WWF v. WCW : Top 10 Faceoff c.1996

As I have written about before, I recently found myself going through some old issues of some wrestling magazines and was amazed at some of the things that I came across. One of the issues, titled The Wrestler and dated December 1996, was billed as a 'Special Issue' and featured an article basically going through the card of a fictional PPV where WW(E)F's top 10 faced off against WCW's top 10. Included in the article are predictions from 5 members of the magazine's staff. Let's take another look into the past...

#10 v. #10 - Owen Hart v. Chris Benoit - This is right around the time that Owen was coming into his own as a singles wrestler and Benoit was beginning to make a name for himelf on a national level. I would tend to agree that both deserved a ranking of #10 back then. The staff has Owen winning 3 votes to 2 votes. I suppose that I can agree with Owen winning.

#9 v. # 9 - Jake Roberts v Rey Mysterio - Why the hell is Jake even on the list? This is during his disasterous return, back when he got fat, old, and started wrestling in a shirt. Here was his gimmick - "I used to be a junkie and a lush". The fact of the matter is that he was still a junkie and a lush. There are 4 memorable moments from his comeback that come to mind: Jerry Lawler telling that Jake needed to go to the blood bank to get his eyes drained, Jerry Lawler presenting Jake with a giant bottle of wine, Jake getting his ass kicked as part of the show 'Boy Meets World', and losing to Austin and somewhat inspiring 'Austin 3:16'. If Jake was WWF's 9th ranked star at that point then WWF must have really sucked back then. As much as I didn't (and still don't) understand any of Rey's popularity , I'm not going to make an argument against him. Staff picks Rey to win 4 votes to 1 vote. It should have been 5 - 0.

#8 v. #8 - Davey Boy Smith v. Kevin Nash - I was never a fan of Davey Boy Smith as a singles wrestler. He had 2 moves. The stalled suplex and that slow powerslam. While I don't think he particularly deserved a ranking of #8, I'm not really going to argue against it. Nash was going through the beginning of the nWo. I would rank him higher. Staff has Nash winning 4 -1.

#7 v. #7 - Mankind v. Scott Hall - Both rankings seem okay to me. Staff has Scott Hall winning 3 - 2. I agree somewhat. Hall was in the nWo's early years and Foley was just starting to gain popularity.

#6 v. #6 - Goldust v. Randy Savage - I was actually a fan of Goldust for a while. Wrestling had never seen a character quite like him. An excellent move for him to come out of his father's shadow and make a name for himself. Like I have said before, Savage's whole WCW career was an abomination. Staff picks Goldust 3 votes to Savage's 2. I can live with that.

#5 v. #5 - Steve Austin v. Lex Luger - Again, Luger's post-WWE run in WCW was horrible (actually his career started spiraling down once he slammed Yokozuna and started the Lex Express). I can't get the image of that stupid collarless shirt he wore on the first episode of Nitro out of my head. He just looked so stupid. He started to look really old and all he would say was "I'm going to rack you!". Austin, on the other hand, was headed straight to the top and was a few months away from what I believe to be the best match of his career at 1997's Wrestlemania 13. Luger was just living on his reputation at that point. Staff picks Austin 3 -2. I would go 4 - 1.

#4 v. #4 - Undertaker v. Hulk Hogan - At one point I was a fan of the Undertaker. That is before he started to look like an old woman and walked slow as part of his gimmick as opposed to now where he walks slow because of his lack of mobility. I liked him most when he was still wearing the hat, tie, and gloves. Not when he started wearing leather and became a biker. On the other hand, I was never ever a Hulkamaniac. I just never was a fan, but that doesn't mean that I don't recognize what he did for the industry in the 1980's and the fact that he was one of the most over guys ever. I also think that his nWo heel turn in 1996 was genius. It helped revitalize wrestling in the mid-1990's and turned WCW into a solid contender which in turn forced WWF to raise their level as well. Hogan and 'Taker had (and still have to a lesser extent) amazing drawing power back then. Staff picks Hogan 3 - 2. An argument cam be made for the opposite too though.

#3 v. #3 - Vader v. Sting - Just like Luger was living on his reputation back then, so was Vader. He had definitely seen better days. Particularly when he feuded with Sting back in WCW. Sting was also a shell of his former self back then. At this point he was still colorful Sting and hadn't yet become black & white Sting yet. Just like I said with Hogan I was never a big fan of his, but I do recognize his drawing power. Whether I understand it or not is something different. Back during late 1996 the nWo was still relatively new and Sting was billed as WCW's best hopes so I guess #3 could fit. #3 for Vader though? a few spots too high of you ask me. Staff picks Sting 3 - 2. Fair enough.

#2 v. #2 - Ahmed Johnson v. Flair - Yes, Ahmed Johnson. There is no possible way that he could have been #2 back then. He was way over with the fans and muscular. That's it. He didn't have a successful past like Hogan or Sting did. Way below average ability if you ask me and extremely sloppy. I may have put him in the top 10 somewhere just based on his popularity, but it would be in the botom half of the bottom half. At this point Flair was no longer the Flair that he should be remembered for. He was in his mid-forties back then and he was definitely showing it. His pecs started to sag and his skin had gotten leathery. No way that I can agree with this #2 either. This was a little more than 9 years ago and if you would have told me back then that Flair would still be actively wrestling in 2006 and part of WWF I would have said that you were joking. Now, if someone told me that Flair would still be wrestling in 2012 I would have a small bit of doubt, but wouldn't be surprised if it turned out being true. Staff picks Ahmed 3 - 2. No way in hell that I agree. Is it possible to make it 2 - 0 in favor of Flair? Yeah, I know it doesn't add up to 5, but can't we make an exception?

#1 v. #1 - Shawn Michaels v. Giant - I have always been a fan of Shawn Michaels as a singles wrestler, although there have been times that I didn't like him as much as I did at other times. Shawn Michaels is at his best when he's a heel. Shawn as a face is okay, but he's awesome as a heel. Fortunately, he turned heel for a few weeks last summer when he feuded with Hogan, but then after the match he became a face again. Say what you will about Shawn Michaels, but he can still put on a great match and can carry a match as well as anyone. As for The Giant I was never a real big fan of him while he was in WCW. Maybe it was when he fell off of a building that ruined it for me. Or it could have been the way that they introduced him - having him break out of a rock wall in the Dungeon of Doom. It could have also been when he was billed as Andre the Giant's son and came out and hit Hogan in the face with what was supposed to be the shirt that Andre wore during filming of 'The Princess Bride'. That whole Andre the Giant stuff was squashed though when Andre's daughter threatened a lawsuit against WCW. WCW sucked back then so maybe he can be #1. He was possibly their biggest star at that time. Staff picks Giant to win 3 - 2. It can go either way, but I would side with Michaels.

All in all the Staff picked 5 wins for each company, and I would have picked WWF with 4 and WCW with 6. That's a little suprising considering my admitted bias towards WWF.

wrestleblogger@yahoo.com