If Matt and Jeff...*more inside*?

Matt Hardy; I'm sorry, Jeff Hardy fans. Despite his size, Matt is a much better wrestler and promo-cutter than Jeff Hardy. Not only that he is more passionate, more disciplined, more industrious and more intelligent.

I like Jeff Hardy to an extent but let's face it; he's horrible compared to Matt Hardy and does basically the same old moves every match. He's a poor technical wrestler and an even poorer promo-cutter. He has shown time and time again that he cares more about himself than the business for which he works. His work ethic is poor, he has failed drug tests twice, recently he's been stopped from getting on a flight because he was drunk, and wrestling purists hate Jeff Hardy.

If Matt had started out as a singles competitor and if size didn't matter in the WWE by the time he debuted, he would have been given more pushes and more championships by Vince McMahon because he is a better wrestler and he is a much harder worker. The only reason Jeff keeps getting a push despite his talent (or lack thereof) is because he has an enormous (well, I guess I exaggerate) fanbase composed mainly of children and young teenagers, which the WWE caters to these days. If he had none of that he would be Intercontinental Champ AT BEST.

Matt has proven time and again that he himself can rally a crowd whether composed of old fans or new fans so his reach is wider. So yeah, in conclusion, Matt Hardy would be more successful.

Reading what you wrote; and thinking about it makes me think that there might be a possibility that Jeff vs. Matt can happen at WM 25. 1:: Yes. 2:: I believe may they would make both start off by doing a tag team match; and then they both turn on each other and end up losing the match and they both start having matches against each other. And the fued would finish in the grandest stege of them all Wrestle Mania.! 3:: I think that Matt would win. But if it would be a match with ladders or a No DQ match I would go with Jeff winning. :]

Good question, I'm not sure actually. I think they would be pretty even, but Matt Hardy slightly ahead. The reason Matt only got the ECW title after 10 years is because he's nowhere near the best in the WWE, he's never been a big guy with loads of fans etc. Like the Undertaker for exmple, he just looks like he should be holding a world title belt, whereas Matt, his size and persona he should be holding the us title. stereotypical. Matt is not at the standard of Undertaker, Batista Khali etc. So when he was in SD it was hard for him to get a world title because of the other talent. Matt can definaltey be that good. He got the ecw title because ECW have what 8 wrestlers. Mark Henry, massive guy, tough to beat, credit to Matt Hardy, he';s a world champion and he deserves it after 10 long years. Jeff has been no world champion, and before now, he;s never really shown signs of becoming a world champion, but Matt hardy i think has. I think they be even, but matt a little ahead. xx

That's a very good question. I have to agree with you that Matt has better technical skills, but I don't think he would have been noticed so much if he'd started off alone because it was Jeff's high-flying techniques in their tag-team that caught the WWE's eye.

Here's what I think would have happened if they'd started off as singles competitors. Matt would have gotten off to a slow start. Sure, he's a good technical wrestler, but so are many other people. He would have had to work hard to get himself noticed. Jeff, on the other hand, would've gone straight up and burned bright because that's what he did in the old days. He was the high-flying insane lunatic and he would've gotten noticed. So that's the short-term.

Long-term, Jeff would've burned out. I mean, he did anyway as soon as he became a singles competitor, but it would have been much earlier, I think, if he'd started out as a singles wrestler. I don't know what would have happened then - he may have gone to TNA earlier, he may have stayed, who knows? - but I think that Matt would have slowly crawled his way to the top.

So my answer is Matt. Jeff, while fun to watch and a great athlete, wouldn't have lasted. Matt could've survived to go the distance.

the high flying of jeff would still be more popular than matt's mat wrestling although matt has achieved more then jeff cause of winning a world title but jeff has been a 4 time intercontinental champ and the fact that before backlash 2008 matt hadn't had a proper singles championship ..... you got me confused Im gonna say they are equally good wrestlers.

I think matt because he sorta keeped jeff in lie little bit and if they werent always together then i think jeff would have done drugs sooner and never gotten over. Also matt is more reliable and he dosent get burned out like jeff does. I think that Matt Hardy is one of the BEST wrestlers that wwe has right now because he has a fan base but he still has great matches

Matt Hardy would have been more successful.

1. He never did drugs

2. He is serious about his job

3. He never asked to be released to go to TNA

4. And a far better wrestler than Jeff Hardy

I think Jeff Hardy would have been more successful because he's more of a high flier and is more entertaining. I think Jeff Hardy would have gotten the WWE Championship before Matt Hardy got the ECW Championship but he didn't get it because he got suspended.

matt would because he hasnt had drug problems or had to go to tna to use it as a "wh*re" and his skills as you said are far more better than jeff's cause matt doesnt just jump off stuff to get over with the crowd, he mixes his technical skills with it. he also makes great comebacks, i was left hanging after great american bash2007 wen matt fought mvp for the u.s. title it took nearly a year for him to get the title and end the storyline, and it was worth waiting for, and in a matter of months he won the ecw title that is a great singles career for just 08 and 07!!!

and including those other 8 years.besides most of jeffs wins comes from tag matches, its a fact

so no contest matt would have done better.PERIOD.

I agree ... Matt is by far the better wrestler, He is much more serious about his career and has done so much even as a teen to get into the wrestling business ... He made his and Jeff's ring attires back in the day, And he was dead seriosus and still is about wrestling.

Whereas Jeff seems to be much more laid back about the wrestling side of things and ratehr than prefering to put on a great wrestling match he chooses to steal the entire show by doing a risk taking high spot.

Now to answer your question ... Jeff Hardy is my choice and that is because of his will to steal the show.

He is recognized more, Much more popular, Much more looked up to and his personal life is much more interesting to some fans than Matt's because of the mistakes he has made and the fact of drugs etc he is constantly in the public eye so to speak and more controversial.

Now ... Due to this alone I think he would have the most success because as everyone knows Vince LOVES controversy and Jeff is just that - controversial - Which in my mind puts Jeff on the spot to become a much more succesful star because people will be more interested in him and Vince can feed off the energy Jeff recieves personally and use it for Jeff's career and therefore make money.