We all have them. Some of us aren't afraid to share them, while others quietly sit in the background, worried about the backlash that would come their way if they spoke up. Unpopular opinions are everywhere. The Big Bang Theory is the most watched television show in America. Captain America: Civil War is the highest grossing movie of 2016 so far. Adele's "25" has remained one of the best selling albums in recent history. Disliking any or all of those things would, technically, rank as an "unpopular opinion".
In wrestling, those types of opinions flow freely. Thanks to the internet, people are able to share their thoughts on any and every little thing taking place. Thought this particular match was a five-star classic? Say so. Think so-and-so isn't a very good in-ring worker? Speak your mind. I am no different than any of you. I have had some rather unpopular opinions through the years. Because you have given me the floor to share, that's exactly what I would like to do here. For one reason or another, the following opinions of mine just don't seem to match up with the thoughts of the "majority".
1. Ric Flair vs Ricky Steamboat hasn't given us the best match trilogy (or greater) of all-time. Of course, don't get me wrong... their matches were really good. Their three major matches against each other in 1989 still stand the test of time, coming on 28 years later. I will forever give them credit, but their matches simply aren't at the top of the list for me anymore.
Call me whatever you will, but my choice for the greatest match series between two wrestlers is Kazuchika Okada vs Hiroshi Tanahashi. These New Japan legends have been engaged in a heated rivalry for nearly five years now. In that span, I've watched them square off a total of nine times, and not only have I never seen a bad match between them, I haven't even seen an average one. Come to think of it, I haven't even seen an above average match of theirs. The first match of theirs that I ever watched (from NJPW's New Beginning event on February 12th, 2012) is my least favorite of the bunch, and if you asked me to give it a star rating, I'd still give it 4.25 stars, which puts it into consideration for Match Of The Year in any year. A whopping SIX of their matches would get the full five-star rating from me. By sheer volume alone, that means I have to rate it higher than Flair vs Steamboat, Samoa Joe vs CM Punk, Steve Austin vs The Rock, or any other group of matches between a set of opponents that has received tremendous praise from wrestling fans. Seriously, if you haven't watched anything involving Okada vs Tanahashi, you're missing out. You owe it to yourself as a fan of the business to check them out and see if it doesn't change your opinion, too.
2. The Attitude Era simply wasn't as great as many people make it out to be. Before anyone gets too worked up about that, I'm mostly talking about the in-ring product here. People always get caught up in the wrestlers that came out of the Attitude Era. They look at "Stone Cold" Steve Austin, The Rock, The Undertaker, Triple H, Shawn Michaels and the like, and they automatically get nostalgic about that time. They always seem to forget that the in-ring stuff back then was... well, let's just say it was lacking.
Call me crazy, but I like to watch wrestling when I watch wrestling. The Attitude Era gave us some legendary names and some all-time great stories, sure, but there wasn't a focus on the in-ring product at all. On any given episode of Raw, you could watch a heavily hyped main event, probably for the WWF Title, and it would end in five or so minutes, probably due to some sort of screwy ending or outside interference. Pay-per-views saw even bigger main events that would end around the 15-minute mark. For the sake of comparison, Kalisto vs Baron Corbin nearly went that long at TLC.
With the WWE Network featuring the episodes of Raw from that era, I, like many fans, have been able to go back and watch the things I loved when I was growing up. They simply don't stand the test of time for me, and I find myself fast forwarding through a large majority of every episode or pay-per-view. For my money, I'll take the last several years of the WWE product over just about any other time in the company's history if we're STRICTLY talking about wrestling.
3. Damien Sandow/Aron Rex is, and always has been, awful. Remember back when the Damien Sandow character started taking off? People were all over social media saying that he should be pushed to the main event. I didn't see it then. Remember when he debuted as Aron Rex in TNA? People were all over social media saying that he should be pushed to the main event. I didn't see it then, either.
He's just so awfully plain and boring to me. If you look at him, it's like you're looking at a Create-A-Wrestler that was never finished up. No real physique to speak of, blank tights, blank pads, blank boots, and a beard. That's it? It got even worse as his WWE tenure went on, because that normal physique turned into something that resembled more of a "dad bod", as if he stopped caring about having to work out all the time. It got even worse in TNA, though. He showed up on Impact looking like a janitor that accidentally wandered his way out through the curtain.
That look translated to his matches, too. Go ahead and name one really good Sandow/Rex match. I'm not asking for a five-star classic. I'm not even asking for a Match Of The Year. I'm wanting to see if anyone can remember any of his matches, actually. It's tough.
- From The Web