KrisZ Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 And Dave has a definite point about Steamer & Youngblood.....they didn't team together as long and had breaks in between runs but when they were on top they were huge draws. RnR never had a feud like Slaughter/Kernodle that dominated the territory main events for about 5 months in a row. Steamer/Youngblood vs. Briscos did pretty damn great business too. Sure RnR had MX but they never dominated JCP like the Slaughter/Kernodle feud did. Now you can make that argument for Mid-South though which to their detriment though ran more smaller cities than JCP did. New Orleans, Houston, Tulsa, & OKC compared to Charlotte, Greensboro, Raleigh, Richmond, Norfolk, Columbia, Greenville, Savannah is slanted towards JCP in a comfortable way. I will vote for RnR every year until they get in because they were in so many classic feuds and matches for a long period of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 They popped Mid-South too, no? That's not just a myth right? They were a definite cog in the machine no doubt because Mid-South had nothing like them before. Their detractors though will say that once JYD left though the territory went down drawing wise with RnR as the main act. Sure Duggan was the top singles star but RnR was the main act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 It's interesting that the argument is less lack of longevity and more lack of longevity in one place. I'm not sure I get that. Many wrestlers who jumped around with great frequency are in the Hall of Fame, just as they should be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victory Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 Here's what Meltzer wrote about the R&R's HOF candidacies back in 2009: Strengths: Top babyface tag team during the high point of both Bill Watts and Jim Crocketts promotion. Although the Fabulous Ones were really the ones that sparked the genre in Memphis, it was the success of the Rock & Roll Express in 1984 in Mid South that caused numerous territories to come up with copies. While the gimmick made them stars, Morton is lauded as one of the great workers of his era, who turned the babyface in peril role into an art form. Not the top, but one of the stronger drawing tag teams in history and in their heyday had consistently good matches with anyone, and great matches when given top heel workers. For years, Rock & Roll Express vs. Midnight Express tapes were used to teach younger wrestlers how to work a tag team match. Weaknesses: While the two started teaming in 1983, and still team on occasion on the independent scene, the reality was they were the kind of an act that would be super hot for a year or two in a territory and start to burn out, similar to a teen heartthrob. They were together a long time, but longevity at the big-time level was relatively short, one year with Watts and a couple of years with Crockett. While they carried Smoky Mountain Wrestling for two years in the 90s, that was a small promotion. Their act was better for the territorial era where they probably would have been a hot act everywhere they went for years, and then could double back later in their career. They had the working ability and the influence, were draws, but the longevity as a top act is their main stumbling block. Some argue that because they were around during JCPs national television era, they are remembered as the best babyface team, but arguments are they were never hotter nor lasted as long on top as Ricky Steamboat & Jay Youngblood. It certainly seems their strengths overshadow their weaknesses. I'm not sure I even agree totally with their top run when it comes to longevity as a weakness. Not that I don't agree with the length, just don't consider it that short when it comes to tag teams. I always felt tag teams need to be judged somewhat differently compared to singles runs. I have heard the Steamboat/Youngblood argument before now that you bring it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 Is it more of a case of Steamboat/Youngblood making sense too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
victory Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 Is it more of a case of Steamboat/Youngblood making sense too? I think you could make a case for it certainly. Then again for the most part their run was in one territory and the RNR we're on top or close to it in multiple. I wonder if Steamboat/Youngblood get the same knock as the Andersons when it comes to working one territory for the most part? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 Steamboat/Youngblood wouldn't get in because well Steamboat is already in.....and yes they would get the one territory treatment even more than the Andersons since they bounced between JCP & GCW. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Boricua Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 Good luck to the voters dealing with the new 15 year rule. I think there is going to be some unintended consequences because of this. What is the argument for Matysik being included on the ballot? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
evilclown Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 I can't think of a single reason for Matysik. It's almost an insult to everyone else on the ballot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shakla Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 Anyone want to boldface/filter those who were added to the ballot? And did Dave add everyone he said he would on the "appearing on next year's ballot" at the end of last year's results issue? I like that there's something in place to clear out some of the deadwood candidates, think Dave could have waited a year to implement it. Give everyone a heads up, then put it in place. Glad the Warrior got on the ballot. Considering some of the modern stars that have been on (and often dropped off the first year), he's worthy of a spot. Wonder what his percentage will be, it's tricky. I think he'll stay on next year by the skin of his teeth. Having a bunch of those modern guys in that "15 year zone" could impact things across the board. How do you think Punk will do? Think he will get a solid percentage, but not sure if he's gonna be a first ballot inductee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pantherwagner Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 CM Punk is an interesting one. I'm sure he'll get very high numbers with news reporters (not sure if that's the proper name for the voter group). Let's also post the subject of the email that Dave sent us with the ballot. Mine is "Re: The Lucha Report for 12/20" which is KrisZ's report. But why did Dave get my name from an email from last year (when this is something that Kris sends almost every day) is something that I will never know. Initial Mexico votes based on gut feeling and previous research: I FOLLOWED WRESTLING IN MEXICO CANDIDATES Brazo de Oro & Brazo de Plata & El Brazo Cien Caras Karloff Lagarde Blue Panther El Signo & El Texano & Negro Navarro Villano III I may vote for Park and or Wagner and I need to think if I want to vote for modern performers in the US. The Rock and Roll Express should be in. I will probably vote for Carlos Colon and need to think if I want to vote in Europe or not. I think the arguments for Colon and Daddy not being in are more emotional than logical. I will definitely vote for Jarrett, Monsoon, Okerlund as non-wrestlers. Last year I voted for Stanley Weston (I was basically convinced by reading arguments in this forum) but I need to rethink that one. I need to think about others in that category. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rovert Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 CM Punk is an interesting one. I'm sure he'll get very high numbers with news reporters (not sure if that's the proper name for the voter group). CM Punk and what the perception of him is is more interesting to me than purely his Hall of Fame candidacy. It is a referendum almost on a polarising figure. I joked yesterday that the only way CM Punk will be voted in the WON HOF is if he finds Jesus and comes back to fight Triple H in a Street Fight. I think Punk is currently analogous to pre-2003 Shawn Michaels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 What is the argument for Matysik being included on the ballot? Services to 57Talk.com? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NintendoLogic Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 Dave once said that every old-timer he talked to besides Bret and Austin thinks Punk is shit. So I don't see him doing very well among former wrestlers. Also, there are plenty of perfectly logical reasons to oppose Daddy's candidacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tim Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 I really think Punk is a very strong candidate. Copy and paste of what I wrote about him on another forum: To me there's a difference between quantitative criteria and qualitative criteria. Quantitatively, Punk doesn't make it. Not a big star, much less of a draw than Cena, not much mainstream buzz, etc. Not a good enough worker to get in on that. But Punk has an importance to wrestling that goes beyond the numbers. First of all, his participation in what is easily the golden age of US indie wrestling is a big deal to me, and I think it should go strongly in his favor. It didn't put a lot of butts in seats or make many people rich but it was a very considerable 'artistic' flourishing and he was one of the three or four biggest parts of it. It created a lot of buzz, excitement and quality and was very, very noticeably better than the scene that came before or after it. That would be a big factor in me voting in Danielson as well, which I would also do. Joe has taken too much of a nosedive for that to save him though.Plus his impact on the WWE. He was the indie darling that made it, that's a big deal. Maybe not quantitatively, maybe a guy like Batista has a bigger footprint as a draw, but Batista as a main eventer doesn't MEAN as much to wrestling as a whole than Punk as a main eventer. He defied odds, got himself over and in a pretty real way opened to doors for a lot of guys who might be future big names in WWE, or are current big names. Bryan, Cesaro, Rollins, Ambrose. Maybe others in the future. If it weren't Punk maybe it would have been someone else, but maybe not. Punk's ascent to the main event was a HUGE deal at the time. Maybe not to casual fans watching on TV but definitely to smart fans and definitely for wrestling as a whole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bix Posted September 7, 2014 Author Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 So I haven't heard back from Dave on this yet, but I realized that, unless there's something he's not telling us, there's a big hole in the new rule: As some of us have discussed in the past, it's a little weird that the only "historical" bucket is US/Canada, with no general international historical bucket, much less historical versions of every other regional bucket. As in should the Sharpe Brothers, Masahiko Kimura, etc. be in the same category as Tenzan and Kojima. This year, that's even worse because American candidates have an unfair disadvantage: Even if they can drop off the ballot, they can return after 2 years if they age into the historical bucket. Non-US/Canada candidates don't have that luxury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loss Posted September 7, 2014 Report Share Posted September 7, 2014 All the ballot crap is too confusing. I'm glad I don't get a vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubbymark Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 If Tanahashi got in as a first ballot Hall of Famer last year, I see no reason Punk shouldn't be a first ballot Hall of Famer, either. Especially since from a historical perspective, he will be seen as the trendsetter that made WWE open their eyes to independent wrestling being the right venue to look for their batch of superstars. Daniel Bryan, Dean Ambrose, Seth Rollins, Luke Harper are reaping the benefits of Punk's work, and in due time, Sami Zayn will have a chance to do so on the main roster. That's 5-6 guys WWE has been high on and will get every chance in the world to be "Best in the World." Does Tanahashi have a memorable "career-defining moment" akin to Punk winning the WWE Title at Money In the Bank? As for the lucha guys, I really want Blue Panther to get in this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C.S. Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 If Tanahashi got in as a first ballot Hall of Famer last year, I see no reason Punk shouldn't be a first ballot Hall of Famer, either. Especially since from a historical perspective, he will be seen as the trendsetter that made WWE open their eyes to independent wrestling being the right venue to look for their batch of superstars. Daniel Bryan, Dean Ambrose, Seth Rollins, Luke Harper are reaping the benefits of Punk's work, and in due time, Sami Zayn will have a chance to do so on the main roster. That's 5-6 guys WWE has been high on and will get every chance in the world to be "Best in the World." I agree, but is there the danger of voters being "butthurt" because Punk "walked out on the business," "abandoned the fans," and all of the other junk I see posted online? I am guessing the WON voting block is a cut above that sort of thing, intelligence-wise, but it's still something that could potentially trip Punk up. I hope not. Whether he actually is worthy of being a first ballot WON HOFer, I'm not so sure on. Then again, we use "the Koko B. Ware rule" to justify a lot of the WWE HOF choices, so who is the WON's "Koko"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Has anyone ever written about Blue Panther as a draw? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Punk isn't one of the ten best guys on the ballot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anotherspammer Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 "WON's Koko" is probably Angle or Ultimo Dragon (even though I really like Ultimo). I think Punk should be in for the reasons listed above, but he is pretty borderline and I understand some of the criticism of him. Some of it is sour grapes, though. What's everybody's opinions about Edge? I think he's horribly over-rated in the ring, a good promo at times, but don't know much about him as a draw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 IMO Edge has more of a case than Punk does actually and I'm not an Edge fan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anotherspammer Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Because Edge had a longer main event run? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shining Wiz Posted September 8, 2014 Report Share Posted September 8, 2014 Punk isn't one of the ten best guys on the ballot Since I know it will be well thought out and backed up with evidence, I'm curious about your opinion of Punk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.