After reading some reviews of Smackdown and the general tone of which direction the belt should go after SummerSlam, I decided it's time I weigh in on something I've been thinking about.
Kurt Angle is a bad champion.
Now, sure, I liked his first title reign. But, Jericho did it better. Much better. Angle's first reign was just okay. His second reign? Just awful. Did it even last a week? I remember the actual wrestling, but his character EXCEPT for the milk truck incident was boring. It was the Rocky Maivia character all over again, just a bit more patriotic and he said very unfunny things and just "whooed" after every single one (is that supposed to make me laugh?). Sure, the argument could be made that he was "more serious," but to me he was just plain boring (yes, I admit it, even though at the time I gave the outward impression that Angle was the greatest face of all time). It seems like his mic skills and charisma deteriorate when he's NOT the pompous ass chasing a win or a title.
Secondly, Kurt's schtick doesn't seem as funny when he has a World Title. It's one thing to be a pompous ass who think's he's better than everybody and is cocky as hell and NOT have a title (that's hilarious). But to BE the MAN, and have that attitude, well, it just doesn't seem as entertaining.
In Kurt's defense, however, is his Euro-Continental Title reign. It will go down as a classic title reign for both belts and it was Angle's best stuff while carrying a belt/belts. No matter how bad his promo stuff is while champion (FACE champion that is), his in-ring wrestling is flat out CLASSIC. I think lately he's really come into his own, especially considering the amount of psychology he's put into those tv matches (he reminds me of a bald, power offense Ric Flair, really). So, I guess it's up to the WWE offices whether or not Kurt REALLY deserves a title reign. The more I think about it, the more pro's there are than con's I guess, but the biggest con for me is he isn't as entertaining as World Champ. I'd be for it, but it doesn't really make any sense for him to feud with Brock, so maybe this was all in vain (becasue while I could see either Rock or Brock winning, I HOPE it's Brock, for the WWE's sake, buit that's another topic altogether).
The REAL question is, "Who Bettah Than Cory Dillon"!?
I think that his face run as champ sucked. His goofiness is his gimmick, and it just doesn't work as a face. He can still be the champ, but he's gotta stay heel. Not only does your olympic hero have gold medals... he's got the undisputed gold, too! Oh, it's true!
WhoBettah I agree with you on alot of things, and yes, his "I'm better than you" schtick is funnier when he doesn't have the belt. However, I think that they can make him into a decent babyface champ, all they have to do is make him a badass babyface who defies the odds. (SCSA without the beer and redneckness perhaps?)
What a Manuever!
Ross During Jeff's Ladder Match, after the KO chairshot: "CLIMB THE LADDER KID, MAKE YOURSELF FAMOUS!" Just awesome.
Please put me in the camps for "Angle can be a good face" as well as "Angle can be a good champ, face or heel."
My problem with Angle's second title reign (as I've discussed on a previous occasion or seven) is that it was just too damn short to blame it all on Angle. Poor writing, as well as opponents not built up enough to make Angle look strong, played big parts. Never mind the fact that so much of the focus was on the then-absent Steve Austin (remember all of the faxes and phone calls?), who shows up two weeks later and semi-cleanly beats Angle 1-2-3. It was almost like a textbook about how not to build up your face champ.
Also, I disagree with Angle's goofiness not working as a face. Some of the biggest faces in modern times have been really goofy. JYD, for example. Hillbilly Jim. And good God, Hacksaw Jim Duggan was still insanely over, even in WCW at the turn of the century!
Bottom line? I think Angle, with better writing and stronger opponents, can make it work.
THE CONSPIRACY FAILS - Randomly Selected Wiener of the Day, August 13, 2002 "Thanks RageRockrr! You're the coolest!" - Excalibur05, March 10, 2002. "Thank you for bringing back a DEEP 80s memory, Rage. THANK YOU." - DMC, June 6, 2002. "Big Props to RageRockrr: '+ Oh, and three simple words: Optimus. Fucking. Prime.' You're DAMN right!" - Bizzle Izzle, August 7, 2002. (former remainder of sig file deleted due to space and bandwidth concerns)
I really think that Vince had no real desire to give Angle the belt the second time around, but had his hand somewhat forced by the events of 9/11. There was no way the crowds would have accepted Angle walking out of Pittsburgh without the title after that day, what with Kurt doing a temporary morph into Hulk Hogan at that point in time. I really think Vince would have kept Austin as champ until after the Invasion angle ended otherwise, hence the very lackluster nature of the Angle reign.
You never know when you'll meet that special someone... the someone that's mysteriously blind to your flaws. or, you know, stupid enough not to realize that yes, you really are that cynical.
I also thought Angle's heel title win was better than his face run. Angle's a heel at his best. But I witnessed his second world title win at Unforgiven in Pittsburgh days after September 11, and it was definitely one of the best times I have ever been to a live event. Winning the title from Austin in front of our home town just after the tragedies had every fan on their feet, and having his family and friends jump in the ring was a great addition. spf is right, they had to give Angle the title. It was the perfect ending of Unforgiven and the fans wanted it, at least the Burgh fans did that night.
Yeah I'll admit it wasn't the greatest run, but I thought the face Angle was all right. I like the heel Angle better though. The title reign wasn't a long one, but it served its purpose. Maybe it's because I witnessed the title win, but I liked it.
I tend to blame the poor quality of both Angle's and Jericho's title reigns on the writers. Let's look at some of the facts, shall we?
1) Both Angle and Jericho put on consistently entertaining matches. Some are better than others, but they're definitely reliable for a good match.
2) Both can deliver killer promos as a face or a heel. We've seen (heard) them do it. When they get boring (ie repetitive) it's usually because they have nothing to talk about. It's not always fair to blame babyface wrestlers for relying on catchphrases. Sometimes they have no story to work with, and they need whatever pops they can get. The Rock, on the other hand....
3) A credible, entertaining champion can win without the help of every other heel/face on the roster or (God forbid) Stephanie MacMahon. Sometimes the heel cheats, but he does it on his own. A face that gets pinned by a man who phones in his promos just looks weak.
Gimme Jericho or Angle as champ any day (as face or heel) as long as you know what you're going to do with them (besides job them in their first defense).
"My doctor says my nose would stop bleeding if I'd just keep my darn finger out of there!" --Ralph Wiggums
I was part of a ratings group years ago. They gave my family a booklet where we wrote down name/age/gender etc. Then X'ed the appropriate columns/rows on when we watched something for a couple of weeks. Back to the ratings. Smackdown did a good 3.