Jake made my list last time around, right between Inoki and Baba. There's a good chance he will this time, but not between Inoki and Baba. I feel like the body of work is actually there for a low-end case, it's just that it wasn't typically in pay-per-view main events where it's easier to remember.

I don't know if there are two better feuds for promos than Jake vs. DiBiase and Jake vs. Savage.

 

But then you watch the matches and ...

 

One of those weird things actually. In Dibiase's mind him and Jake had great matches, I've heard him say that in many shoots. He also thought Jake was a tremendous worker and I've heard a lot of other guys say the same.

 

Jake is the one worker who really is raved about by his peers who I just don't get. If this were a poll by wrestlers, I think he'd probably finish top half. And they always cite his psychology. I've also listened to many a Jake shoot where he sings from the same hymn sheet about himself. He talks a good game. But then in the matches, again, very limited goods. But he does control the crowd.

 

Can someone be a top 100 worker purely on crowd control?

Yes. I don't think any great wrestler has to be great or even good at everything. It's all about the end result, not what they do to get there.

When wrestlers talk about "psychology", they're talking about crowd control.

Why would they talk about anything else? Their purpose is to work the crowd. If a wrestler can consistently get the crowd to react the way he wants, where is the problem?

This is a somewhat forced comparison, but I kind of always think of Roberts as a prime example of an American rudo. Pirata Morgan is a better mat worker and bumper than Jake, but they're similar enough in their Top 100 strengths (expert heeling, charisma, brawling, persona) that when I look at Morgan likely making my list, I wonder what he has that Jake lacks.

 

The chief difference I'd guess is that as a WWF heel who didn't stay long anywhere thereafter, he didn't get to work enough bloodbath blow-offs, esp. post-territories. He doesn't get that Tully/Flair/Bockwinkel-level comeuppance. I can't think of a Morgan-Faroan type of match to be found on Jake's C/V. I like the Steamboat feud but it's pretty tame for two NWA alum in '86. The Savage feud is notorious but if those two ever had a really great knock-down brawl, I haven't seen it. Best Jake match that I've seen might be against Garvin on the 12/83 Georgia TV. They tell a pretty good story of Jake being outclassed on the mat but then finding cheap shots that keep him mounting these sneaky comebacks.

 

Whether him being outclassed on the mat by Garvin is good storytelling or lack of athleticism probably depends on how you view Jake. I vaguely recall him being in the camp of "Heels shouldn't look like the superior athlete, even when they are", which I buy into psychologically but may be a rationalization for lack of skill on the part of guys like him, Raven, and whoever else espouses that theory.

Why would they talk about anything else? Their purpose is to work the crowd. If a wrestler can consistently get the crowd to react the way he wants, where is the problem?

Exactly. It just hit me how dumb it is when people say shit like "It's said he had great psychology but I don't see it. But he indeed could control a crowd." If your "psychology" ISN'T intended for the people you're performing in front of then who the fuck would it be for? Numbskulls watching footage thirty years later? 😆

good promo

two pretty good moves the DDT and the short clothesline

 

Why would they talk about anything else? Their purpose is to work the crowd. If a wrestler can consistently get the crowd to react the way he wants, where is the problem?

Exactly. It just hit me how dumb it is when people say shit like "It's said he had great psychology but I don't see it. But he indeed could control a crowd." If your "psychology" ISN'T intended for the people you're performing in front of then who the fuck would it be for? Numbskulls watching footage thirty years later?

 

stop it

I dunno Johnny I've seen plenty of WWF Jake matches with long stretches with a bored as all heck crowd. And then there's the blindfold match which is a masterclass in psychology.

Jake is maybe the best I've ever seen at delivering and getting over an angle regardless of where it was slotted on the card. In that sense he was a genius. He was also very good at getting the most out of little moments and touches in matches. That said, I really struggle to see an argument for him as a top 100 wrestler if we are talking strictly in ring. He doesn't have a high number of good matches, he doesn't have a large number of great matches, he wasn't a particularly great squash worker, he has no all time classics. Throughout this process I've been one of the more critical voices arguing against output as the sole metric to judge talent on, but when you have so little output relative to others your input had better be absolute tip top tier. Jake's isn't.

Reading back through the thread, I’m baffled he made it to 130. We’ve gotten a couple of Georgia matches since which really do help his case though. The Bart Sawyer match feels like the promise of Jake fulfilled.