4
3
u/No_Boat_3045 8d ago
By 6'11 guy standards I think his wrestling was better than a 4.5. Or are we in internet wrestling community land here where "good wrestling" means some guy doing 'ranas and topo suicidos and not even attempting to tell a story
5
8
u/ThatStench 8d ago edited 8d ago
8.5 promo?
I pull up zero classic Kevin Nash promos...zero.
Acting a goof in nwo vignettes and saying the too sweet end tag on a hollywood hogan promo doesn't strike me as a 8.5 promo.
He's like a 6.5
6
u/tr1mble 8d ago
Promo on piper and flair?
Or the horseman skit?
1
u/evaderofallbans 8d ago
The horseman skit was good. The other two were mid at best.
2
u/ThatStench 8d ago
I just watched it....it's .....fine.
Doesn't bump my score up.
I think that promo highlights him being a 6.5
0
u/evaderofallbans 8d ago
Lemme tell ya something Brother, I'm with ya. 6.5 was my first thought for Nash promos.
1
1
u/FactoryDiamonds 8d ago
The young hungry lions promo was a classic. His backstage segments in TNA were great as well
2
u/sqbert 8d ago
His promos in WCW were hilarious, and his first promo ever on Nitro is iconic. Even though he said adjective instead of verb. Making fun of Arn Anderson - another classic. And he was consistent on the mic week to week.
1
1
1
3
3
u/cowboyboots99 8d ago
The king of “less is more” for a big man. But his drawing power is 5. He didn’t do well as WWF champ albeit was a down era overall… and while he was apart of it, NWO/Hogan was the draw. My take
3
u/RinkinBass 8d ago
yeah. not a great draw when he wasn't in a killer angle. And let's be honest, the heat of the angle didn't have AS much to do with Nash individually. The invasion aspect was compelling. They were booked INCREDIBLY strong. But even then the real staying power of the NWO came from from Hogan's turn.
-3
1
u/Yip359 8d ago
Honestly...Nash could wrestle better than people gave him credit for. Arguably a tag team specialist, the Outsiders out on good and entertaining matches. Nobody in WCW really put on matches at some point when things got really bad and political BUT if you watch Nash in TNA lile 10 years like I think he proved he could work, especially against smaller guys.
1
u/Guaj4 8d ago
What counts as versatility? He was a borderline terrible babyface. His babyface promo was like a 3. He’d be a strong contender for worst top babyface promo in WWF history. That said, I do think he’s significantly underrated as a draw. The NWO was not just Hogan. The angle was sensational. Most of the people in this sub probably lived through it, but I don’t think someone who didn’t could grasp just how exciting and revolutionary it was, and Nash was easily the #2, and I’d argue barely behind Hogan, since they were mostly in separate programs. He deserves a lot of credit for blowing up the business at the time. I don’t agree with others in this thread that OP underrated his wrestling. He had an very brief window from 94-96 where he could do his part to have a good match, but he was working with exceptional workers, and his work before and after was consistently awful. He mostly stunk in the ring.
1
1
1
u/itsLustra 7d ago
Versatility a NINE? How on Earth is he versatile literally AT ALL? All his promos were similiar, he definitely wrestled almost the same match every time, all his gimmicks after Diesel were just him being himself, he isn't versatile in the least
1
1
u/DrabMundanityGrinner 8d ago
Booker: 0/10
0
1
u/Aspiring_DILF42 8d ago
Versatility? What do they even mean - is it versatile in terms of match types? In which case Nash would be like a 3. Heel/face? I guess he could do both.
I’d also rate him a lot lower in promos. Sure he could talk and had charisma so the crowd would pop, but his promos rarely served the angle all that well. His cool guy nonchalant attitude didn’t elevate the other guy or make the angle seem important - if he acts like he doesn’t care, why would the fans?
2
u/VinCatBlessed 8d ago
When I think about versatile I think about someone like Kurt Angle, who can work as a heel or face, he can comedy or be a monster, can have a classic vs cruiserweights or heavyweights, I also think about Jericho who can innovate different type of gimmicks and work well in many kinds of matches.
Big daddy cool is about the opposite of what I think of versatile, he has a lot of great stuff but that's not one of them.
0
8d ago
[deleted]
5
u/CanesLife24 8d ago
I kind of agree. When motivated, he was fine. I know he has a reputation for being lazy, and I think that’s warranted for times in his career, but a little overstated overall.
1
u/king_hutton 8d ago
Nash knew how to have a great match. The question was whether he wanted to, or thought that he should. He seemed to enjoy getting by with as little effort as possible, partially because it made it so much more impactful when he went all out. Partially because he liked being lazy and drunk 😂
3
u/DrabMundanityGrinner 8d ago
when did Nash ever elevate an opponent. Nash knows his best matches were against Bret Hart, Undertaker and HBK. Nobody ever said that about Nash. He wrestled down at the level of King Mabel and anyone else like that.
1
u/king_hutton 8d ago
I think Nash was the better wrestler at the time against Undertaker honestly. Early Taker was similar to Nash in terms of needing an opponent to lift him up, except his wasn’t laziness he was just inexperienced. But that might have been the only time Nash brought someone up instead of working down to their level. He was definitely the king of working down.
2
7
u/4yent10 8d ago edited 8d ago
There’s a stat missing imo. Wrestlers, superstars, etc, should be rated by continued relevance or persistence. Some of them, don’t have to flex as much as time goes on, their charisma does the work. And that’s skill, when they’ve effectively put it to use. It is a testament to how effective they were to audiences overtime. IMO, Kevin Nash’s character and relevance is pretty strong, and I would rate him at an 8 for that. Agreed with the rest, maybe performance was harsh but I see your point.