Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

This year's WON HOF ballot


Loss
 Share

Recommended Posts

Crimson Mask over at Wrestling Classics has now posted his Observer HOF ballot for 2005. This year's candidates are:

 

PERFORMERS LIST

Jun Akiyama

Arn Anderson

Gene & Ole Anderson

Masked Assassins (Jody Hamilton & Tom Renesto)

Red Bastien

Carlos Colon

Fabulous Freebirds (Michael Hayes & Terry Gordy & Buddy Roberts)

Masakatsu Funaki

Eddie Guerrero

Volk Han

Owen Hart

Hiroshi Hase

HHH

Curt Hennig

Chris Jericho

Ivan Koloff

Konnan

Aja Kong

Mark Lewin

Jose Lothario

Lonnie Mayne

Midnight Express (Dennis Condrey & Bobby Eaton & Stan Lane)

Dr. Bill Miller

Fabulous Moolah

Don Muraco

Dick Murdoch

Paul Orndorff

Blue Panther

Rock & Roll Express (Ricky Morton & Robert Gibson)

Rick Rude

Sabu

Seiji Sakaguchi

Masa Saito

Kensuke Sasaki

Jimmy Snuka

Wilbur Snyder

Sting

Yoshihiro Takayama

Kiyoshi Tamura

John Tolos

Villano III

Dr. Wagner Sr.

Johnny "Mr. Wrestling II" Walker

Tim "Mr. Wrestling" Woods

 

NON PERFORMERS LIST

Paul Heyman

Jerry Jarrett

Gorilla Monsoon

Don Owen

Roy Shire

Jesse Ventura

Here is the list of wrestlers currently in the Hall of Fame:

 

Perro Aguayo

Andre The Giant

Bert Assirati

Giant Baba

Fred Blassie

Nick Bockwinkel

Bobo Brazil

Jack Brisco

Bruiser Brody

Dick The Bruiser

Mildred Burke

Abdullah The Butcher

Canek

Negro Casas

Riki Choshu

Crusher Lisowski

Alfonso Dantes

Blue Demon

The Destroyer

Ted Dibiase

The Dusek Family Riot Squad

Jackie Fargo

Ric Flair

Tatsumi Fujinami

Dory Funk Jr.

Terry Funk

Verne Gagne

Cavernario Galindo

Ed Don George

Gorgeous George

Frank Gotch

Karl Gotch

"Superstar" Billy Graham

Rene Guajardo

Salvador "Gori" Guerrero

George Hackenschmidt

Stan Hansen

Bret Hart

Danny Hodge

Hulk Hogan

Antonio Inoki

Rayo De Jalisco

Tom Jenkins

Don Leo Jonathan

The Fabulous Kangaroos

Dynamite Kid

Gene Kiniski

Killer Kowalski

Ernie Ladd

Jerry Lawler

Ed "Strangler" Lewis

Jim Londos

Akira Maeda

Devil Masami

Mil Mascaras

Tiger Mask (Satoru Sayama)

Dump Matsumoto

Earl McCready

Leroy McGuirk

Danny McShane

Rey Mendoza

Mitsuharu Misawa

Bronko Nagurski

Pat O'Connor

Kintaro Oki

Atsushi Onita

Pat Patterson

John Pesek

Roddy Piper

Harley Race

Dusty Rhodes

Rikidozan

Yvon Robert

Antonino Rocca

Road Warriors

Billy Robinson

Buddy Rogers

Bruno Sammartino

El Santo

Jackie Sato

Randy Savage

The Sheik

Dara Singh

El Solitario

Rick Steamboat

Joe Stecher

Ray Steele

Ray Stevens

Nobuhiko Takada

Genichiro Tenryu

Lou Thesz

Jumbo Tsuruta

Mad Dog Vachon

Vader

Johnny Valentine

Fritz Von Erich

Whipper Billy Watson

Bill Watts

Jaguar Yokota

Stanislaus Zbyszko

Jim Barnett

Wild Red Berry

Paul Boesch

Jim Cornette

Dory Funk Sr.

Eddie Graham

Stu Hart

Bobby Heenan

Fred Kohler

Dick Lane

Salvador Lutteroth

Vince McMahon Jr.

Vince McMahon Sr.

Joe "Toots" Mondt

Sam Muchnick

Antonio Pena

Lance Russell

Billy Sandow

Hisashi Shinma

Gordon Solie

Tony Stecher

Frank Tunney

Edouard Carpentier

Toshiaki Kawada

Jimmy Lennon

William Muldoon

Chigusa Nagayo

El Hijo Del Santo

Dos Caras

Lioness Asuka

Jushin Liger

Keiji Mutoh

Jim Ross

Steve Austin

Mick Foley

Shinya Hashimoto

Bill Longson

Akira Hokuto

Frank Sexton

Sandor Szabo

Black Shadow

Lizmark

Bull Nakano

El Satanico

Diablo Velasco

Farmer Burns

Jack Curley

Kenta Kobashi

Wahoo McDaniel

Manami Toyota

Chris Benoit

Shawn Michaels

Kazushi Sakuraba

Undertaker

Bob Backlund

Masahiro Chono

Ultimo Dragon

Kurt Angle

Requirements are that the candidate be 35 years old OR have 15 years experience in the business.

 

Also, here's the Gordy list. It's far from official, but it's the closest thing we have to a method of weeding out the bad and supporting the good. Here are the questions.

 

1. Was he ever regarded as the best draw in the world? Was he ever regarded

as the best draw in his country or his promotion?

 

2. Was he an international draw, national draw and/or regional draw?

 

3. How many years did he have as a top draw?

 

4. Was he ever regarded as the best worker in the world? Was he ever

regarded as the best worker in his country or in his promotion?

 

5. Was he ever the best worker in his class (sex or weight)? Was he ever one

of the top workers in his class?

 

6. How many years did he have as a top worker?

 

7. Was he a good worker before his prime? Was he a good worker after his

prime?

 

8. Did he have a large body of excellent matches? Did he have a excellent

matches against a variety of opponents?

 

9. Did he ever anchor his promotion(s)?

 

10. Was he effective when pushed at the top of cards?

 

11. Was he valuable to his promotion before his prime? Was he still valuable

to his promotion after his prime?

 

12. Did he have an impact on a number of strong promotional runs?

 

13. Was he involved in a number of memorable rivalries, feuds or storylines?

 

14. Was he effective working on the mic, working storylines or working

angles?

 

15. Did he play his role(s) effectively during his career?

 

16. What titles and tournaments did he win? What was the importance of the

reigns?

 

17. Did he win many honors and awards?

 

18. Did he get mainstream exposure due to his wrestling fame? Did he get a

heavily featured by the wrestling media?

 

19. Was he a top tag team wrestler?

 

20. Was he innovative?

 

21. Was he influential?

 

22. Did he make the people and workers around him better?

 

23. Did he do what was best for the promotion? Did he show a commitment to

wrestling?

 

24. Is there any reason to believe that he was better or worse than he

appeared?

So, who are this year's top choices?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Dorian

Ventura, Monsoon and Heyman will get in sometime soon, me thinks.

 

As for performers, will HHH get in? I mean, does he have the credentials to make it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to separate these into four categories:

 

Should go in

Shouldn't go in

Unsure

Need more info

 

Here's where I stand on everyone at this point:

 

Should go in:

Gene & Ole Anderson

Carlos Colon

Fabulous Freebirds (Michael Hayes & Terry Gordy & Buddy Roberts)

Eddy Guerrero

Volk Han

Aja Kong

Midnight Express (Dennis Condrey & Bobby Eaton & Stan Lane)

Dick Murdoch

Blue Panther

Rock & Roll Express

Sting

Kiyoshi Tamura

John Tolos

 

Shouldn't go in:

Arn Anderson

Owen Hart

Hiroshi Hase

HHH

Curt Hennig

Chris Jericho

Mark Lewin

Fabulous Moolah

Don Muraco

Paul Orndorff

Rick Rude

Sabu

Seiji Sakaguchi

Jimmy Snuka

 

Unsure:

Jun Akiyama

Red Bastien

Masakatsu Funaki

Ivan Koloff

Masa Saito

Kensuke Sasaki

Wilbur Snyder

Yoshihiro Takayama

Johnny "Mr. Wrestling II" Walker

Tim "Mr. Wrestling" Woods

 

Need more info:

Masked Assassins (Jody Hamilton & Tom Renesto)

Jose Lothario

Lonnie Mayne

Villano III

Dr. Wagner Sr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ceased to care about the WON HOF after Kurt Angle got in.  Meltzer has way too much sway over the voters and who they vote for.  The fact that Triple H probably gets in this year is an even bigger joke.  He has no business anywhere near a HOF.

I still enjoy talking about the HOF, but I definitely agree about Kurt Angle. It's asinine to me that the MX, Rock & Rolls and Freebirds are considered marginal at best while Kurt Angle was able to get in so easily on his first try. Inflation would play a part, but I'd be willing to bet that the 'Birds headlined far more sold out shows than Angle has.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the 'Birds should get in based on their work in Texas alone. The heat for the feud with the Von Erichs was nuclear. I have that DVD Kevin put out, and most of the matches are against the Freebirds. Michael Hayes gets "I'm going to kill you" heat just standing in the ring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MJHimJfadeaway23

I'm going to separate these into four categories:

 

Should go in

Shouldn't go in

Unsure

Need more info

 

Here's where I stand on everyone at this point:

 

Should go in:

Gene & Ole Anderson

Carlos Colon

Fabulous Freebirds (Michael Hayes & Terry Gordy & Buddy Roberts)

Eddy Guerrero

Volk Han

Aja Kong

Midnight Express (Dennis Condrey & Bobby Eaton & Stan Lane)

Dick Murdoch

Blue Panther

Rock & Roll Express

Sting

Kiyoshi Tamura

John Tolos

 

Shouldn't go in:

Arn Anderson

Owen Hart

Hiroshi Hase

HHH

Curt Hennig

Chris Jericho

Mark Lewin

Fabulous Moolah

Don Muraco

Paul Orndorff

Rick Rude

Sabu

Seiji Sakaguchi

Jimmy Snuka

 

Unsure:

Jun Akiyama

Red Bastien

Masakatsu Funaki

Ivan Koloff

Masa Saito

Kensuke Sasaki

Wilbur Snyder

Yoshihiro Takayama

Johnny "Mr. Wrestling II" Walker

Tim "Mr. Wrestling" Woods

 

Need more info:

Masked Assassins (Jody Hamilton & Tom Renesto)

Jose Lothario

Lonnie Mayne

Villano III

Dr. Wagner Sr.

I don't see your logic for Sting getting in and HHH not. I love Sting, but Sting was only a big draw for one year, and specifically for one match. He was never a great worker, and wasn't a great promo guy. During the mid 90s when WCW was desperate for star power and someone to carry the torch, Sting never drew them any money and never got any big gates attendances. He was very popular and was involved in some meorable storylines. However he never carried the promotion to success or drew any big money for them until the Crow angle.

 

And HHH, hate him or love him, was a big draw for the WWE post-Rock era. And mainevented many sell-outs PPVs and househows, gets huge buyrates, and was one of the most successful WWE champions ever. Was a great worker in his prime, and was involved in numerous memorable angles.

 

I don't even mind Sting that much if you had HHH in it too. But Sting being in it, and HHH not, I don't see how that's possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right. Sting never actively sent the company into a decline, and I blame HHH about 90% for the end of the wrestling boom. There are guys like Hulk Hogan in the Hall of Fame that also caused the end of a wrestling boom (in WCW), but honestly, I don't see how someone like HHH's case is a hell of a lot stronger than that of Kevin Nash. Yes, HHH has been a more consistent headliner for a longer period of time, and yes, WWE has managed to avoid losing money by running an impractically lean operation during his time on top, but Sting never actively damaged the company he worked for. HHH has done that for five years now. HHH has headlined some big money shows, but ever year he's been on top has been worse than the one before it for the company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Dorian

Just for humor and so I can get hated for this, here's what I have to say about Sting and HHH for HoF.

 

1. Was he ever regarded as the best draw in the world? Was he ever regarded as the best draw in his country or his promotion?

 

Sting and HHH were both respectively a top draw for their company for a brief period of their careers. Neither though were the best draw in their country (although Sting has a case for the NWO angle) nor the best draws in the world.

 

2. Was he an international draw, national draw and/or regional draw?

 

Sting and HHH both were international draws. Yes.

 

3. How many years did he have as a top draw?

 

Sting had a few good years, while HHH had one.

 

4. Was he ever regarded as the best worker in the world? Was he ever

regarded as the best worker in his country or in his promotion?

 

While neither man was ever the best at in-ring work or promo work, HHH for his one year was at the top of his game and seemingly could put on some damn good matches with anyone. So at one time he was at the top of his promotion.

 

5. Was he ever the best worker in his class (sex or weight)? Was he ever one of the top workers in his class?

 

Sting, no. HHH during his one year was one of the top workers.

 

6. How many years did he have as a top worker?

 

HHH for one year.

 

7. Was he a good worker before his prime? Was he a good worker after his prime?

 

Sting and HHH both were good workers before their primes but never really took it to that next step. Both men slagged off badly after their prime (more specifically HHH, since he only had one good year).

 

8. Did he have a large body of excellent matches? Did he have a excellent matches against a variety of opponents?

 

Sting and HHH both have some excellent matches, however against quite often the same opponents.

 

9. Did he ever anchor his promotion(s)?

 

Sting at one time was the anchor of his promotion during his war against NWO, and HHH did manage to successfully anchor the WWF during his one year good run.

 

10. Was he effective when pushed at the top of cards?

 

During their periods of being on top yes, but after the hotbed was over, neither man could keep up on top of the card (through political manuveuring [sting] or just flat out slagging [HHH]).

 

11. Was he valuable to his promotion before his prime? Was he still valuable to his promotion after his prime?

 

Both men were quite the comodity before their prime, but afterwards either man could be written off.

 

12. Did he have an impact on a number of strong promotional runs?

 

No, both men had a single run at the top that was strong.

 

13. Was he involved in a number of memorable rivalries, feuds or storylines?

 

Both men had memorable rivalries, feuds, and storylines.

 

14. Was he effective working on the mic, working storylines or working

angles?

 

During their hot periods and before them, both men were good at what they did. However, after those, both men drastically dropped off in quality.

 

15. Did he play his role(s) effectively during his career?

 

Sting effectively played the "crow" gimmick out well. HHH played out his gimmicks well up until the point that he came back from injury and then just did a poor man's Ric Flair.

 

16. What titles and tournaments did he win? What was the importance of the reigns?

 

I can't look up at the reigns right now, but both men had some pretty bland title reigns really. HHH's one year run literially was him not having the belt most of the time (funny that, eh?).

 

17. Did he win many honors and awards?

 

Neither did that I can recall, again something I can't look up due to I'm speeding through this.

 

18. Did he get mainstream exposure due to his wrestling fame? Did he get a heavily featured by the wrestling media?

 

HHH is only featured currently because he's the boss's son-in-law, so not really. Sting didn't get much exposure due to the NWO angle screwing him over.

 

19. Was he a top tag team wrestler?

 

Neither man was.

 

20. Was he innovative?

 

Neither man was.

 

21. Was he influential?

 

Sting was quite influential in making the NWO angle work. HHH was also influential during his DX days as well as his transformation into the Game.

 

22. Did he make the people and workers around him better?

 

Neither man really did.

 

23. Did he do what was best for the promotion? Did he show a commitment to wrestling?

 

Both men are/were commited to the wrestling business. Sting did what was best for his promotion, while HHH thinks he is but isn't.

 

24. Is there any reason to believe that he was better or worse than he

appeared?

 

Sting was probably better than he appeared but was oftenly screwed over by politics. HHH is better than he appears but oftenly would go out of his way slag off if he felt the opponent wasn't up to his snuff.

 

Personally, I wouldn't enter either man into the HoF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MJHimJfadeaway23

Sting also outdrew HHH in that one year since HHH has never drawn aside from 2000 and even then it was all about the Rock.  HHH has been on top while the WWF has continued to fall money, ratings and buyrate wise.

WWE has never lost money with HHH as there top draw. WCW was losing money in the MILLIONS yearly when Sting was on top. You can say HHH's situation was helped out cause of the promotional advantage WWE has over WCW, but how do you quantify how much of that impacted HHH's drawing power? I could easily say Sting's drawing power in 1997 was mostly do to the nWo and Hogan. I mean how many shows sold well because of Sting when he wasn't even being promoted to appear on a majority of the shows that year?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WWF lost money in 2002 during his big face run and his early vanity plate run. Money has also gone down consistently every year he's on top. Go read the investors thread where they stated that they'll be doing less shows in the United States due to no one coming. They've also stayed profitable by chopping whole limbs off business wise. Ratings, money, etc. also show no sign of decline when he's not around. That's not being a draw. There hasn't been a WWF draw since 2001. You can interchange anyone right now and make the same amount of money. But HHH has been a proven negative PPV draw as he's headlined some of the worst buyrates in WWF history.

 

Sting on the otherhand drew fistfulls of money just by walking around the rafters and pointing a baseball bat at people for over a year. He also headlined the biggest drawing WCW event ever with Starcade 97.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest brian

While neither man was ever the best at in-ring work or promo work, HHH for his one year was at the top of his game and seemingly could put on some damn good matches with anyone.

I personally think Triple H migh have been a smarter worker when he came back, but his ability to physically push himself, speed, and the quality of his opponents had fallen a bit. I think Triple H's carrying ability during that whole year is pretty overrated; look at who he was wrestling against.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Dorian

WWE has never lost money with HHH as there top draw. WCW was losing money in the MILLIONS yearly when Sting was on top. You can say HHH's situation was helped out cause of the promotional advantage WWE has over WCW, but how do you quantify how much of that impacted HHH's drawing power? I could easily say Sting's drawing power in 1997 was mostly do to the nWo and Hogan. I mean how many shows sold well because of Sting when he wasn't even being promoted to appear on a majority of the shows that year?

Actually 2000 was the only time HHH was raking in money. Other than that, he's been costing them a shitload currently. I didn't say Sting is much better, just up until he was beaten by Hogan he was raking in the dough for WCW. Which is more than HHH's one year (which wasn't really a year more like 8 months).

 

However, both men benefitted more from strong storylines that they were attatched to, rather than from their own work.

 

While neither man was ever the best at in-ring work or promo work, HHH for his one year was at the top of his game and seemingly could put on some damn good matches with anyone.

I personally think Triple H migh have been a smarter worker when he came back, but his ability to physically push himself, speed, and the quality of his opponents had fallen a bit. I think Triple H's carrying ability during that whole year is pretty overrated; look at who he was wrestling against.
While HHH was a smarter worker when he came back from his quad injury, he also began slowly to slack off on his work and it shows in his regular matches. Until the point of were he is today, in which he doesn't have to bring his work boots unless for that special occassion.

 

Yes, he had a shitload of wrestlers that were talented, but during that single year, it wasn't a carry job like it nearly has to be nowadays (cause he slags). During that year he held his own with the best, having some of the greatest matches of his career and actually being an entertaining bastard on the top of the card. I mean, I wasn't a fucking mark for him back then for nothing. I re-watched those matches against Foley, Austin, Rocky, Taker, and yes, lots of talent there, but then again he also went out against Funaki, Hardy, and put shows against lower talents too. But nowadays its like "why bother" for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Generally, I consider two things in Hall of Fame discussions...

 

1. What did this person do that sets them apart from their contemporaries?

 

Dick Murdoch and the Andersons? What makes them stand out. There are dozens of good brawlers and tag teams. Why them and not any of the others?

 

This is the absolute defining trait of any Hall of Fame. What did this person do that others did not. Similarity is a mark AGAINST Hall of Fame candidacy. Hall of Famers are standouts. Otherwise, when you elect too many lesser candidates, the field is flooded with wrestlers who have similar credentials to an existing Hall of Famer, and it just falls apart.

 

2. Am I absolutely sure of their selection, knowing it is irreversable?

 

Tag teams are horrifically underrepresented, and that needs to change. Surely wrestling produces Hall of Fame caliber tag teams at a better rate than one every 20 years.

 

I can't bring myself to vote for any of the MMA guys. It seems like competitors are candidates after a few big wins. Dominating a sport still in its infancy should not make one a Hall of Famer, especially this soon. We need perspective. If MMA outfits die out within the next few years (I don't know what their current state is, honestly), their inclusion would look quite silly. Just my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of these arguments against HHH are ridiculous. People are acting like he's to blame for business going down and not the fact WCW went out of business and wrestling lost half its audience.

 

This whole "HHH had one good year" is silly too, he's become more selective in his performances to be sure but he can still put on a **** match when he wants to. I'll grant he came back too soon from the quad tear and it took a while for him to regain his form, but he's had some excellent performances since then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(1) I don't think HHH has ever had a **** match in his life. Several ***-**** ones, but nothing that looks outstanding. I'm not saying that to be elitist or unfair either, I'm just saying that I think the matches HHH has had that are heralded as classics with guys like Michaels, Rock, Foley, Austin and Jericho just aren't as great as they're made out to be.

 

(2) HHH has never been the best worker in the company at any point. Austin, Rock and X-Pac were better in '98, Rock and Jericho better in '99, Rock, Benoit and others possibly better in '00, he was abysmal in 2002-2003 and in 2004, Eddy Guerrero was head and shoulders above him, and probably Benoit and Michaels too.

 

(3) Wrestling lost half of its audience, but WWE's audience has also dwindled considerably. In actuality, ratings should have gone *up* when WCW died, but they went down. The core WWE audience has shrunk in his time on top.

 

HHH has had on-again, off-again periods of drawing, largely based on his opponent and the fact that he became a headliner in a boom period for his company. The more they centered things around him, the worse off the company became. I actually don't think HHH regressed as much as he's been accused of post-injury, but rather that his flaws were more noticeable because the babyfaces had lost so much heat, largely thanks to him going over all of them so many times. In 2000, HHH's matches *seemed* better because there was more suspense and the possibility of him losing (both the match and his spot) was plausible -- now it's not. I would venture to say that only HHH's feuds with Austin and Rock have been draws based on the feud itself -- the rest of his big numbers have come either when WWE was touring internationally (which can be attributed to the company brand name) or when he was headlining a Wrestlemania (which has always drawn). He may have something in his favor if Vengeance posts an enormous buyrate, but the average-below average numbers he's posted against Benoit, Michaels, Jericho, Hogan and Batista on non-big five PPVs shows that the feuds themselves weren't really the draw as much as the event.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...