WON HoF Candidate Poll Thread

[Dylan Waco]

To try and foster some discussion. Here are five workers with traits I think a bit similar to Sting. Most famous for face runs, got national exposure, not in the WON Hall of Fame. Where would you rank Sting among them?

 

Sting

Kerry Von Erich

The Junkyard Dog

Mr. Wrestling II

The Ultimate Warrior

Batista

 

This is a good question and I think a more interesting way of framing things at this point in the discussion.

 

If I were ranking them in order I would go:

 

JYD

Mr. Wrestling II

Kerry Von Erich

Sting

Batista

The Ultimate Warrior

 

I think Warrior is clearly last - he was the worst worker of the bunch (yes worse than JYD in my opinion, though his best matches are probably better), and he's not the draw people assume he was. Batista and Sting is closer than I'd like to admit. Batista has done some good numbers and headlined some big time shows. At times he was good in the ring. But he was never the top babyface in the U.S. and you can certainly make the case that Sting was for most of 1997, which was a huge period for wrestling. I could be convinced Batista is a better candidate, but my initial thought is that Sting is my a small margin.

 

KVE was ultimately the biggest star of The Von Erich's during a period where they set records all over Texas. Yeah I tend to think the Birds were driving that train in many ways, but The Von Erichs were rock stars and no way the Birds could have had a run like that with someone who wasn't waiting to explode. Kerry was a very underrated worker and did well some territories and places outside of Texas as well (particularly St. Louis). He doesn't have the longevity of Sting, but his peak as a star was substantially longer.

 

I would need to re-read KrisZ's bio on MWII, but he was a guy who could and did actually sell out the Omni and other buildings a whole lot. In some ways he set the table for Tommy Rich and TBS explosion. I'd put him slightly ahead of Kerry.

 

JYD is the only one of these guys I absolutely think should be in. Record setting draw and cultural figure in Mid-South, particularly New Orleans where he took the town from absolute shit and made it maybe the single hottest wrestling town in the country. I'd give the Dog extra points for being the first black babyface "ace" of note in the South, but I understand not everyone would. When he left Watts for the WWE he was actually utilized well around the loop as a guy who could and did draw on his own absent Hogan. He should be in.

[Matt D]

The thing people seem to forget, although John talked about it earlier, is that the nWo angle didn't need Sting to take off. It needed Hogan.

What if Sting turns instead of Hogan?

[Al]

A Hall of Fame is supposed to honour the Best of the Best, period. Honestly, Sting shouldn't even be on the ballot anymore. I know the rule is if you maintain 10% of the vote you stay on, but how many years has Sting been on the ballot now? I have no idea, but if in the most extreme case he has been on since the late-90s and still hasn't been voted in after all these years, indeed, that his HoF case is based entirely on what he did prior to the 21st century, then the only way he is ever going to get in is as a "Well, we need to induct somebody this year, but all of the best candidates are already in, so we'll lower our standards and let him in this time" induction, and that would just make the HoF pointless. In baseball, if you are on the ballot for, I think, seven years and are not voted in, you are removed as a candidate. Something similar should apply to the WON HoF. If someone is truly one of the Best of the Best they will be voted in within seven years, and usually in much less time. Yes, many wrestlers are in the HoF who are, depending on your viewpoint, not the Best of the Best, as has been discussed thoroughly (usually, these contoversial inductees are guys who were perceived by certain smart fans as being superworkers--Angle, Michaels, etc). Many wrestlers from the past were overlooked for much longer than seven years who were deserving of induction (eg. Hans Schmidt), but due to the fact their careers ended long ago and serious research must be made by committed fans to uncover the numbers, this is understandable. Sting is a modern star, not a name from the distant past whose career is unfamiliar to most wrestling fans. If he was one of the Best of the Best, his induction should have occurred at least ten years ago. He has not been overlooked. The majority of voters have looked at his career a million times over and have said "No" year in year out. I think it's time to move on.

It's 15 years for the Baseball HOF, as long as you remain above 5%.

[S.L.L.]

And for the record, I do not think that any of us on this entire forum can have a serious discussion on any wrestlers who pre-date the 1970s. How can we with no footage? Guesswork based on a few title histories and a few figures? For all intents and purposes, "best ever" might as well mean "Since the 1970s".

Jerry, you're a well-educated man. Surely, you've taken a history course at some point in your life. You know better than this. There are plenty of ways to learn about and understand the past if you care to look for them.

 

Since when has "ever" actually meant "ever" in the world of talking about wrestling?

"Ever" means "ever" in the WON HOF, which is the subject of this thread. "Ever" not meaning "ever" would actually be a major shift in tone after we just got done talking about Hans Schmidt and Gus Sonnenberg.

[Dylan Waco]

The thing people seem to forget, although John talked about it earlier, is that the nWo angle didn't need Sting to take off. It needed Hogan.

What if Sting turns instead of Hogan?

 

No way in hell it would have worked as well. I'm not saying it wouldn't have worked and it would have been a huge shock. But Hogan turning had an impact unlike anything in modern wrestling history and I say that without a hint of hyperbole.

[Ricky Jackson]

Hogan turning heel after fifteen years as the biggest babyface ever (and "ever" means "ever" ) was absolutely what made the angle The Angle. Just like Andre turning heel in 87 made it The Angle for that time period. The build was so long coming it seemed like Hogan, like Andre before him, would never turn. Sting turning on WCW and joining WWF guys would have made no sense really. Hogan as the third Outsider, still the icon of the WWF even two years into his WCW run, was the perfect touch.

[Ricky Jackson]

It's 15 years for the Baseball HOF, as long as you remain above 5%.

Either way, Sting has had plenty of time for his case to have been made.

[Matt D]

Honestly, i tend to agree. Sting being the next in line of Hogan Friends to get Jealous and Turn on Him would have been good for a Program, but not an engine to last two years.

 

I do think there's something to Sting being the face of WCW replaced by Hogan and teaming with the guys who basically replaced Hogan in WWF but they wouldn't have ran with it as far as they needed to because of Hogan's creative control.

 

That, to me is the most important thing of all of this. With Hogan as the heel, he had a huge interest in the NWO working. With him as a face, his interest was in building them up a little (maybe they could beat up Bockwinkel again) and then vanquishing them.

[Victator]

The thing people seem to forget, although John talked about it earlier, is that the nWo angle didn't need Sting to take off. It needed Hogan.

What if Sting turns instead of Hogan?

 

No way in hell it would have worked as well. I'm not saying it wouldn't have worked and it would have been a huge shock. But Hogan turning had an impact unlike anything in modern wrestling history and I say that without a hint of hyperbole.

 

The important thing is people had wanted to hate Hogan for two years at that point. Also Hogan would have made them all look like shit.

[Matt D]

I think whether or worked or not with Sting as a heel actually has NOTHING to do with Sting at all, which is actually amazingly fitting as part of his career.

[El-P]

The thing people seem to forget, although John talked about it earlier, is that the nWo angle didn't need Sting to take off. It needed Hogan.

What if Sting turns instead of Hogan?

 

No way in hell it would have worked as well. I'm not saying it wouldn't have worked and it would have been a huge shock. But Hogan turning had an impact unlike anything in modern wrestling history and I say that without a hint of hyperbole.

 

This.

Sting was considered for the job actually, as was Luger. Hogan was just on another level. Plus it fit so well with all his history in WCW and the frustration of the old fans who never quite adopted him and saw him as a WWF guy. In that respect, Hogan turning heel made Sting a much bigger babyface than he ever was before too.

[JerryvonKramer]

And for the record, I do not think that any of us on this entire forum can have a serious discussion on any wrestlers who pre-date the 1970s. How can we with no footage? Guesswork based on a few title histories and a few figures? For all intents and purposes, "best ever" might as well mean "Since the 1970s".

Jerry, you're a well-educated man. Surely, you've taken a history course at some point in your life. You know better than this. There are plenty of ways to learn about and understand the past if you care to look for them.

 

Since when has "ever" actually meant "ever" in the world of talking about wrestling?

"Ever" means "ever" in the WON HOF, which is the subject of this thread. "Ever" not meaning "ever" would actually be a major shift in tone after we just got done talking about Hans Schmidt and Gus Sonnenberg.

 

You're right S.L.L.

 

The JvK campaign to induct Edwin Bibby starts here!

 

Seriously, for all the talk of Big Daddy, why isn't Bibby inducted already?

[Log]

KVE was ultimately the biggest star of The Von Erich's during a period where they set records all over Texas. Yeah I tend to think the Birds were driving that train in many ways, but The Von Erichs were rock stars and no way the Birds could have had a run like that with someone who wasn't waiting to explode. Kerry was a very underrated worker and did well some territories and places outside of Texas as well (particularly St. Louis). He doesn't have the longevity of Sting, but his peak as a star was substantially longer.

How valid are the Von Erichs' claims that they were some huge ratings-draw in the Middle East? I've heard that claim on the WWE doc and Heroes of World Class, but always wondered if it was valid. No clue if it's even anything that could be checked or whatever. If true, it seems like it'd bolster Kerry's case even more.

[jdw]

The one thing that really surprised me here with all the numbers posted is how the NWO didn't bump up PPV sales.

It did & didn't. 0.6 - 0.7 was about the average for a Hogan "B" show which is what WCW was doing at the start of the year then things droped big time, down to 0.4 range for the 2 PPVs before the NWO came along which were headlined by the Giant vs Sting & then vs Luger (Giant also bombed vs Hogan at the 1st Souled Out PPV). So the NWO did bump things back up but just back to whear they used to be a few months before. Also should be noted that the Hog/Road wild PPVs never drew big except for the year Leno came in.

 

The first big buy rates for WCW during the NWO days didn't come until late 96 & early 97 with the Hogan/Piper feud.

 

This.

 

One really needs to compare buys from a year-to-year basis as much as a show-to-show basis in this era:

 

* Hogan didn't work every PPV

* Hogan typically drew bigger buys than anyone else in WCW starting in 1994

* there were Big Shows and there were Smaller Shows

* this was a period of massive expansion of the PPV schedule (WWF added the IYH and WCW added more shows)

 

Viewers were selective in what they orders. The WWF had this: 11/95 Bret vs Nash drew more than 12/95 Bret vs Davey. That shouldn't *entirely* be read as Bret and/or Davey not being over. A big part of it was that 11/95 was Survivors, 12/95 was an IYH with the Rumble around the corner for 1/96. It's one of the reasons why the 2/96 show's buy was impressive: it was an IYH that did a good number for Bret-Nash in the cage, a sign *that* feud (actually Bret-Nash-Taker) was doing a strong uptick in business from 1995 for the WWF.

 

Hall & Nash didn't spike up business massively. Their buys weren't bad, nor were their ratings... but they weren't a massive uptick. Hogan was the uptick, especially in terms of buys starting with Hogan-Savage and Hogan-Piper.

 

Which I think I mentioned earlier in the thread: those set records for WCW.

 

John

[jdw]

I'd also add:

 

The early buyrate numbers are largely useless. Those 1990-91 ones look really great, but they aren't comparable to 1993 on. Hogan-Flair in August 1994 set a record for buys for the company. The "buyrate" doesn't look great compared to 1990... but far more people bought the show. It simply was available in more homes.

 

John

[KrisZ]

I voted for Sting last year but didn't this year because I voted for some others that weren't on last year's ballot but I would easily vote for him again. Sting was the heart and soul of WCW for years whether they were successful or not and he was huge among the children at the shows I went to which back then were numerous. I want to look at the years 1988-94 and see how Sting progressed.

 

1988: He got the jetpack on his ass on "Ric Flair Night" in Raleigh and that led to the Clash match which was one of the greatest matches of his and Flair's career and their best singles match which is interesting that their 1st big match was their best against each other. Their feud kept going until the Summer when Luger got extremely hot and feuded with Flair which dominated the rest of the year. Sting became basically a tag team guy with various partners the rest of the year and it looked then that Luger passed him by in status but Sting was still very very popular way more than his push.

 

1989: Sting stayed in the same spot for the first 4-5 months of the year although he did win the TV title which gave him a rebirth as a singles wrestler along with feuding with Muta. Sting latching on with former rival now extremely hot babyface Flair led to a great last 6 months of the year and was building up to a great next year when they would eventually feud.

 

1990: The turn goes down and Sting gets injured which kills all the future plans they had as Sting was going to beat Flair then move on to Luger who was the hottest heel in wrestling for the biggest feud of the year but that injury killed everything and you can link that injury to the beginning of the end of the Jim Herd era as they would turn Luger in a panic which should've never been done and he never really recovered from that as far as status with the fans as sure he was cheered but it wasn't the same as 1988 and Luger was so awesome as a heel everyone still saw him that way. Sting would of course come back and beat Flair and it was a big deal but not nearly as big as it should've been and then of course the bookers completely fucked up his title reign which wasn't Sting's fault but it happened and you can't go with a fantasyland in a HOF situation.

 

1991: They take the strap off of Sting and back on Flair at a house show no less and they wouldn't have another big match against each other for another 3 years. Sting of course is still the top babyface but he isn't programmed with Flair but with Luger against The Steiners which was a great match but the fact that Sting like Flair a year earlier never got the high profile rematch on PPV or on a Clash was idiotic. Sting spends the Spring and Summer in a holding pattern before Rude comes in and they start their feud but again they never have that big singles match with a rival as they had Battlebowl at Starrcade.

 

1992: The Sting/Rude situation continues as they have a tag match at the Clash before going to the Luger feud which was started at the Clash in November as he was behind a fake injury angle. The problem was the heat was still all on Sting/Rude not Luger who was basically MIA for the entire month of build for Super Brawl II thus killing what should've been a big match as it was their first singles match against each other in over 2 1/2 years. Sting again wins the title but it still feels cold and then yet again theme shows killed Sting as a singles star as there was War Games at Wrestle War, he wasn't even on the next Clash which was the NWA Tag Titles tournament. Sting then moves in to a mini feud with Cactus Jack leading a damn good match at Beach Blast but the next PPV which was GAB saw Sting lose his title to Vader in a match which was damn good but again wasn't properly built. Yet again Sting gets screwed as they start a new feud with Jake Roberts who injures him so he couldn't get a rematch on a TV taping and Watts puts the jetpack on Ron Simmons while Sting gets in a good feud with Jake ending at Halloween Havoc. Sting then gets programmed back with Vader winning the King of Cable trophy at Starrcade ending one of Sting's greatest years as a wrestler in the ring but definitely not in the booking.

 

1993: They kept up the Sting/Vader feud which was good but Flair comes back to town and immediately overtakes Sting as the top babyface in the promotion and Sting is now relegated to teaming with Davey Boy Smith so it's 1988 all over again but this time though they are teaming against Vader and Sid Vicious as WCW is in very bad shape business wise here and not running big shows as much as they used to especially Clashes. Sting & Flair would have a TV match for the NWA title in August which was a pretty great match since both were babyfaces but Sid would get involved for the cheap finish. Sting stayed as a tag team guy basically teaming with Davey, Steamboat, Flair, & Road Warrior Hawk and the year was a bust other than a handful of matches.

 

1994: Sting was again working various opponents the early part of the year before going back to feuding with Rude 2 years after their first one winning the International title before losing it in a unification match with Flair who was turning heel again and to push Sting out of the way for Hogan to come in and to dominate the next 2 years as a babyface.

 

Sting became Hogan's buddy and never really got that #1 babyface spot back until Crow Sting as he would always be Sting and have a top spot but he wasn't the guy anymore. Sting was so obscured by booking it isn't even funny as every big feud he was in basically only featured one big match between them. Whether it was Sting/Flair in 88, Sting/Flair in 90, Sting/Rude in 91, Sting/Luger in 92, Sting/Vader in 92, and Sting/Flair in 94.

 

Sting wasn't given the chance to realize his full potential which wasn't his fault but again fantasyland what if scenarios shouldn't be talked about only what really happened. I vote for Sting because I grew up with him as the face of my favorite promotion so I'm biased but I can totally understand why some don't see him as a HOF guy.

[Matt D]

The heart.

[evilclown]

Do listen to yourself evilclown, your pomposity in the last few posts has been borderline ridiculous.

I apologize. I admit your discussion of Renegade made me unreasonably angry. It's sort of like suggesting that Fake Diesel and Fake Razor were the most misused talent in wrestling history isn't it?

[Bix]

The heart.

EARTH! FIRE! WIND! WATER! HEART! GO PLANET! WITH YOUR POWERS COMBINED, I AM CAPTAIN PLANET!

[Matt D]

Not the power I would have pegged Kris to have.

[JerryvonKramer]

Do listen to yourself evilclown, your pomposity in the last few posts has been borderline ridiculous.

I apologize. I admit your discussion of Renegade made me unreasonably angry. It's sort of like suggesting that Fake Diesel and Fake Razor were the most misused talent in wrestling history isn't it?

 

No worries evilclown -- I took it all too seriously as well (ironically) and lashed out a bit, sorry for that.

 

One upshot of this is that I've become interested in the very first American pro wrestling Catch-as-catch-can title: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Heav...ht_Championship

 

This has always been something that confused me, because "Catch-as-catch-can" in my mind is a British thing, but guys like Gordon Solie always talk about "the American tradition of catch-as-catch-can wrestling".

 

It would appear they have a common root in Edwin Bibby -- a British wrestler from Lancashire who travelled to New York and won the aforementioned title.

[Guest Nell Santucci]

KVE was ultimately the biggest star of The Von Erich's during a period where they set records all over Texas. Yeah I tend to think the Birds were driving that train in many ways, but The Von Erichs were rock stars and no way the Birds could have had a run like that with someone who wasn't waiting to explode. Kerry was a very underrated worker and did well some territories and places outside of Texas as well (particularly St. Louis). He doesn't have the longevity of Sting, but his peak as a star was substantially longer.

How valid are the Von Erichs' claims that they were some huge ratings-draw in the Middle East? I've heard that claim on the WWE doc and Heroes of World Class, but always wondered if it was valid. No clue if it's even anything that could be checked or whatever. If true, it seems like it'd bolster Kerry's case even more.

 

According to Meltzer, it's true. In fact, it's a key point that Meltzer makes when showing just how big the Von Erich's were. But I also got the impression, perhaps wrongly, that their stint in Israel was a flash in a pan even more than other flashes.

[S.L.L.]

Not the power I would have pegged Kris to have.

He is from South America...in a manner of speaking.

[Death From Above]

So do you consider Nash a HOF candidate? Is Sting a demonstrably better candidate than Nash?

I don't know how you even start to have a carny hall of fame without Kevin Nash.

[Dylan Waco]

I am assuming CM funk posts as dailyskew on Classics. In the Sting thread over there http://wrestlingclassics.com/.ubb/ultimate...9963;p=3#000102 he's now pimping Sting as a "sabermetrics" candidate. I would be interested to see what people here think of this argument. I'll reserve my criticisms of it for later.