Pro Wrestling Matches Hall of Fame

[soup23]

I wanted to start this topic since it won’t derail the Greatest Wrestler of All Time Project thread (another worthy project that I will be participating in).

Anyway, I want to create a pro wrestling match hall of fame. I think the scope of this could be dwindled where if you don’t want to vote for a certain region, you don’t have to.

 

Here is how I envision the project being worked out but I am open to any suggestions.

 

Timeframe: I think October – November is a good time frame to run this every year. It comes off the heels of the WON HOF vote, is a down period for modern wrestling usually, and is right before the year end lists and rewatching for MOTY ramps up.

 

Matches Eligible for Nomination: I do see value in watching past matches. Hindsight and other factors can blur the significance of a match over time. Historically, I think it is safe to say that the “greatest” matches have stood the test of time. For that reason, I don’t think any match that occurred on or after October 1, 2009 should be eligible for nomination.

 

Region Breakdown: This is where I think something like this is a lot of fun. I will use Scott and Justin from Place to Be as an example. I respect their WWF/WCW opinions and know they have watched a vast majority of footage form these two promotions over the years. I also know that they are not inclined to sit down and watch a lot of Joshi and CMLL from the 1980’s. For this reason, a match HOF would allow them to have a voice in selecting the matches to advance for WWF/WCW but abstaining in other areas that are not of interest. To use myself, I would abstain from the Great Britain region due to a lack of knowledge/watching.

 

Beyond just a WWF or Japan regions, I see sub regions for even more focus. For Instance, the WWF would have WWWF, Backlund era, Rock N Wrestling, New Generation, Attitude, Ruthless Aggressions, PG Era all as defined eras of nominated matches. Backlund matwork bores you? Then don’t vote in that defined era. Similarly, Japan could be broken down into joshi, shoot style, Kings Road, etc.

 

Nomination Process: In order for a match to be nominated, footage of said match must exist. Hypothetically, I will set up the forums once all the parameters are set into stone. Then, each poster can nominate a match. A match CANNOT be voted for the HOF unless it has been nominated. I don’t think it is too much to ask for someone to throw out 4-5 sentences of why Hulk vs. Andre should be in the Matches HOF. From there certain discussion of that match can be hashed out. I am iffy on requiring a specific number of YES votes for a match to get on the ballot.

 

Voting Criteria: This is the area that I think is the most subjective and unlike the GOAT poll. I welcome the individual voter to decide what components make a match “great” whether it is the crowd that was drawn, crowd heat, historical significance, strictly workrate, etc. In addition, I think it is fair that every voter rewatches the amount of nominated matches again before making their final list. Without being rude, I don’t want any “I remember” being stated when votes come into question. I also would like to limit the amount of matches you can vote for in each reason causing the voter to really go out on a limb for particular matches.

 

I look forward to hearing what everyone else thinks as this is something that I think could be really fun and sustainable throughout the years.

 

 

 

 

[khawk20]

Just a thought/comment...

 

I've always thought that the 80's project would culminate in the top ten (or whatever number is deemed acceptable) from every completed region thrown onto a set (along with a pre-determined amount of "wildcard" picks to add matches from each reason cutoff with a top ten slotting for automatic entry) with the same voting criteria as the regular 80's set, which would take care of the Greatest Matches of the 80's portion of a project like this.

 

That, of course, should it ever come to pass, is eons away, but the 80's projects that are completed should serve as a good nomination center for matches from that era for the purposes of what you are proposing. A good starting point in that regard would be a simple re-listing of the voting totals in each completed region.

 

If nothing else it's potentially a baseline for people to start watching.

[Grimmas]

I've been pondering this exact idea for a year now.

[concrete1992]

This feels pretty unique and just a great concept. There's enough Wrestler HOF but this takes a different angle. Only thing would be narrowing down eras and whatever but clearly in conceptualization phase and you guys seem pretty fantastic with these projects. Think this also works as an annual thing.

[BillThompson]

I agree with Sam, really like this as a concept. I've never hidden the fact that I am very much a project watcher, and this, along with the GOAT project, and my own personal projects will give me more than enough structured watching for some time to come.

[Ricky Jackson]

Totally down for this, Chad. Great idea

[Johnny Sorrow]

Cool. My list will be Memphisriffic.

[Grimmas]

Matches Eligible for Nomination: I do see value in watching past matches. Hindsight and other factors can blur the significance of a match over time. Historically, I think it is safe to say that the “greatest” matches have stood the test of time. For that reason, I don’t think any match that occurred on or after October 1, 2009 should be eligible for nomination.

 

I like the ten year rule, more than 5. Gives more time for perspective.

[soup23]

I have no problem with 10 years either as the cutoff and was debatinng between that and 5 years myself.

[soup23]

My question is how compartmentalized everyon thinks this should be.

 

For instance should the NWA/WCW bucket have two eras with nominated matches, pre Crockett buyout/post or even more areas than that?

[JerryvonKramer]

I think if you split JCP and WCW, which there is a case for, it might overly skew things against WWF if you don't make a similar split on that side.

 

Perhaps the "pots" should be bigger.

 

(W)WWF/E

JCP/WCW

"Territories"

Japan

Lucha

Europe

 

And that's it. Macro categories as opposed to granular.

[soup23]

That is the internal debate I am open to. I see the merit that judging Backlund vs. Valentine with Angle vs. Brock is a bit unfair and may have individuals that overly prefer one era over the other one. On the other hand, I want this thing to have legs and the tough choices between matches with a limited amount of votes is a lot of fun. Do I give Garvin vs. Flair a vote over the worst Flair vs. Steamboat match? These are the debates I find intriguing when compiling a final list.

[mookeighana]

Just a thought/comment...

 

I've always thought that the 80's project would culminate in the top ten (or whatever number is deemed acceptable) from every completed region thrown onto a set (along with a pre-determined amount of "wildcard" picks to add matches from each reason cutoff with a top ten slotting for automatic entry) with the same voting criteria as the regular 80's set, which would take care of the Greatest Matches of the 80's portion of a project like this.

 

That, of course, should it ever come to pass, is eons away, but the 80's projects that are completed should serve as a good nomination center for matches from that era for the purposes of what you are proposing. A good starting point in that regard would be a simple re-listing of the voting totals in each completed region.

 

If nothing else it's potentially a baseline for people to start watching.

Yes, I do know that idea had been discussed because I've brought it up during our countdown podcasts before. Of course, since different sets have different "depth", they might not be an equal amount of quality footage from each group - likewise if it's spit by year.

 

Cheap Plug, if anyone wants to see those "Best of the 1980s" results, they're all on my website.

 

Best of 1980s Men's Other Japan

Best of 1980s Midsouth

Best of 1980s Memphis

Best of 1980s New Japan

Best of 1980s Texas

Best of 1980s All Japan

Best of 1980s AWA

[JerryvonKramer]

Judging Backlund vs. Valentine against anything is a bit unfair, Chad, because that match shouldn't even be in contention! (Just kidding! Well, not really, that match sucks to hell and back. I'd much prefer to see the era represented by something like the Death Match with Patera)

 

I think there's merit in pitting stuff like Garvin vs. Flair against your Malenko vs. Guerrero type stuff. I think having the categories too small will make it too easy to get in.

[Grimmas]

I think if you split JCP and WCW, which there is a case for, it might overly skew things against WWF if you don't make a similar split on that side.

 

Perhaps the "pots" should be bigger.

 

(W)WWF/E

JCP/WCW

"Territories"

Japan

Lucha

Europe

 

And that's it. Macro categories as opposed to granular.

Probably should break stuff into time too. Like Pre-1980's should be a category.

[Loss]

I was thinking about a "Gordy List" of sorts for this project. I personally think this should be a mix of great matches and memorable ones performed on a grand stage that may or may not be great. So something like Hogan-Andre or Bret-Shawn in Montreal should absolutely be in a matches HOF. Matches we love within our PWO bubble that haven't gotten much play outside of it? I don't want to say no, but I do think it's a tougher sell. At that point, I'm looking at things like PWI, WON and Tokyo Sports MOTY honors. Our thoughts on the matches matter for sure and should absolutely be considered. I just think we need to take everything into consideration -- how it looked then, how it looks now, how influential it was, how much it drew, what type of honors it got, and yes, what we've learned to appreciate about it through revisionism. The matches that get in aren't necessarily strong or weak in specific areas, but the composite takeaway is important when factoring in everything.

[KrisZ]

This needs to be bracketed the right way either by decade or promotion with a feasible amount of nominees.

[Grimmas]

This needs to be bracketed the right way either by decade or promotion with a feasible amount of nominees.

 

but not so many nominees that nobody gets in.

[KrisZ]

That's why I said feasible where you have the right amount of nominees per section to ensure the ratio is sound in the matches that get in and don't get in.

[Grimmas]

That's why I said feasible where you have the right amount of nominees per section to ensure the ratio is sound in the matches that get in and don't get in.

 

What kind of numbers is going to work out?

 

Also, how is the voting going to work? Will it be ten matches like WON or some other system?

[BillThompson]

If we factor in drawing then I'm out, as that's not an element that matters to me whatsoever. I'm in the minority I know, and it will still be a worthwhile project, just not one I feel the need to contribute to.

[JerryvonKramer]

If we factor in drawing, then Steamboat vs. Flair, Clash 6 probably wouldn't get in.

[KrisZ]

You need figure out how the sections are going to be organized if you even do sections because there is a way where you can have as many matches as you want available for voting then whatever matches meet the final percentage for election then they get in automatically.

[soup23]

Addressing a couple things here.

I feel that there isn't one set criteria for how you vote and how much you weigh in drawing ability, historical significance, etc. I can see doing a ballot based strictly on the quality of the match and expect there to be nominations available if you go that route probably generated by individuals with a like mind.

 

However, I know my list will have a mixture of certain elements. If asked to do an All Japan ballot right now based on workrate, I could safely write down 6/3/94, 6/9/95, 12/6/96, 1/20/97 and 6/5/89 and be done with it. Using other criteria, something like 6/8/90 might sneak into my final ballot and I am a lot less assured of what the ballot will look like. I think there is room for both Hulk vs. Andre and Han vs. Tamura in an overall wrestling matches HOF as the criteria isn't as strict as the WON HOF ballot for someone to get in on work alone.

 

I agree that the narrowing of the regions is critical to the success of the project. Don't be surprised if a few people get some PM"s over the next few days.

[Loss]

Factoring in drawing is not a zero-sum game. Not every match that is going to be in the HOF is going to be in for the same reason. A HOF based entirely on drawing is boring and too factual. A HOF that doesn't factor it in at all and goes entirely with match quality lacks perspective. The absolute best matches of all time should make a HOF, but so should iconic, generation-defining matches that shattered attendance records. There's room for both.