was a champion but I don't think they ever made him look like a monster. Especially with the finishers he had. The Chop and the Head Squeeze ( I don't know the official name of that finisher, sorry!) I mean c'mon. Umaga has only gotten to be intercontinental champion and that was it. These guys could be used a whole lot better and made to look like total monsters that anybody would have a hard time defeating. Now, Cena can just go in and beat any of these guys with ease!

 

[D-Man]

WOOHOOOOO!!! I was HOPING that IC25 was going to swoop in on the SHW chat. I totally love arguing with you. It makes my day. REALLY.

I recently held my monthly Superheavyweight staff meeting, and you know something? They don't like you either.

Well poop on them.

But they MADE those major PPV events - Andre and Bundy headlined the first two Wrestlemanias,

I agree that they helped MAKE those events, but I still think Hogan was the majority draw. He could've wrestled Leaping Lanny Poffo and drew 93K of an audience if the storyline was built correctly.

and did so against Hulk Hogan, who at the time was between 298 - 313 lbs in his own right.

I really never considered Hogan a SHW, so I can't agree or disagree with this.

Except for Andre's WWF Title win over Hogan. But let's just overlook that, shall we?

Dammit, he snuck in there.

Man, you ruined it for me. I was looking forward to WRECKING his "title reign." Oh, well...

Right. Because they are and were great professional wrestlers. You've just proved MY point. Nice job, I think.

Like I've said in the past as a rebuttal to some of your arguments against my views, opinions vary. I never said they sucked as professional wrestlers. I just said I didn't care for them personally. Oh, and you're welcome

Except that Khali has charisma and is infinitely marketable in foreign countries.

You call screaming "WASSUP" charisma??!? Or making out with fat, ugly women? Or wearing MC Hammer pants?? I'd rather watch the Brown Bunny on repeat.

Yes, it must suck losing to two of the greatest of all time, both I will remind you averaged over 300 pounds in their primes.

Thanks for proving MY point

Yet another astigmatic, myopic statement that links greatness to Gold. So off base. PPV's didn't start occuring until 1985, and before that, it was me like Andre the Giant, Big John Studd, and Gorilla Monsoon who helped sell out Madison Square Garden.

Yeah, but that doesn’t mean I care for them. They’re still shit. And nice big words LOL.

Incidentally, a year before Undertaker went over Hogan, Big Van Vader had won his third IWGP World Heavyweight Title.

Weren’t we talking about the WWE? Oh, that’s right. But thanks for adding that!

That's because of the availability of the product and the short attention span of the fan. Title reigns in the 80's and early 90's routinely lasted more than a year. Not any more.

Yet I find the argument that there are more titles now to be faulty. Rit ow you have the WHC, WWE, ECW, and TNA Titles that make up the 4 big ones. 10-20 years ago you had the WWF, WCW, NWA, and AWA Titles. Pretty even.

I guess you didn’t catch the part where this was the only optimistic and positive part of my post. Oh, well.

Again, they do not miss you either.

What is so wrong with losing to guys named Hogan, Warrior, and Undertaker? Or Hart for that matter?

What’s wrong is the fact that they spend all this time building these monsters up who can CONVINCINGLY crush the current champion, and yet they make them job out. It’s a shame and a travesty, actually. It’s a waste of good talent. Maybe if they were utilized better I’d enjoy watching them more. But since they have a track record of having more loses than wins in championship matches, it makes those matches too predictable for me to watch and therefore unsatisfying.

And Hogan lost to Andre a few times. Hart lost to Yokozuna. Undertaker lost to Vader and Yokozuna. Earthquake almost took Hogan out completely. Bundy legit broke Hogan's ribs.

Congratulations. Some realism in a choreographed sport.

It's Andre's presence - not Hogan's - that created Hulkamania as we know it today because it was Andre being slammed and pinned that mattered.

Absolutely false and untrue. Hulkamania (according to the WWE) was created on January 23, 1984. And it began taking major momentum because of Rowdy Roddy Piper. I’m not saying that Andre didn’t help. But he did not create Hulkamania alone.

Who drew fans to the Intrepid on July 4th, 1993? Yokozuna did, because he had just killed Hulkamania at King of the Ring.

No, Yoko drew fans there because he truly was a diamond in the rough and built himself up over the previous year as a dominant force. Hence, one of the “exceptions” I was speaking of.

Regarding your sig, I will NEVER be schooled by the D-Man.

Oh admit it… I teach you a thing a two here and there

 

[jellmoo]

WWE has been abysmal when it comes to booking the big guys. Half of the problem stems from the fact that there are just too many of them at the moment. I would have 1 super heavyweight per show, and that's it. That guy gets to play "big man" for that show.

Guys like Big Show, Kane and Mark Henry should be booked to frickin dominate. Use them sparingly, and not necessarily in the title picture, but book them as MONSTERS. Have the top faces do repeated jobs to them, and get only the occasional miraculous win at an important PPV.

I am sick to death of the David vs Goliath matches, and even sicker of people that should have no chance against them whatsoever beating these behemoths.

Andre was booked perfectly. Practically unbeatable, it meant something when Hogan somehow managed to beat him. That was great. Having everyone and their mother beat the Big Show is crap. If the announcers go on and on about how monstrous he is and how his opponents fear him, there should be some actual basis for it.

 

[LEGEND KILLER]

DMAN:

The Great Khali is $$$$$$$ in India....thats his backround and just as Santino is popular in Italy (his debut the crowd went nuts) Khali is money money money in India....

do some reasearch you'll see

As per anything else you said i didnt ask if you like big guys or not...stick to the topic

 

[D-Man]

DMAN:

The Great Khali is $$$$$$$ in India....thats his backround and just as Santino is popular in Italy (his debut the crowd went nuts) Khali is money money money in India....

Point taken.

do some reasearch you'll see

Um... ok. But only because YOU said so.

As per anything else you said i didnt ask if you like big guys or not...stick to the topic

Part of my reply was an answer to this statement by you...

".......and NO i dont wanna hear Khali/Show suck because IF they had been in the 80's era you would surely sing a different tune....and yes i know wrestling has changed....but Cena is billed as the newe hogan right??"

If you didn't want to hear a reply to that statement then maybe you shouldn't have written it in the first place. So, I guess I "stuck to the topic" now, didn't I?

 

[LEGEND KILLER]

"So the question for all of you is...Do ya miss the fact that the "big Guys" would dominate the ranks? How would you book Big Show/Khali/Umaga?"

irishcanadian/dman i like your guys back and forth contesting each others remarks...irishcanadian im on your side...

D-man ...as reitterated above the point of this thread was DO YOU MISS THE BIG GUYS? and how would YOU book the big guys now? NOT do you like them so when i said nobody asked your opinion about who you like/dislike it means NOBODY CARES if YOU the "DMAN" like Khali or show nobody not even the little turd you left in the can 5 minutes ago...stick to the damn topic or how about this find something else to when you done jerking it

now YOU'VE just been schooled by THE LEGEND KILLER!

 

[D-Man]

Ah, yes. Another noob that thinks they rule the world because one of their precious threads was slightly misunderstood. And you kissed the MOD's ass in the process?? BRAVO. Congratulations and welcome to Wrestlezone. You'll fit in just fine.

Anyhoo... I believe I already explained that the big guys were misused back in the day and I don't miss them one single bit.

"If I booked the show now," then due to the big guys' immense size, I would have them dominate everyone in their path. Then, if a smaller competitor defeated them, it would be on a rare occasion ONLY. This would create some of those "special moments" that the WWE has been lacking on their programming for years. And just like you earlier stated, Hogan vs Andre at WM3 was a perfect example of that. Nowadays, the 'smaller' wrestlers are beating stars like the Big Show on weekly programming, which is a travesty.

And the only thing you schooled me in is how to act like a complete, immature imbecile with horrible, illegible grammar on a public wrestling forum. I'll keep it in mind next time I want to embarrass myself.

 

[pampero firpo]

seeing someone as big as andre in the 1970's was a site too see. now its no big deal.
the big show has more wrestling skills now, even though he's alot older, than andre ever had. thats why the big show is still an attraction. the crusher,the bruiser, jesse the body ventura,nikita koloff, the road warriors, were considered big wrestlers back in the 1970's. now they wouldnt be considered that big compared to wrestlers today. seeing someone as big as khali, and kane is no big deal today. fans enjoy watching high flyers like jeff hardy and ray mysterio alot more today than watching a big wrestler destroy someone.

 

[RicSpade]

Here's the issue with big guys dominating wrestling not happening, its simply the fact that pre attitude era Shawn Michaels paved the way for the little guy to be able to stand toe to toe with big guys. Yes Bret Hart tried doing that with Undertaker and Nash, but they took it to a new level with HBK by having him go toe to toe with guys like Sid, Vader, Taker, Nash and that is why from then to now Kane, Undertaker, Khali, Umaga, Henry, Big Show have lost to guys like Cena, Rock, Floyd Maywhether (sad ain't it?), HBK, Christian, etc. because its more about skill then size now a days.

Now how would you book the big guys now? The ones with no real talent (i.e. Khali with his problems and limited mobility) I would use as one of those Andre oddities where he beats mid carders or are in rare 3 on 1 matches with jobbers. Undertaker is the one big man with real skill so he is the one man who doesn't need to be booked right, Umaga had a good thing going with his domination streak as did Kozlov, but right now you have to make them look ruthless even if they don't get the job done. Big show needs an opponent he can man handle (kinda like the old ECW days when spike dudley was thrown into the crowd) or even show a little more mobility, I mean come on you lost 50lbs or whatever you should be able to do those spinning chokeslams from the 90's or attempt something a little more bold. Kane is hard to book now because he has been in so many horrible storylines the hardcore fan can't take him serious as a threat they would have to repackage him (the whole mask storyline could've did that but they ruined it)

Thats about all I got at 3am...