>>14048365I know this is bait and all but
>where match quality doesn't really matterThat's where the actual skill of being a great wrestler comes from. A great wrestler is a great performer. The greatest wrestlers of all time have had some of the worst matches imaginable, some of the stupidest fucking gimmicks imaginable, some of the worst periods but they are great wrestlers because they can actively makeup for it.
A great wrestler is a larger than life figure that can project emotion through their body language, a great wrestler is someone who can make something seem believable when it's dumb as fuck. A great wrestler can involve the crowd.
Cody's in-ring abilities are solid. They're not amazingly spectactular. He's not a technical "trained by the Harts/forged in the untrained realms of New Japan" wrestler. He's a consistent reliable worker that can latch onto ideas and concepts and connect with the audience.
That's what being a good wrestler is. That's what being a money-making boxer or a money-making MMA fighter is about. You draw money, notorioty and fame from your personality and your figure and your feats even if they are worked. The irony of this is when people turn around and say all this shit about Cody but then say someone like Omega is the true example of a great wrestling talent when they're not that different. Omega did have character and notorioty.
Match quality is more than just the technical aspects or the moves, it's the emotion, its the build up, it's the actual perks of being more than a travelling band of performers from Regal's neck of the words in wrestling carnivals. With a show you can build your matches on bigger scales. The definition of a "good wrestler" has changed overtime, just like it would with anything else.
Yes, there are consistent factors. Do they move well, are they able to not injure opponents/themselves, can they string together sequences? But this is a worked fucking business, brother.
