Observer HOF prediction/ballot question thread

[cm funk]

Orton: I see him as a better candidate than Edge. Edge's candidacy always bugged me because he was out injured so much. The sum total of his active career makes him less impressive. He may have been seen as a top star for however many years but he was probably out injured 50% of that. To follow onto the talk above of representing all generations, to me Orton should go in at some point when you look at the fact that Cena & Jericho would be the only representatives of the WWE-only era. He's been "in the mix" of top guys for 10-11 years now with not many breaks. The constant turns haven't seem to dull his appeal as much as a guy like Luger.

 

Orton really hasn't turned that many times

 

2004 - Evolution turns on him, weak run as top babyface on RAW

2005 - Turns heel by starting the "Legend Killer" gimmick. This is the best run of his career which includes long feud with Undertaker, feuds with Cena, HHH and Hogan, Rated RKO and Legacy, amongst other things.

2010 - Comes out of Legacy breakup as a babyface for the first time 5+ years

2013 - Turns heel by cashing in on Daniel Bryan at SummerSlam and joining The Authority

2014-Present - Turns on The Authority/Rollins, taken out by Curbstomp, comes back as a babyface

 

5 turns in 10+ years is nothing in modern WWE, and that 5+ year run as a heel is almost unprecedented

[Matt D]

Someone needs to make a Jim Breaks argument on work alone.

[Cox]

Here's what I'm wondering about the Hall of Fame at this point: have we reached a point where there are no slam dunk Hall of Famers left for a long time? It feels like everybody left is borderline, some are better than candidates that are already in, some are not, but nobody is a definite, no doubt about it, this guy belongs in the Hall of Fame candidate. That doesn't mean it should go away or anything, and I think the debate does help bring to light even fringe candidates like Rose or Patera who might not stayed on the ballot, but whose case was seen and helped find new fans. But at this stage of the game, it really just feels like we're debating along the margins, and without a slam dunk candidate anywhere near the horizon, I don't see that changing anytime soon. I even wonder if we'll have a year coming up where nobody new gets elected.

[Grimmas]

Apparently Tanahashi was a slam dunk candidate a few years ago. If he is a slam dunk, then there is still a lot to come.

[dkookypunk43]

Is there anyone that would like to discuss the observer HOF with me this Friday at 1pm for a podcast?

[Dylan Waco]

Here's what I'm wondering about the Hall of Fame at this point: have we reached a point where there are no slam dunk Hall of Famers left for a long time? It feels like everybody left is borderline, some are better than candidates that are already in, some are not, but nobody is a definite, no doubt about it, this guy belongs in the Hall of Fame candidate. That doesn't mean it should go away or anything, and I think the debate does help bring to light even fringe candidates like Rose or Patera who might not stayed on the ballot, but whose case was seen and helped find new fans. But at this stage of the game, it really just feels like we're debating along the margins, and without a slam dunk candidate anywhere near the horizon, I don't see that changing anytime soon. I even wonder if we'll have a year coming up where nobody new gets elected.

 

I think we are at the point where no modern/new candidates will be slam dunkers for a long time, but it also depends on what you mean by a slam dunk pick. For some the standard of slam dunk is "absolute top tier ever" in which case I would argue there are no slam dunkers on the ballot and probably haven't been since The Rock was inducted. For others a slam dunk pick is someone where there is no particularly strong argument against them and they check off every box in some way, shape, and form. I would think Cena is sort of in between that category and the first one I mentioned, but most will get the point. The other standard I have seen some use is "would this person have fit in with the first class of inductees." This is where I suspect a lot of people would put someone like Rey Mysterio. I would argue that Carlos Colon and Cien Caras at minimum fit into category two, and as such I would call them "slam dunks." But they aren't "modern" candidates in the sense of being active and products of the modern wrestling landscape.

 

I will say if New Japan stays at it's current level or grows, and Okada remains a top player for seven or eight more years he would probably be at that level regardless of what you think of him in the ring. But I still wouldn't vote for him at that point because of rule changes designed to benefit "new" candidates.

[WrestlingPower]

The only one on the current ballot that I can say certainly will go in is Danielson. I agree with Dylan on Okada, if he reaches age 35 and has gotten several more years as a top guy under his belt & the age limit is still 35, I would think he'd be the strongest candidate at that point. I could see Lesnar and AJ possibly in this category with a couple more years under their belts.

[jdw]

We're only a few years removed from Cena. If the WWE creates another Cena, which at some point they'll have, dunkers will come back.

 

Based on past history of how people have been voted in, what Danielson has done to this point would make him a dunker as well. Who knows how the voters will look at him. I suspect most of us think he'll go in, as 60% isn't that high of a threshold. On the other hand, Cena got "just" 71% back in 2012 so... er...

[Al]

If the HOF used 20 years after debut or 45 years of age, the Rock wouldn't even be eligible yet. A big reason for a lack of slam dunk candidates is that they're voted in before they can even reach slam dunk status.

[jdw]

Rock was elected in 2007 when he was effectively "retired" making movies. He already was a dunker when he got elected.

 

We'd have to go back and look at the ones from 1998 (when voting started) to the present that were premature. We all can point pretty easy to Kurt Angle, but I'm not sure how many more there are. I doubt it would be the majority who were active that went in.

[Parties]

I don't know if you can call any of these premature, but they're viewed differently now by many online followers of Dave's HOF, and he takes more flack for them just a few years removed from their entry:

 

Jericho (class of '10) would be an example of a guy who got in on Meltzer praising his then-present or very recent work (calling him the best worker in the business, calling his heel work with Michaels some of the best he'd ever seen, etc).

 

Chono ('04) seems quite odd.

 

Konnan ('09) is a weird one to me in that he was massively over in a crossover kind of way in Mexico, but was such a bad worker that I think people had to overlook his matches and highly value star power. In terms of fame in Mexico, who is Konnan equiv? Someone like Piper or Bret? I doubt he's an Austin/Rock level guy there? (I'm asking, not telling.)

 

Kensuke Sasaki ('13) seemed a beneficiary of the YouTube era, but as others have said, most of the Japanese voters view the candidates differently than I would.

 

Not sure if Dave or anyone outside of Japan lobbied for Ultimo Dragon, but he's been discussed ad nauseum as a bad choice.

[cheapshot]

Remember, Big Daddy should be on your ballots guys.

[Loss]

Outside of circles like ours, I've never heard very much criticism of Jericho in the HOF at all. By and large, he's viewed as a legend and one of the best workers and talkers of his time.

[kjh]

Sasaki benefits a lot from the power of the interpromotional dream match. Hard to see him getting in without those Dome shows with Kawada and Kobashi.

[dkookypunk43]

How does everyone here feel about Jun Akiyama's candidacy

[jdw]

I don't know if you can call any of these premature, but they're viewed differently now by many online followers of Dave's HOF, and he takes more flack for them just a few years removed from their entry:

 

Jericho (class of '10) would be an example of a guy who got in on Meltzer praising his then-present or very recent work (calling him the best worker in the business, calling his heel work with Michaels some of the best he'd ever seen, etc).

 

Jericho has been on the ballot for several years before he got in. He wasn't a dunker. Whether it was premature... that seemed to be around the peak of Y2J. Not sure if he's done a lot since then that would make him a stronger candidate.

 

 

Chono ('04) seems quite odd.

 

 

He'd been on the ballot since at least 2000 when Hash went in, and hadn't gotten in. Not a dunker. I don't think Chono has done anything since then that would increase his candidacy. His core stuff is all before he got in.

 

Konnan ('09) is a weird one to me in that he was massively over in a crossover kind of way in Mexico, but was such a bad worker that I think people had to overlook his matches and highly value star power. In terms of fame in Mexico, who is Konnan equiv? Someone like Piper or Bret? I doubt he's an Austin/Rock level guy there? (I'm asking, not telling.)

 

 

Konnan had been kicked around the ballot for a decade, and may even have dropped off. I doubt whatever he's done since 2009 would impact people voting for him. It was based on what he'd done years earlier.

 

Kensuke Sasaki ('13) seemed a beneficiary of the YouTube era, but as others have said, most of the Japanese voters view the candidates differently than I would.

 

 

Sasaki was a beneficiary of being around forever, and basically one of two of the Big 8 of AJPW & NJPW his generation (Pillars + Musketeers + Sasaki) who hadn't gotten in. He had the honors and headlined a ton... yadder, yadder. It took forever for folks to vote him in as there were a number of us who weren't sold on him, and frankly some of us still are. So poor Taue is the only one of the 8 still out.

 

Seriously doubt Youtube had a great deal to do with it since there's never been a big buzz about Sasaki being a "hidden great worker" like others have gotten a bump off. Sasaki is closer the the Sting argument than folks actually bothering to watch him.

 

Not sure if Dave or anyone outside of Japan lobbied for Ultimo Dragon, but he's been discussed ad nauseum as a bad choice.

 

 

Nobody really lobbied for him. Dave indicated he voted for him in 2003. Voters in the US and Japan liked him. It was silly, but what can you do about it.

 

I doubt forcing Dragon to wait more years with a higher age / experience requirement would have impacted him much. It took him a few years until 2003 to get in. 20 years of experience would have made him eligible in 2007. Same folks, though likely with more voters, would have voted him in then, or in a few years.

[jdw]

Sasaki benefits a lot from the power of the interpromotional dream match. Hard to see him getting in without those Dome shows with Kawada and Kobashi.

 

He was eligible the year after the Kawada matches happened. It didn't really move people. He was still down around 33% in 2005 when the voting happened a while after the match with Kobashi.

 

He's Sting. He was around forever, headlined a lit, won a lot of shit, in some good matches even if he was a solid-to-middling worker.

[TheBigBoot]

Was Arn Anderson a bigger draw than Bryan, Nakamura, Orton, or Styles? I can say no for all of them. I know Arn is a great worker but he'd get in on onlybhis workrate merits and a bit on influence. Was Arn the best wrestler in the world at any point? No so I can see a case for all these guys before Arn Anderson JVK

I can get the overall point about Styles being a better overall candidate but Career vs Career does Styles really have a better drawing record than Double A? In the category they are in (well Ran would theoretically be in again).

 

I can see someone preferring Styles as a worker, even if I disagree, or rating him on influence for helping to popularize the early-00s Indie style but in terms purely of drawing power are his contributions to the NJPW brand the last couple of years a bigger draw than Anderson's career overall?

 

And if so how much does that count for considering Styles is in the US category (like Saito in reverse). Not saying someone's work outside their category is completely irrelevant but the way it's laid out surely it should be a little bonus at best not the main argument for that person's drawing ability. I can understand taking into account the whole body of a wrestler's output when judging on work but in terms of drawing power then how they drew in the category they are in has to be more important than how they drew in other regions otherwise why split things up geographically.

 

Like if you enjoyed Rocco as Black Tiger that's great but you would hope his case as a draw was being judged more on the Marty Jones and Kendo Nagasaki feuds. Considering Styles is in the "I followed Modern US/Canada" category there's no obligation that anyone has to take it into account at all.

 

I find it difficult to believe that Styles outdrew Anderson in the States.

 

In terms of live attendance he certainly didn't. In terms of TV ratings then even as late as 2000 those Flair/Anderson segments were some of WCW' s highest ratings at the time. So it would have to be based purely on PPV buys and merchandise sales.

 

Hard to tell without them releasing the figures but AFAIK TNA' s biggest PPV draws were Angle, Joe, Hardy and Sting (first proper PPV appearance). Going back a bit didn't Raven' s first appearance supposedly pop the weekly PPV rating as well? Can't remember all the details on that one. Hogan, Flair and Hardy for popping a TV rating as well when they jumped as well. Still the thought of anyone being considered "a draw" due to being a draw for TNA seems a stretch but I can see how it could be used as a little bonus for someone like Angle (who is in) or the others who have been or will be on the ballot. The difference is ALL of their HOF candidacies (even Joe) in terms of drawing were more or less made before they joined TNA something Styles (no fault of his) doesn't have.

 

I suppose you can give Styles, Raven, Jarrett and AMW credit for keeping things ticking along (before, and after, they got iMPACT! off the ground) for as long as they did but I'm not sure they brought in any new fans in any significant numbers.

 

The X Division was one of TNA' s unique selling points of which he was one of the poster boys (with Lynn, Low Ki, Daniels... later on Joe) but that seems like such a niche of a niche. He Daniels and Joe did show that style could be featuring in a main event spot but that seems more a case for influence than drawing power.

 

ROH has already been covered but I was under the impression the draws were Joe, Bryan and Punk at the peak of their DVD sales/cultural relevancy/International touring power/whatever.

 

Arn Anderson was part of the top heel stable (that he named in one of his regional promos) in a highly successful product in JCP of 1985-87. He was never the main draw or even close to it but I can't see how he wasn't 'a draw' to some degree.

 

Those weekly promos of his helped draw in fans as much/more than AJ did. Even if the argument is he was the least of the original Horsemen he was still an important part if the puzzle and had a clearly defined role as 'the Enforcer'.

 

Arn was part of two very successful tag teams at a time when tag teams were heavily featured across the board in all the major promotions far more so than the X Division. In the context of it's time, Rock N Rolls vs Andersons at StarrCade was abigger deal than anything Styles was involved in Stateside. I would say the first War Games was as well. In terms of influence, Double A's role as the first man out there has to count for something in terms of getting over (arguably) the greatest gimmick match of all time.

 

You can't really compare Styles contributions to getting over Ultimate X, Six Sides of Steel (that would be more a case for AMW than AJ anyway) or King of the Mountain because it's not like those concepts a) drew anything of any significance; are imitated on as widespread a level as War Games was and is. Even TNA' s signature 'feud ending match' is a War Games ripoff. Obviously that's more a case for Dusty Rhodes than it is for Anderson but I'm not saying he should be in the HOF for it, just that his contributions to getting over a match which turned out to be a pretty good draw are another feather in his cap that Styles doesn't have.

 

Right now AJ looks more like a guy with decade plus as one of the top guys in a Worst Promotion of All Time contender and a hot year as an international draw for a successful one. Wheareas Arn was more a (very important) f machines which had mixed results but peaked in the case of Crockett when he was a featured 'part'.

 

In both cases the failures of the companies they worked for had very little to do with them and you could argue they both did everything expected of them but if Styles gets credit simply for being in the main event more often doesn't he also deserve more of the blame?

[mrwaukegan]

All of the non wrestling candidates should almost be automatic. For example if wasn't for Apter and Weston and if your over 35 there wouldn't be wrestling. Gary Hart was a driver in two of the biggest angles in wrestling history. He was still used indirectly by the WWE. Even Carlos Colon should go in for his promotion.

[goc]

Carlos Colon is really a no brainer for the HOF but he might not ever make it in due to Brody's death.

[goodhelmet]

Few quick fixes.

 

Raise age/time in business limit so you aren't voting for people in their prime.

Don't give out ballots to people who don't deserve them.

I think designating what areas people can vote in is something to look into.

Set up some kind of hub for discussion and debate.

 

1. Agreed

2. Meltzer gives ballots to people he thinks are worthy. You might not think they are worthy. I may not think they are worthy but Meltzer does. The fact that Phil Schneider and Dean Rasmussen don't have ballots is a travesty in my eyes when DVDVR was just as influential of a hub of wrestling opinions for wrestlers (including guys on the ballot) as it was for fanboys like us.

3. Agreed

4. There are plenty of hubs for discussion and debate. Those who would use them are already using them.

 

 

Does anyone have a sense of who makes up the current set of voters? How many ballots does he usually receive? I know Bix and Zellner have ballots, and that there a few other historians in the mix. I know guys like Cornette and Matisyk get them, as does Ross most likely. Is it mostly workers/people who've worked in wrestling? Or does it skew more towards Meltzer's peers? Like, do people who currently work for companies like WWE/NJ/ROH actually vote? That just seems like a really backwards system if someone like Gedo is voting for Nakamura.

 

And yeah, I agree with Boriqua's note that there are almost certainly people voting in regions for which they lack proper knowledge. If you haven't seen a decent amount of work from all of the candidates in said region, you should be there. Part of voting anyone in should be weighing them against the other options in their era/nation.

 

Seems like way too many people votes. Ben Miller has had one since 2001 - that should tell you all you need to know.

 

 

I have no idea who Ben Miller is.

 

 

Anyway, treating the Observer Hall of Fame like a sports Hall of Fame is a mistake. It is more akin to the Rock N Roll Hall of Fame where certain types get in and others get abandoned regardless of accomplishments and rely on the arbitrary rules of one person.

[Loss]

Just to drop it here, Dave has addressed the criticism of making guys eligible too soon before. He has said he wants people who lived through the era voting on the wrestlers from it as much as possible, because the hindsight perspective leaves voters too open to hearsay and rose-colored memories, and you also have a less knowledgeable pool of voters. I think the opposite is true, as people are much more likely to get lost in the moment and have an inability to be objective about it because it's fresh. The more time is removed, the more rational the thought process. I was mainly just dropping that here because it is something Dave has addressed.

[kjh]

I think the problems with the eligibility criterion has worsened with the 15 years on the ballot rule. In lucha, many wrestlers drawing power peak late, as the value of their mask/hair grows, and they're adding to their Hall of Fame cases well into their 50s. Look at Atlantis who has had three of his biggest career matches past the age of 49. Hell, Sting just headlined a WWE pay-per-view at age 56.

[Matt D]

I think the problems with the eligibility criterion has worsened with the 15 years on the ballot rule. In lucha, many wrestlers drawing power peak late, as the value of their mask/hair grows, and they're adding to their Hall of Fame cases well into their 50s. Look at Atlantis who has had three of his biggest career matches past the age of 49. Hell, Sting just headlined a WWE pay-per-view at age 56.

 

Sting may have even moved the needle, so far as we can tell these days. WWE was much more socially active than for usual PPVs and it was up against football and the emmy's.

[goc]

Just to drop it here, Dave has addressed the criticism of making guys eligible too soon before. He has said he wants people who lived through the era voting on the wrestlers from it as much as possible, because the hindsight perspective leaves voters too open to hearsay and rose-colored memories, and you also have a less knowledgeable pool of voters. I think the opposite is true, as people are much more likely to get lost in the moment and have an inability to be objective about it because it's fresh. The more time is removed, the more rational the thought process. I was mainly just dropping that here because it is something Dave has addressed.

I agree with this. I've read in places, and it seems like even Dave agrees, that Edge is some great candidate who should get voted in but I don't think he holds up to scrutiny now much less in 10 years removed from his retirement.