Dylan Waco

Part of the WWN deal with FloSlam is a certain number of shows a month. That, combined with booking issues in FIP, is what drove the changes. They aren't over committing, they are delivering on the terms of their contract.

Price point is 9.99. We will launch this fall. It's powerbomb.tv. We will have more announcements regarding content soon.

Hansen v. Bock from Wrestlerock is as close to the feel of Starrcade 93 as AWA could possibly get

I could probably be convinced to vote for Finkel on a ballot that didn't have 5 non-wrestlers who I thought were clearly better. And that could probably happen if two or three guys from that category get in, maybe even just 1. But he does strike me as a really weird guy to see as a horrifying omission.

I've thought about doing a show focused exclusively on the indie scene (looking at results, big match ups and shows coming, talk of what is good beneath the surface level obvious stuff), but I have no clue what I'm doing when it comes to recording or editing a show.

I'd say everything after The Gordy List fits as well in this thread as that one

Gene should be in. I wonder if the Tamura HOF stuff and subsequent discussion should be moved over from The Microscope

Haven't voted yet. At peak the answer is Eddie, but they also had some matches I remember really disliking or finding disappointing. Also Mark Henry is not his best opponent BUT after Punk and Jericho he might have had my favorite in ring series with Rey that was solely in WWE.

Also to elliot's point about Japan, the problem with that section of the ballot from my perspective isn't that no one is deserving, it's that it is filled with borderline cases and/or guys where the master narrative has effected the perception of them so much that I don't know what to do with them. I had Akiyama in my top ten for GWE. I think he was the best wrestler in Japan in the 00's, and no worse than the third best wrestler in the World for that decade. He's been a very good-to-great wrestler for the entirety of his 24 year career. As a pure work candidate it's extremely difficult to see how he's meaningfully worse than Daniel Bryan. If you start adding in other factors I still think it's unclear how he's worse than Bryan, BUT there is a narrative surrounding Akiyama that any advocate has to overcome in a debate with critics, and if you are self aware enough that is going to lead to some concern about over correction. You can say similar things about Taue, Fujiwara, Tamura, Han, and Cima at minimum.

My struggle with this is that where would it leave someone like El Dandy, William Regal, or if we want to get really outside of the box Chris Hero. Dandy was almost certainly a bigger star at his peak in Mexico than Tamura was, like Tamura can realistically claim years where he was the best on Earth based on the opinions of those who have watched the footage, worked in higher profile promotions and had higher profile feuds, is widely revered by fans of the style he represents, et. Dandy finished above Tamura in the GWE, and had a close average placement per ballot. Regal was never as important to his promotion as Tamura was to Rings, but like a Fujiwara he was often times considerably more over than his push. Also like Fujiwara he's had a massive influence on subsequent generations, and as an office figure/trainer/mentor has probably done as much or more to open up WWE developmental recruiting and talent grooming in productive ways than anyone. He placed on 83 more ballots than Tamura (only 11 people appeared on more ballots than Regal) and yet had a per ballot average that was within 2 points of Tamura. He nearly made the GWE top 20, with Arn Anderson at 19 (two spots above Regal) being the only other career mid-carder ranked above him and Arn at least worked around the top guy periphery more than Regal. Hero is someone who has started calling himself the greatest of all time, and at least within the context of indie wrestling that's a point that is increasingly difficult to argue. From my perspective the only real competition to that claim is Danielson, and as the years role by Hero's case grows and Danielson's is static. Hero also has a reasonable claim to being the best in the World in several years, including this one, an opinion that is not considered controversial by those who watch outside of the major promotions. Given the quality of indie wrestling, it's depth, growing influence, et. the argument that he's the best of all time at that level can not be dismissed IF it is true that work alone is enough to get you into the WON HOF. While Hero placed just outside the top 100 in GWE, I suspect if the poll were redone in five years he'd be a top fifty candidate at worst. Now it may be that you would advocate for these guys as HOFers, or it may be that you consider them just below the threshold for where work alone can get you in. But my suspicion is that Tamura is viewed differently because of the novelty of the style, and because he's someone who connects in a way where if you divorce the volume issue from the discussion he seems like a believable candidate for THE best wrestler ever not ONE of the best wrestlers ever. That said that doesn't reflect consensus, nor has anyone explicitly made that case. I echo a lot of what elliot has said in this tread, but I do think the issue of consensus is a tricky one. On the one hand I reject the notion that democracy or master narratives of wrestling history should govern how we view certain workers. I'm also not comfortable with the idea that Matt expressed in this thread about WON history disqualifying JYD. As a voter I believe we are trustees and not delegates. If our job were simply to reflect back consensus, the research would be all within the context of the Observer canon. I don't even think Dave wants that or otherwise I wouldn't be getting a ballot. That said I do think the extreme subjectivity surrounding the issue of in ring work, combined with the increased disagreement surrounding who is and isn't a great worker, makes it hard to say yes to someone purely on your thoughts alone. I do get that you referred to the results of a large poll, and that in effect none of the counters to Tamura I listed above are wildly outside the boundaries of what would be considered a great worker by the vast majority of WON HOF voter types. That said Dandy can't get on the ballot, Regal fell off easily, and even though Hero's eligible I doubt Dave has even given a thought to including him. In a way revisionism has allowed candidates like Buddy Rose and Akira Taue to get on the ballot, but revisionism has also killed the idea of a work alone candidates by contributing to the breakdown of critical consensus. Conditions on the ground as we speak probably can and will change this, and there are people who seem to transcend and still find themselves appealing to virtually every cross section of hardcore fandom (Danielson, Styles, dare I say it, Chris Hero), but it does feel odd to me to vote for someone that didn't reflect a certain degree of critical consensus on work without at least strongly arguing for them via some other metric to bolster the claim.

I can't think of a favorite off hand who I completely turned on. Ambrose is probably the closest of modern wrestlers, but I still don't completely hate him. I was a Jericho fan of sorts at one point and now I have basically no use for him even when he's doing relatively entertaining character work because I know the end game is going to be him dragging down a superior talent in a feud he politicked his way into. But the window for him being one of my favorites was very small and it feels like a cheat to the question. This is actually a tough question.

Haven't submitted mine yet, but right now Lewin is my last cut.

Great stuff here Elliot. Your last post is why I don't vote for candidates purely on work alone.

.

Savage, Bockwinkel, Terry Funk.....and Arn Anderson. I'm typing on a phone so I'll leave others to talk up the first three, but Arn shouldn't go without a mention here as I think he's probably the most complete performer I've ever seen who wasn't a career main eventer. For my money he was the best promo of all time. Pure believability and intensity, with incredible delivery that made you forget he kind of looked like a slightly tougher version of a math teacher. He was great as both a tag and singles worker, and it's worth noting that his TV title runs did have an ace-like quality to them that suggests Arn could have delivered as a World champ if the situation had ever called for it. Instead he was a brilliant sidekick. An enforcer who you believed could kill you, but also believed was a scaredy cat, or wimp if the situation called for him to stooge. Arn had all time great execution on his signature spots (possibly the best DDT ever, definitely the best spine buster), was among the best ever when it came to facial expressions, and was equally effective as a face and a heel even if the vast majority of his best work was on the heel end. Good with any partner, and great with most, Arn was also great working short TV matches and great working big time ppv title bouts or feuds. He was also an excellent squash match worker. As a character I doubt anyone was as rock solid in their role as Arn was as a Horsemen, member of the Dangerous Alliance, or even a Brainbuster in the WWF. Literally the only knock I could see against him is his look, but I don't buy it as he made his look work for him and became a sort of every man version of badassery. Even with the 3 other names I mentioned being hall of fame level all timers, I'm not sure I can honestly say that Arn wasn't an even more complete package than they were. He just wasn't in the spotlight as much.

I wasn't outaged. To me it's typical in the bubble Dave. That bubble is noticeably insular when it comes to social issues, race, et. This is another example. Feels ridiculous to me to pretend Dave doesn't constantly miss the point on this stuff.

To play devil's advocate and potentially reference a monkey's paw, this is "Positive Impact?" Purely asking. I'm not sure we know the answer to this, nor am I sure we ever will. I have made this comparison before, but in many ways I think Bryan is comparable to Foley. Both were ultimate underdogs in part due to aspects of their look, who through force of will, and there unique lovably liberal personalities, and obvious desire became the most beloved figures in the business during their respective eras. Neither was ever REALLY the top guy (at least not for any length of time), but they were both the hardcore fan picks. Foley came around at the advent of hardcore fandom having a significant impact on the shape of the business and his book sort of set the table for popularization of pulling back the curtain and humanizing the characters and world of pro wrestling. Bryan represented the logical endpoint of a world where "casual" fans scan WrestleZone for news, and YouTube makes every aspect of a performers career accessible (which in some sense was the World that Foley helped to create). Is it possible that someone else could have connected the way Foley did and become the biographer and weirdo populist character that he was/is? Yes. Is it possible that someone else could have become the beloved figure Bryan was and a symbol of fan revolt that ultimately changed the way WWE engages with hardcore fans? Yes. But to me that isn't terribly relevant. What matters is what did happen. If you reject that narrative okay, but if you accept the narrative I think we have to give both credit, or at least acknowledge that they changed wrestling - at least in terms of how fans interact and understand it - in meaningful ways.

I think Matt is drastically underrating Panther's popularity. In no way am I going to suggest that he's an all time top tier star in lucha or even close. And I could see an argument for him being the 10th or 11 best candidate in the lucha region. But that says more about the lucha regions quality and depth than it does about Panther as a candidate. Panther has been widely regarded as a great worker forever. He was one of the first guys pitched to me as a great worker by lucha fans two decades ago, and up until the last couple of years this seems to have been the consensus position. He's always struck me as a guy who was more over than his push, which is saying something since CMLL is a promotion where virtually everyone could be considered a mid-carder because of the nature of the booking. When he has occasion for big matches - the Love Machine match, the 75th anniversary when he dropped his mask, the hair match v. Casas from a few years ago - the results have been big drawing shows where Panther was clearly seen as a star. I see Panther as very analogous to Chris Benoit or Eddie Guerrero. I believe that if Panther had the exact same career in the States or Japan as he had in Mexico he'd have been in years ago. That said I do think it's possible and fair to argue that Benoit and Eddie are just below the cut off line as HoFers. I'm just not sure I buy the argument that someone knowledgeable on all three, could see Benoit and Eddie as definitely in and Panther as definitely out. At the very least I'd need to see a case presented to me. On the point about W2TBD being upset by Bryan not getting in last year, I would submit that it likely had little to do with people undervaluing work as a criteria given the voting break down. The reality is that Bryan gets in if he had comparable support from his peers as he did from other categories. For whatever reason he didn't. It's a mystery to me as to why his peers didn't vote for him, but I find it hard to believe that contemporary wrestlers are combing over the drawing record of Bryan and saying "nah, fuck him." In theory they are the LEAST likely group to do that. Personally I didn't vote for Bryan last year in part because of the 15/50 rule but also because I saw no reason to rush. He's not Cena. I won't vote for him this year either, though I have zero objection to him getting in which I expect him to do rather easily. On the broader subject of Bryan I suspect that his strongest influence is not necessarily going to be related to indie wrestling directly, but rather the change in fan culture that came with his ascent to the top. It's been said before, but the rise of Bryan showed the fans that they have a voice. People can complain about the "hard push" of Roman Reigns that doesn't actually exist, the failure to push Cesaro, et. but the reality is Bryan's popularity forced a change to the booking of a Wrestlemania, and has created a universe where hardcore fans know that they can kill or alter the landscape of a show if it deviates too far from what they want. It's hard to imagine a WWE with AJ Styles debuting on the main roster, Nakamura as the top star in the hardcore fan utopia that is NXT, the CWC, et. without the rise of the Bryan Fan Phenomenon

I wouldn't use that verbiage, and I don't think it's that calculated, but it's hard to believe that the goal wasn't to make the "Other" region more competitive.

Part of the issue there is that Dave just saw that region as a way to get Colon in. He doesn't see anyone else in PR as worthy of consideration (I get the feeling that he sort of concedes that Invader 1 should be on the ballot at minimum but feels that he can't do it for the obvious reason) and I very much doubt he could be budged on this absent someone dropping dead. With Colon gone I suspect Dave looked out and saw a bunch of names he didn't feel super strongly about, in places where he himself isn't as knowledgeable, and decided to create one bucket.

Compare Chyna as a non-wrestler to say Sherri Martel. I would never vote for Sherri or advocate for on the ballot, but she was a vastly better performer, who worked higher up the cards at her peak, and was more memorable in the role. I suppose it is true that HHH never would have gotten over initially without Chyna and HHH has gone on to be one of the three or four most powerful figures in pro wrestling, but that has nothing to do with her. It's baffling to say the least.

Some interesting things to note: - Nakamura is on the ballot again even though he got in last year. - Europe has been folded into the "rest of the World" category which I assume is related to Carlos Colon finally getting in last year. - Hayabusa, Chyna, Lord James Blears, Ed Francis, Bearcat Wright, Don Fargo, Kerry Von Erich, Yoshiaki Fujiwara, Fishman, Mistico, Steve Rickard, Blackjack Mulligan and I think Archie Gouldie are all additions this year. Notable here is that Fujiwara is finally on the ballot after being previously laughed off, the lucha logjam issue has gotten worse, and Dave brought Chyna on while openly mocking my half joking Tommy Rich suggestion on Twitter - Denucci, Lewin, Kox and Murphy/Bernard were moved from "rest of the world" to historical candidates. The Sharpe's however remain in Japan. - Modern U.S. Candidates is the smallest region with only ten names. This is interesting for a variety of reasons.

Just got my ballot. Here it is in full. It's time for the 2016 Hall of Fame elections. This ballot is being sent out to major wrestling stars, past and present, major management figures in the industry, writers and historians. If you are getting this, you are being asked your opinion on who should be inducted into this year's Hall of Fame class. The criteria for the Hall of Fame is a combination of drawing power, being a great in-ring performer or excelling in ones field in pro wrestling, as well as having historical significance in a positive manner. A candidate should either have something to offer in all three categories, or be someone so outstanding in one or two of those categories that they deserve inclusion. The names listed below are those under consideration for this year. To be eligible, a performer must have reached their 35th birthday and completed ten years since their debut as a full-time performer, or be someone who has been a full-time pro wrestler for at least 15 years. Longevity should be a prime consideration rather than a hot two or three year run, unless someone is so significant as a trend-setter or a historical figure in the business, or valuable to the industry, that they need to be included. However, just longevity without being either a long-term main eventer, a top draw and/or a top caliber in-ring performer should be seen as relatively meaningless. The election is broken down into a number of categories. You should check each category for wrestlers that you feel you are familiar enough with based on geography that you've either traveled or are familiar with, and based on the time you have followed pro wrestling. You do not have to vote for a wrestler in every category you've checked. The ballot is also broken down to wrestlers and those who are not pro wrestlers but have been valuable parts of the industry. The maximum number of wrestlers that you can vote for all the categories is ten. You can pick as few as zero if you don't believe anyone on this list deserves inclusion. For wrestling executives, managers, announcers and other outside the ring performers, you can vote for them and they are not counted against the ten. You can vote for as many as five of them. All responses are confidential. There is nothing to worry about politically about any involvement in this process. Your selections will not be revealed unless you choose to do so yourself. Anyone who receives mention on 60% of the ballots from the geographical region and time frame (broken down as Continental United States & Canada; Mexico; Japan; and the rest of the world) will be added to the Hall of Fame in the class of 2016. If you are unfamiliar with any of the candidates due to geography of having never seen them, that is fine. Ballots are sent to many people from all over the world and from different wrestling cultures so that everyone has as fair a shot at possible. The breakdown for modern and historical performers is 30 years ago, or 1986. So if the last year the person was a headliner, or was a key figure in the industry, was prior to 1986, they would be in the historical class. All performers who receive mention on 10% to 59.9% of the ballots from their geographical region or era will remain on the ballot for consideration next year. All those who receive less than 10% of the vote will be dropped from next year's ballot. They can return in two years based on if there is significant feedback from voters who say they will vote for them. This is mostly for wrestlers who are still active who may improve their career legacy, but can be for retired wrestlers if voters believe they should be put on or returned to the ballot. In addition, in following the lead of the baseball Hall of Fame, which is the model here, starting this year we have a 15-year-rule. The following candidates have been on the ballot since 2000. In baseball, this would be their last year of eligibility. Here, if they don't get at least 50% of the votes in this year's election they will be removed from the ballot. If they are modern candidates, they can be brought back in the historical performers era in two years if it is more than 30 years since their career as a Hall Fame level performer is up: The following candidates will be dropped from next year's ballot unless they are elected in or garner 50% of the vote: Cien Caras Blue Panther Seiji Sakaguchi Villano III Volk Han Please return this ballot by October 15th. You can e-mail the ballot back to [email protected] or fax it to 408-244-3402 or mail (please do so by October 5th) to Wrestling Observer, P.O. Box 1228, Campbell, CA 95009-1228. Please check by every category you are familiar with I FOLLOWED THE HISTORICAL PERFORMERS ERA CANDIDATES Red Bastien Brute Bernard & Skull Murphy June Byers Domenic DeNucciCowboy Bob Ellis Don Fargo Pepper Gomez Archie "Mongolian Stomper" Gouldie Dick Hutton Rocky Johnson Killer Karl Kox Mark LewinPedro Morales Blackjack Mulligan Kinji Shibuya John Tolos Enrique Torres Von Brauners & Saul Weingeroff Johnny "Mr. Wrestling II" Walker Tim "Mr. Wrestling" Woods Bearcat Wright Ron Wright I FOLLOWED THE MODERN PERFORMERS IN U.S/CANADA CANDIDATES Bryan Danielson/Daniel Bryan Junkyard Dog Edge Curt Hennig Randy Orton C.M. Punk Sgt. Slaughter Sting Kerry Von Erich Ultimate Warrior I FOLLOWED WRESTLING IN JAPAN CANDIDATES Jun Akiyama Cima Yoshiaki Fujiwara George Gordienko Volk Han Hayabusa Masahiko Kimura Satoshi Kojima & Hiroyoshi Tenzan Yuji Nagata Shinsuke Nakamura Mike & Ben Sharpe Minoru Suzuki Kiyoshi Tamura Akira Taue I FOLLOWED WRESTLING IN MEXICO CANDIDATES Brazo de Oro & Brazo de Plata & El Brazo Caristico/Mistico Cien Caras Fishman Ultimo Guerrero Karloff Lagarde Blue Panther L.A. Park Huracan Ramirez El Signo & El Texano & Negro Navarro Vampiro Villano III Dr. Wagner Jr. I FOLLOWED WRESTLING IN EUROPE/AUSTRALIA/NEW ZEALAND/PACIFIC ISLANDS/AFRICA CANDIDATES Spyros Arion Johnny BarendJim Breaks Big Daddy Horst Hoffman Billy Joyce Mario MilanoKendo Nagasaki Jackie Pallo Steve Rickard Rollerball Mark Rocco Johnny Saint Ricki Starr Otto Wanz NON-WRESTLERS Bill Apter Lord James Blears Dave Brown Chyna Jim Crockett Jr. Jim Crockett Sr. Gary Hart Jimmy Hart Howard Finkel Ed Francis Jerry Jarrett Larry Matysik Gene Okerluind Don Owen George Scott Stanley Weston

Strongly disagree with Childs. Ecstatic that we didn't get one trick pony Sabre as champ, and while I would have been fine with Metalik I like the idea of him chasing the belt better. TJP had a hell of a night tonight and the reason why is that the guy is one of the more versatile and truly cross trained guys on the planet. As the ace of the division he'll be able to work with anyone which is more than I can say for a lot of the other guys they have. I still would have preferred the Kendrick story as a personal thing, but Perkins is probably a better pick in some ways, and his personal story was nearly as good. I came into the show almost certain that I wouldn't care because Kendrick lost and instead they grabbed me and completely won me over with a couple of great matches and performances from TJP. I don't really get the praise here for Metalik v. Sabre (a fine match with some glaring miscommunication), but overall I thought this was a damn fine show.

He's my brother so I'm biased, but I strongly disagree that Devon doesn't add much to the program. I listened to the show this morning and he provided a unique insight to every single match discussed whether he went first, last or second, and filled in a few context gaps along the way. He doesn't speak with as much confidence as the other guys and does say "absolutely" when he agrees, but from a content perspective I feel he adds a lot to the shows. Probably more than I would at this point.