Reported by Ben Hagen of WrestleView.com
On Tuesday, May 2, 2006 at 2:56 PM EST

So he’s hurt again? He’s on the shelf, apparently, for an extended period of time. When he comes back, if he comes back, he’ll be wrestling on borrowed time (as he has been since 2003). Moments like these make me wonder, “If Angle is done, what sort of legacy does he leave behind? What will people remember?" When it comes to Kurt Angle, everyone has an answer. Some praise him as one of the greatest ever, a top ten American wrestler of all time. Some praise him as the greatest wrestler on the current roster. Some criticize him as overrated. Others claim that Dustin Rhodes is a better wrestler. Some claim that Dunn of the Ring Crew Express is a better wrestler. We call that a spectrum, readers. The question here isn’t “Who’s right?" but, rather, “Where, in this spectrum, can a proper analysis place him?" That’s where I come in.

I’m not going to do anything fancy here. I’m not going to rant for two thousand words about how much Angle sucks. Quite frankly that isn’t true. He’s an exciting performer who can be funny and kick-your-ass all in one show. The mouth guard is a nice touch, and ever since he shaved his head back in 2002, he’s turned up the intensity. The purpose of this specific column is simple: How much weight do current criticisms of Kurt Angle carry? Which are valid? Which reveal unfair bias? Which are way off? Let’s take a look, shall we? Afterwards we’ll look at the recent Undertaker / Kurt Angle World Heavyweight Title match at No Way Out to see what we can come up with.

Criticism #1: Lack of Selling

There is some credibility here. Kurt Angle is among the worst sellers in the company. His tendency to pop up after taking a variety of offense usually has one of two effects: (1) the “Kurt Angle Is Incredible!" response the commentators try to pass off and (2) the collective groan fans with a bit of curious analytical tendencies release. Is this fair? Are the commentators over doing it? Is Angle really all that bad at selling? Let’s look at some examples, yes?

(A) Kurt Angle’s signature belly-to-belly suplex off the ropes. It has turned into a clichéd spot in all his bigger matches and fans, including those of us who hate it, can see the damn thing coming a mile away. Angle pops up while his opponent climbs to the top rope, sprints to the turnbuckle (regardless of what kind of move he may have taken previous), and tosses his opponent off the top rope. His most recent, perhaps his last, match against Rey Mysterio on Smackdown! was no different.

(B) Kurt Angle’s Ankle Lock. Angle’s nifty little transitions into his ankle lock would work if Angle kept up the impression that he had taken any damage before applying the maneuver. He just grips his opponents leg, rushes to his feet, swirls around unbounded, and screams his lungs out once he gets to his feet. Watch him commando roll around after taking a match’s-worth of heavy offense. Watch him take high impact move after high impact move only to brush it all off when applying the Ankle Lock.

Criticism #2: Offense Issues

Kurt Angle is often criticized for having a variety of high impact moves that focus on the back of his opponent and having a finishing submission hold (which is the only thing he seems to win matches with anymore) that focuses on a completely different body part. Now I’m not entirely certain why this is an issue. However, I do find it strange that he hasn’t won a high profile match with anything BUT the anklelock (or a flash pin) in a long time. I love that his grape-vine lock-o-doom is nearly a kiss of death finishing maneuver. However, it seems strange that he wouldn’t lock it in that way right away like he did at Wrestlemania 22. These and other issues, like his sometimes-purposeless suplex and celebratory dance, seem valid.

Criticism #3: He’s an Olympian?

Shouldn’t an Olympic gold medalist be a bad ass mat wrestler. The discrepancy between Angle’s obvious mat superiority and what happens in the ring is often too humorous to stand. Michaels / Angle hinted at some sort of superiority in their Mania match, but never carried through with it. Angle managed to outmaneuver Michaels on their first lock up, but it took him about five minutes to figure out how to keep away from a side headlock takeover. Granted, we can’t always have things our way, but Angle should rarely be outshined on the mat when in reality, he often is.

But to a match.

Kurt Angle (World Heavyweight Champion) vs. The Undertaker (No Way Out 2006)

After the champion enters, Michael Cole dubs Angle “A Wrestling Machine," “The Champion," “One of the Most Decorated Athletes in WWE History." The lights go out while Angle crouches, ready. The challenger enters the arena through a cloud of smoke: a mere shadow before walking into a blue light. Angle stands and stares as Taker approaches. As they stand in the ring antebell (get it?), Michael Cole again cuts in: “Kurt Angle: perhaps the best pure wrestler ever. The Undertaker: perhaps the best pure striker ever." Wrong. Neither are “pure" anything. Both have proven time and again they can exist in any environment and stay competitive. Tazz cuts in eventually during the match to try and correct him. Ah well. To the match.

But Michael Cole was on the right track with his break down. Taker puts his dukes up as the bell ring; Kurt Angle crouches in a wrestling stance. Taker rushes the champion right away with a big boot attempt and follows with a right hand attempt. Angle ducks, applies a waist lock, and rides the Undertaker to the ropes. Seems simple, yes? Notice the different approaches. Whether or not they are “pure" anything, both have a strategy coming in. Cole blabs something about neither man ever tapping out. Huh?

Most of the first five or so minutes sees the challenger control the champion by his arm. Angle tries to reverse their roles by escaping with his fists, but he’s more effective after dodging a big boot attempt and nailing a big German suplex and, eventually, knocking Taker off the apron into the ringside barricade. He isn’t able to sustain any degree of offense, however. The challenger rams the champion into the ring post and nails his ring apron leg drop. Back in the ring, the champion counters a choke slam with a few kicks to the challenger’s leg before focusing his attack. A few minutes later, about twelve minutes in, Taker tosses the champion out of the ring before attempting another ring apron leg drop. The champion, however, locks in the Ankle lock as a counter, wrenching the ankle and knee of Taker’s right leg. He releases to break the count and then rolls back out and applies the Ankle lock to the challenger’s left leg (the one he’d been working on earlier). Back in the ring, Taker can barely stand, and Angle continues his attack. After several minutes, the challenger applies a triangle choke earning some time, but gets drilled with an Angle Slam through the Spanish announcers’ table moment later.

Though Taker recovers enough to send him into the ringside steps, he gets yanked off the top rope with an ugly (but effective) belly-to-belly throw – good enough for a near fall over twenty minutes in. And we’re in the finishing stretch, folks. Angle reverses everything into an Ankle lock attempt. The Undertaker fights out and gets near falls of his own with various high impact moves. Several minutes of finishing sequence later, Angle reverses the Tombstone into yet another Ankle Lock. He grapevines his legs, but Taker manages to be one of very few people to escape. Angle nails a second Angle Slam, but Taker reverses another Ankle Lock attempt into yet another Triangle choke. The champion nearly passes out, but manages to power over with a bridge and earn the pinfall at 29:36.

Match Analysis: This is a great match, one of the best of the year that I’ve seen thus far. It is a solid encounter between two established guys in a match better than anything at Mania. But how do the criticisms of Angle fit in here? In a sense, they are all do apply: (1) Angle pops up pretty often during the match, but he also uncharacteristically does a pretty good job selling Taker’s heavy offense. The major criticism here is his goofy expression and lightning quick movements when applying the Ankle lock. Though some of his counters are nifty, they ultimately act to undermine any sort of credibility the “sport" has. (2) As far as the criticism of Angle’s offense, that is circumvented with his unusual focus on Undertaker’s leg (which worked very well for wrestlers like Bret Hart). His focus was well done, but also pretty awkward at times. He mimicked the Hitman’s strategy well, but it still never felt authentic given the Angle’s usual preoccupation with suplexes and other high impact moves. A good thing about his refocus is that the suplexes he did manage to hit meant something and were few and far between. (3) As for the “Best Pure Wrestler" nomenclature applied to Angle by Michael Cole and Tazz (please ignore the slip into passive voice), Angle’s stance at the beginning of the match really didn’t translate into any sort of mat superiority. His focus on the leg doesn’t necessarily translate into “technical superiority" considering Taker reversed almost every hold he applied. Whether or not that’s a bad or good thing, I leave that up to you. Well, actually, I don’t. In this case, I think it works. Taker is Taker. Had Angle been in the ring with, say, HHH or John Cena, I say that Angle’s current character demands that he dominate the mat. With Taker, however, his role is too established as the ultimate opponent who is immune to almost any style.

When I watched this match through the first few times, I hated how back-and-forth it was . . . until the last time. Overall, there are very defined control segments. Though Angle sneaks in offense in the early portions of the match, he never really sustains offense until the Ankle locks outside of the ring. Afterwards, Taker still manages to sneak in offense of his own, but never really takes over again at all until the seven or eight minute finishing stretch: a chaotic cycling of finishing attempts strung together with Angle’s cheap counters into his Ankle lock and Taker’s various escapes. When watching it the last time, I’m reminded of two things: (1) Undertaker’s greatness, that is, how he controls the pace and structure of the match, that is, his ability to switch into an epic style when in the ring with a capable opponent he can bump around, and (2) Kurt Angle’s impatience. Remember Angle’s match with Ric Flair on RAW where he wanted to travel at light speed while Flair wanted to actually . . . tell a story in the ring while working within his limits? Angle’s impatience, his masturbatory need to nail pointless suplexes for the sake of a crowd pop, to attempt the Angle slam fifteen times a match, to drop the selling in order to move onto the “next thing" in a match, to rush, rush, rush. Those are valid criticisms of Kurt Angle and things that keep him from being the top wrestler in the company (though he’s easily in the top ten for me). However, there are good things about Kurt Angle that I think his detractors tend to ignore. His passion, his drive, his intensity, his character all make for an entertaining and exciting atmosphere. Rarely does Kurt Angle have a bad match (or a boring one if that would be a better qualifier). Rarely does the prospect of Kurt Angle in the main event of a pay-per-view turn me off. The man can be brilliant. The man can be hilarious. The man can be scary-intense. And in this match with Taker, despite his pitfalls being very visible for those who would look for them, they work together to pull off something I feel is pretty special. It won’t win any Match of the Decade awards, but I think we all have to come to a place where we realize that doesn’t matter.

So what is Angle’s legacy? What would he leave behind if this is it for the Olympian? Like every other wrestler, he’d leave behind a legacy of devotion and passion (regardless of his motivation or performative pitfalls). In a way, he reminds me of the Ric Flair who is participating in ladder matches at near sixty years of age. Although I might shake my head at what seems to be senseless passion, I can’t help but admire that passion that drives a person to perform on borrowed time, to shoulder the weight of an entire show on borrowed time. That’s Angle’s legacy. It might not be about grandness or stretching the potential of in ring performance like Chris Benoit, Toshiaki Kawada, or Bret Hart. It’s about raw intensity that gives a big middle finger to work rate and snowflakes. Once in a while, when in the ring with a guy like the Undertaker who can tone down his flaws, great things can happen. It is hardly a perfect match, but it certainly isn’t one I can forget.

Until next time dear readers . . . consider what really matters and consider how little we really know.