Str8Shooter wrote:Yeah I'm going to try and watch both these matches again before I vote, but I feel like recency bias is strong with that one getting in. Razor/Shawn basically set the tone for the Ladder match, which would become one of WWE's strongest gimmick matches for years and even up to today.
I have the opposite worry here. I'm going to urge people to watch the matches and judge for themselves, because I feel like Neville/Zayn could get shut out just for being a recent match and an NXT match. And it deserves to be considered.
That match was to me, without a doubt the best match of 2014 (and I couldn't quite say that I think Michaels/Razor was the best match of 1994 ... it wasn't even my favourite match at Wrestlemania X). Both performers were great, they told a story within the match that was done extremely well. Of all the matches I've watched back in this tournament so far, only Hart/Austin told as strong a story as this one. The match also had a whole bunch of emotion behind it. I only really got into NXT with R-Evolution so I hadn't seen all of the build up, but I was still sucked into the emotion of the match itself.
Shawn/Razor is more historically significant. Of course it is. For starters, it's had a lot of time to become so. And it was also WWE's first promoted ladder match so that's a big deal too. But I don't think it should be getting a walk through for that reason. It should be judged on its own merits. We're not judging the most famous matches or the most significant matches; just the best matches.
I have to go back and watch the ladder match again, as it's been a while for me. I do remember thinking it was a good match. But I'd actually be surprised if I didn't end up voting for Neville vs Zayn. They just had a near perfect match that made me completely engage in the story and the characters in a way that few other matches ever have, and it would suck for them to get knocked out just because people hadn't seen the match or because it happened too recently so people think voting for it makes them seem fanboyish or fickle. New matches can be just as good as old matches, or even better.
I'm not accusing anyone of anything here, you're all great, I just wanted to say my piece early in case anyone felt guilty about voting for a great match just because it's not as historically significant.