Rock Region, Seattle SubRegion, Second Round: (5) Brock Lesnar vs. (12) Bob Backlund

[SSJPhenom]

When did Backlund beat Hogan? I'll look back over his career but I don't recall that ever happening. I recall him ducking out of losing the title to Hogan though. Of course, Lesnar DESTROYED Hogan though, so.....

 

[AhSpicyDrop]

Okay, first thing... Backlund beating Hogan before he was a major star and Lesnar beating Hogan when he was way past his prime pretty much cancel one another out. Let's take Hogan out the equation... because if you use that argument there's no way on this fucking planet that Backlund would have been booked to beat Hogan when he was at the top of the mountain, and neither would Lesnar.

Now, that's out of the way... Let's get down to the meat and potatoes. The people arguing for Lesnar are way off base in saying Backlund would essentially get chumped. Backlund's entire gimmick was comprised of being the underdog whom used the art of grappling to outclass his opponents... His technique coupled with his insane cardio and strength made him an attraction. He may not have been the biggest guy, but he could lift the biggest guy(with relative ease)... Anybody that knows anything about Backlund knows he has ALWAYS done freakish things in the gym, and last I knew still does to this day.

Amateur wise? Lesnar has better credentials, but let's not act like the work ethic in the last few generations is comparable in any real way to the stretchers and grapplers of Backlund's era. I would venture to say I'd give Lesnar the raw strength advantage, but Backlund's technique and craftiness could more than allow him to keep up, and possibly beat Lesnar IN an amateur setting. Let's not forget that plenty of pure technicians have bested Lesnar along the way and that has been his weakness throughout his career.

If we're looking at prime vs. prime, which is the way people like to do things around here it seems, then you'd have to say that right now is Lesnar's prime since he's been dominating the competition and suplexing everyone to death... Lesnar now has cardio issues, and as anybody that follows Backlund knows, the guy was conditioned to go 60 minutes and still do jumping jacks and burpees while the other guy was puking through his nose over the apron.

If I'm being fair I think Lesnar is definitely WAY more popular than Backlund ever was, but that's a major flaw to debating different time periods in itself.

All that said, I'm enjoying this debate... and I'm actually swaying more toward Backlund in my vote just based on how people are undercutting his abilities as a stretcher, and his longevity as a dominant champion.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

Don't get me wrong, I know that Backlund beat the best of his era too, but do the best of his era stack up to best of Lesnar's? I'd argue no. Backlund beat Superstar Billy Graham for his first title reign. Defended against the likes of Antoni Inoki(60 minute draw most of the time), Sgt Slaughter(out in first round), Bob Orton(not in the tournament), George "the Animal" Steele(not in the tournament), Jimmy Snuka(not in the tournament), Big John Studd(not in the tournament), Ivan Koloff(not in the tournament), and etc. He lost it to the Iron Sheik(not in the tournament), because he refused to lose it to Hogan. Then, after winning it again, he lost it to Nash in mere seconds. I'm saying that Brock has beaten more impressive and decorated opponents far more often than Backlund did.

Spin it anyway you'd like. You can't dismiss Lesnar's accolades, acumen, or history. Again, add all of that to his kayfabe destruction of top stars and Lesnar wins.

Vote Lesnar.

So essentially your argument here is that because there is a lot of ignorance involved in this tournament, ignorance should reign supreme and Lesnar should win?

Because let's look that best of Backlund's era you just so casually dismissed:

Graham - One of the most innovating, emulated, and ahead of his time wrestlers ever. Hulk Hogan ripped off so much of Superstar Graham's persona that he should be writing him a check with his Gawker money. What was arguably Scott Steiner's most popular run ever, was a modern day take on Superstar Billy Graham. Jesse Ventura didn't just borrow from Graham... he straight up stole from him, and became so popular because of it that he was able to parlay his wrestling fame into a very noteworthy political and later media career.

I would argue that there isn't a single opponent of Brock Lesnar's who will ever have the impact that Graham did.

Slaughter - The unfortunate thing about this tournament, is that people only remember Slaughter's final days as the Iraqi sympathizer, his run as Commissioner, and his Legends appearances nowadays. A time when he was actually at the end of his career, and far removed from his peak. It never seems to register whenever I mention that there was a time in the early 80's that Slaughter was the most mainstream popular guy in the business. It's part of the reason he got fired from the WWF. He was too popular for Vince to control, got himself a toy deal with GI Joe without Vince's help, and there was no way Vince was going to allow that. And yes, this was after Hogan joined the company.

You're very hard pressed to find many Lesnar opponents who reached the level of popularity that Slaughter had at his peak, and anyone who did, bear in mind that they had a huge hand in the WWE being built to such a recognizable brand. Slaughter never had that advantage. He built his brand on his own.

Orton - It'll be interesting to see how many of todays top names are forgotten or marginalized 30 years from now... because that's EXACTLY the case with Cowboy Bob.

Plain and simple, Bob Orton was considered BY HIS PEERS, to be one of the absolute best of his time. People that know a hell of a lot more than either you or I. Nothing more needs to be said than that.

Snuka - Before I ever heard about professional wrestling, I knew the name Superfly Jimmy Snuka. We would stack up crash mats in the gym at school, and do Superfly Leaps off onto each other. I didn't know what they were from, or what that was about, and I don't know how many of my friends did either. But we all knew about the Superfly.

I'm not going to keep going on, because I think my point is made.

Also, if you don't like Lesnar's accolades, accumen or history being dismissed (although most here aren't doing that)... then why the hell are you so hell bent on doing exactly that to Backlund? Be fair. There's no need to tear someone down just to build another up.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Lots of arguments against Backlund here but many of them aren't warranted. Backlund could take Brock in this match, no question he could. Brock was an accomplished amateur wrestler, drew a ton of money, held the title longer than Brocks full time wrestling career, is as technically sound as anyone and is deceptively strong (like stupid strong). Lastly, Backlund has more endurance than Lesnar as well, Lesnar is a beast but so is Bob, something he gets little credit for.

We could spout Brocks accomplishments until the cows come home and I'm not saying Backlund is gonna roll over him or even beat him but I assure you this is a match Bob could win and quite frankly I'm leaning towards him right now. I'm an absolute mark for Brock too, I just understand what Bob brings to the table and he has the goods to take Brock.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

When did Backlund beat Hogan? I'll look back over his career but I don't recall that ever happening. I recall him ducking out of losing the title to Hogan though. Of course, Lesnar DESTROYED Hogan though, so.....

They did the typical heel challenger run in 1980 and 1981, although their match never made it as far as MSG. Typically they worked the 2nd level buildings, like in Philadelphia, New Haven, and a few times at the Allentown TV tapings. I don't know if that was because McMahon Sr. didn't want to expose Hogan by having him lose in his main building... if it's because he didn't feel Hogan was a big enough draw to main event MSG... or if he just felt that Hogan was still too green to main event MSG. But that's likely why you never heard of it.

Hogan being the heel would go over in the first match by dq or countout. Or lose by dq or countout, but either way it was done to establish him as a credible threat for the rematch. They'd do the rematch, and that time Backlund would come out on top and beat him.

Standard stuff back then.

 

[SSJPhenom]

So essentially your argument here is that because there is a lot of ignorance involved in this tournament, ignorance should reign supreme and Lesnar should win?

Because let's look that best of Backlund's era you just so casually dismissed:

Graham - One of the most innovating, emulated, and ahead of his time wrestlers ever. Hulk Hogan ripped off so much of Superstar Graham's persona that he should be writing him a check with his Gawker money. What was arguably Scott Steiner's most popular run ever, was a modern day take on Superstar Billy Graham. Jesse Ventura didn't just borrow from Graham... he straight up stole from him, and became so popular because of it that he was able to parlay his wrestling fame into a very noteworthy political and later media career.

I would argue that there isn't a single opponent of Brock Lesnar's who will ever have the impact that Graham did.

Slaughter - The unfortunate thing about this tournament, is that people only remember Slaughter's final days as the Iraqi sympathizer, his run as Commissioner, and his Legends appearances nowadays. A time when he was actually at the end of his career, and far removed from his peak. It never seems to register whenever I mention that there was a time in the early 80's that Slaughter was the most mainstream popular guy in the business. It's part of the reason he got fired from the WWF. He was too popular for Vince to control, got himself a toy deal with GI Joe without Vince's help, and there was no way Vince was going to allow that. And yes, this was after Hogan joined the company.

You're very hard pressed to find many Lesnar opponents who reached the level of popularity that Slaughter had at his peak, and anyone who did, bear in mind that they had a huge hand in the WWE being built to such a recognizable brand. Slaughter never had that advantage. He built his brand on his own.

Orton - It'll be interesting to see how many of todays top names are forgotten or marginalized 30 years from now... because that's EXACTLY the case with Cowboy Bob.

Plain and simple, Bob Orton was considered BY HIS PEERS, to be one of the absolute best of his time. People that know a hell of a lot more than either you or I. Nothing more needs to be said than that.

Snuka - Before I ever heard about professional wrestling, I knew the name Superfly Jimmy Snuka. We would stack up crash mats in the gym at school, and do Superfly Leaps off onto each other. I didn't know what they were from, or what that was about, and I don't know how many of my friends did either. But we all knew about the Superfly.

I'm not going to keep going on, because I think my point is made.

Also, if you don't like Lesnar's accolades, accumen or history being dismissed (although most here aren't doing that)... then why the hell are you so hell bent on doing exactly that to Backlund? Be fair. There's no need to tear someone down just to build another up.

I wasn't dismissing Backlund's legacy. I was making a point that Lesnar's opponents were more decorated and celebrated which they were. More champions, more legacy, more popularity, more drawing power. Brock's opponents out weigh Backlund's. Why don't you preach that shit to Ech, because that's damn near what he does in every round against the one he deems unworthy. If you read most of my posts in this tournament, you'll see that I usually go the route of citing each person's accomplishments then I argue my point.

You can use your subjective arguments all you want about your fond memories as a child doing the Superfly Splash, because, unfortunately, that splash and getting hit in the head with a coconut is all he is and will be remembered for.

Orton? His son has accomplished a hell of a lot more then he did. BTW, don't give me that respect of his peers thing as an argument for his legacy. The same thing is said every year for 'Taker and it's always dismissed.

Sgt. Slaughter? We don't just remember his final days and what not, it's just, as an in ring competitor, his final days as a sympathizer was when he was at his best and most over and that's what this tournament is about.

Graham? Well he was revolutionary and influential. So was the Rock, one of Lesnar's opponents. 'Taker, Trips, Angle, Cena can all be put into that bracket. I would argue that several of Brock's opponents had the impact that Graham did. Some maybe even had a greater impact.

 

[SSJPhenom]

They did the typical heel challenger run in 1980 and 1981, although their match never made it as far as MSG. Typically they worked the 2nd level buildings, like in Philadelphia, New Haven, and a few times at the Allentown TV tapings. I don't know if that was because McMahon Sr. didn't want to expose Hogan by having him lose in his main building... if it's because he didn't feel Hogan was a big enough draw to main event MSG... or if he just felt that Hogan was still too green to main event MSG. But that's likely why you never heard of it.

Hogan being the heel would go over in the first match by dq or countout. Or lose by dq or countout, but either way it was done to establish him as a credible threat for the rematch. They'd do the rematch, and that time Backlund would come out on top and beat him.

Standard stuff back then.

Yes I know. Unfortunately for Backlund though, all of this happened while Hogan was apart of NJPW. I also think all of their matches were in 81. Backlund also teamed with Inoki a number of times to face Hogan and Stan Hensen. Way before Hogan was a demi god Hulkamaniac. When Hogan was getting there, though, Backlund refused to drop the title to him and dropped it to Iron Sheik instead.

 

[nightmare]

More talk of if A beat B then he could beat C.

Nobody Backlund beat had the same combo of size, skill & intensity Lesnar has, except maybe Sheik. That dude was legit. Lesnar would toss Bob around and use his strength to power out of anything thrown at him. Lesnar has not had as many long runs with a strap, but he more than makes up for that. He would win here & would certainly not drop out of round two in a tournament like this unless it was to a much bigger name than Backlund.

 

[Bernkastel]

Nobody Backlund beat had the same combo of size, skill & intensity Lesnar has, except maybe Sheik.

Iron Sheik? Bob beat him plenty of times before Sheiky Baby took the title from him. And even then his manager threw in the towel. Bob didn't submit or give up on his own free will.

Lesnar would toss Bob around

Perhaps. But there's no way Lesnar wouldn't get tossed around in the process.

and use his strength to power out of anything thrown at him.

Ha! Neither Hogan, Graham, nor Ken Patera could do this. What makes you think Lesnar could?

Lesnar has not had as many long runs with a strap, but he more than makes up for that. He would win here & would certainly not drop out of round two in a tournament like this unless it was to a much bigger name than Backlund.

There aren't many stars bigger than Bob Backlund. There's Sammartino, Hogan, Austin, and Cena. That's about it. A man that carried the promotion for 5 years as a globally recognized icon should damn well defeat a special attraction that WWE only uses sparingly because they don't need his star power on a full time basis. Don't try and bullshit me. You know Bob Backlund should win this match.

 

[George Steele's Barber]

How is Lesnar undefeated for three years?

This match is important but not exactly Mania level and surely not the main event of this round. It basically reeks of SummerSlam 2013 where Lesnar beat Punk in an epic battle and intense feud (mostly driven by Heyman).

But here's the thing, Bob Backlund isn't Punk. He's more of a Punk, Cesaro, Bret Hart hybrid. He's the damn IWC's wet dream if they actually felt the way they pretend to feel when they want to sound wrestling pious. Where as Lesnar is supposedly Vince's wet dream.

But I digress, back to the match. Backlund hurts Lesnar. He throw things at the guy that takes him off his skinny legs. He takes Brock's throws like a champ getting up quickly and not running back for more punishment. He technically works a part of Lesnar to the point where Lesnar can't function and gets the submission.

Vote Bob.

You're welcome Ech.

 

[stingray11214]

I am probably one of the few on this site that saw Backlund live back in the day. Seen many matches in Madison Square Garden and Boston Garden with Backlun holding the strap. I have also seen Lesnar live in his first run. That was at the SummerSlam where Lesnar kicked the living shit out of The Rock, and Rock would get booed right out of Nassau Coliseum.

Those things said, a lot of things have been said about both. However, few have mentioned two things that should sway votes.

1) Backlund was probably the most PROTECTED Champion in wrestling history. He rarely, if ever, defended the strap outside the WWWF territory. He also rarely wrestled faces. If they did, they usually ended up as time limit draws. Backlund only defended the strap against heels, and only in the Northeast. Because of this, many writers, including Bill Apter, refused to recognize the WWWF strap as a "World" title. So, the WWWF strap was considered a lesser title than the NWA or AWA straps. Worse, it was considered on the same level as the Florida and Mid-Atlantic titles. This would NEVER have been done during the reigns of Sammartino or Graham. However, because of Vince Sr. protecting his piggy bank, the WWWF took a PR hit until Hogan won it.

2) Lesnar has three things going for him that makes him far more credible in the ring then some give him credit for. Those things are the letters U, F and C. Those three letters, and his accomplishments made under Dana White, turned Brock into a legitimate ass-kicking badass. People remember that Lesnar, in only his second fight, WON the UFC Heavyweight title. This is an accomplishment that Backlund did not have access to. But, you CANNOT ignore for Lesnar.

Now, if this match is with Backlund at his height, against Lesnar as he is right now, here is how it would go: It wouldn't. NO WAY IN HELL would Vince Sr. allow this match to be booked. He was NOT going to put his cash cow in the crosshairs against a monster like Lesnar. As great as Backlund was, Lesnar was on another plain altogether. Backlund had his share of badasses: Iron Sheik, Ken Patera Blackjack Mulligan and Spiros Arion. However, NONE of them had the pedigree of Brock.

I am saddened that it was Backlund and not Rikidozan advancing. Rikidozan, I felt, was a far tougher test than Backlund is. So, there has to be a choice. Normally, I am usually agreeing with Bernkastel on the Old School. However, on this match, I part company. As great s Backlund was for the WWWF, Lesnar would be far too much.

Vote for Brock Lesnar.

 

[nightmare]

Iron Sheik? Bob beat him plenty of times before Sheiky Baby took the title from him. And even then his manager threw in the towel. Bob didn't submit or give up on his own free will.

That is great, but exactly how does that show he beats Brock? I said Sheik was close to his attributes & possibly Patera since you mentioned him. Neither of them are a monster like Lesnar is.

Perhaps. But there's no way Lesnar wouldn't get tossed around in the process.

Lesnar is not getting tossed around here. That happens very seldom & only by higher caliber guys in talent or strength than Backlund. (As in Angle or Big Show). He would get his shots in, but dont fool yourself by implying he would easily throw Lesnar anywhere.

Ha! Neither Hogan, Graham, nor Ken Patera could do this. What makes you think Lesnar could?

Talk to me when either of them walk around with people like Henry or Show on their shoulders like a sack of potatoes. Patera was legit strong, but was never going to beat Bob during that time & Hogan's great feat of strength will always be a bodyslam to Andre that people forget was done before. Neither of them are freak strong like Brock. Guys like Bruno, Cena & Steiner are three that come to mind who are freakishly strong like Lesnar. Backlund is outclassed here.

There aren't many stars bigger than Bob Backlund. There's Sammartino, Hogan, Austin, and Cena. That's about it. A man that carried the promotion for 5 years as a globally recognized icon should damn well defeat a special attraction that WWE only uses sparingly because they don't need his star power on a full time basis. Don't try and bullshit me. You know Bob Backlund should win this match.

The fact you put him in a list with those guys is hilarious, but lets just focus on one of them for a sec. Hogan. A man with half the skill & strength of Lesnar. Backlund never pinned or submitted him to my knowledge & when Hulk was becoming the next big thing, Backlund refused to lose to him because Bob is a little bitch.

Brock Lesnar, the biggest star in WWE now behind Cena, would not fall to his opponent here. Stronger, faster, more skilled & with Heyman in his corner Brock takes this fight. Even from a kayfabe booking stance, the money is in Lesnar moving on to face another higher profile guy in this bracket. Howdy Doody either does the job or walks off mid match. Legit fight? Lesnar does not fall to a chicken wing or knee drop & you are bullshitting yourself thinking either of those gets it done.

 

[justtxyank]

Bob Backlund was a good wrestler. Let me get out of the way.

The legend of Bob Backlund is largely a Vincewashing of history. Backlund's time as world champion was a time where it meant more to be NWA champion or AWA champion. When Vince Jr wanted to take the WWF national the first thing he knew that he had to do was get a different champion.

Brock advances and no wrestling promoter in the history of wrestling would even consider pushing Backlund over Brock...except for Vince Sr.

 

[Bernkastel]

That is great, but exactly how does that show he beats Brock? I said Sheik was close to his attributes & possibly Patera since you mentioned him. Neither of them are a monster like Lesnar is.

Speed advantage. Cardio advantage. Threw around the same size men as Lesnar regularly. Kayfabe protection. And he actually cared about the industry and being a pro wrestler.

Lesnar is not getting tossed around here. That happens very seldom & only by higher caliber guys in talent or strength than Backlund. (As in Angle or Big Show). He would get his shots in, but dont fool yourself by implying he would easily throw Lesnar anywhere.

What makes you say this? Is Lesnar just going to refuse to work with Backlund because he's an asshole. Backlund is cut from the exact same cloth as Kurt Angle. In fact he's much stronger than Kurt Angle. Bob could bench press 500 pounds. Angle was good for about 420. He tossed the big guys around like children. He was known for his freakish strength. Do you even know anything about Bob Backlund at all?

Talk to me when either of them walk around with people like Henry or Show on their shoulders like a sack of potatoes. Patera was legit strong, but was never going to beat Bob during that time & Hogan's great feat of strength will always be a bodyslam to Andre that people forget was done before. Neither of them are freak strong like Brock. Guys like Bruno, Cena & Steiner are three that come to mind who are freakishly strong like Lesnar. Backlund is outclassed here.

Ken Patera was a former Olympian who could clean and press over 500 pounds raw. Please direct me to any source of Brock Lesnar doing anything close to this. In reality Brock is not that strong; he's legit weaker than Bruno, Patera, Graham, and probably Hogan too. Many of Brock's kayfabe feats could have been easily replicated by any of those men.

Backlund is right at home here. He has all the talent and ability to take Lesnar down.

The fact you put him in a list with those guys is hilarious

So a guy that carried the WWE for 5 years, drew a fuck ton of money, and was known globally is not on the level as other WWE all time greats? Talk about personal bias.

Brock Lesnar, the biggest star in WWE now behind Cena, would not fall to his opponent here. Stronger, faster, more skilled & with Heyman in his corner Brock takes this fight. Even from a kayfabe booking stance, the money is in Lesnar moving on to face another higher profile guy in this bracket. Howdy Doody either does the job or walks off mid match. Legit fight? Lesnar does not fall to a chicken wing or knee drop & you are bullshitting yourself thinking either of those gets it done.

Really? The man that worked the mid card on the biggest Wrestlemania ever is going over one of the WWE's top drawing cards of all time. Astounding logic.

And I never said anything about this being a legit fight, so I have no idea why you think that it is. I only emphasized Bob's amateur background when people either downplayed it or ignored it because Lesnar is apparently the greatest fighting god that there has ever been.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

Yes I know. Unfortunately for Backlund though, all of this happened while Hogan was apart of NJPW. I also think all of their matches were in 81. Backlund also teamed with Inoki a number of times to face Hogan and Stan Hensen. Way before Hogan was a demi god Hulkamaniac. When Hogan was getting there, though, Backlund refused to drop the title to him and dropped it to Iron Sheik instead.

Sorry, I thought you said you didn't know that they had fought before? I wouldn't have brought it up otherwise.

They fought in '80 and '81 actually, and Hogan was with the WWF. He fought his first NJPW match in November 1980, and by that point, had already done a round on the B circuit with Backlund.

Yes, when it came time to drop the belt 3 years later, Backlund didn't want to drop it to Hogan. He wanted to lose the title to someone with a legit amateur background. After almost 6 years as champ, that was his right.

I have absolutely no idea what that has to do with a fantasy matchup between him and Brock Lesnar though. Unless you're trying to say that Backlund would be happy to lose to Lesnar because of his background? Although if that`s where we`re going with this, it`s a lot easier to see Lesnar lying down as long as it was made to be worth his while to do so.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

I saw your gif and it made me look for something for Brock. Now I know some people are disputing Backlund's strength and that is wrong, Backlund had an immense core, rigid grip.

But by god look at that. No wonder that man is the draw that he is. Its not just the power, its his ability to draw because of that.

Bret was right, he is the T-Rex of wrestling.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

I wasn't dismissing Backlund's legacy. I was making a point that Lesnar's opponents were more decorated and celebrated which they were. More champions, more legacy, more popularity, more drawing power. Brock's opponents out weigh Backlund's. Why don't you preach that shit to Ech, because that's damn near what he does in every round against the one he deems unworthy. If you read most of my posts in this tournament, you'll see that I usually go the route of citing each person's accomplishments then I argue my point.

Another guy that doesn't like hearing about the past. Gotcha.

More decorated? You mean more titles from a different era where titles are hotshotted around under a different business model to spike TV ratings and PPV buys? As opposed to the slower burn of the previous era where weekly live TV shows and PPV's did not exist, where they would build a match over a course of months to spike gate receipts, and maintain single champions for far longer than the modern era to create both credibility in an era where it was meant to be perceived as real, and suspense over whether or not tonight would finally be the night you got to see a new champion?

Yeah, let's just completely ignore those apples to the others oranges and call them both the same fruit. Seems fair.

More legacy? Along with more streams to maintain legacy thanks to the advent of the digital age. Even so... why don't we talk again in 30 years and see how some of those 'legacy's' hold up?

More drawing power? You mean guys working for a globally recognized brand that is one of the most recognized companies in the World. Not just wrestling companies. All companies.

Wrestlers today aren't the ones who draw anymore. The WWE does. Look at Wrestlemania that just passed. All time gate record, yet the card itself and the build to the show was horrible and uninspiring. The main event was the near 50 year old Champion, against a guy that fans are openly sick of, and the 50+ year old attraction against the 45+ year old owners non-wrestler son. Does that sound like a show that should have set attendance records? No, but it did because the company itself is the draw.

You can use your subjective arguments all you want about your fond memories as a child doing the Superfly Splash, because, unfortunately, that splash and getting hit in the head with a coconut is all he is and will be remembered for.

But no, you're not dismissing anyone's legacy?

You missed the point there. That point being how poplular some of these guys you put down were in their day... which you obviously do not comprehend.

Orton? His son has accomplished a hell of a lot more then he did. BTW, don't give me that respect of his peers thing as an argument for his legacy. The same thing is said every year for 'Taker and it's always dismissed.

Different eras. Different times. And not even the point. I'm sure Bob's estatic that his kid did so well with himself. The point again, that you were writing him off as a nobody, and I was pointing out that you were wrong.

Sgt. Slaughter? We don't just remember his final days and what not, it's just, as an in ring competitor, his final days as a sympathizer was when he was at his best and most over and that's what this tournament is about.

You REALLY need to watch some of his other stuff if you think that's when he was his 'best' and 'most over'.

Graham? Well he was revolutionary and influential. So was the Rock, one of Lesnar's opponents. 'Taker, Trips, Angle, Cena can all be put into that bracket. I would argue that several of Brock's opponents had the impact that Graham did. Some maybe even had a greater impact.

I would love to hear that argument. The only one that comes close in pro wrestling circles is the Rock, and we'll have to see if in 20 years, there's still guys out there trying to emulate the Rock, and having the best runs of their career while doing it.


Honestly guy. For someone who claims he's not tearing someone down to build another up... you're doing a horrible job demonstrating that. I was undecided coming into this. You're doing a good job making my mind up for me though.

 

[MrMojoRisin]

I saw your gif and it made me look for something for Brock. Now I know some people are disputing Backlund's strength and that is wrong, Backlund had an immense core, rigid grip.

But by god look at that. No wonder that man is the draw that he is. Its not just the power, its his ability to draw because of that.

Bret was right, he is the T-Rex of wrestling.

Yeah Brock is a powerhouse. I don't know that anyone's denied that.

The point of that .gif though, was to show everyone who didn't realize it exactly how strong Backlund was. Koloff is probably at least 300 lbs there. All muscle too. Backlund does a ONE ARMED dead lift of a 300+ pound man, then carries him half way across the ring before setting him down on the top turnbuckle.

That is just ridiculous strength, and should dispell every single notion that he wasn't strong enough to keep the chicken wing on Lesnar.

 

[nightmare]

Speed advantage. Cardio advantage. Threw around the same size men as Lesnar regularly. Kayfabe protection. And he actually cared about the industry and being a pro wrestler.

Please tell me how cardio matters when Brock would waste him in less than 15 ? He isnt gonna run around Lesnar till he gets tired like some Looney Tunes bit. And Kayfabe protection? 9/10 promoters would definitely feed Backlund to Lesnar in this so they can draw bigger money in a later round pitting him against another juggernaut.

What makes you say this? Is Lesnar just going to refuse to work with Backlund because he's an asshole. Backlund is cut from the exact same cloth as Kurt Angle. In fact he's much stronger than Kurt Angle. Bob could bench press 500 pounds. Angle was good for about 420. He tossed the big guys around like children. He was known for his freakish strength. Do you even know anything about Bob Backlund at all?

Do you know anything about Lesnar? He would surely have no problem working with Bob here, but that in no way means he allows himself to be thrown or taken down to the point you are implying he would. When has anyone besides Show, Angle & to some degree Cena tossed Brock like a child? Working a match & allowing your character to lose credibility are two very different things. Brock is not gonna just forget he is a monster for the sake of some nerdy little bitch. The bookers would not allow it either & back to kayfabe, the money match is Lesnar moving on to the likes of Warrior, Andre, etc.

Ken Patera was a former Olympian who could clean and press over 500 pounds raw. Please direct me to any source of Brock Lesnar doing anything close to this. In reality Brock is not that strong; he's legit weaker than Bruno, Patera, Graham, and probably Hogan too. Many of Brock's kayfabe feats could have been easily replicated by any of those men.

Backlund is right at home here. He has all the talent and ability to take Lesnar down.

I gave Ken his credit, but also stated he was not going to go over. Downplaying the strength of Lesnar is laughable though. So please direct me to where Backlund ever hoisted the likes of Henry & Show on his shoulders or handed them their ass with multiple suplexes. Struggling to lift a guy that is 300 or so pounds is much different than pretty easily tossing around people in the 450 range. Strong ? Yes, but not as strong as Brock has shown to be.

Oh, and again with Hogan & his one kayfabe feat of strength... the bodyslam is easier to pull off than what Brock does to men larger than he is. When has Hogan shown since then that compares? His move set has been all leg drops, worked punches and a no-selling hulk up since then 95% of the time.

Lesnar will not go down to a knee drop or tap to the chicken wing. It just isnt happening.

So a guy that carried the WWE for 5 years, drew a fuck ton of money, and was known globally is not on the level as other WWE all time greats? Talk about personal bias.

Personal bias? Backlund does not belong on that list & sticks out among their names like a sore thumb with a bow tie wrapped around it. Take a poll. Oh, this tournament did & he is ranked lower than Brock? Well look at that.

Really? The man that worked the mid card on the biggest Wrestlemania ever is going over one of the WWE's top drawing cards of all time. Astounding logic.

Anyone not named Ech, who ran this tournament, would clearly see more money being made off Lesnar moving on to face a better opponent than they would Backlund. When Hogan was being made, the company wanted him to go over & Bobby couldnt handle someone better going up. Nobody wears a Bob Backlund shirt, but I see tons for Hogan & now Lesnar. They both draw more attention and fans, which equals money & promoters would certainly go with that logic over yours.

And I never said anything about this being a legit fight, so I have no idea why you think that it is. I only emphasized Bob's amateur background when people either downplayed it or ignored it because Lesnar is apparently the greatest fighting god that there has ever been.

Legit fight it is not, but clearly Brock would have the advantage there as well considering he won a title in UFC. A legitimate fighting title match Backlund would never get because he does not have what it takes.

As far as your comment of downplayed & ignored - they are not the same as what has been said. Brock had a flat out better amateur career than Backlund. That is a fact.

Ech, your old school guys & their accomplishments do have merit in these tournaments, but in this match your guy is outmatched. Bobby Bow Tie takes a trip to Suplex City & comes home from vacation a very sore boy.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

He most certainly did. Trips was the biggest star in the company next to Cena, and Brock had been gone for years. He was able to build some fantastic heat and momentum with that win.

......how?

Like how are we coming to that conclusion? When was Hunter ever the biggest star next To Cena? I have many questions here about this. Brock has been unstoppable and came off a crappy run in 2012 tbh to finally being booked to a stature that befits him and properly utilizes his appeal.

 

[SSJPhenom]

Another guy that doesn't like hearing about the past. Gotcha.

More decorated? You mean more titles from a different era where titles are hotshotted around under a different business model to spike TV ratings and PPV buys? As opposed to the slower burn of the previous era where weekly live TV shows and PPV's did not exist, where they would build a match over a course of months to spike gate receipts, and maintain single champions for far longer than the modern era to create both credibility in an era where it was meant to be perceived as real, and suspense over whether or not tonight would finally be the night you got to see a new champion?

Yeah, let's just completely ignore those apples to the others oranges and call them both the same fruit. Seems fair.

More legacy? Along with more streams to maintain legacy thanks to the advent of the digital age. Even so... why don't we talk again in 30 years and see how some of those 'legacy's' hold up?

More drawing power? You mean guys working for a globally recognized brand that is one of the most recognized companies in the World. Not just wrestling companies. All companies.

Wrestlers today aren't the ones who draw anymore. The WWE does. Look at Wrestlemania that just passed. All time gate record, yet the card itself and the build to the show was horrible and uninspiring. The main event was the near 50 year old Champion, against a guy that fans are openly sick of, and the 50+ year old attraction against the 45+ year old owners non-wrestler son. Does that sound like a show that should have set attendance records? No, but it did because the company itself is the draw.



But no, you're not dismissing anyone's legacy?

You missed the point there. That point being how poplular some of these guys you put down were in their day... which you obviously do not comprehend.



Different eras. Different times. And not even the point. I'm sure Bob's estatic that his kid did so well with himself. The point again, that you were writing him off as a nobody, and I was pointing out that you were wrong.



You REALLY need to watch some of his other stuff if you think that's when he was his 'best' and 'most over'.



I would love to hear that argument. The only one that comes close in pro wrestling circles is the Rock, and we'll have to see if in 20 years, there's still guys out there trying to emulate the Rock, and having the best runs of their career while doing it.


Honestly guy. For someone who claims he's not tearing someone down to build another up... you're doing a horrible job demonstrating that. I was undecided coming into this. You're doing a good job making my mind up for me though.

Whether it's different eras or not, Brock's opponents are more decorated. I'm not trying to deminish their legacies, I know how popular they all were, but to be fair, you're doing the same exact thing to the modern era guys. You're basically saying that their reigns as champs were meaningless and not as important as the older reigns because they're shorter. You're saying that the modern era guys don't draw and you're using WM as the basis for that argument which is ridiculous considering that WM sells itself every year. The majority of WM tickets are sold way before the build to the show even begins. But look at B PPVs and house shows. You're going to tell me that Lesnar's impact on shows like Night of Champions isn't felt because that show sells itself? Please. You can't bring up the different eras argument and then completely discount the modern era and then say I'm dismissing legacies. Btw, if you really think I don't like the old school, look at my arguments for other older guys over modern guys. I vote for who I think will win based on everything and that's Lesnar this time.

Don't preach to me about tearing down the old school when you're doing the same to make your point. Just because you don't like my opinion that Brock has faced more celebrated and decorated champions doesn't mean I'm tearing the old school down. It's just my opinion and its true, Brock has faced more champions, with more legacy, and more drawing power. So if I've made your mind up for you and that's led you to vote for Backlund then either you misunderstood my arguments, read them out of context, or you've intentionally misconstrued my comments because you were leaning towards Backlund all along.

 

[Bernkastel]

Please tell me how cardio matters when Brock would waste him in less than 15 ? He isnt gonna run around Lesnar till he gets tired like some Looney Tunes bit. And Kayfabe protection? 9/10 promoters would definitely feed Backlund to Lesnar in this so they can draw bigger money in a later round pitting him against another juggernaut.

Wow, you are really,really underrating Bob Backlund if you think this match would go less than 15 minutes. This isn't a modern tournament. These matches are not happening in 2016. It wouldn't be feasible to compare these guys in their primes if we thought like that. Do you really think Vince Sr. would book this match the same way as Vince Jr.? Vince Sr. would be looking to push the guy that could pack him a really big house against Andre next round. And Backlund was far better at packing houses than Lesnar.

Besides, fan's of that time wouldn't want to see Andre squash a guy less monstrous than him, they'd want to see him face off against the undefeated for 5 years world champion.

Do you know anything about Lesnar? He would surely have no problem working with Bob here, but that in no way means he allows himself to be thrown or taken down to the point you are implying he would.

I never implied this would be a shoot match. I have no idea why you still think that it would be.

When has anyone besides Show, Angle & to some degree Cena tossed Brock like a child?

So only those 3 guys could touch Lesnar, huh? Is your argument next round going to be that Andre can't harm Lesnar and is going to be suplexed 20 times? It has been shown that Bob had more than enough strength to throw Lesnar around. He's not Kofi Kingston.

Working a match & allowing your character to lose credibility

Brock would not lose any credibility losing to Bob Backlund. Not at all. This is where I know you're just downplaying the man for the sake of downplaying because you obviously don't care for pre-modern wrestlers.

Downplaying the strength of Lesnar is laughable though. So please direct me to where Backlund ever hoisted the likes of Henry & Show on his shoulders or handed them their ass with multiple suplexes. Struggling to lift a guy that is 300 or so pounds is much different than pretty easily tossing around people in the 450 range. Strong ? Yes, but not as strong as Brock has shown to be.

I never questioned whether or not Lesnar is strong or not. I merely pointed out that he's not as strong as the men I mentioned. He could probably concede Hogan though. Not like it matters. And I certainly never claimed that Backlund was stronger than Lesnar.

Lesnar will not go down to a knee drop or tap to the chicken wing. It just isnt happening.

No one on the pro Backlund side has ever claimed that Brock would tap out. He might pass out though. A 50 year old Undertaker was able to do this after some shenanigans. Whose to say that there wouldn't be shenanigans in this match and Lesnar is done dirty? Are you saying that a 50 year old Undertaker is capable of doing something that a prime Bob Backlund is not?

Personal bias? Backlund does not belong on that list & sticks out among their names like a sore thumb with a bow tie wrapped around it. Take a poll. Oh, this tournament did & he is ranked lower than Brock? Well look at that.

Ah yes, the tournament where Stevie Richards and Matt Hardy made the field as part of the 128 greatest pro wrestlers of all time. Excuse me while I dismiss your study.

When Hogan was being made, the company wanted him to go over & Bobby couldnt handle someone better going up.

Nope, Backlund didn't want to drop the title to someone that he didn't deem as a grappler. He actually took pride in being a pro wrestler unlike Brock Lesnar. So if him having some pride in his abilities means he was being a dick, then I suppose lots of pro wrestlers are dicks.

Nobody wears a Bob Backlund shirt, but I see tons for Hogan & now Lesnar. They both draw more attention and fans, which equals money & promoters would certainly go with that logic over yours.

Mass marketing strategies for tee shirts didn't exist in the late 70's/early 80's.

Legit fight it is not, but clearly Brock would have the advantage there as well considering he won a title in UFC.

The UFC or even MMA as we know it didn't exist when Backlund was in his prime. If it did he probably would have gone into that.

A legitimate fighting title match Backlund would never get because he does not have what it takes.

As far as your comment of downplayed & ignored - they are not the same as what has been said. Brock had a flat out better amateur career than Backlund. That is a fact.

Downplayed and ignored - observe the rolling similes above.

I also never claimed Backlund was a better amateur wrestler than Brock. I simply emphasized his successful amateur career when people were downplaying them.

Ech, your old school guys & their accomplishments do have merit in these tournaments, but in this match your guy is outmatched. Bobby Bow Tie takes a trip to Suplex City & comes home from vacation a very sore boy.

Based on how you vote I very highly doubt that you think anything before 1985 even matters. But that's beside the point. Looking at the poll Backlund's lost and there's no point in beating a dead horse.

 

[SSJPhenom]

Wow, you are really,really underrating Bob Backlund if you think this match would go less than 15 minutes. This isn't a modern tournament. These matches are not happening in 2016. It wouldn't be feasible to compare these guys in their primes if we thought like that. Do you really think Vince Sr. would book this match the same way as Vince Jr.? Vince Sr. would be looking to push the guy that could pack him a really big house against Andre next round. And Backlund was far better at packing houses than Lesnar.

Besides, fan's of that time wouldn't want to see Andre squash a guy less monstrous than him, they'd want to see him face off against the undefeated for 5 years world champion.

IDK. If you're looking at it in terms of booking a compelling match for Andre in the next round; I think Lesnar would make the more interesting opponent. The Beast Incarnate, the Conqueror vs the true Giant. That really is the unstoppable force meeting the immovable object and it's a match I'd pay money to see then and even today. Especially prime Andre against Brock. Hell of a match.

 

[nightmare]

Ech is just going in circles & I am done trying to point out where his guy is at a disadvantage. Backlund is not as great as advertised.

Saying things like fans wouldnt want to see Andre squash someone less monstrous than him like Brock, but they would if it was Backlund? That is just crazy to think people would rather see a wrestler basically try to take down a brick wall instead of two monsters collide.

Preaching Bob's amateur career & how he didnt want to drop the strap to someone who wasnt a grappler? Since it has been agreed upon that Lesnar had a better amateur grappling career, then there should be no problem conceding Backlund would not have the same issue here as he did with Hogan.



Agreeing that Lesnar is the stronger of the two men & yet Backlund would be able to make Lesnar pass out? So a freakishly strong guy would not be able to break the hold of his weaker opponent by forcing his way out or standing up and running into the turnbuckle... right. Like that has never happened before.


Lesnar is by far not a god of wrestling, but he is certainly more than his opponent here can handle. Legit fight or kayfabe booking, Brock moves on past Backlund. He is not going to pass out from a move he could escape out of & being strong enough to suplex someone does not mean he wont be suplexed twice the amount by his much stronger and more vicious opponent. Backlund is strong, but not as strong. His mat game is good, but not as good. Math and common sense say Brock wins.

See you all in round 3.

 

[X]

Backlund wins this match. Easily. And here's why...

Come on man, easily? When has anyone ever beaten Brock Lesnar easily? I literally can't think of a single instance.

- He was a dominant champion for a whole lot longer period of time. 5 years. He defeated everyone of note there was to beat in the WWE at the time. Hogan, Graham, Iron Sheik, Ventura, you name it. Brock would not just steamroll over Backlund. Bob was able to match strength with guys like Hogan and Graham. He was Kurt Angle throwing 300 pound musclemen around like rag dolls years before there ever was a Kurt Angle.

Good point here though, a lot of people don't realize how freakishly strong Backlund was.

- Backlund was a more successful champion. He was one of the WWE's top drawing cards ever. He was the one that bridged the gap between Sammartino and Hogan. And unlike Hart, who would later bridge the gaps between Hogan and Austin, he did an amazing job. Brock was not a strong draw during his first run. He was not a strong draw during his time in Japan. Now he's used as a special attraction that still doesn't garner all that much interest. Even after 2 years he still uses "I beat the streak" as a selling point. It is literally the only thing of major note the guy has ever done.

I'm extremely curious as to what you're basing this claim of Backlund being one of the top drawing cards ever in the WWE, because that's a bold and frankly false statement. Backlund was widely, I mean WIDELY considered a failure as champion, a vanilla babyface that could give you a good match but had absolutely zero crossover or mainstream appeal or much of any charisma. Like the end of Hogan's WWF run, he also started to receive vocal backlash from fans for being such a clean cut boring character. He was even nicknamed Howdy Doody at one point (hint: that's not a compliment). House show attendance across the board declined steadily during his reign as champion, and didn't really pick back up until Hogan got the strap. Backlund then proceeded to disappear off the face of the planet...and no one missed him. Business boomed. This idea of Backlund being a legendary champion and draw is total revisionist history that the WWF tried to sell us during Backlund's return in 92.

- Brock Lesnar doesn't care about the pro wrestling industry. He doesn't. He works limited dates and half asses most of his matches. The fans give him a pass for some insane reason because he's legit when they never gave a shit about guys like Ken Shamrock and Dan Severn 15 years ago.

What? Shamrock was over huge for a period of time. But no one actually watched the UFC back then too, now the UFC is so far ahead of pro wrestling in popularity that I'd venture to say way more wrestling fans have seen Lesnar in the octagon than have bothered to go back and look for Shamrock or Severn matches.

And they had far more talent as pro wrestlers than Lesnar ever did. Backlund lived this business for 25 years.

Right. Except for when he took his ball and went home for EIGHT YEARS, wrestling maybe 3 or 4 matches from 1984 to 1992. That doesn't sound like someone who "lived the business".

He owned the late 70's and early 80's. That was his era. He came back years later and reinvented himself for a hugely successful second run, and defeated biggest wrestling star in the world Bret Hart.

I don't even know where to begin here. First, you're not going to find anyone who would say Bob Backlund was the better champ or bigger star in that era than Harley Race. Harley Race owned that era. Second, "hugely successful"? The WWF has literally never been in worse financial shape than when Backlund came back. And let's be honest, at no point in his entire career was Bret Hart "the biggest wrestling star in the world". WWF had to paper Wrestle-fucking-Mania in 1993. You of all people should know that guys like Misawa and Choshu were drawing waaaay bigger crowds at that time than any american promotion was. And I loved that run too, I think his I Quit match with Bret is a super underrated match with a hell of a story.

Brock Lesnar was used in the mid card of Mania this year. Probably for a number of reasons, but it demonstrates that Brock is not that important of a headliner in any capacity.

Uhhh...what? Backlund wrestled a shit match in the midcard of the worst Wrestlemania ever, so that argument goes both ways. You're really going to say that Lesnar isn't an important headliner for this company? Is that why he has that gargantuan contract and only has to work maybe 10% of the dates everyone else does?

So to reiterate, Backlund...

- Was a bigger star

Nope. Don't remember Backlund ever headlining a card in front of 76,000 people, setting the all time wrestling gate record in the process. Let alone the fact that Brock's UFC tenure has made him roughly 20 times the celebrity that Backlund ever was.

- A bigger drawing card

Incredibly, incredibly false. Backlund did zero to improve business. Zero. Plus, you know, Wrestlemania 31. Headlined a card roughly 3-4 times the size of the largest crowd Backlund ever wrestled in front of. Oh and should I even mention the buyrates of the PPV's he fought on for UFC? Cause that really puts the nail in that argument's coffin.

- Had more mass appeal

On what planet is this a true statement? Bizarro World? Backlund had ZERO mainstream appeal. Lesnar has tons.

- More charisma

I just honestly don't understand how you could believe these things you're saying, like this. Backlund is one of the single least charismatic world champions ever. THEY CALLED HIM HOWDY DOODY. He's as vanilla as they come. Lesnar oozes charisma just by walking to the ring. He doesn't even need to say a single word and every eye in the arena is fixated on him. He has more charisma in one of his little side-to-side jogs than Backlund has in his entire career's body of work.

I've already touched on your other bullet points so I'll leave it there.


The thing is, I actually like Bob Backlund. He was a terrific worker. But your argument is just...well, it's ridiculous man.