With Daddy, for me it comes down to:
1.) He was super-famous, but I don't feel he was as big of a draw as his rep--British wrestling as a whole was bigger in the '60s and '70s than it was in the '80s and certainly in the '90s.
2.) In the 3 major Observer HOF criteria--drawing power, quality of work, and positive influence--he's say a 9.5/10 in one category and a zero to negative in the other two. I fully agree that drawing in the UK is different than drawing in the US, but even if Daddy sold out Wembley Arena 185 straight times like Bruno's MSG legend I wouldn't see him as a HOFer, because his influence was universally negative (why would anyone want to hold *him* up as an example of what British wrestling was like?, and he ended up killing the golden goose anyway, or at least being a major contributing factor) and his quality of work was nonexistent. Only Tiger Jeet Singh compares in terms of sheer non-output over the course of so many years.