HOF nonsense thread

[Bix]

One thing I'll say, not so much to defend Sting's candidacy as much as clarify things, is that looking at WCW from a traditional on the books profit/loss standpoint doesn't really paint an accurate picture until the huge losses in 2000. Bischoff getting TBS to pay rights fees for the TV shows made the company profitable and would've put all of the previous years in the black if any of his predecessors did it, but he also signed a lot of wrestlers to contracts that weren't with WCW proper. There was a lot of creative accounting going on and it's better to look at how shows drew.

[Jingus]

Looking at it from the "why not?" side: there's much lower draws in the HoF than Sting. There's crappier workers. There's plenty of guys who aren't remembered nearly so fondly by the general casual-fan audience than the Stinger. So, why not?

[Cox]

Ideally, you'd like somebody to have better credentials than, "He's better than the worst guy currently in the Hall of Fame," but would have merits all on his own to stand behind. What is the realistic case for Sting that you can't make for dozens of other candidates that will never make it in? I'm not necessarily anti-Sting, but what is his case beyond he's probably a better candidate than Kurt Angle?

[Dylan Waco]

Someone run a Gordy List on Sting.

[jdw]

In any case, I've always argued this: did anyone EXPECT any Southern wrestling promotion at that time to do more than 8,000 at The Omni? Had the NWA EVER really had bigger crowds than that?

JCP/WCW wasn't really a "southern wrestling promotion" during any point of Sting's career in JCP/WCW. It was a national promotion.

 

Of course JCP drew 8000+ at the Omni in the years prior to Sting's time on top. Pretty sure GCW drew 8000+ for their most successful shows as well. Don't know if Rich's GA site has attendance data for the GCW period.

 

Limited attendence numbers at Graham's site, but you'll find a number in the 70s:

 

http://www.thehistoryofwwe.com/omni70s.htm

 

7 that were 10K+, which are actually the only 7 attendence numbers list.

 

More in the 80s:

 

http://www.thehistoryofwwe.com/omni80s.htm

 

Suspect there are a good number of additional ones in the shows that didn't have numbers listed.

 

John

[NintendoLogic]

You have to understand that HOF qualifications are determined on a sliding scale. The worse you were as a worker, the better you have to be as a draw, and vice versa. Sting wasn't really exceptional at either.

[sek69]

Sting is pretty much the wrestling version of Dale Murphy. Dale was a great baseball player for the Atlanta Braves during one of the shittiest periods of their history, winning multiple MVP awards, but has not made it into the baseball HOF and has become their "almost, but not quite" guy. It's not completely out of line to suggest he would have been in a long time ago had he not played all but the last three years of a near 20 year career on a team that was primarily bottom dwellers-middle of the pack at best. Since the Braves started their run of division titles almost immediately after he retired, he's mostly known as the one bright spot in an era largely mired in forgettable shit. Sting being best known as the face of WCW during their lean times is a similar situation. I think in a way he does sort of get it held against him, in the "captain goes down with the ship" manner. Of course he wasn't the sole reason business wasn't exactly booming for them, but for better or worse he's the face people associate with it.

[Gregor]

Eh...Dale Murphy's Hall of Fame case wasn't really derailed by his playing for forgettable teams. It's more that his ability vanished overnight in the late eighties, whereas a normal, more gradual decline would probably have been enough to get him in. During his peak, he was generally considered a lock for the Hall.

[cm funk]

This is what I posted the last time Sting's candidacy came up (in the 2011 WON HOF thread)

 

I did a post on DVDVR several years ago attempting to debunk the idea that Sting wasn't a draw. The basic gist of it was that PPVs headlined by Sting almost always did a better buyrate than other shows in the same timeframe. The reality is that by the time Sting was put into the top spot the industry was on a major downswing, WCW was a mess creatively, they were awful at house card promotion.....sometimes a company itself just won't draw. You can lump him into the same crowd with Hart and Michaels as guys who had the misfortune of getting their run on top at the nadir of the industry.

 

Sting was also a major part of WCW's biggest year (98 may have been bigger financially, not sure, but 97 was the year for WCW).....which led to their biggest PPV buyrate in history. You take a guy who was essentially the babyface ace of a company for the better part of a decade, who helped them stay afloat through the lean years, who sold merch and magazines etc....and who had a major hand in their biggest year......I just don't buy the "Sting doesn't draw" canard. A guy who was that over with those crowds for that long was certainly putting asses in the seats and making the company money. Imagine how bad WCW might have been in 91-93 if they didn't have Sting?

 

And you also have to qualify post-Starrcade '97 as he was absolutely sabotaged from a chance to draw big money on top for the first time. Could he have done it? I don't see why not. But we all know what happened there and it's not worth rehashing.

I tried to find the post I had made on DVDR but couldn't. But basically I looked at all the PPV buyrates in the 90-94 years, and shows that Sting main evented almost always did the best buyrates. The info is out there on the web if you're curious enough to do the research yourself.

 

I'm not even that big of a Sting fan, I just feel the need to defend him because the wrestling industry was in a total tailspin in the early 90's and WCW was a complete trainwreck of a promotion. I've never bought the idea that Sting couldn't draw.

[JerryvonKramer]

I want to say that even if Sting ISN'T a big draw to a wider casual audience -- and honestly I think probably less than 10 wrestlers are in the history of wrestling -- for a period of about 8 or 9 years he consistently got the biggest pop of the night whenever he worked.

 

Even after Hogan came in, and before the crow gimmick, in like 95, Sting would be the biggest pop of the night.

 

Doesn't that overness with the crowd count for anything when building a HoF case? Seems to me that it should be AS IMPORTANT as wrestling ability.

 

Also, do we only look at PPV buyrates and gates? What about merch sales?

[GSR]

I want to say that even if Sting ISN'T a big draw to a wider casual audience -- and honestly I think probably less than 10 wrestlers are in the history of wrestling -- for a period of about 8 or 9 years he consistently got the biggest pop of the night whenever he worked.

 

Even after Hogan came in, and before the crow gimmick, in like 95, Sting would be the biggest pop of the night.

 

Doesn't that overness with the crowd count for anything when building a HoF case? Seems to me that it should be AS IMPORTANT as wrestling ability.

 

Also, do we only look at PPV buyrates and gates? What about merch sales?

Pop of the night and overness with the crowd as important as wrestling ability? When building a HoF case. Seriously? Sure, if that overness with the crowd translates into an increase and upturn in business, but on its own, no not at all.

[JerryvonKramer]

I don't see how you can say "wrestling ability" is in any way important either then, if it doesn't translate into money.

 

"Wrestling ability" is AS ARBITRARY a benchmark as overness.

 

IF wrestling ability is a criterion, I don't think that being massively over should be overlooked either. If wrestling ability is not important, and it's just about being a draw, fair enough.

[KrisZ]

Sting also has a quasi Gale Sayers comparison as he was never the same after his knee injury but unlike Sayers he has worked 22 years since the injury took place. The Sting before the injury though was headed for big big things not to say he didn't do great after the injury but pre-injury he was special.

[JerryvonKramer]

What are the normative elements that led to Benoit going in then?

[Loss]

Haven't we been through all of this before? We've had this conversation at least a half dozen times, then it seems to restart a few months later like it never happened. I don't understand that.

 

Anyway, it's not a Hall of Guys I Like. If it was, Sting would be in mine.

 

Benoit went in because he was considered one of the top five wrestlers in the world for 15 years. The HOF is biased more toward guys with reps than guys who look good watching old footage now. I don't know how long you have been online, but Benoit had a pretty great rep before he murdered his family. Based on what I know about your interests, you didn't like him because he wasn't part of the WWF gimmick era. Sting surprises me a little coming from you because it's the first time I've ever heard you praise anyone that wasn't in the WWF in the 80s or 90s. That seems to be your point of interest, and that's fine, but sometimes, whether you see it or not, you do it to the detriment of all other wrestling, implying that if it didn't happen in the Hogan era of the WWF, it doesn't count.

 

If you don't get it, you don't get it. I'm not even sure Benoit should be in the HOF. But do you seriously not understand why he went in? He went in based on work, just like dozens and dozens of other people in the HOF. It's the exact same reason Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Ted DiBiase and Ricky Steamboat went in. Why aren't you saying the same about them?

[Cox]

Doesn't that overness with the crowd count for anything when building a HoF case? Seems to me that it should be AS IMPORTANT as wrestling ability.

No. If a wrestler is over in front of a small crowd, then is he really over? Sandman used to get huge pops at the ECW Arena and was probably as over as anybody in the history of the company...are we going to make a case that Sandman belongs in the Hall of Fame? Being able to pop a crowd in and of itself is not enough to build a Hall of Fame case. Instead, point out how Sting's "overness" led to bigger crowds, higher buyrates, etc while the ace of WCW from '90 to '94, and again from '97 into '98.

[Mr Wrestling X]

I think it was insane that WON decided to take Benoit's HOF place to a vote following the tragedy. Sure, nobody wants to honour a guy who murdered his family and killed himself following that, but the "honouring" in question was done years before the tragedy occured. I think it's important to preserve history and it's ludicrous to erase something historical such as recognition by a HOF, regardless of what said person went on to do. At the time Benoit was inducted, he was one of the best workers in the world, and as Loss mentioned - he'd been one of the best for around 15 years at that point.

 

I will say that I'm one of these people that doesn't get the indifference to the Benoit tragedy by some fans, he was one of my favourite wrestlers and he is most definitely one of the best workers that the business has ever seen, but he also murdered his family before taking his own life and therefore I have no respect or admiration for him. But, like I said it's important to not just "do-away" with things because you want to hide the fact that you once respected and recognised the work rate of someone who went on to become a monster. So for the benefit of historical preservation, I feel that Benoit's accomplishments should stay in the records.

[Dylan Waco]

I want to say that even if Sting ISN'T a big draw to a wider casual audience -- and honestly I think probably less than 10 wrestlers are in the history of wrestling -- for a period of about 8 or 9 years he consistently got the biggest pop of the night whenever he worked.

 

Even after Hogan came in, and before the crow gimmick, in like 95, Sting would be the biggest pop of the night.

 

Doesn't that overness with the crowd count for anything when building a HoF case? Seems to me that it should be AS IMPORTANT as wrestling ability.

 

Also, do we only look at PPV buyrates and gates? What about merch sales?

 

The biggest reaction I ever heard someone get live was for Ice Train.

 

New Age Outlaws and Rikishi/Too Cool were as over as any acts during the attitude era if you are looking purely at pops/reactions.

 

I don't see any of those guys at HoFers and I don't put much stock in pops because they prove nothing.

 

When assessing drawing power buyrates, ratings, gates/live attendance figures and merch sales (if you can find real numbers) are all valuable tools

[Mr Wrestling X]

New Age Outlaws

Who could justifiably be in any HOF...

 

When assessing drawing power buyrates, ratings, gates/live attendance figures and merch sales (if you can find real numbers)

...for those reasons alone

[Loss]

Yes, because they headlined so many PPVs and house shows where you can directly credit them for the live gate. You can't be serious.

[Mr Wrestling X]

Yes, because they headlined so many PPVs and house shows where you can directly credit them for the live gate. You can't be serious.

In terms of house shows and as a part of DX, they were responsible for a large chunk of the gate, second only to Steve Austin.

[Loss]

They were midcarders.

[Dylan Waco]

Jerry Blackwell can't get on the ballot and he meant far more to the AWA's hot run than NAO did to the Attitude Eras.

 

Cowboy Bob Orton was a huge part of Roddy Piper's act and did well in Mid Atlantic and elsewhere as a complimentary figure in feuds that drew. I suppose he's an HoFer now as well...

[Loss]

Slowly splitting off all of this stuff. Use this thread to debate the merits of people who are already in the HOF, make cases for people who aren't on the ballot and write anything that contains the word "overness" as criteria.

[Mr Wrestling X]

They were midcarders.

Who people paid to see, bought their shirts and went apeshit when their music hit. Just because they were booked as midcarders, doesn't mean that they couldn't still recieve reactions reserved for main eventers and sell merch like a Hogan.