This is a discussion on Is It Cool To Like Hogan Again? within the General Pro Wrestling : Classic & General forums, part of the Wrestling Forums category; No, the difference between amatuer wrestling and pro wrestling is that pro wrestling is a work.
I agree a hot ...
Welcome to Wrestling Clique Wrestling Forums
Hello and Welcome to WrestlingClique - Wrestling Forums!
We are the premier wrestling forum and your source for wrestling news and rumors, wrestling divas, wrestling gifs, sports discussion, e-feds, writing and more. Wrestling fans participate in active discussion on all the major wrestling leagues and events including WWE, ECW & TNA pay per view events, live wrestling streams, wrestling video games, collectibles, and other wrestling related products and services.
You're currently viewing our site as an unregistered guest which means you are limited to most discussions and features.
Take a few minutes to browse around, and if you like what you see, Register a free account to gain access to :
• Richer content, access forums that are not viewable by the public.
• Complete access to post topics, respond to polls, communicate privately (PM), take part contests, arcade, photo sharing, networking, groups.
• Create your personal profile and bio
• Meet and Chat Live with other members who share similar interests
Registration is simple and fast. Won't take you more than a minute and of course it's completely free.
So Join our Community today!
Hogan doesn't do anything for me. I can respect his ability to get over while having to do so little in the ring, that is pretty much the epitome of being a great Pro Wrestler from a business perspective.
Hogan will always remain popular amongst 80's fans, just like Austin will always be popular among 90's fans, and Cena will likely remain popular with the kids watching today who grow up and continue to watch wrestling. It's the same way that Goku is still my hero despite me being 10 years too old to dignify watching Japanese anime distributed by a company with a name like "Funimation".
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
No, the difference between amatuer wrestling and pro wrestling is that pro wrestling is a work.
I agree a hot crowd adds to a match but, again, crowd reaction /= match quality.
Yes it is. Yeah. I mean, not the live crowd reaction, per say, but the people in the crowd as well as everyone else who watches the match are the ones who decide if it is good.
For example, Taker vs. Michaels is a generally high rated match. Why? Because everyone enjoyed it. Most everyone you talk to says its at least ****1/2, but there are a couple people out there who say its only ***.
Obviously, the match appealed to more people than not. However, if there were more people who said that the match was only ***, then it would be a *** match. Period.
Perception is reality. A wrestler is only good because we say he's good. So yeah, if enough people in the world agree that Mark Henry is the greatest wrestler of all time, beause he appeals to them, then he is in fact, the greatest wrestler of all time.
__________________
Subscribe Nucka
blogs.myspace.com/robertdrulia
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Safe to say I don't go for all that jazz. People seemingly love those Date/Superhero/Whatever Movies. They see them in droves. By that logic they're very good because people watch them and enjoy them.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Some might say TNA is good for that reason. Yet I say no - everyone on the planet could like it and it would still be shit.
I'd also like to point that Hogan was partially behind the wrestling boom of the nineties. Which just goes to show the incredible power of heel turns. Like an atomic bomb.
Yes it is. Yeah. I mean, not the live crowd reaction, per say, but the people in the crowd as well as everyone else who watches the match are the ones who decide if it is good.
For example, Taker vs. Michaels is a generally high rated match. Why? Because everyone enjoyed it. Most everyone you talk to says its at least ****1/2, but there are a couple people out there who say its only ***.
Obviously, the match appealed to more people than not. However, if there were more people who said that the match was only ***, then it would be a *** match. Period.
Perception is reality. A wrestler is only good because we say he's good. So yeah, if enough people in the world agree that Mark Henry is the greatest wrestler of all time, beause he appeals to them, then he is in fact, the greatest wrestler of all time.
Please can you never use star ratings when trying to make a convincing arguement in the future.
Opinions are subjective, no shit sherlock. However you are still missing the point that there is a difference between a crowd-peaser and a substantionally good match. If two guys go out and put on a botchy shitfest but get a good reaction, it's still a shitty match, just with a hot crowd. Vice versa, if two guys go out and put on great match in front of a small crowd with little reaction, it's still a great match, just in front of a shitty crowd. Do you see how there is a difference there?
And yes obviously Hogan knew crap about match psycology. Probably one of the worst sellers I've ever seen.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Linear Mode
