Wrestlemania XIX: Jericho/Michaels vs Rock/Austin

King Steventon · 05-30-2009, 02:59 PM

Wrestlemania XIX... arguably one of the best single shows of the decade and produced a lot of good matches.

Jericho vs Michaels was a old generation vs new generation type of fued, whith the bitter heel wannabe gunning to overtake his older adversary.

Rock vs Austin was more or less the culmination of a rivalry spanning around four years on and off and was the last meeting between the two aces of a generation.

Both matches are pretty much universally loved and praised as "MOTYCs", "Classics", "Best match of their careers", and other accolades. Two very differently worked matches.

But which was the better match out of the two that night?

horrorfan_1986 · 05-30-2009, 05:27 PM

The Rock vs Steve Austin was damn near perfect. The culmination of a six year feud at the biggest show of the year. Having Rock finally beat Austin was the last accomplishment that Rocky needed to fulfill. With the exception of Benoit vs Angle, I can't think of any WWE match in 2003 that could compare to that match.

While very good, I do feel as if Jericho vs Michaels is a bit overrated. If it wasn't for the fact that 2003 was a horrible year, it wouldn't have been a MOTYC.

Tommy Platinum · 05-30-2009, 05:29 PM

Rock vs Austin was epic simply because it was Rock vs Austin again. Yes, Rock getting the win was good, yes his heel work was amazing etc, but the match itself wasn't as good as Jericho/Michaels imo. It was a good brawl which descended into a bunch of finishers at the end. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed it a lot, but I consider Jericho vs Michaels a better match.

Internet God · 05-30-2009, 06:00 PM

This is a tough choice for me; I really like both matches and could watch both of them over and over again. I think HBK/Jericho might just be a tad overrated to a certain degree but then again Rock/Austin wasn't that much of a match. Like Tom said, just alot of brawling into a bunch of finishing moves. That last Rock Bottom that Rock won the match with was a great one (no pun intended) and I enjoy the match alot. Although overall I think I'm going to have to go with HBK/Jericho on this one.

King Steventon · 05-30-2009, 06:40 PM

I agree with Jim 100% here, summed up my thoughts perfectly. I would be willing to say Rock/Austin is contender for best WWE match this decade.

I don't get the criticism of "just brawling". Is there something wrong with brawling? Given the fued it would have been somewhat retarded if they had started trying to do chain wrestling or anything like that. I would say Jericho/Michaels was "just" restholds and aimless moves for the majority of the match.

I don't see anything wrong with the finishers in Rock/Austin. They had already kicked out of each other's moves in the past so it's not as if it was ridicuous or overkill-y. Hell, the finish to that match may be my favourte match finish ever.

I think Michaels/Jericho was a good match that was very formulaic and people seem to overlook the flaws because of the two wrestlers involved and the situation. Up until Jericho started mocking Michaels about two thirds of the way through the match, literally nothing noteworthy happened. I can't think of anything Michaels did in that match you wouldn't see in any other big HBK match this decade.

Rock/Austin also had SO MUCH more heat and emotion.

Smarketh. · 05-30-2009, 07:04 PM

I'd need to rewatch these before voting, but from what I remember (WM XIX was in my mark-ish) days, I enjoyed both a lot. HBK/Y2J as a competitive technical bout, of course, my standards would've been lower then, and Rock/Austin as a dramatic, exciting, story-driven match.

My opinion's changed on a lot of things since then, so I can see myself leaning towards Rock/Austin the way that Jim and Steve talk about it.

Tommy Platinum · 05-30-2009, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Steventon

I agree with Jim 100% here, summed up my thoughts perfectly. I would be willing to say Rock/Austin is contender for best WWE match this decade.

I don't get the criticism of "just brawling". Is there something wrong with brawling? Given the fued it would have been somewhat retarded if they had started trying to do chain wrestling or anything like that. I would say Jericho/Michaels was "just" restholds and aimless moves for the majority of the match.

I don't see anything wrong with the finishers in Rock/Austin. They had already kicked out of each other's moves in the past so it's not as if it was ridicuous or overkill-y. Hell, the finish to that match may be my favourte match finish ever.

I think Michaels/Jericho was a good match that was very formulaic and people seem to overlook the flaws because of the two wrestlers involved and the situation. Up until Jericho started mocking Michaels about two thirds of the way through the match, literally nothing noteworthy happened. I can't think of anything Michaels did in that match you wouldn't see in any other big HBK match this decade.

Rock/Austin also had SO MUCH more heat and emotion.

Its clearly just a sentimental pick though. I mean, best this decade? What about... you know... their previous infinitely superior encounter.

King Steventon · 05-30-2009, 07:28 PM

I think people talk Jericho/Michaels up as a technical mat based match but really there wasn't that much going on. They did the usual counter-recounter chain sequence to a "we are equal!" stand-off spot which every indy wrestler and his mum knows how to do, but the matwork (imo) wasn't really that impressive at all nor was it really that good in terms of the story they were trying to tell. Going from what I felt when I watched it last time, a lot of it was pretty aimless and they were just stalling for time untill the big FIP segment from Michaels.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tommy Plat

Its clearly just a sentimental pick though. I mean, best this decade? What about... you know... their previous infinitely superior encounter.

I would say so, yes. Notice the use of the word "contender", the second Wrestlemania match was better but I wouldn't say "infinitely", the XIX match had a better finish and it did more in terms of elevating them. Why not? It was a great match. Don't really see how it's just a "sentimental" pick when the match has a lot of substance in it. Dunno wether you're suggesting I'm blindly biased towards it (which is kinda insulting, I guess) or not, but I don't see why that would be the case.

Tommy Platinum · 05-30-2009, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Steventon

I would say so, yes. Notice the use of the word "contender", the second Wrestlemania match was better but I wouldn't say "infinitely", the XIX match had a better finish and it did more in terms of elevating them. Why not? It was a great match. Don't really see how it's just a "sentimental" pick when the match has a lot of substance in it. Dunno wether you're suggesting I'm blindly biased towards it (which is kinda insulting, I guess) or not, but I don't see why that would be the case.

Blindly biased is a bit strong. I'm just saying that you understandably prefer the match because it was the last match between two bona fide legends. Well, maybe that isn't the whole reason you prefer it, but it definitely makes you look back on the match more favourably. Nostalgia plays a part subconsciously because it was the end of such a great era for wrestling with those two guys. Y2J and HBK are still in the company now (although obviously Jericho was gone for a while). The match just isn't as "big" or emotional as Rock/Austin. I just feel that its a better wrestling match.

And now I'm not one of those who believe its a technical match. It isn't at all really, it just represents everything I look for in a match. It flowed really well, contained some great back and forth action, great heel work by Jericho and a lot of memorable moments.

King Steventon · 05-30-2009, 07:46 PM

Memorable moments such as?

Rock/Austin had better highlights, better heelwork, and as you said more emotion, importance and atmosphere.