soup23 Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 At PTBN we are running a series discussing the Real World Champion that is located here: http://placetobenation.com/ptbns-real-world-champion-1983-1988/ This seems like an interesting topic I would like to get opinons from the board on. Basically we are looking at 1983-2014 and using a combination of drawing power, marketability, match quality and card positioning to pick the champion for each year. There are some choices coming up that I really disagree with but I am curious to hear opinions on whom the board thinks would be the Real World Champion for each year. We also only restricted this to U.S. and Canda too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted April 20, 2015 Report Share Posted April 20, 2015 83 - Flair84 - Flair85 - Flair86 - Flair87 - Flair88 - Flair89 - Flair90 - Flair91 - Flair92 - Flair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigelow34 Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 1989 - 1994 is up! http://placetobenation.com/ptbns-real-world-champion-1989-1994/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 Totally disagree with the Perfect choice for 1990....Stan Hansen CLEARLY had a better year winning the TC twice...the Vader series....then his matches with Luger in WCW.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 Luger himself had a better year too arguably. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 Incidentally, my first post in this thread was not a troll. Based on the criteria, I would pick Flair every year from 83 to 92. Only two years there's competition is 87 and 91, where in both years Hogan would be the other contender. I understand wanting to go with different guys, but in the 80s those were your #1 and #2 draws and Flair has Hogan smoked for quality, so it's Flair every year. At a push I could see a case for Savage in 88. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigelow34 Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 Kris, just to qualify this was for North America only. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dylan Waco Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 This is an interesting project, but it presents some real problems. For starters the brew of criteria itself is problematic. I don't really take issue with any of the listed criteria, but the issue any time you engage with something like this is going to be how much weight do you put on what? For instance Parv's argument for Flair every year is one that I think is very defensible if you are arguing that in ring performance is the dominant criteria. Hell I think you can make a case for Flair most years even if you see in ring performance as a co-equal with the other categories. Having said that I struggle with the notion that in ring performance should mean even half of what drawing power does when you are talking about who should be champion. And from that perspective I think Hogan should win in almost every year listed so far. Of course the other big question is if the goal of this project is to say who an ideal champ would have been in a given year, or who was the MVP of given years, or who would have had the most potential to break out and have a great run in a given year..or any number of other things? Are the voters in this on the same page with what the goal is? I'm not sure how they can be. There is also the issue of how you treat the success of regional stars in a discussion like this. For example I think you could make a real case for JYD in 83. I'm not saying I'd take him over Hogan, but it's not a completely outlandish thing to suggest depending on what the goal of the project is, and how much you weight certain pieces of the criteria. But I get the feeling JYD wouldn't have been considered much if at all because he was theoretically regional. Same with Lawler who allegedly came close to getting major title reigns at points during this period (and actually did in the AWA to the extent that was a major title at the time he won it), to say nothing of someone like Carlos Colon who I doubt would even be on the radar at all for this despite the fact that operating under the established metrics there are years where he is arguably as good a pick as anyone (and yes I agree that Colon was never going to be a national star in the continental U.S., but that's also not part of the criteria). Finally there is the question of whether or not the analysis is meant to indicate the relative value of someone coming into the year in question, or whether or not the exercise is purely about analyzing what they did in the year in question. This is key to me because if you look at Hennig objectively in 1990 based on what we know looking back at his 1990 I think he is a remarkably bad pick - possibly not even one of the ten best options available in a landscape that is admittedly thin on obvious picks. Having said all of this it is an interesting project and the only pick I strongly disagree with is Hennig. I'd want to look at things more closely but if I were taking the approach of "who would you crown based on what they did in 1989 and the potential they exhibited" I might go with Luger. If I was basing it purely on what the person did in 1990 I still might go with Luger but there are other candidates worth thinking about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 Okay that helps out some......in that case then I think if we are comparing Luger as Parv said to Perfect then I gotta go with Luger.....one thing about Perfect that hurts him is that his program with Hogan was never expanded to the national stage other than tag matches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted April 22, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 This is an interesting project, but it presents some real problems. For starters the brew of criteria itself is problematic. I don't really take issue with any of the listed criteria, but the issue any time you engage with something like this is going to be how much weight do you put on what? For instance Parv's argument for Flair every year is one that I think is very defensible if you are arguing that in ring performance is the dominant criteria. Hell I think you can make a case for Flair most years even if you see in ring performance as a co-equal with the other categories. Having said that I struggle with the notion that in ring performance should mean even half of what drawing power does when you are talking about who should be champion. And from that perspective I think Hogan should win in almost every year listed so far. Of course the other big question is if the goal of this project is to say who an ideal champ would have been in a given year, or who was the MVP of given years, or who would have had the most potential to break out and have a great run in a given year..or any number of other things? Are the voters in this on the same page with what the goal is? I'm not sure how they can be. There is also the issue of how you treat the success of regional stars in a discussion like this. For example I think you could make a real case for JYD in 83. I'm not saying I'd take him over Hogan, but it's not a completely outlandish thing to suggest depending on what the goal of the project is, and how much you weight certain pieces of the criteria. But I get the feeling JYD wouldn't have been considered much if at all because he was theoretically regional. Same with Lawler who allegedly came close to getting major title reigns at points during this period (and actually did in the AWA to the extent that was a major title at the time he won it), to say nothing of someone like Carlos Colon who I doubt would even be on the radar at all for this despite the fact that operating under the established metrics there are years where he is arguably as good a pick as anyone (and yes I agree that Colon was never going to be a national star in the continental U.S., but that's also not part of the criteria). Finally there is the question of whether or not the analysis is meant to indicate the relative value of someone coming into the year in question, or whether or not the exercise is purely about analyzing what they did in the year in question. This is key to me because if you look at Hennig objectively in 1990 based on what we know looking back at his 1990 I think he is a remarkably bad pick - possibly not even one of the ten best options available in a landscape that is admittedly thin on obvious picks. Having said all of this it is an interesting project and the only pick I strongly disagree with is Hennig. I'd want to look at things more closely but if I were taking the approach of "who would you crown based on what they did in 1989 and the potential they exhibited" I might go with Luger. If I was basing it purely on what the person did in 1990 I still might go with Luger but there are other candidates worth thinking about. I find weight to be an inherent issue with any objective list whether it be this, GWE or whatever. I think match quality and Parv's argument are indeed valid but there is still a perception for instance that Perfect was an elite in ring talent in 1990 that was prevalent among the panel voted. That was the pick throughout this whole list I disagreed with the most although my own personal picks for the years aren't the ones that usually were selected by the panel. I think the overall goal was based on who in that year was the best person presented of all of the criteria listed. This was mapped out in our chats while discussing the project. The idea of potential didn't really take much effect in the overall process. It was a facts presented basis. I don't want to present myself as some seasoned white knight for the territory guys but I can tell you that I presented applicable territory candidates when I thought they were viable. Lawler was one vote away from winning 1983 for example. Piper in 84 may actually be another one that I disagree with a strong bit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrisZ Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 1984 I would go with Flair but I think Kerry Von Erich definitely deserves some consideration Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chief Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 Was it listed anywhere what the criteria were? Because I totally misunderstood. I thought you were looking for who the best World Champion was that particular year. In that you had to be a World Champion that year to be on the ballot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peachchaos Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 "World Champion" of North America Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted April 22, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 If ECW can call their title that, so can we. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted April 22, 2015 Report Share Posted April 22, 2015 but there is still a perception for instance that Perfect was an elite in ring talent in 1990 that was prevalent among the panel voted. Chad (or Justin) - can you ask any of the panel to explain why they have that perception? Like what performances specifically can they point to in 1990 that puts him over the competition? Just seems like a bizarre pick. I'd put up DiBiase for consideration in 83, 85 and 88. Andre in terms of star power, drawing etc, might get a look in 83-7. Magnum TA in 85-6 maybe. Nick Bockwinkel in general. Rude in 92. Honestly though, Flair kills them all if quality AND drawing are both criteria. If it's just drawing it's Hogan 83-92. If it's both, it's Flair. If it's "whatever we damn well please", then I don't get the whole thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tofu_chipmunk Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 but there is still a perception for instance that Perfect was an elite in ring talent in 1990 that was prevalent among the panel voted. Chad (or Justin) - can you ask any of the panel to explain why they have that perception? Like what performances specifically can they point to in 1990 that puts him over the competition? Just seems like a bizarre pick. I'd put up DiBiase for consideration in 83, 85 and 88. Andre in terms of star power, drawing etc, might get a look in 83-7. Magnum TA in 85-6 maybe. Nick Bockwinkel in general. Rude in 92. Honestly though, Flair kills them all if quality AND drawing are both criteria. If it's just drawing it's Hogan 83-92. If it's both, it's Flair. If it's "whatever we damn well please", then I don't get the whole thing. World Champion of "whatever we damn well please" is Sid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigelow34 Posted April 29, 2015 Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 1995-2000 is up http://placetobenation.com/ptbns-real-world-champion-1995-2000/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MutaMark Posted April 29, 2015 Report Share Posted April 29, 2015 93 Vader is an interesting pick. Would said Bret Hart but there is an argument for Vader for that year.Sting a good shout, heck maybe Rude? The next installment for the early 00s will be an interesting read. Too many to pick from for the different years. Could easily but Angle for 01,02,03 but with the WWE a strong roster, could argue 4 or 5 guys for there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSR Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 93 Vader is an interesting pick. Would said Bret Hart but there is an argument for Vader for that year.Sting a good shout, heck maybe Rude? I haven't listened to this so don't know who they chose, but see Vader as a far stronger pick that Bret in 1993. I see Bret's best years being the ones that sandwich this in 1992 and especially 1994. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 It's not a podcast but written text. Just click the link and you'll see their picks. My pick for 93 is Flair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted April 30, 2015 Author Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 What is the argument for Fliar in 93 Parv? That seems like a really big stretch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSR Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 It's not a podcast but written text. Just click the link and you'll see their picks. My pick for 93 is Flair. Ah, cheers. I saw it was Place to be Nation and assumed it was an audio broadcast. Interesting that they had Bret for 1992 and 1994 as would be my choice. It would've been a toss up between Flair and Bret for 1992 (with Savage and Sting as an outside bet), whilst I can't even think of a viable alternative for 1994. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted April 30, 2015 Report Share Posted April 30, 2015 Flair going back to WCW was a really big deal for them. It was the ace coming home and they presented him as their top stair. He brought relevance again to the NWA title, before ending the year as WCW champion in one of the all-time great angles. Vader may have been the champ for much of the year, but on TV Flair was a constant presence with the Flair for the Gold stuff and still seemed like the biggest deal around. Over in WWF-land, Hogan is gone after KOTR. I wouldn't give it to Bret, Luger or Yoko. Incidentally, if I had to keep going: 1994 - Hogan 1995 - Hogan 1996 - Hogan 1997 - Hogan 1998 - Austin 1999 - Austin 2000 - Rock 2001 - Rock 2002 onwards - don't care Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigelow34 Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 2001 - 2007 is up! http://placetobenation.com/ptbns-real-world-champion-2001-2007/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Boricua Posted May 6, 2015 Report Share Posted May 6, 2015 Flair going back to WCW was a really big deal for them. It was the ace coming home and they presented him as their top stair. He brought relevance again to the NWA title, before ending the year as WCW champion in one of the all-time great angles. Vader may have been the champ for much of the year, but on TV Flair was a constant presence with the Flair for the Gold stuff and still seemed like the biggest deal around. So you're saying that Flair was the ace and top star for a promotion that supposedly lost around $23 million that year? 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.