WON HoF Candidate Poll Thread

[El-P]

That was the same for us. We only got Superstars, but we got to see the PPVs free-to-air. They were months and months behind, however.

Same thing, PPV free. First PPV they showed was Survivor Series 1991. It was showed in December, a few days before Christmas. They showed some Saturday Nights Main Event too, but it was mixed with some other stuff. The French broadcasts were a mish mash of Supertars, Wrestling challenge with some MSG channel & Mapple Leafs Garden competitive matches too.

[JerryvonKramer]

Fairly sure they showed Prime Time here too.

[ohtani's jacket]

The first PPV they showed on TV when I was a kid was SummerSlam '89. The SummerSlam the year before had been a massive deal on home video. The last one they showed was Royal Rumble '91. After that, parents got WWF taken off the air.

[Gregor]

No, it's annoying as hell and comes off to me as Ross being insecure over announcing wrestling and wants to talk about real sport instead. If there's a thing I can't stand about Jim Ross (apart from the bad JR screaming and overselling everything like a coked up Joey Styles), that's it. At times it gets unbearable when he gets into details of college sports. Who gives a flying fuck ? We already watch the wrestling, you don't have to make distinct effort to try ro seel those guys as college athletes, sell us their wrestling personnality.

It's not something that's ever bothered me. When I watch baseball or whatever, announcers will often mention that so-and-so was recruited to play, say, college football, and it doesn't sound like the commentators are trying to legitimize their sport.

[JerryvonKramer]

I might be alone in this, but I always found JR's college stuff had a vaguely homo-erotic bent. With certain guys -- Pillman, Luger and Ron Simmons all spring to mind -- he sounded like he was actually aroused by their sporting achievements. He could talk for 5 minutes straight on Luger's time in Pennsylvania State, Miami and his time with the Packers.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if when Ross used to make love to his wife, he'd imagine he was actually doing it to Luger. Reeling off the key stats of his pro-football career as he was climaxing.

[El-P]

It's not something that's ever bothered me. When I watch baseball or whatever, announcers will often mention that so-and-so was recruited to play, say, college football, and it doesn't sound like the commentators are trying to legitimize their sport.

Well, they already announce a real sport, so it's totally different. Pro-wrestling isn't a real sport.

[ohtani's jacket]

I really don't need to think about JR making love.

[Gregor]

Well, they already announce a real sport, so it's totally different. Pro-wrestling isn't a real sport.

I get that, and I actually do see where you're coming from. "This isn't just a bunch of guys playing pretend - no, these guys are athletes, and this is serious business."

 

It's just never sounded like that to me. When a baseball broadcaster notes that Dave Winfield was drafted by pro teams in both basketball and (American) football, it sounds like he's trying to say that Winfield was a super athlete. When Jim Ross notes that Brian Pillman played football, it sounds the same. I understand that the two announcers are starting from different places - the baseball player is already understood to be an athlete, whereas the wrestler might not be - but they don't sound very different to me.

 

Ross loved to point out that D'Lo Brown was a Certified Public Accountant. He would point this out in half of Brown's matches and possibly even more than that. I never got the impression that he was trying to say something about how professional wrestlers are smarter than you might think; it just sounded like a way of getting Brown over.

 

You feel what you feel, though, so if a whole bunch of people were bothered by Ross' talking about football careers, then it's possible that it hurt more than it helped.

[JerryvonKramer]

Does the baseball broadcaster sound like he gets off on Winfield being a super athlete though? Does he make it sound like he's got a secret closet full of Winfield posters?

 

Ross at times bordered on being a creepy stalker-type fan of Pillman, Luger and Simmons.

[El-P]

Well, they already announce a real sport, so it's totally different. Pro-wrestling isn't a real sport.

I get that, and I actually do see where you're coming from. "This isn't just a bunch of guys playing pretend - no, these guys are athletes, and this is serious business."

Right, that's it.

 

It's just never sounded like that to me. When a baseball broadcaster notes that Dave Winfield was drafted by pro teams in both basketball and (American) football, it sounds like he's trying to say that Winfield was a super athlete. When Jim Ross notes that Brian Pillman played football, it sounds the same. I understand that the two announcers are starting from different places - the baseball player is already understood to be an athlete, whereas the wrestler might not be - but they don't sound very different to me.

I can undertsand that, but Ross would just go overboard sometime and got into details of Simmons or Luger or Pillman's football career. I mean, a mention sometimes doesn't bother me, but at some point it felt like Ross was more interested about those acomplishements and rather talk about real sports than pro-wrestling. The worst was when Steve Williams was in the ring.

 

Ross loved to point out that D'Lo Brown was a Certified Public Accountant. He would point this out in half of Brown's matches and possibly even more than that. I never got the impression that he was trying to say something about how professional wrestlers are smarter than you might think; it just sounded like a way of getting Brown over.

That is true. That didn't bothered me.

 

You feel what you feel, though, so if a whole bunch of people were bothered by Ross' talking about football careers, then it's possible that it hurt more than it helped.

At point to me it was *really* annoying. Although I admit watching early 90's WCW TV these days made me enjoy Ross again after years of not even wanting to hear him after he became a parody in the early 00's.

[El-P]

Ross at times bordered on being a creepy stalker-type fan of Pillman, Luger and Simmons.

It was a lot worse with Steve Williams.

 

Well, both Steve Williams I should say.

[ohtani's jacket]

The problem was that you had to hear about it every single time you saw Brian Pillman, etc. Not only that but he'd drop lines in the middle of a match like: "what courage, what tenacity from this former two-time Second Team All-American defensive tackle for the Miami University Redskins." The guy should've commentated college football. It was obviously his calling in life.

[El-P]

The problem was that you had to hear about it every single time you saw Brian Pillman, etc. Not only that but he'd drop lines in the middle of a match like: "what courage, what tenacity from this former two-time Second Team All-American defensive tackle for the Miami University Redskins."

Yep, pretty much. At one point I'm like "Okay, I get the point, but he's a wrestler now. GET OVER IT ROSS."

[kjh]

Tito Santana

 

Underrated in ring talent, but he was never a draw and was never even really positioned to be a draw. I'm not even sure what his farthest position up the card was. I would guess the Valentine feud but I may be forgetting something. Either way he's not a good enough worker to make up that gap.

The Valentine feud closed out four Madison Square Garden house shows in 1984/85, but usually wasn't the match that likely drew the house. The Savage vs. Santana feud in '86 was the other highlight. He headlined MSG twice that year in tag matches with Bruno Sammartino against Savage and Adonis, which certainly was the biggest matches on those shows, but didn't draw that well (13,000 for the first match, 16,000 for the second cage one).

[kjh]

Hiroyoshi Tenzan

 

To me he sort of comes across like a shittier NJPW version of Akiyama but my perspective may be skewed. I don't see him as a serious candidate in any respect.

I think the difference between Tenzan and Akiyama is that you can't blame the booking for Akiyama failing as a project, Tenzan was killed off by New Japan's yo-yo pushes during their freefall period. Though of course this is not the Hall Of What Could Have Been.

[Mad Dog]

4 pages late, but there was NO player on the MLB HOF ballot this year that is worse than Tony Womack, let alone many horrible ballplayers, which would make Womack "far from the *worst* player on the ballot." Terry Mulholland? Nowhere close to as lame as Womack.

 

Name THREE players from the last TWENTY YEARS of the Ballot that are worse than Womack. It's not possible. I'll even spot you Dodger superstar Lenny Harris. Womack is clearly one of the worst, if not the worse guy to show up on a HOF ballot.

 

Shoot, explain to me how Tony Womack would deserve someone's vote over Neifi Perez?

 

However, Bobby Womack - who you mentioned - is fucking awesome.

Edgar Martinez...

[Cox]

I've noticed that a lot of the folks who are coming out against JR's hard-on for college football are from outside the US, so to explain: college football is absolutely HUGE in the American South, and that was an area WCW was obviously targeting hard in the late 80's and early 90's. I look back and see that as Ross trying to relate some of their top wrestlers to an audience that loves college football. I can see where it might be considered grating to those who haven't grown up with college football as practically a second religion, but to the core WCW audience, I think it was a good move. Of course, JR being a legit mark for college football probably had a lot to do with it too...

[Ricky Jackson]

Eh, you Europeans just don't understand the greatness of REAL Football.

 

Seriously, I enjoyed Ross and his real sports commentary style in the early 90s because it was such a contrast to the often too cartoonish world of the WWF. I haven't rewatched any Saturday Night's from that period and have only watched a few of the WCW ppv matches here and there, so I haven't got to a point where Ross' football obsession has become annoying. The man loves football and he cut his teeth in a territory where emphasizing a wrestlers athletic background was considered a key part of getting someone over and making wrestling seem "legit" to the mainstream. He was just continuing the tradition of NWA-style commentary, but had a bit more of a hard-on for football than most. (and what the man may or may not have fantasized in the privacy of his bedroom is his own business )

 

Regarding Steve Williams, I just don't get the love or understand why he made the HOF ahead of so many other guys . Granted, I have only seen a smattering of his work over the years, but what I have seen has usually bored me to tears and hardly left me dying to see more of his matches. Just my opinion, though.

[Childs]

I've never cared much about the Ventura debate, in part because Dave has couched it in terms of Jesse's wider fame, about which I couldn't give less of a shit. But I have to say, this discussion has made me consider what drove my love of 1980s WWF. And Jesse was a big part of it. I just loved listening to the guy, to the extent that I cared less about an event if it was called by Heenan and Gorilla. I still like listening to him when I watch 1990s WCW. I have less defined expectations of a wrestling announcer than Loss; I don't think getting over the sporting drama of a match is the only way to skin that cat. Jesse succeeded in creating a character that was, for me, one of the indelible ones from a hugely significant era. So I'd vote for him out of personal preference, though I don't think his case is a commanding one.

[Jingus]

I've noticed that a lot of the folks who are coming out against JR's hard-on for college football are from outside the US, so to explain: college football is absolutely HUGE in the American South, and that was an area WCW was obviously targeting hard in the late 80's and early 90's.

That's actually a good point. College football hereabouts often has nearly as many followers as the professional variety. Heck, out here near Dallas, every high school has a gargantuan football stadium which must have cost eleventy zillion dollars. And football and wrestling do have plenty of crossover audience. Before the rise of MMA, there weren't very many slightly-trashy full-contact sports which were very popular; boxing appeals to a much older crowd, hockey never got tremendously popular in places where it doesn't snow much, and that pretty much just leaves football as the premiere real sport where guys hit each other really fucking hard.

[jdw]

How much credit does Dr Zahorian get for his importance on overall presentation?

That's a good one.

 

Though he probably wasn't the only source for the stuff. Hogan, for example, was juiced long before he came to the WWF.

 

John

[jdw]

4 pages late, but there was NO player on the MLB HOF ballot this year that is worse than Tony Womack, let alone many horrible ballplayers, which would make Womack "far from the *worst* player on the ballot." Terry Mulholland? Nowhere close to as lame as Womack.

 

Name THREE players from the last TWENTY YEARS of the Ballot that are worse than Womack. It's not possible. I'll even spot you Dodger superstar Lenny Harris. Womack is clearly one of the worst, if not the worse guy to show up on a HOF ballot.

 

Shoot, explain to me how Tony Womack would deserve someone's vote over Neifi Perez?

 

However, Bobby Womack - who you mentioned - is fucking awesome.

I would say Lenny Harris, as his (admittedly bad) numbers are inflated by platooning:

 

.272/.321/.355/.676 vs RHP

.244/.297/.298/.595 vs LHP

 

The number of PA's against LHP were massively limited: 3790 RHP vs 499 LHP. So he actually was a much worse player than he looked, but his managers pretty wisely didn't let him hit against LHP.

 

Shawon Dunston was a pretty shitty player, and got 1000 more PA's than Womack. He also was a harder guy to get rid off than Womack because folks in Chicago (along with his managers) thought he was better than he really was. If you put a gun to my head, I'd probably rather have Womack because I could simply get rid of him with no controversy.

 

Dante Bichette was a pretty horrible player considering he was a corner OF, and his inflated numbers earned him $42M in his career, a lot of those years when he was making very good money. As bad as Womack... no. More damaging to a team? Yes.

 

Scott Brosius was a weird cat. Take his best three years from 1995-2001, and he was useful-to-good. His other four years in that run? Mediocre to awful. Corner position at a time of good offense out of 3B. Perhaps not as bad as Womack, but the net of his career was a bad player. 1996 and 1998 deluded people into thinking he wasn't a bad player for most of his career.

 

Bobby Witt? 400 starts... overall, a bad starter. Pretty damaging to the Rangers... kind of a rotation killer because they pinned so much hope and effort on him. To a degree, I'd rather have him as a draft pick than Womack because you'd hope with the right early coaching you could teach him to Throw Strikes. But a bad player.

 

Ozzie Guillen was a FUCKING HORRIBLE PLAYER!!! 7100+ PA's to Womack's 5400. An even worse hitter, though (allegedly) a better fielder. Dear god... give me Womack because it's easier to get rid of him, and Ozzie was/is such a prick.

 

Walt Weiss... never had a 100+ OPS+ and a 78 overall for his career. Surprised me a bit since he had a good eye and wasn't a .220 hitter. But zero power and his good eye wasn't a great eye overall. Of course I'd rather have Weiss than Womack.

 

Gary Disarcina got on the ballot. Another good defensive player, bad hitter. As bad as Womack? Eh... we're down there in the same range, with Womack bottoming out in WAR due to WAR rating his defense as horrid.

 

Mark Davis... 2 good years, a lot of shit, and a monster contract. Yikes!

 

Vince Coleman was a pretty bad player. Corner OF, and damaging because people thought he was better than he was. I'd actually rather have Womack, again because you could dump him.

 

That's going back 10 years. There are a lot of other guys on the ballot that we could point to as "these guys have no business being on it" like Mitch Williams or Dan Plesac.

 

John

[jdw]

4 pages late, but there was NO player on the MLB HOF ballot this year that is worse than Tony Womack, let alone many horrible ballplayers, which would make Womack "far from the *worst* player on the ballot." Terry Mulholland? Nowhere close to as lame as Womack.

 

Name THREE players from the last TWENTY YEARS of the Ballot that are worse than Womack. It's not possible. I'll even spot you Dodger superstar Lenny Harris. Womack is clearly one of the worst, if not the worse guy to show up on a HOF ballot.

 

Shoot, explain to me how Tony Womack would deserve someone's vote over Neifi Perez?

 

However, Bobby Womack - who you mentioned - is fucking awesome.

Edgar Martinez...

 

Edgar was a great player. If not for the DH, someone would have made him 1B in 1995 when he couldn't play 3B anymore. .343/.404/.544 in 1992? After the two injury seasons, if the M's decided that Tino was their guy at 1B, Tino would have gone somewhere else. Sticking with Tino would be ironic since they traded him after 1995 and signed Sorrento as a FA. But anyway...

 

All the DH has largely done is open a spot for guys that teams would have otherwise played at 1B/LF/RF is they hit well enough and there was no DH. Cecil Fielder was a shitty 1B. Luzinski was the worst LF that I've ever seen, but was getting MVP votes in Philly... and given how well he hit in his best years, those weren't unreasonable votes.

 

By 1995 there were enough sabermetric minded teams in the game that at least one of them would have taken him and dropped him at 1B. And he would have knocked the crap out of the ball. Probably not as long or high end successful of a career, but my guess is that he would have popped out a fair number of years like 1990-91, adjusted for the change in era (1989-92 were low offense, while offense took off from 1995 on when he was healthy again).

 

John

[Childs]

Was he actually suggesting that Edgar was a worse player than Tony Womack? Is that a DH thing?

 

As for the Womack argument, I'd take him over Lenny Harris and Mark Davis. I think he's neck and neck with Bichette. The other guys at least hit higher peaks, though it was, of course, pointless to throw them on the HOF ballot.

[Mad Dog]

I really only mentioned him because he was a DH largely for his career which I think should hurt him. I would include Jose Canseco as a really bad candidate as well for being primarily a DH.

 

Looking at the actual ballots now that I'm home. They all suck but I'd say Brian Jordan, Phil Nevin and Terry Muholland are equally bad as candidates. Nevin is probably worse. He had a really high peak for about 3 years but for the majority of his career, he had to hit it out of the park to get on base. Kirk Rueter was probably a worse candidate too. And Greg Vaughn, he was on the ballot at one point. I'm only at 2009 and I've found plenty of awful names on there.