WON HoF Candidate Poll Thread

[El-P]

Is there a heel announcer in wrestling in 2012? That answers the question. Yes, he defined it, but it's a meaningless role.

Managers and valet also became a meaningless role. Not because it doesn't work, but because WWE sucks and can't book a wrestling product worth a shit. Bobby Heenan and Jim Cornette were great heel managers. Where are the great managers in 2012 ? Sensationnal Sherri defined great valet. Where are the great valets in 2012 ?

Hell, where are the great face announcers today ?

So yeah, it doesn't work as a knock against Jesse to me.

[ohtani's jacket]

I think ALL FIVE of those have a better claims than anyone mentioned in this thread so far. I really do.

What's next? Sean Mooney? Danny Davis? Earl and Dave Hebner? Mr. Fuji?

[Matt D]

For Monsoon, I think it'd be worth looking at his promotional/managerial roles.

 

As an announcer, his main skill, often to the detriment of matches where it wasn't needed, was to make the really, really crappy WWF mid 80s prelim matches watchable by being engaging and amusing. I wonder if people wouldn't have so willingly sat through Swede Hansen vs Mike Sharp to get to a two minute Hogan promo if Monsoon wasn't there to keep things entertaining. Is that reason enough to be in the HOF as an announcer? I doubt it but he deserves credit for it.

[ohtani's jacket]

Sorry. Loss mentioned in the other thread that he wanted to expand on his point that the HoF is effectively full at this point and everyone that could come up on the docket is basically just a way of keeping the thing alive rather than getting deserving people in. At least I think that was his point. Hence the concept has outlived itself

Yes. I'm not saying every single person who should be in is already in. I am saying that it seems like we've crossed a threshold of inducting obvious people, and now we're just arguing almost entirely about borderline candidates. When that happens, does it mean less to be in the HOF? Wrestling has happened less and the system has produced less stars in the last decade than in any other 10 year period ever.

 

Hans Schmidt should probably be in. John Cena should probably be in. The Rock & Roll Express should probably be in. Jerry Jarrett should probably be in. I'm sure there are others as well. But we seem out of slam dunk picks after Cena goes in this year. If, from here, keeping the HOF open means someone is just going to get in every year, then I think the HOF will weaken over time and in a decade, we'll be inducting anyone who ever had a modicum of stardom.

 

A HOF needs an industry that continues to churn out worthwhile candidates to stay relevant. That isn't happening. Therefore, the concept feels self-serving now. We induct people every year because someone has to go in, not because there are still dozens of worthwhile people to induct (without lowering the bar). While I don't think anyone is arguing candidates that they don't think deserve to go in, I do think most of the people being argued now would not be argued if the system were still producing stronger picks.

 

It just seems like it's run its course.

 

There are Mexican and British wrestlers who deserve to go in but never will because of the stupid voting system.

[Al]

Okerlund I think played a role in the success of the WWF in the 80s, because his interviews helped get wrestlers (and Gene himself) over. So I would listen to a case for him. The rest of them were just passengers during successful business periods, and weren't the reason the company was successful, so I'd say no -- easily -- to all of them.

 

It speaks volumes to Jesse Ventura's ability to self-promote that anyone thinks he has anything resembling a HOF case.

And Okerlund's AWA work is fairly strong I believe. Maybe Dylan can enlighten us there. It's worth noting that WWF popped a crowd by promoting Okerlund in a wrestling match in St. Paul.

 

Finkel really should be in. If the precedent is there to induct an announcer, than the Fink was the best of them all.

[Loss]

Is there a heel announcer in wrestling in 2012? That answers the question. Yes, he defined it, but it's a meaningless role.

There is but he's the biggest problem with the product, but that's an issue of execution, not concept.. well and Vince being nuts.

 

And regardless of that, it was a style that lasted twenty years, at least, through two booms. I don't think you can dismiss it so easily.

 

It lasted, but how different would wrestling be without it? Because nothing matters in wrestling anymore, the last decade has been a good test of which institutions are critical and which ones aren't. A good lead announcer is critical. A color guy? More of a nice to have than a need to have.

 

And while managers and valets aren't really a staple anymore, a good manager was able to get people over and draw money. If you look at the managers who are in the HOF, most of them had periods where they were successful in getting heat and drawing fans. If you look at the announcers in the Hall of Fame, guys like Jim Ross, Lance Russell and Gordon Solie are institutions who contributed greatly to the success of their company. Who did Jesse Ventura get over who would not have been over without Jesse's ability to sell them from the announce booth, the way Ross was associated with Austin, or Okerlund with Hogan and late 90s Flair, or Russell with Lawler, or Solie with everyone in Florida and Georgia? He could be very entertaining, but Jesse sold himself way more than he sold what was happening in the ring.

[Loss]

Oh, and I do agree that Finkel should go in since there is a precedent. On the old school Raw last year, I remember thinking that him just announcing everyone made them seem more like stars than normal. I always meant to ask if I was the only one watched that show and thought that.

 

But really, 80s WWF was all about two guys -- Vince and Hogan. Below that, you have Hogan's greatest rivals: Andre, Savage and Piper. (Andre accomplished enough before this to be a HOF pick and Piper did enough to at least be discussed in that category.) Everyone else was just a cog in the wheel.

 

I give the Gene argument some consideration because he was the one put in the position to do interviews to get guys over, and had the control center which was given tons of TV time and was key in selling big shows.

[Loss]

I'm sure this is a silly question, but humor me. If Ventura didn't define the role of the weekly heel announcer, who did? I'm trying to think from the various stuff I've seen. Even Ole was a face when he was an announcer.

He didn't define it, but I like Michael Hayes during the same time period much better.

[jdw]

Is there a heel announcer in wrestling in 2012?

Michael Cole.

 

 

That answers the question.

Well, it's a slightly different question.

 

It's also akin to those folks who don't think Maeda would get in the HOF because the type of wrestling he defined is dead. That it died doesn't take away the significance of what Maeda did.

 

 

Yes, he defined it, but it's a meaningless role.

This all doesn't have anything to do with why I don't vote for Jesse.

 

* I don't think he was a good announcer

 

Folks can certainly debate that, and the majority of folks fall on the other side of that. But it's my vote, and I don't think he really was all that good, let alone great. I thought Hayes with Ross in UWF was much better, and always like Cornette much better in the role later in the decade.

 

 

* the non-wrestling is meaningless to me

 

Dave gets a boner over him becoming Governor. It means jack shit to me in terms of a wrestling HOF. To most of the country, it meant jack shit at the time, and means jack shit now. Dude off the Love Boat got voted into Congress. It doesn't make me think he should go into a TV HOF.

 

 

* impact overplayed

 

The role became a cliche that was run into the ground to the point of being of marginal value as the 90s went on. That doesn't mean that the role didn't still exist, but that was largely because people inside the business thought it was a key role.

 

Jesse had a role in the WWF's success in the 80s. So did a lot of people. Are we going to toss all of them in?

 

John

[Matt D]

* I don't think he was a good announcer

 

Folks can certainly debate that, and the majority of folks fall on the other side of that. But it's my vote, and I don't think he really was all that good, let alone great. I thought Hayes with Ross in UWF was much better, and always like Cornette much better in the role later in the decade.

Part of me wonders if Jesse is beloved because he was somehow smarkier in his comments. Or maybe he was just anti-Hogan at a time where it seemed like no one else in the rest of the country was anti-Hogan except for Dave and his ilk. As if he was their mouthpiece on some level. Maybe that's reaching too far.

 

I think he's entertaining, but part of why I like him is because, as a kid, I always felt "hey, Jesse has a point!" which has nothing to do with him being effective, just with me being contrary.

 

Jesse had a role in the WWF's success in the 80s. So did a lot of people. Are we going to toss all of them in?

I don't know, how important/extraordinary/influential/striking, relatively, is the WWF's success in the 80s? I think it's something of a valid question?

[kjh]

It's worth noting that Piper did heel commentary nationally before Ventura did. Also, the WWF didn't skip a beat when they lost him and his WCW run was fairly uninspired.

[jdw]

* I don't think he was a good announcer

 

Folks can certainly debate that, and the majority of folks fall on the other side of that. But it's my vote, and I don't think he really was all that good, let alone great. I thought Hayes with Ross in UWF was much better, and always like Cornette much better in the role later in the decade.

Part of me wonders if Jesse is beloved because he was somehow smarkier in his comments. Or maybe he was just anti-Hogan at a time where it seemed like no one else in the rest of the country was anti-Hogan except for Dave and his ilk. As if he was their mouthpiece on some level. Maybe that's reaching too far.

 

I think he's entertaining, but part of why I like him is because, as a kid, I always felt "hey, Jesse has a point!" which has nothing to do with him being effective, just with me being contrary.

I think there were people who didn't like Hogan. I certainly didn't like Hogan at the time, yet I didn't read the WON in the 80s.

 

 

 

Jesse had a role in the WWF's success in the 80s. So did a lot of people. Are we going to toss all of them in?

I don't know, how important/extraordinary/influential/striking, relatively, is the WWF's success in the 80s? I think it's something of a valid question?

 

The WWF's success in the 80s was landmark. Pro wrestling had seen nothing like it before, and arguably nothing like it since.

 

On the other hand, who are the people most responsible for it?

 

Vince and Hulk.

 

Who else?

 

We don't know all the details of Patterson's impact behind the scenes, or just when it became impactful.

 

WWF Production was ahead of the game. I know that a lot of us like to point to WWF Production in the later parts of the Monday Night Wars as their peak, but from the standpoint of putting on a very professional production in the mid-to-late 80s for their syndication and PPV product, the WWF was well ahead of the curve in pro wrestling. I also know that folks like to point to Dallas for being ahead of the curve, and Mid South in terms of quality of their TV product... but both really looked rinky dink relative to where the WWF transitioned towards in 1986 with the refresh of their syndicated programs, and also SNME and PPV. Is there someone involved in that worthy of the HOF? Long term, that person's impact is probably more than Jesse's.

 

Then other wrestlers?

 

I'm just trying to figure out what % goes to Jesse. Vince and Hulk eat up probably 80% of the credit, if not more. On the other extreme, there are probably a lot of guys who were along for the ride on some level.

 

John

[Matt D]

I knew I was forgetting someone. For a minute I thought it was Hayes but the timing didn't work out. yeah, Piper sort of kills that argument for Jesse.

 

but

 

I'm just trying to figure out what % goes to Jesse. Vince and Hulk eat up probably 80% of the credit, if not more. On the other extreme, there are probably a lot of guys who were along for the ride on some level.

What if you run the math and decide that Jesse is somehow responsible for 2% of the success. I'm not sure you would (I actually think someone who did so much of the back office managing like Finkel might be worth more than Jesse, his ring announcing be damned). But let's say you did. How much does 2% of THAT success compare to the sort of success someone else like.. and I hate bringing it up but it's on my mind, Buddy Rose had elsewhere, where he was worth a huge percentage of the success in his territory? (and I'm sorry if that paragraph made no sense).

[jdw]

It's worth noting that Piper did heel commentary nationally before Ventura did. Also, the WWF didn't skip a beat when they lost him and his WCW run was fairly uninspired.

There are people who love his WCW stuff, which goes to the "we could argue his quality".

 

His impact on WCW was nil. Unless it was in making the Turner Marks think WCW was big time by signing Jesse, and it help keep them from pulling the plug.

 

Well, if that's is the case... don't people think Eric should go into the HOF? Who had more impact on keeping WCW alive to reach the eventual level that it reached: Eric or Jesse?

 

I hate Eric. Suspect a lot of folks do here. But honestly, who was more impactful on the wrestling busines: Eric or Jesse? If we're talking impact, which should go in first?

 

It's not like I've voted for Eric. But if a gun was put to my head and I had to vote for one, Eric is the obvious choice to me. And I HATE Eric.

 

John

[Matt D]

I know this is going to be laughed out of the room but Jesse does claim to have set up the Universal tapings due to connections he had through hollywood.

[Al]

Who did Jesse Ventura get over who would not have been over without Jesse's ability to sell them from the announce booth, the way Ross was associated with Austin, or Okerlund with Hogan and late 90s Flair, or Russell with Lawler, or Solie with everyone in Florida and Georgia?

Randy Savage?

[Marty]

Also, the WWF didn't skip a beat when they lost him and his WCW run was fairly uninspired.

This might be just me, but I actually enjoyed the WWF from WM6 up until WM8 far more than the previous year or two, and some of that involved the change of color commentator. I don't know what it was, but Piper and Heenan just seemed to add a lot more energy to the setting and there seemed to be additional energy elsewhere (the ring work, the crowd heat, etc.). To me, the company felt reborn in a way after the Golden Era was winding down, and just before the Hart/New Generation era was happening. They seemed to have that added burst of energy that hadn't been seen since the calendar year building to WM4.

[Dylan Waco]

I don't mind all this talk, and I'll get to Matt's point about Jesse vis a vis Buddy later (I don't think it's close to a favorable comp for Jesse), but I should not that that's not really the point of this thread. This thread was created as a result of the polls Meltzer is running at the Observer site on candidates. Apparently he's run another one today since Dreamer's name has popped up and I would like people to dump any new ones in this thread.

[Matt D]

and do note that I wasn't necessarily saying it was Jesse so much as "someone who caused 2% of the WWF 80s boom vs someone who caused 80% of his far smaller territory's success." Jesse and Buddy just sort of seemed to vaguely fit. I'm more interested in the general question, than the specifics, so if you can plug in someone better, please be my guest.

 

Arn scored really high in his grouping on the poll, no?

[jdw]

I know this is going to be laughed out of the room but Jesse does claim to have set up the Universal tapings due to connections he had through hollywood.

I'm not sure if this is a positive. The company didn't take off until there were live Monday night shows.

 

John

[tomk]

Ultimate Warrior

 

On the one hand Warrior is a better candidate than Angle in my view. While he didn't work out as champion, he didn't bomb to the degree some others did and he was at least something of a draw for a couple of years. The Skydome Mania match was hardly the first "super" match in WWE history, but it was a major face v. face match on the biggest ppv of the year in front of one of the two or three biggest crowds in the history of the promotion at that point. He is still one of the most recognizable names of that era, moved a lot of merch, when he came back to WCW popped a major rating (before shitting the bed), et. There are at least some measurable plusses. Having said that his peak run was really short and I don't think anyone would lobby hard for him for the HoF. Seems crazy to put a guy on the ballot unless their being on the ballot will increase research/discussion on the person that might uncover new things or there is an actual constituency for that person to be elected in the immediate. Warrior fails on both fronts.

 

drew and the only source I've heard talk about it is Powers so I am skeptical. He claims to have been a big draw in Canada and the States.

 

For whatever it's worth, Earthquake v Hogan at Summerslam supposedly drew more than Warrior v Hogan at Mania (only time summerslam outdrew Mania).

 

I don't know how much that should be blamed on Warrior and how much blamed on the problems of face v face booking (which wrote about in another thread). But that hurts the argument about it as a "super match".

 

I guess you could look at Hidaka, Kyoko Inoue, Black Warrior and Ultimo Guerrero and argue some sort of Sayama like influence.

 

Baron Von Rachke

 

What's the argument for the Baron? From what I can tell he was never the top guy or even in the top four or five guys in any territory he was in. Am I wrong?

I thought he was one of top opponents of Verne.

How did his program with Bruno draw?

Good worker, with amateur background and pretty sure he's talked about as "legit" hooker.

I don't think that should affect votes, but it does.

[tomk]

Also would like an explanation of Tiger Jeet Singh. He's one of the worst fucking wrestlers ever, a sixth-rate Sheik knockoff, and is notoriously selfish and unwilling to put anyone else over at practically any time. But I'm admittedly pretty ignorant on his 70s heyday and exactly what difference he made to the fledgling New Japan's bottom line.

 

I've yet to see a good complete Singh match. There are matches where the wrestling parts are intereszting but the brawling is awful. matches where the brawling is entertaining but wrestling is uninteresting. Plus alot of the stuff from the 70s early eighties doesn't have really satisfying finishes as they all feel like partial incomplete matches. That said, I think you could edit a bunch of Singh v Inoki matches together to create one complete satisfying match.

[tomk]

Big Bossman

 

Can't see it. A memorable gimmick, and I think his series with Hogan may have done good business, but what else does he have going for him? Seems like a huge stretch.

I don't have the Matt Farmer numbers in front of me and I'm not the biggest fan of the way those are put together but, based on those he drew really well opposite Hogan (as well as teamed with Hogan) and drew well opposite Rock. I think once HHH went in in 04/05? there has been a desire to add top opponents of top draws.

[tomk]

What about some more of the non-wrestlers?

 

 

 

Gorilla Monsoon - well, logic dictates if you have Schiavone, you've got to have Gorilla too. WON might hate him. All of you might hate him. But Gorilla is one of the important announce men in wrestling history. You can debate about whether or not history would have been the same if it had been someone else, but Gorilla was extremely effective at getting over angles and subtle in-ring traits of performers. He's been accused of getting himself over and of burying guys, again, I don't see the argument that Lance Russell, JR and Walton make the cut but he doesn't. If Dave didn't have such prejudices, he would have been in in 1996.

 

You don't hear that agument used against Russell, or JR or Walton because they aren't known for doing that.

When Ed Whalen and Larry Zbysco get into the HOF for their commentary work, then one can make that argument.

But they're not getting in.

 

As an announcer, his main skill, often to the detriment of matches where it wasn't needed, was to make the really, really crappy WWF mid 80s prelim matches watchable by being engaging and amusing. I wonder if people wouldn't have so willingly sat through Swede Hansen vs Mike Sharp to get to a two minute Hogan promo if Monsoon wasn't there to keep things entertaining. Is that reason enough to be in the HOF as an announcer? I doubt it but he deserves credit for it

In Monsoon's defense it's worth thinking about the way WWWF/WWF arena cards are structured.

Guys like Russel or Solie are really skillful at crafting ways to make deadly dull undercard draws interesting. Telling the audience what they're learning by watching this match.

The purpose of the dry undercard Georgia draw is to establish that this is the kind of "clean wrestling" that the face aspires to, but is forced to go his fistus in face of the evil heel.

The purpose of the dry undercard draw in Vince Sr.'s system was to be the concession stand match. A match that crowd would walk out on and buy concessions. Not sure if Vince Sr had percentage of concessions that other feds didn't. But the "concession match" was an important part of the WWWF/WWF formula.

One could argue that Monsoon's commentary where he implied that everything on undercard was shit and not worth watching makes sense in that context.

The last thing the WWWF/WWF wanted was a Solie or Russell telling you why you should stay in your seat to watch the undercard.

 

But if the point of wrestling is to get the audience to buy concessions and not watch the matches; then we should talk about the designer behind the Macho Man T-Shirts and the guy who worked out the WWF ice cream bar licensing agreement with Good humor getting into the HOF.

[NintendoLogic]

Big Bossman

 

Can't see it. A memorable gimmick, and I think his series with Hogan may have done good business, but what else does he have going for him? Seems like a huge stretch.

I don't have the Matt Farmer numbers in front of me and I'm not the biggest fan of the way those are put together but, based on those he drew really well opposite Hogan (as well as teamed with Hogan) and drew well opposite Rock. I think once HHH went in in 04/05? there has been a desire to add top opponents of top draws.

 

HHH wasn't just the top opponent of a top draw.