Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

Comments that don't warrant a thread - Part 3


Loss

Recommended Posts

TomK illustrated the best and most obvious reason of Angle getting in so easily: old workers wanted to be lumped in with his legitimacy. He's just like us, gold medal caliber wrestling skills and cutting off the ring."

Seems like an easy way to test this hypothesis would be to look at the vote totals. Did Angle do significantly better among current and former wrestlers than among reporters and historians?

 

Also, for the record, Angle got in with exactly the bare minimum of necessary votes in 2004. I don't know where this notion that he got elected in a cakewalk came from.

 

Old wrestlers always talk up Angle. Always. It always bugs me when Bret does it, since it's pretty hypocritical relative to his comments about Flair.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest TheGreatPuma

Lots of wrestlers and fans love Angle's work. It works for them. Just because it doesn't work sometimes for some smarks doesn't mean it doesn't work for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TomK illustrated the best and most obvious reason of Angle getting in so easily: old workers wanted to be lumped in with his legitimacy. He's just like us, gold medal caliber wrestling skills and cutting off the ring."

Seems like an easy way to test this hypothesis would be to look at the vote totals. Did Angle do significantly better among current and former wrestlers than among reporters and historians?

 

Also, for the record, Angle got in with exactly the bare minimum of necessary votes in 2004. I don't know where this notion that he got elected in a cakewalk came from.

 

Old wrestlers always talk up Angle. Always. It always bugs me when Bret does it, since it's pretty hypocritical relative to his comments about Flair.

 

I'm looking for data, not anecdotes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TomK illustrated the best and most obvious reason of Angle getting in so easily: old workers wanted to be lumped in with his legitimacy. He's just like us, gold medal caliber wrestling skills and cutting off the ring."

Seems like an easy way to test this hypothesis would be to look at the vote totals. Did Angle do significantly better among current and former wrestlers than among reporters and historians?

 

Also, for the record, Angle got in with exactly the bare minimum of necessary votes in 2004. I don't know where this notion that he got elected in a cakewalk came from.

 

Old wrestlers always talk up Angle. Always. It always bugs me when Bret does it, since it's pretty hypocritical relative to his comments about Flair.

 

Say what?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TomK illustrated the best and most obvious reason of Angle getting in so easily: old workers wanted to be lumped in with his legitimacy. He's just like us, gold medal caliber wrestling skills and cutting off the ring."

Seems like an easy way to test this hypothesis would be to look at the vote totals. Did Angle do significantly better among current and former wrestlers than among reporters and historians?

 

Also, for the record, Angle got in with exactly the bare minimum of necessary votes in 2004. I don't know where this notion that he got elected in a cakewalk came from.

 

Old wrestlers always talk up Angle. Always. It always bugs me when Bret does it, since it's pretty hypocritical relative to his comments about Flair.

 

I'm looking for data, not anecdotes.

 

In the case of something like that this data on it's own tells you very little. You would need to know why people voted for certain people, and wrestlers are the absolute least likely group among voters to give reasons publicly for their votes. What we do have are cases of guys in shoots and interviews talking about how none of the guys from the modern era could cut it, or work their style, et. other than Angle. Whatever you think of Angle as a worker or a star, it's hard to see how Angle is a modern day representative of wrestling as worked by Ole Anderson or Jack Brisco. We also have historians who are on record talking about how guys that "tested themselves" in legit competition are more likely to get their votes. So while I have no clue, what the actual data was, but I think it's fair to say that tom's point was likely a factor in Angle's early induction. It was not the only one, as I think there are a couple other obvious ones.

 

1. He was in the midst of his "prime," and was regularly touted as a super worker during the period by Dave and others. Angle benefited for the same reasons that Jericho did (two consecutive Wrestler of the Year Awards) and Tanahashi did (basically the same thing, plus was touted regularly by Dave as one of the great workers in the history of wrestling). Compare those guys to people like Mistico or Perro Aguayo Jr. or Batista or even Edge who's peaks came before eligibility.

 

and

 

2. The collapse of Japanese wrestling and U.S. competition. In the past I think it's highly unlikely that Angle would have become the "flavor of the week" to nearly the degree he was, because the worldwide standard was considered higher, and even in the States there was one or more promotions that were deemed relevant with talent to compare him directly to. Angle was seen by some as an era defining worker and star, because he was the guy that hit his full stride when everything else was falling off of a cliff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Angle was a guest on Steve Austin's podcast, Steve verbally fellated him in regards to his quick ability to pick up the business and how he "worked smarter" in later years. Angle popping the old timers and the boys in the back has always been one of the major reasons his induction was backed. Dylan's reasons are also correct, but it really can't be understated how much Angle's contemporaries and the old timers loved him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To you it's unwatchable. To me it's decent entertaining stuff that tells a good story I enjoy. JCP is better in tag wrestling until you get to the finish, which is usually garbage. I've said it so many times, but to me, endings are very very important. Dusty's endings are awful and WCW in general continued his trend for years.

WWF tags in the 80s had a lot of shitty finishes. It's not exactly Hulk Hogan Legdrops in terms of clean, no bullshit finishes. At a certain point, it seemed like all of them had Conference Finishes, though that often was more of an early 90s thing than an 80s thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Oh god, what did we let these carny bastards and action junkies do to our precious hall of fame." clause.

Not really. Dave defends Angle as a HOFer and thinks he was a good choice.

 

Not exactly: He didn't vote for Angle that year. He feels Angle made the case eventually.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "Oh god, what did we let these carny bastards and action junkies do to our precious hall of fame." clause.

Not really. Dave defends Angle as a HOFer and thinks he was a good choice.

 

Not exactly: He didn't vote for Angle that year. He feels Angle made the case eventually.

 

Meltzer also thinks that Angle's TNA has added to and strengthened his legacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...