Reactions to the List: 100-51

[El-P]

Becoming more shocked with each roll out that Hogan hasn't dropped yet.

 

And quite frankly, it is turning into a sad joke.

[ohtani's jacket]

 

 

By what logic should Bret Hart be #1? My point is being it's no affront for DK to be considered the greatest British wrestler.

If he had ended up in Mid-Atlantic or Mid-South instead of WWF. If he had jumped to WCW in 1991. If he had homesteaded in New Japan instead.

 

But if you've ever watched a young Bret Hart in a territory

 

From the evidence we have, Dynamite might have become the best of the WoS workers of his era if he stayed. I get that point. He didn't stay though. He jumped to Calgary and became something else instead. And now he's above all of them, generally by far.

But if you've ever watched a young Bret in the territories then you know he pretty much sucked outside of Calgary.

[Loss]

I wouldn't say Bret was propped up by the WWF machine at all. But I will say that I think he had his big run in the right place, even if he was far better than almost everyone he worked with. Bret's best matches tended to be cinematic, and the announcers, production and wrestlers are usually completely on the same page in the best ones. There's no way he could have had the Diesel match at Survivor Series '95 in WCW, for example, simply because I don't know that WCW wouldn't have changed leadership too often to give that one the nearly two-year build it had, plus coordinating an announce table spot in WCW without the left hand and right hand being clued in would be a nightmare. Bret had big visions, and at the very least, the WWF had the infrastructure to support that.

 

I think had Bret gone to WCW earlier, sadly, he might have ended up as a permanent early 90s Brian Pillman. Him actually going to WCW in 1998 bears that out. Mind you, I don't mean that as a critique of Bret. I just don't think his approach to wrestling would have been a good fit in WCW. Could he have adapted? Possibly, yes. But some guys are able to block out the noise and put everything into their match, and those are the guys that delivered in WCW. For better or worse, that's just not Bret. He doesn't need booking to be good, but he needs booking to be motivated, and he needs motivation to be good.

[Dylan Waco]

After Tito, today has kind of been a murderer's row of guys who were talented and maybe even great for a time, who also come across as badly exposed post footage explosion. I'd regard all of them as overrated on the list (though I don't really mind any of them making it) and would be interested to know how many posters here agree.

[Jmare007]

Is Hogan gonna be the highest ranked guy with the lowest average or lowest ranked with more ballots?

[Loss]

Tito Santana with a big jump, which is another credit to the deep dive on footage in recent years.

[Grimmas]

Is Hogan gonna be the highest ranked guy with the lowest average or lowest ranked with more ballots?

No to both.

[Jimmy Redman]

For me it's a murderer's row of guys I don't really give a shit about.

 

I said this on the podcast at one point, but in my exploration of other styles I left so many 80s and 90s American wrestlers behind.

[Matt D]

I wouldn't say Bret was propped up by the WWF machine at all. But I will say that I think he had his big run in the right place, even if he was far better than almost everyone he worked with. Bret's best matches tended to be cinematic, and the announcers, production and wrestlers are usually completely on the same page in the best ones. There's no way he could have had the Diesel match at Survivor Series '95 in WCW, for example, simply because I don't know that WCW wouldn't have changed leadership too often to give that one the nearly two-year build it had, plus coordinating an announce table spot in WCW without the left hand and right hand being clued in would be a nightmare. Bret had big visions, and at the very least, the WWF had the infrastructure to support that.

 

I think had Bret gone to WCW earlier, sadly, he might have ended up as a permanent early 90s Brian Pillman. Him actually going to WCW in 1998 bears that out. Mind you, I don't mean that as a critique of Bret. I just don't think his approach to wrestling would have been a good fit in WCW. Could he have adapted? Possibly, yes. But some guys are able to block out the noise and put everything into their match, and those are the guys that delivered in WCW. For better or worse, that's just not Bret. He doesn't need booking to be good, but he needs booking to be motivated, and he needs motivation to be good.

 

1.) I don't want to distract from the point. I was mainly naysaying the use of such hypotheticals using the Bret example that we've brought up many, many times here.

2.) That said, it's a good question. I think Bret's quality of opponent would be higher. I think the most interesting thing would be that he would be wrestling different opponents every night (or at least every week), and in doing so, would have developed into a very different wrestler, especially if he jumped over early. If you look at the WWF house show line ups on historyofwwe.com, you can see how they ran the same match night after night after night for months, really, while WCW,, at the same time, barely had the same line-up two nights in a row. I'm not sure what that would have meant for his imagination or creativeness and general match quality in a world where it's much harder to get bored in front of crowds with very different expectations.

[Jmare007]

 

Is Hogan gonna be the highest ranked guy with the lowest average or lowest ranked with more ballots?

No to both.

 

 

Interesting.

[Mr. Lacelle]

Andrew, come and talk to us about Rick Rude.

When making my list I factored how I felt about wrestlers at different points of my life. 12 year old Andrew's favourite wrestler was Rick Rude. I had to acknowledge that. Plus I find myself always gravitating to 92 WCW. When I wanna throw on something to watch, that's near the top of the list. Sure there is lots of other stuff out there, but the aesthetics of that era is my favourite.

 

During my favourite time Rude was the best. I believe not all years are created equal. It means more to me to be the best wrestler in a year like 92, 94, 89 or 97 than it would in 09, 12, or 99.

[soup23]

After Tito, today has kind of been a murderer's row of guys who were talented and maybe even great for a time, who also come across as badly exposed post footage explosion. I'd regard all of them as overrated on the list (though I don't really mind any of them making it) and would be interested to know how many posters here agree.

 

Agree for sure on Gordy. Watching his 1982-83 big World Class run, I was shocked by how much I preferred people like Jimmy Garvin to what he was doing. Add to that his MVC which is spotty and him not having the break out singles stuff in AJ like Doc had and I would have him below Doc even though I didn't vote for either.

 

Dynamite Kid is someone that I can quite grasp. He didn't make my list but I don't think he is held in the high reverence he once was. The stuff I have seen from him sprinkled throughout the 80's has been well done.

 

Rude's 1992 is a supreme year but I just don't see too much beyond that besides an adequate to good worker that had a couple of other highlights. The contrast to Rude I guess is that Hokuto is someone I did rank high and she also has a relatively short peak period.

[El-P]

Tito Santana with a big jump, which is another credit to the deep dive on footage in recent years.

 

Do you really think so ? I mean, Tito is a WWF guy. It's not like all the major Tito stuff wasn't available for ever.

[Loss]

Interesting and possibly daring statement about Rude -- if you throw out the Kandori match (which you can't I realize, and that's why Hokuto did so much better than Rude on my list) I don't think the whole of Rude's 1992 has that much of a gap with Hokuto's 1993.

[Loss]

 

Tito Santana with a big jump, which is another credit to the deep dive on footage in recent years.

 

Do you really think so ? I mean, Tito is a WWF guy. It's not like all the major Tito stuff wasn't available for ever.

 

 

Yes. Who was talking about the Valentine series in 2006? Or the Savage series? Smarkschoice did their poll on WWF matches, and jdw did his tOA series walking through 80s WWF matches. Both contributed to Tito's higher profile.

[Matt D]

 

Andrew, come and talk to us about Rick Rude.

When making my list I factored how I felt about wrestlers at different points of my life. 12 year old Andrew's favourite wrestler was Rick Rude. I had to acknowledge that. Plus I find myself always gravitating to 92 WCW. When I wanna throw on something to watch, that's near the top of the list. Sure there is lots of other stuff out there, but the aesthetics of that era is my favourite.

 

During my favourite time Rude was the best. I believe not all years are created equal. It means more to me to be the best wrestler in a year like 92, 94, 89 or 97 than it would in 09, 12, or 99.

 

All of that is fair enough. Thanks for chiming in.

[JerryvonKramer]

Just thought I'd drop in my DJ remix homage to Rick Rude here: https://soundcloud.com/jerryvonkramer/dj-parv-feat-ravishing-rick-rude-sax-appeal

 

Made me realise just how little variation there was in that promo he cut, but man it was a good one.

[soup23]

HASE!!!!!!!!!!!! You bastards.

[The Man in Blak]

I love watching Rude at his best and I favored peak pretty strongly in my voting process, but I think he's benefited from the most egregious boost that we've seen so far. (Though Mutoh and Angle are yet to come.) Even with that, though, I can buy him and everyone else that we've seen on a Top 100.

 

And count me down as another voter that didn't have either half of the MVC on their list, but would have ranked Williams over Gordy.

 

But some guys are able to block out the noise and put everything into their match, and those are the guys that delivered in WCW. For better or worse, that's just not Bret. He doesn't need booking to be good, but he needs booking to be motivated, and he needs motivation to be good.

 

I think this is definitely emblematic of his approach after he came back in 1996, but how does Bret's 1995 fit into your view?

[Jetlag]

Hase makes the list, but drops 45 places. Another painfully inoffensive pick.

[Loss]

Finishing up with Owen and working with Hakushi motivated him. Working with Lawler and Yankem didn't. Regaining the title did.

[Tim Cooke]

Tanahashi didn't make my list but I think Paul does a good job covering why he isn't an absurd top 100 pick and actually probably belongs there if you don't let bias get in the way.

http://www.crossarmbreaker.com/88-hiroshi-tanahashi-86/

[goc]

After Tito, today has kind of been a murderer's row of guys who were talented and maybe even great for a time, who also come across as badly exposed post footage explosion. I'd regard all of them as overrated on the list (though I don't really mind any of them making it) and would be interested to know how many posters here agree.

 

I guess I'll be a fellow wrestling hipster because I agree with this. Never saw Gordy or Rude as GREAT wrestlers, more like really good.

 

[El-P]

 

 

Tito Santana with a big jump, which is another credit to the deep dive on footage in recent years.

 

Do you really think so ? I mean, Tito is a WWF guy. It's not like all the major Tito stuff wasn't available for ever.

 

 

Yes. Who was talking about the Valentine series in 2006? Or the Savage series? Smarkschoice did their poll on WWF matches, and jdw did his tOA series walking through 80s WWF matches. Both contributed to Tito's higher profile.

 

 

You're right.

[Grimmas]

Tanahashi didn't make my list but I think Paul does a good job covering why he isn't an absurd top 100 pick and actually probably belongs there if you don't let bias get in the way.

http://www.crossarmbreaker.com/88-hiroshi-tanahashi-86/

A bias that thinks he's not a good wrestler. That's not a bias.