Would the WWE be better without super-heavyweight wrestlers?

Question

I notice a lot of people complaining about guys like Big Daddy V and Mark Henry and Umaga as "pieces of large, overweight crap".

So, just for this question, I was wondering, do you think the WWE would be any better without super-heavyweight wrestlers (i.e. No wrestler exceeds approx. 300 lbs)?

Discuss.........

I agree with you, TA.

Pedigreed- I have been watching, and Umaga beat down HHH because Randy Orton helped him. Otherwise, Umaga was getting destroyed one-on-one against him.

Chris Hero- I like Umaga, too.

King Kjors- I agree about Big Daddy V. People just crap on him because he exposes himself more than he should.

Answer 1

Yes and No.
This cannot be exactly true, think of all the good big guys in wrestling, they just need to make sure the people can actually wrestle, Mark Henry BDV ect. Umaga has a lot of talent, some people just dont like him because he isn't flat chested like Cena Batista ect, and we need to remember that half of answers is marks, there is no definite answer to that.

Answer 2

Yes and no.

It does get annoying whenever BDV or Mark Henry or Khali get better matches because they are big rather than TALENTED wrestlers get squat. And I'm tired of the Undertaker fighting only big dudes. The only other guys 'Taker has feuded with are Batista, Edge and that's it. Other than that he only fights the big guys. I'm REALLY tired of that.

But at the same time the wrestlers need someone to make them seem like the underdog at times. Cm Punk has BDV. Mysterio has Khali and Henry. We still need them so that the underdog can overcome them and be more popular. Even though I dislike the HUGE guys for getting all of the attention just 'cause they are REALLY FAT (BDV), look really muscular (Mark Henry), or are the tallest guy in the WWE (Khali) we need them to make the other wrestlers look better by making them oversome these huge dudes.

I have nothing on Undertaker, Kane, Umaga or any of the other guys 'cause they can actually perform a suplex and other wrestling moves. I'm only talking about Mark Henry, Big Daddy V and the Great Khali. THEY ARE NOT wrestling material.

Answer 3

Umaga is actually a very good superheavyweight, why are people saying that about him???

there are good superheavyweights, like Glen (Kane), and Mark Callaway (Taker), but guys like Khali just need a better gimmick and a larger move set.

BDV has improved, i'd rather see him as BDV instead of Viscera, that gimmick change put him in the main event scene on ECW. if anything, he just needs a new wrestling gear to cover his atrocities (you know what i'm talking about)

same thing for Henry, he has been more competitve, with just a few more moves, he would be a very good wrestler.

and former WWE wrestler Big Show was phenomenal and had great abilities for someone of his condition.

WWE should keep their superheavyweights.

Answer 4

First of all... No they would not be better without them. They are just being misused. They should be used in situations to place a babyface in the "underdog role". Then have the baby go over stunningly (Nash vs Rey Mysterio, etc.) If a super heavyweight is limited they should be relegated to jobbing on PPVs.

Second of all... Putting Umaga in the same group as BDV is ludicrous. Umaga is very fundamentally talented while BDV can barely do a leg drop.

Answer 5

No super heavyweight wrestlers are a dominate wrestlers to be honest i like super heavyweight wrestlers like Earthquake rip
Umaga Mark Henry and sometimes Big daddy V and kane and undertaker weigh over 300 pounds

Answer 6

No way! Umaga beat the crap outta Triple H 2months ago. Did you not see that? Plus I can tell that he's been working on His physique a lot more than He was last year.

Mark Henry is to good to leave the game.

Now I understand your concern about Big Daddy V ( He just doesn't do anything for me)

Answer 7

I like Umaga. And Big Vis and Henry have been in the WWE for a pretty damn long time so i don't see them going anywhere anytime soon. That's not to say i enjoy watching them wrestle, because i don't. I think Henry is past his prime (Which was his sexual chocolate days IMO) and Vis has struggled since he was Mabel to get over with fans. He just can't do it. Somehow he's still in WWE though. IDK. I think Khali is horrible too but he's at least funny when he talks. But seriously, Umaga has great talent. And WWE would suck without Kane and Taker, so i think i disagree with your idea.

Answer 8

Well what I am thinking is that people just don't like the big men in the WWE. I mean look at Big Show and Andre they are some of the most popular wrestlers ever and they were huge. So what I thinkis that if they made Khali into more of an Andre wrestler than this big dumb giant freak that he is playing then the WWE would be a little better.

Answer 9

Yes, people like Cm Punk, MVP, Benoit, Y2J, Ect. are better on Mic and better wrestlers

however some are good, I believe that Umaga is good but they shouldn't have many of these types, no more than 4 in the WWE (Khali is bad, Snitsky is bad)

Answer 10

IM GONNA HAVE TO SAY NO NOT AT ALL. THE ONLY SUPER HEAVY WEIGHTS I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ARE THE GUYS LIKE GIANT GONZALEZ WHO HAD ABSOLUTELY NO TALENT. THE BIG AND TALL GUYS ARE GREAT TO WATCH AND WONDER WHEN SOMEONE IS GONNA FINALLY BE ABLE TO END THERE DOMINANCE THEY MAY NOT PUT ON THE BEST MATCHES BUT I DO FIND THEM ENTERTAINING AT TIMES.

FOR THE PEOPLE WHO SAY BIG DADDY V IS SLOW I DISAGREE WITH THAT FOR HIS SIZE HE MOVES REALLY GOOD AND I WOULD BET HE COULD BEAT SOME OF THE PEOPLE HERE WHO COMPLAIN ABOUT HIM IN A RACE.

EVEN MARK HENRY HAS IMPROVED QUITE A BIT SINCE HIS EARLY DAYS WHEN HE FIRST STARTED IN THE WWE BACK IN THE LATE 90S.

WITH OUT THE SUPER HEAVY WEIGHTS THERE WOULD BE NO BAM BAM AND NO VADER AND YOU CANT TELL ME THOSE GUYS WERE ENTERTAINING.

I ONLY HATE WHEN THEY HAVE GUYS LIKE REY GET A WIN OVER THESE GUYS EVEN THOUGH I DIDNT MIND IT ON RAWS TRIBUTE TO THE TROOPS SINCE IT WAS FOR A GOOD REASON.