Given as wrestlers pretty much did as they were told, which ones got the better deal, the blue eyed good guys adored and cheered by nearly everyone or the orrible heels who nearly everyone hated? I wonder which ones enjoyed their role? If I had been lucky enough to have made a name for myself in wrestling I'd have hated to be the blue eyed one, I'd have wanted to be a complete animal who was brought to the ring in a straight jacket by the men in the white coats, fed raw meat and caused complete mayhem at every bout. Many of the good guys made the switch to villain ie Wayne Bridges, Mal Saunders etc both who in my opinion were much better for it. I can't think of any who switched to the good side for long apart from Big Daddy. Kendo's brief switch to unmasked good guy was a complete disaster.
top of page
bottom of page
Don’t remember Brian Maxine as a blue eye, I wonder why he did that? I thought he was an excellent heel.
and Mike Bennet turned out to be a great villain !
Brian Maxine switched from villain to blue eye....always better as a villain I thought. Alan Dennison was another....although he was a great blue eye, particularly against the likes of Jim Breaks !
Definitely a heel, you had more flexibility in the role
Better deal as in which role was more enjoyable to play.
What do we perceive as a better deal? larger payday per bout or more bouts per week albeit on a lesser deal than the first option. I would think the trusted core would be the better paid, they were reliable, trustworthy, didn't rock the boat and did what the promoter required and were guaranteed as many bouts as they wanted.