Tag Team Hall of Fame

[Dylan Waco]

Over at Classics Yohe mentioned how he disagrees with the way Meltzer has the Sharpes categorized for the WON HoF while also mentioning that he thought they would fit in any tag team Hall of Fame. The idea of a tag team HoF has come up a ton of times in the past, so I started thinking about who the teams and candidates would be if you applied the traditional WON criteria to tag teams. This is the list I came up with. I left off Japanese teams, not because there are none that are deserving (Kawada/Taue are no worse than my third favorite team of all time, and possibly number one), but because I wanted to see what other people could come up with from Japan since my perception of Japanese teams is weird (i.e. they all seem more "makeshift" to me than they probably are). I also left off Lucha teams and trios because A. I'm underqualified to talk about it and B. Part of the purpose of this post is to troll Jose into publicly talking about some of the better trios in history, including at least two that I know he thinks should be in the WON HoF.

 

Dusek Family Riot Squad

Miguel Perez/Argentina Rocca

The Golden Grahams

The Sharpe Brothers

The Funk Brothers

The Freebirds

The Fabulous Kangaroos

The Midnight Express

The High Flyers

Pat Paterson/Ray Stevens

Ray Stevens/Nick Bockwinkel

Crusher/Dick The Bruiser

Harley Race/Larry Hennig

The Fabulous Fargos

The Torres Brothers

The Tolos Brothers

Don Curtis/Mark Lewin

The Vachon Brothers

The Hollywood Blondes (original)

The Road Warriors

The Rock N Roll Express

Black Gordman and Great Goliath

The Andersons

The Assassins

The Von Brauners

The Von Erichs

The Blackjacks

The Flying Scots

The Heavenly Bodies (Don and Al Greene)

The Valiant Brothers

The British Bulldogs

Rip Hawk/Swede Hansen

Johnny Weaver/George Becker

Red Bastien/Billy Red Lyons

The Sheepherders

Tully Blanchard and Arn Anderson

The Fabulous Ones

The Steiner Brothers

Dan Kroffat/Doug Furnas

The Hardy Boys

The Dudley Boys

 

Now some of these teams have weak arguments in my view (Bulldogs, Dudleys) under a WON metric, others suffer from really short peaks, others I would argue are weaker than they might originally appear when you scratch the surface (Tully and Arn, Steiners) and others stronger than their reps and/or a quick thought might lead you to believe (High Flyers, The Sheepherders). In general I am interested in which of these teams the people on this board would see as WON HoFer's, but also what the standards for a tag team HoF would even be. I'd also be interested to see if people wanted to subtract or add any teams to the above list, or a discussion of individual teams as "candidates." If the term HoF turns you off, just think of this in more general "list" terms.

[Mad Dog]

I find your list to be hard to argue. I would agree I think some people have weaker cases than others.

 

I would add to the list:

 

Hart Foundation

Texas Outlaws

Edge and Christian

Brute Bernard and Skull Murphy

[Al]

There are some Golden Era teams that are tough to gauge. The Kalmikoffs, the Von Brauners, the Gallaghers. Obviously noteworthy but there's little to no footage at all. Also some of the '60s/'70s era southern teams like the Interns.

[JerryvonKramer]

Steamboat and Youngblood need to be represented. THE proto-type 80s blow-job babyface team years before such teams were absolutely everywhere.

[BrickHithouse]

Another blowjob type team that doesn't get much run is Bulldog Brower and Tor Kamata.

[pantherwagner]

Teams that definitely should be on any HOF:

 

My top choice would be Los Misioneros de la Muerte: El Signo, Negro Navarro and El Texano

I wrote this 10 years ago on Wrestling Classics:

Top working trio of their era, and big drawing power on their own, not just at el Toreo when the other legends were in. They should be in because their immense popularity changed the way the Mexican business was. They, literally, changed lucha libre from a tag team matches business to a trios matches business. Trios wrestling had existed until then, but six men matches were usually a chance to see six stars together (or two stars with four locals) doing their big spots and otherwise mailing it in. Misioneros had a great working ethic and they brought to the table a "new style" (so to speak) where you could have more action (guys could go at full speed for a few minutes, tag in and rest) and promoters could book longer feuds as it was easier to protect wrestlers in this environment. Fans, promoters and wrestlers loved it and now people know Mexican wrestling because of the trios. This was NOT a natural business change, but something that came off the popularity of them. Also things to consider are: the three of them were top 15 Mexican workers at a time when there was more (and better) good workers than at any point in history. After them there were tons of regular trios with a gimmick name and matching tights popped up, including "Los Infernales" who were EMLL's answer to Los Misioneros, and that tradition still stands today, though on a minor scale. But on the other hand, they had a relatively short 7 year run headlining in both Arena Mexico and El Toreo, but never did anything of note after the trio broke up (Texano was 1/2 of Los Cowboys with Silver King, maybe the most underrated tag team of the 90s, but they couldn't even get a job with All Japan even though Furnas and Kroffat were desperate for that). Also they had the benefit of being pushed in a promotion that was already drawing big, even though they retained business and in fact, if it had not been for them and Canek (and not Villanos, or Dos Caras, or Casas, or Santo or whoever) the promotion would have died way faster, but I'm not sure that's too good of a thing.

 

An added note is that it’s a shame that we don’t have a lot of footage from them at their best.

 

Los Infernales: Satanico, Pirata Morgan and MS-1

As the note below mentioned, they were EMLL’s answer to Los Misioneros, though comparing the footage that we have they were much better as a trio. To me these three guys were the backbone of the company during a period were they were the second promotion in the country, but were still doing very good business even with a somewhat bland babyface roster during many years. Satanico and Pirata are two of the best rudo workers ever in lucha libre, and MS-1 is one of these guys who excelled at the epic bloodbath “mano a mano”.

 

Los Brazos: top comedy team in the 80s and early 90s, as well as a tremendous draw all over Mexico, doing great business in places like Monterrey. Incredible workers even when two of them were ridiculously overweight. When Antonio Pena turned around EMLL he didn’t raid anybody else’s roster but he took five valuable players from UWA/LLI and signed them to exclusive contracts. One was Perro Aguayo who was the biggest draw in the country. One was Blue Panther, who nobody knew, but Pena considered the best rudo worker that there was in the country. The other three were Los Brazos. It’s interesting that he didn’t take El Hijo del Santo, or Canek, or Negro Casas. They also should get credit for being the stars that made Universal a hit in Japan (along with Hamada and Asai), even though the promotion wasn’t successful as it didn’t have a viable business plan. The lineage of that promotion is still alive today in Dragon Gate and Michinoku Pro.

 

Los Rebeldes: Ray Mendoza, Rene Guajardo and Karloff Lagarde

La Ola Blanca: Dr. Wagner, El Angel Blanco and El Solitario

Los Hermanos Dinamita: Cien Caras, Mascara Ano 2000 and Universo 2000

 

La Pareja Atomica: El Santo and Gori Guerrero

El Santo and Rayo de Jalisco

Los Hermanos Shadow: Blue Demon and Black Shadow

Los Hermanos Espanto (I and II) if you want to know more about them http://luchawiki.com/index.php?title=Espanto_I

Los Compadres del Diablo (Perro Aguayo and Fishman)

 

Teams that I want to mention just for fun:

El Hijo del Santo and Negro Casas (their team was somewhat short-lived but damn if they didn’t have awesome matches week after week)

Los Cadetes del Espacio (Solar, Super Astro and Ultraman): I’m sure they’d be held in much higher regard if we had more footage of them.

Los Fantasticos (Kato Kung Lee, Kung Fu and Black Man): I wasn’t a big fan of their schtick but they were a sensational team that did very good business for at least half a decade.

Los Cowboys (El Texano and Silver King): They lacked that major AJPW run that Baba never got them to be held on the same regard as Furnas and Kroffat.

Los Guerreros (Sangre Chicana, Mocho Cota and La Fiera)

[ohtani's jacket]

Where would you rate Los Villanos?

 

I wish we had Los Temerarios footage from their prime. More Lobo Rubio footage would be nice.

 

Los Bucaneros, Los Destructores and Los Intocables were all pretty solid second tier trios who grew out of the boom. I'm all for the matching outfits.

[NintendoLogic]

No love for the (Midnight) Rockers?

 

As far as Japanese teams go, Baba/Inoki is pretty legendary.

[Busterira]

As for Japanese, my favorite team of all time is Choshu and Yatsu. I think Riki Choshu is one of the most underappreciated wrestlers of all time. He actually might be my all time favorite Japanese wrestler where it used to be Jumbo. Now I would say its Choshu.

 

Here is one of my all time favorite posts on the history of Choshu "invading" All Japan courtesy of Frank Jewett, a great read.

 

 

 

http://www.otherarena.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=609

[Al]

Panther, when did trios wrestling become popular in Mexico? I'm just curious about the prime years of those groups.

[WingedEagle]

What's the case for the Steiners? Don't think I see it in work, drawing or influence over any significant period.

[Dylan Waco]

I think The Steiners are one of the weaker teams on the list. In a sense I see them as the "Sting" of tag teams in the sense that they were remembered as being big deals and often booked against stars so people assume they were bigger deals than they were. And I say that as someone who was a HUGE mark for them as a kid. I feel the same way about them as I feel about the Bulldogs, though I think the Buldogs have even fewer positives (people cite influence, but I see no evidence of them being influential).

 

Youngblood and Steamboat is a good call, I should have included them as a possibility.

 

I love The Rockers as a team, probably more than the vast majority of people actually, but they would be "work" candidates and I don't really think anyone should get in just for work to any hall of fame. That's just my own bias and perspective, but even if I believed someone could get in solely on work, they aren't high enough up the charts if we count international teams for me to feel comfortable backing them. I actually think as an "overall" act you could argue they are worse "candidates" for WON criteria style HoF than MNM

[Migs]

I think The Steiners are one of the weaker teams on the list. In a sense I see them as the "Sting" of tag teams in the sense that they were remembered as being big deals and often booked against stars so people assume they were bigger deals than they were. And I say that as someone who was a HUGE mark for them as a kid. I feel the same way about them as I feel about the Bulldogs, though I think the Buldogs have even fewer positives (people cite influence, but I see no evidence of them being influential).

Do you not see the Bulldogs as influential because the influence is really that of Dynamite's style?

 

I'd also argue the Steiners were fairly influential as well. Their style was really heavily incorporated into US indies in the early part of the last decade (for better or worse). High impact, less traditional "flow" to matches.

[Dylan Waco]

I just don't see the Bulldogs or Steiners as being all that influential. I think guys like the Briscoes were probably influenced by them in a sense, but it's not an obviously traceable influence like you see with the RnR's or the Fabs before them.

[pantherwagner]

Where would you rate Los Villanos?

 

I wish we had Los Temerarios footage from their prime. More Lobo Rubio footage would be nice.

 

Los Bucaneros, Los Destructores and Los Intocables were all pretty solid second tier trios who grew out of the boom. I'm all for the matching outfits.

1- Good question. I forgot to mention them. The problem with them is that they did not have a lot of continuity. We have nothing of Villano I and II. Villanos I, IV and V had a half decade run but we have almost no footage. They were definitely a great team but not headliners like Villano III was. Villanos III, IV and V had a longer run but I think their AAA stuff was pretty uneventful. But, as a group, the five of them, would definitely be Mexican Hall of Famers. For a WON type Hall of Fame it would be hard to consider Villano II as more than a Mike Von Erich that could work.

 

2.- Yeah, and Shu el Guerrero too, I loved it when he would show up at IWRG a decade ago and he'd have a huge buddha belly but he was super agile and would do awesome submissions. But Black Terry is one of those guys who was a good hand, just like Jose Luis Feliciano/Guerrero del Futuro, but he wasn't a top 25 worker at any time or anything. Which is why it's so mind blowing how awesome he is nowadays.

 

3.- Again not sure why I didn't mention Los Bucaneros. They were freakin awesome. I was also a fan of Los Javieres (Javier Rocca, Javier Cruz and Javier Chamaco Valaguez, sometimes it was Javier Gusano Llanes instead of Cruz). If there's one thing that AAA gets right is that they are truly continuing the tradition of theme trios.

 

Another awesome underrated team were Los Bravos: El Dandy, Talisman and Guerrero Negro. Dandy and Talisman used to be an awesome team, too. Wish we had footage of their matches with Solar I and II (we only have a clip), Hijo del Santo and Eddy Guerrero (when Eddy was a rookie), Lizmark and Atlantis...

[pantherwagner]

Panther, when did trios wrestling become popular in Mexico? I'm just curious about the prime years of those groups.

Basically it blew up sometime in 1981-1982. I don't have a results archive in front of me so I can't accurately tell you when. Soon thereafter EMLL's main cards were only trios except sometimes the opener. El Toreo had tag matches in the first or second match, and the mains were often tags too.

 

Here's a card where the main and the opener were tags.

And now people start getting ready to cry because we will never see this card.

 

 

How about this one? (Image is large so not linking it)

http://i753.photobucket.com/albums/xx175/o...acio/PAREJA.png

Main event was a bloodbath where even Andre did the honors. The only one who didn't bleed like a pig was fucking Canek.

[Dylan Waco]

Great stuff Jose.

 

One thing I would say is that I strongly believe that guys who "maintain" do deserve credit. They don't deserve the same amount of credit you would give to guys who clearly popped houses by virtue of their presence (Hogan, Londos, Rogers, Andre and not that many others), but I'm of the opinion that if people keep paying to see an act, it means the act is doing something right. To that end I would give Los Misioneros de la Muerte real credit as drawing cards which adds to their case.

 

I would also note that 7 years is really not that short of a run at all as headliners. Backlund is in on less than that (though I don't think he was when you wrote this) and he is another guy where it could be argued that he "maintained" and didn't pop business to new levels. Cena basically got in on seven years as a drawing card up top. I think Michaels got in way too soon, but he got in on way less than seven years as a headliner. If you think it's unfair to compare them to guys like that who were focal point single stars look at the Midnight Express - six years together, the last year or two of which were not in anything close to a headlining capacity. The Birds if we are being really generous could maybe be stretched out to seven years, but the Gordy/Hayes/Roberts unit really had what...five as true headline acts? The Road Warriors? Probably right around seven years at that top level before falling down into solid upper mid-card spots. Anyway the point is that 7 years isn't a small amount of time. Certainly not small enough to be a real negative and it could be argued that amount of time as a relevant act is more of a plus than anything.

 

Also, and I am getting like a broken record here, but do you mind if I cross post that in the thread I have over at the figure four board on potential HoF candidates?

[pantherwagner]

I agree with you on the 7 year run. It's a good run. I probably didn't consider it that great of a run back then. In lucha libre runs are usually much longer: somebody like Dr. Wagner Sr. was still a headliner (albeit not two on the Mexico City arenas) two decades after his first big run.

 

And of course feel free to repost anything that I write anywhere else.

[pantherwagner]

Great stuff Jose.

 

One thing I would say is that I strongly believe that guys who "maintain" do deserve credit. They don't deserve the same amount of credit you would give to guys who clearly popped houses by virtue of their presence (Hogan, Londos, Rogers, Andre and not that many others), but I'm of the opinion that if people keep paying to see an act, it means the act is doing something right. To that end I would give Los Misioneros de la Muerte real credit as drawing cards which adds to their case.

I think that's why Infernales should get a lot of credit as draws. They had solid business with few supporting acts. Los Misioneros did much better business and undeniably were big draws but cards were loaded.

[Mad Dog]

I know belts mean very little in the grand scheme of things but they were in a same group of teams to win WWF, NWA/WCW and IWGP tag gold.

 

They were maybe the 4th best feud in WCW in 1997 with the Outsiders and probably in the range of 4-6 on the top face list.

 

They also had that awesome match against Hase and Sasaki and were in the 91 War Games.

[Mad Dog]

What about some of these teams:

 

New Age Outlaws

Sgt. Slaughter and Don Kernodle

Ivan and Nikita Koloff

Ric Flair and Greg Valentine

[Mr. Lacelle]

Demolition held the WWF straps three times and were the main focal point for the division during two very hot years for the company. They could at least be in the discussion.

[Busterira]

Good choice with the Slaughter and Kernodle tag team. I think the only draw back would be the fact they were only together for a very short time as a tag team. It might have been less then a year. But what a great year they had. They were awesome.

 

 

Other teams that could be in the discussion

 

Robert Fuller and Jimmy Golden

 

Dennis Condrey and Phil Hickerson

[Mad Dog]

That was my issue with Slaughter/Kernodle. It was a really brief run but it was one of the best tag team feuds of all time.

[JerryvonKramer]

In terms of influence and drawing, the two sets of Blond Bombers Dylan has listed -- Hawk/Hanson and Patterson/Stevens -- are locks for this. As far as I can tell practically every territory had a knock-off version of this basic formula for about 20 years.

 

Hawk and Hanson were staples for Mid-Atlantic in the 60s, Patterson and Stevens ruled San Francisco. From what I've seen of these guys in-ring though, Swede Hanson at least as an older wrestler fucking sucked. And reading about him, Rip Hawk was basically both the worker and the talker for that duo, which makes me wonder if Hanson was ultimately a replaceable part. Stevens we've talked about before, but I have every reason to believe that Pat Patterson was a super worker in the 60s. He's arguably been the MVP of 79-80 WWF so far and he's clearly several years past his prime. Peak Patterson was probably a "top 2-3 worker in the world" type of guy.

 

You can trace the basic gimmick of the two heelish blonde Teddy Boys back to the Golden Grahams though and you'd have to consider them the originators. They would be locks too with big runs in New York and Florida.

 

If you were doing this properly, all three of these teams should probably be in "via fiat" along with the Fabulous Kangeroos.

 

This is where it gets interesting though: I'm not sure who else is an automatic lock pick along these lines.

 

Maybe we should establish those total locks before analysing the much much more marginal cases (e.g. Steiners).