General consensus would have it that some matches are unimpeachable in their brilliance.
Something like the first entry on this list, for example, is so ingrained as a classic that it never gets spoken of as having been improved upon. But is that fair? Many critics are very quick to criticise the modern day product. Selling isn't treated with the reverence it used to and still should be; they all flip a bit too much now, don't they; yada yada yada, FDM. It's tedious.
A commitment to simulated hatred has broadly been supplanted by near-fall shortcuts and an overabundance of back and forth, everybody-shines action. The generic structure of a modern match is more mutually helpful than driven by hate. A not inconsiderable amount of matches held this decade are very much guilty of this. However, there are talents out there keen to use the foundations of wrestling's past to create something which is often more progressive and exciting than what came before it.
This isn't a troll-job. This isn't nyuh WWE sucks and here's proof.
Nothing can take away their status as very good to great matches - so consider this list a case of 'if you like X, you'll love Y'...