I figured this might ruffle a few feathers.....what do you guys think?

Interesting comments... I've always liked Benoit better too, but I see where Meltzer is coming from on the Guerrero side of things. Over the last few years, he's gotten much slower in the ring, and doesn't really go "Balls out" in big matches anymore.

I greatly prefer Guerrero to Benoit, but to say either man has a lot of bad matches is a little crazy. In my opinion, both have great matches, but Eddie gives me a reason to care about the match before it even happens. I will say Eddie hit his peak in '97, but he's still better than almost anyone in the WWE. I always get a kick out of these debates that claim Eddie, Benoit, Angle, or HBK are overrated, or just plain no good. If I had a roster full of guys like that, I could put on a tremendous show. I mean, if we're gonna talk about people being bad, why not start with Viscera?

Personally, I just like Benoit's intenseity more. Everything he does just seems real. (As real as anything in the circus that WWE has become can seem, anyway)

Eddie can still "go", but it seems like for the better part of the last 18 months he's been in cruise control. His matches with Mysterio have been disappointing compared to all the fucking hype they get, and just 2 weeks ago, Eddie looked like he was pulling a half ass job with Holly.

Also, lets not forget Eddie dogging it at ONS.

I think that most of you guys missed the point. I don't think that anyone was refering to Eddie/Benoit not being good. I think it was more of a case of comparing the two. I would agree with most of what he said except for his bias that he seems to have concerning Kurt Angle (I believe that's where the people have to slow down for Eddie comment comes from). Not to mention that I would take Benoit over Eddie in ring for sometime now. Eddie has been having issues with dealing with his pain and such since he doesn't have the luxury of taking painkillers like the rest of the guys. So therefore he cannot go "all out" every show. I expect that and totally understand it. Benoit on the other hand has broken his neck and has had the wear and tear of a 15+ year career......and he's still better in the ring. Now, I'll fully admit that Eddie is about a bazillion times better in the promo and charisma department..........but still. For me Benoit can have a good match with more of the roster than Eddie can CURRENTLY.........but I would also like to see where most people rank Mysterio in this conversation, because I may think that he's better than both of them currently..................

I haven't been impressed with Mysterio for some time now. Last time I remember really liking him was his series with Edge against Benoit/Angle and whatever the other team there was...

My response was specifically to the idea that a.) Eddie has a lot of bad matches, and b.) he is at his best 10% of the time.

I also wouldn't consider Benoit better than Eddie in the ring. What Benoit is great at is taking a beating and making his opponent look credible. This was also the strong point for Flair and Lawler, but they both had a little more personality to inject into their character than Benoit. Eddie, while not as strong as Benoit in that category, has a more entertaining offense.

I do think Rey is great, but I honestly don't rank him anywhere near Eddie or Benoit. I would also put Angle and HBK above Rey, but those are your top five workers in the WWE.

WOW, WMD I was really shocked reading that. I think that Rey is easily above Angle or HBK currently in ring wise. He's had good to great matches with literally everyone he's faced in the last year or so. I can't say that for Michaels or Angle on that matter. I would certainly agree though that those are the 5 best workers definately.

I also agree on the making opponents look credible department when it comes to Flair. Lawler on the other hand..........I disagree totally. Everyone that was brought into the Memphis territory was brought in to make Lawler look like money. Bret Hart would be a great example of what Benoit is in the ring..........makes people look great, but lacks in teh personality department.

Lawler was a 25 time USWA Champion. Exactly how does that constitute making anyone look good, especially when he's the king of Memphis booking, which means 10 minutes of stalling, 5 minutes of punching, and a lame finish.

If he was 25 time champ, he lost the belt at least 24 times right? I'm not saying he put anyone over, or elevated anyone's career. I'm saying (when he was young) he could take a beating and totally convince the crowd that his opponent was legit. It's what made him such a Memphis draw in the first place. Now, other than that Lawler SUCKS, so I don't want to argue his merit too much. I would agree somewhat with the Bret comparison, though I'd say Bret's offense was better, and his heel turn before leaving WWF showed a little more personality.

I honestly don't know if I could come close to saying that Bret has/had a better offense than Benoit.

I would, seeing as a lot of Benoit's offense is derivative of Hart's, and Hart was smoother with it. The Shapshooter, for instance. Don't tell me Bret's wasn't 10x better than Benoit's.

I'm not talking about the sharpshooter. I would agree though that Bret's is better. But Benoit has a lot more varied offense than Bret ever did. His highflying game is WAY better and he's on Bret's level technically. Plus, the crossface was a totally original move.................Sting used the "Scorpion Deathlock" before Bret used the shooter........even though the shooter is much better.

To get back on topic a bit, do you think Eddie peaked in '97?

Probably. That was before the majority of his injuries and after he had been a staple in Japan as Black Tiger. Not to mention that I think that when Eddie added his "Steriod mass" years later, he got worse as a worker.......

When would you say Benoit peaked? As good as he is, he's clearly on the downhill portion of his career.

Benoit? I would say that his peak was probably either 95 or in 2001. It's hard to say because I know that he was working in Japan still in 1995 and I've always thought that was his best stuff. BUT, his best stuff in the US is definately his 2001 stuff in the WWE. He was pretty much flawless that year.....and before the neck injury.

I would go with Japan. Funny how he was able to show more emotion there without being able to cut a promo.

Well, that is easy to explain. There is more emotion shown in the ring over in Japan than in their promos.

True, but the only time I can think of him showing that much emotion in the ring in the US was when he beat Sid for the WCW title....which he promptly threw in the garbage.

Well, besides Wrestlemania 20...........does he have much to be emotional about?

It doesn't have to be good emotion. Take Booker T for example. He seems to sho good emotion regardless of how retarded his circumstances.

It does when you are having a lacking personality.

Point well taken.

On to my next question...why do smarks prefer their wrestlers to have lacking personalities?

Because smarks lack personalities themselves?

Point well taken.

Smarks don't like personalities? If we're gonig by WWE, who has a personality to begin with? All I can think of is Guerrero, Angle, and Michaels. Triple H's personality is rather blah, and Hogan is too part-time to be considered.

Cena, Carlito, Big Show, Jericho, Edge, Eugene, Kane, Booker T, Heidenreich, Christian, JBL, MNM, Juvi, ....umm there's a start.

Edit: Maybe I should've rephrased my comment... who has personality that isn't a 1 note wonder like JBL, and isn't currently boring to death and/or stale like Jericho, Show, Heidenreich, and Booker?

I don't think it's so much that smarks don't like personalities, it's just that everyone the WWE is throwing out there with a personality is a horrible worker. Take Cena, for example, who marks love, but smarks hate because he's shitty in the ring. Marks look past that and just enjoy what's being put in front of them. Kinda like when I used to be a mark and would enjoy just watching the Undertaker wrestle/destroy his opponents.

This type of conversation always makes me think of Rock/Big Show at No Way Out 2000. The match sucks all kinds of balls work-rate wise. However, I was an innocent little mark while watching it the first time and I was on the edge of my seat throughout it because I cared about who won. As a mark, I found the match to be thrilling, if I were to rewatch it today I would probably be bored out of my skull.

I haven't watched the match in quite a while, but even as a mark I didn't care for it much. I've never been a big Show fan, and I never cared much for the Rock outside of in 1998 and not again until his 2003 3-month heel run.

I was buying the whole storyline seeing as I considered Big Show to be the true Royal Rumble winner at the time. It wasn't as much that I liked either guy, it was just making things right.

...You can call Michaels overrated. You can even call Angle overrated. Hey, you can even call Christopher Daniels overrated. But to call Guerrero overrated. Someone's about to be hurt. Calling Guerrero overrated is like someone saying Benoit is overrated.

Considering Guerrero's age, I don't blame him for slowing down a bit. He still delivers the goods, his matches with Rey this past year have been good, it's just that they have that ***** Halloween Havok 97 match hanging over their heads. Besides, no one can tell me that Guerrero hasn't been a great worker when you take into consideration his matches with Rey, Edge in 2002, Lesnar, and Angle. Guerrero made me mark out like a little kid on more than one occasion in 2004 and his heel turn has been great this year. If you do not think Eddie is even a good worker, then you probably shouldn't be watching wrestling because there is little you will ever enjoy (unless you are like Vince McMahon and have a fetish for the Chris Masters and Nathans Jones of the world).

I would be quick to say that Eddie stuff from this year though isn't really up to par for him though....

I agree, but I still think it's good. It may not be great or outstanding, but it is good. I probably wouldn't want to push Eddie as a main eventer at this point in time, but he is quite effective in his current position.

I would even disagree with that DK. I think given what he's had to work with, Eddie's done just fine this year.

Weird as Eddie is booked to be in the main event position against Batista next.