WWE: Super Heroes, Underdogs and Why Smaller Wrestlers Belong in Main Event

Use your ← → (arrow) keys to browse more stories
WWE: Super Heroes, Underdogs and Why Smaller Wrestlers Belong in Main Event
Photo: WWE.com

Unless Grantland.com twisted his words, wrestling legend Kevin Nash believes that deceased wrestlers Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrero never belonged in the main event. Nash doesn't think current wrestlers Daniel Bryan and CM Punk belong in the main event, either.

Why?

Because they're supposedly "vanilla midgets"—"small-statured, gifted technical wrestlers that lack big in-ring personalities." In other words, vanilla as in boring, midgets as in small. 

I have a question: if Bryan and Punk are vanilla midgets, what does that make John Cena and Sheamus? Vanilla supermen? Vanilla as in boring, supermen as in predictably invincible.

Bryan and Punk are definitely small-statured in comparison to Cena and Sheamus, but are they any more boring than Cena and Sheamus? No? So, what makes Cena and Sheamus worthier of being in the main event? Their larger size?

What effect does a wrestler's size have on ratings, ticket sales and pay-per-view buys? Are viewers more likely to pay to see a body-builder type like Cena than they are to pay to see the smaller CM Punk? Is there something extraordinarily fascinating about body-builder types in wrestling? 

Rapper Immortal Technique recently wrote (on Twitter), 

@ImmortalTech: The subconscious nature of the human mind is like the bottom of the ocean, who knows what's really down there.

If you were to run a google image search for "super heroes," you would find that most traditional super heroes are pretty big and muscular. Superman, Batman, Captain America, Goku, Vegeta, you name it. Perhaps deep down, people are attracted to body-builder types like Cena for the reason that body-builder types remind people of super heroes or Roman gladiators.  

Regardless of what attracts certain fans to the body-builder types, there is no good reason why smaller wrestlers shouldn't be in the main event if they're over with fans.

Just as there's something extraordinarily fascinating about body-builder type wrestlers, there's something extraordinarily fascinating about smaller wrestlers.

What's fascinating about smaller wrestlers?

One word: underdogs.

Smaller wrestlers are usually underdogs, and who doesn't like an underdog?

Who didn't cheer for Eddie Guerrero during his WWE title match with the much larger Brock Lesnar at No Way Out 2004? Who didn't cheer for fictional boxer Rocky Balboa when he went the distance with Apollo Creed?

The reason we love underdogs is simple: they inspire us. Unlike Cena and Sheamus, they (smaller wrestlers like CM Punk and Daniel Bryan) struggle. B/R's own Maria Cane wrote (regarding struggle),

Think deep into your mind of all the heroes that you admire in the journey to who you are today or where you want to be. Cogitate for a second on exactly how they became heroes in your mind.

No matter what they achieved, it was the struggle that made the achievement worth it. After all, if a man's grasp doesn't exceed his reach, then what good is the item that he's reaching for?

Do you agree with Kevin Nash?

Submit Vote vote to see results

Ultimately, body-builder types like Hulk Hogan and Cena may remind us of traditional super heroes, but small-statured types like Eddie Guerrero and CM Punk remind us that anything is almost possible if we're willing to work hard for what we want. For this reason, smaller wrestlers are just as worthy of being in the main event as their larger counterparts.

What do you think of Nash's comments? What do you think of anything I've written here? Share your thoughts!

 

Thanks for reading! 

Load More Stories

Out of Bounds

WWE

Subscribe Now

We will never share your email address

Thanks for signing up.