Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only

WON HOF 2016


Dylan Waco

Recommended Posts

I could probably be convinced to vote for Finkel on a ballot that didn't have 5 non-wrestlers who I thought were clearly better. And that could probably happen if two or three guys from that category get in, maybe even just 1. But he does strike me as a really weird guy to see as a horrifying omission.

Agreed. Fink is a nice garnish on top of everything but if he had never gotten in the wrestling business it would pretty much have 0 ramifications on WWF's success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 245
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

I could probably be convinced to vote for Finkel on a ballot that didn't have 5 non-wrestlers who I thought were clearly better. And that could probably happen if two or three guys from that category get in, maybe even just 1. But he does strike me as a really weird guy to see as a horrifying omission.

Agreed. Fink is a nice garnish on top of everything but if he had never gotten in the wrestling business it would pretty much have 0 ramifications on WWF's success.

 

 

Would it be fair to compare Fink's case as a non-wrestler to "work" candidates since so much of his case is built on artistic excellence? Does that make sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I could probably be convinced to vote for Finkel on a ballot that didn't have 5 non-wrestlers who I thought were clearly better. And that could probably happen if two or three guys from that category get in, maybe even just 1. But he does strike me as a really weird guy to see as a horrifying omission.

Agreed. Fink is a nice garnish on top of everything but if he had never gotten in the wrestling business it would pretty much have 0 ramifications on WWF's success.

 

 

Would it be fair to compare Fink's case as a non-wrestler to "work" candidates since so much of his case is built on artistic excellence? Does that make sense?

 

I don't know because a "work" candidate still brings a lot more value to a promotion than a ring announcer, even a guy you want to say is the best or 2nd best ring announcer ever.

 

I don't really like the comparison from earlier in the thread about a ring announcer being like a kicker in football either. The difference between a good kicker and a bad kicker can really make a huge difference on the outcome of games.

 

I don't think going from Fink to Lillian Garcia really made a huge impact on overall show quality. Like, if Fink were to get put back on Raw Monday it would be an upgrade over the current ring announcer but not something that's going to hugely upgrade the show quality overall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I could probably be convinced to vote for Finkel on a ballot that didn't have 5 non-wrestlers who I thought were clearly better. And that could probably happen if two or three guys from that category get in, maybe even just 1. But he does strike me as a really weird guy to see as a horrifying omission.

Agreed. Fink is a nice garnish on top of everything but if he had never gotten in the wrestling business it would pretty much have 0 ramifications on WWF's success.

 

 

Would it be fair to compare Fink's case as a non-wrestler to "work" candidates since so much of his case is built on artistic excellence? Does that make sense?

 

I don't know because a "work" candidate still brings a lot more value to a promotion than a ring announcer, even a guy you want to say is the best or 2nd best ring announcer ever.

 

I don't really like the comparison from earlier in the thread about a ring announcer being like a kicker in football either. The difference between a good kicker and a bad kicker can really make a huge difference on the outcome of games.

 

I don't think going from Fink to Lillian Garcia really made a huge impact on overall show quality. Like, if Fink were to get put back on Raw Monday it would be an upgrade over the current ring announcer but not something that's going to hugely upgrade the show quality overall.

 

 

Excellent points. And I'd agree with Parv about Okerlund being a more glaring omission than Fink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So basically Dave's argument against Finkel comes down to something he had no control over and had nothing to do with his actual job performance. It seems unfair to punish a guy because Vince has a weird phobia of people he perceives as "too old" on his TV. By that argument, Jim Ross isn't a Hall of Fame announcer because Vince did the same thing to him and pushed him out the door for Michael Cole.

 

When they put Howard in the WWE HOF (I know, but bear with me here) they had interviews with a bunch of guys saying how when they were kids a title change wasn't official until they heard the "and NEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW".

 

It comes off to me as the WON HOF version of the NFL HOF's reluctance to put punters and kickers in. It's not the most important position of course, but it seems like Dave doesn't think like any announcer is worthy except Jimmy Lennon Sr.

 

I don't think it's right to look at someone not going in the HOF as "punishment". Lots of guys didn't have the careers they should have for reasons outside their control. They aren't HOFers because the HOF is based on the career they had, not the circumstances that prevented the career they could have had from happening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So basically Dave's argument against Finkel comes down to something he had no control over and had nothing to do with his actual job performance. It seems unfair to punish a guy because Vince has a weird phobia of people he perceives as "too old" on his TV. By that argument, Jim Ross isn't a Hall of Fame announcer because Vince did the same thing to him and pushed him out the door for Michael Cole.

 

When they put Howard in the WWE HOF (I know, but bear with me here) they had interviews with a bunch of guys saying how when they were kids a title change wasn't official until they heard the "and NEWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW".

 

It comes off to me as the WON HOF version of the NFL HOF's reluctance to put punters and kickers in. It's not the most important position of course, but it seems like Dave doesn't think like any announcer is worthy except Jimmy Lennon Sr.

 

I don't think it's right to look at someone not going in the HOF as "punishment". Lots of guys didn't have the careers they should have for reasons outside their control. They aren't HOFers because the HOF is based on the career they had, not the circumstances that prevented the career they could have had from happening.

 

 

I'm looking at disqualifying someone from consideration for something completely out of their control as the punishment. Just like it seems like non Vince promoters have it held against them that in the end they went out of business. If ring announcers are such a non essential part of the business, why even have them on the list? Limit it to in ring performers and territory owners/bookers if that's the line we're going to draw. Dave opened the door by putting them on the ballot in the first place, it seems disingenuous to now try to say they're not important enough to warrant inclusion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

From my perspective, Kandori was a short term draw in the early 90s against the AJW girls but I don't see her as worthy of consideration. To me I don't know that the peak of joshi was long enough to get anyone into consideration based on drawing. Joshi candidates from that era pretty much have to rely on work. I see that Hokuto, Aja, and Toyota are in from that era. I'd consider Kyoko Inoue & others long before Kandori. I think Kyoko might have been on at one point but dropped off. While those secondary joshi groups from that era consistently drew better than they do now, Meltzer has never been one to include good workers from secondary or indy promotions otherwise we'd have Hero, Daniels, etc. on the ballot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Wrestling Observers hit late Wednesday or Thursday. The HOF issue was out this time last year, so I expect it any week now.

 

Dave made it sound like it might be awhile because of his mother's medical needs.

 

I'm not intending this to be insensitive in anyway, but this does lessen the overall legitimacy of a "Hall" if announcements are affected by the IRL matters of its sole curator and opperator.

 

Kind of echos what some dickwad told me when I was trying to organize an Internet Fan Community voting drive for a "Hall" of a specfic baseball team on a website (proto blog really) I once ran. Pretty much, who gives a rat's ass since you are the only person tabulating the votes and making an unofficial production out of something that already exists on a more professional scale.

 

FWIW, this was his advice:

 

Well, I'd start with making someone other than you the vote-counter.

 

That's not a dig at your ability, btw. You need accountability in any voting process, and "Trust me, I'll be fair" isn't going to cut it.

 

Then I'd have "internet voting" being only one constituency among many, all of which would need to agree on a candidate to be put on the ballot. This may seem to complicate things, which it does at first, but it also allows you to eliminate a lot of other stupid rules (like "x years in a met uniform," which has more problems than I've hinted at here.) Possible "other" constituencies might be "Met Bloggers," who although they're anonymous need to maintain ther reputations as authorities. Maybe I'd have another group of "Mets historians," like the guys here who run "Mets By the Numbers" and "the UMDB" and like that. If all six or seven of these constituencies agree on a group of candidates, then they're Mets HOFers whatever length of service they have, and there's no point in flooding the internet voting with absurd crap because it's only going to influence that one group, so the qualilty of internet voting will improve as well.

 

That's just for starters.[\quote]

 

Granted the bulk of that is not the issue with Dave, but that first sentence is. Granted that is what Vince does as well, but Vince hasn't made any pretences that the WWE Hall selection is anything but his based on various criteria and circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much "legitimacy" is there in a HOF that only exists on one man's hard drive and which has many members who are unaware of even being in it? At the end of the day it's just an excuse for a bunch of longtime fans to talk about the business and maybe learn something new about its history. Pretty ridiculous to begrudge Dave for prioritizing a family member's health over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much "legitimacy" is there in a HOF that only exists on one man's hard drive and which has many members who are unaware of even being in it? At the end of the day it's just an excuse for a bunch of longtime fans to talk about the business and maybe learn something new about its history. Pretty ridiculous to begrudge Dave for prioritizing a family member's health over it.

Where did I say I was begrudging?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From my perspective, Kandori was a short term draw in the early 90s against the AJW girls but I don't see her as worthy of consideration. To me I don't know that the peak of joshi was long enough to get anyone into consideration based on drawing. Joshi candidates from that era pretty much have to rely on work. I see that Hokuto, Aja, and Toyota are in from that era. I'd consider Kyoko Inoue & others long before Kandori. I think Kyoko might have been on at one point but dropped off. While those secondary joshi groups from that era consistently drew better than they do now, Meltzer has never been one to include good workers from secondary or indy promotions otherwise we'd have Hero, Daniels, etc. on the ballot.

 

What do we know about 80s JWP in terms of how they drew? Same for LLPW? I presume the answer is "not well" and certainly not "hall of fame level." But I don't really know much about that and I'm a little curious. One thing I was struck by watching Kandori vs Devil from 88 recently was the crowd. It wasn't enormous, but it appears to be a mostly adult male audience. One thing that is always pointed to in Aja Kong's favor is her influence in drawing the hardcore male fans based on appearing on those Hamada's UWF shows and helping move Joshi away from catering to the younger girl audience. I'm wondering if that was fairly consistent at JWP shows in the 80s or if that match was an anomaly.

 

Its not an entire HOF case by any means, but looking back at the "Golden Age" of Joshi Wrestling, Hokuto vs Kandori is one of the first things to come to mind.

 

I guess I'm just more curious about her career. She comes across like a big deal watching footage but discussion of that era, where it exists, is usually centered around ring work.

 

All this said, I agree with everything Tim said above except for the part about Kyoko. Kandori and Kansai strike me as the two best candidates from that era. Neither strike me as particularly strong candidates for the Hall in general, but I think both, especially Kandori, are pretty interesting figures to think about on some level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be curious & interested in discussion of Kandori & Kansai. I didn't even realize Kandori had notable moments prior to the 90s. I know there was a JWP 1.0 but I've largely forgotten or didn't know much about any non-AJW groups prior to the 90s. I just threw out Kyoko's name as someone who was a top worker & just below the Toyota level of stardom during that period. I could have just as easily listed Yamada. Both had lengthy careers including being an "indy level draw" in their post-AJW work. Whether right or wrong, secondary groups have become more & more marginalized over the years in the WON so I was basically just following that trend in discounting Kansai & Kandori off hand on anything other than work.

 

I know that drawing and work are supposed to be completely separate categories but I could see an argument for someone like Satomura as a work candidate but I know that would be scoffed at simply because of the fringe level she's performed at. If joshi itself hadn't been marginalized in Japan as unimportant, there might be more visibility for someone like that to be considered. Someone else feel free to draw the comparisons between a Satomura and a Chris Hero as far as being victimized by where they have worked & the size of the crowds they've worked in front of that discount the alleged stand-alone criteria of work for this HOF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

From my perspective, Kandori was a short term draw in the early 90s against the AJW girls but I don't see her as worthy of consideration. To me I don't know that the peak of joshi was long enough to get anyone into consideration based on drawing. Joshi candidates from that era pretty much have to rely on work. I see that Hokuto, Aja, and Toyota are in from that era. I'd consider Kyoko Inoue & others long before Kandori. I think Kyoko might have been on at one point but dropped off. While those secondary joshi groups from that era consistently drew better than they do now, Meltzer has never been one to include good workers from secondary or indy promotions otherwise we'd have Hero, Daniels, etc. on the ballot.

 

What do we know about 80s JWP in terms of how they drew? Same for LLPW? I presume the answer is "not well" and certainly not "hall of fame level." But I don't really know much about that and I'm a little curious. One thing I was struck by watching Kandori vs Devil from 88 recently was the crowd. It wasn't enormous, but it appears to be a mostly adult male audience. One thing that is always pointed to in Aja Kong's favor is her influence in drawing the hardcore male fans based on appearing on those Hamada's UWF shows and helping move Joshi away from catering to the younger girl audience. I'm wondering if that was fairly consistent at JWP shows in the 80s or if that match was an anomaly.

 

Its not an entire HOF case by any means, but looking back at the "Golden Age" of Joshi Wrestling, Hokuto vs Kandori is one of the first things to come to mind.

 

I guess I'm just more curious about her career. She comes across like a big deal watching footage but discussion of that era, where it exists, is usually centered around ring work.

 

All this said, I agree with everything Tim said above except for the part about Kyoko. Kandori and Kansai strike me as the two best candidates from that era. Neither strike me as particularly strong candidates for the Hall in general, but I think both, especially Kandori, are pretty interesting figures to think about on some level.

 

 

I don't think the original JWP particularly catered to the school girl audience. They initially had some backing from the producer behind a popular idea group at the time, which was a large part of the reason why the wrestlers were dressed in more elaborate costumes than the traditional All Japan "bathing suits." But New Japan was quite heavily involved w/ the women training at the New Japan dojo and Kandori herself preferring to spar with men and eventually Shinma, Onita and Hamada started pulling it this way and that trying to turn it into a multi-style promotion ala the original UWF before the shoot style guys took over. The women wanted it to continue as a women's promotion and the internal split eventually led to the formation of FMW and Hamada's UWF. JWP up until that point hadn't been making any money. They mostly ran small venues like they do today and their video releases were these overpriced, terribly shot handhelds that you had to write away for. They had no TV presence whatsoever and mostly drew the hardcores.

 

Kandori was either fired or suspended after she shot on Jackie Sato (I don't remember which) and when she returned she became the first freelance wrestler in Joshi puroresu history. All Japan wanted to bring her in for a big match with Chigusa prior to Chigusa's 1989 retirement but apparently they wanted Kandori to sign a five year contract and she was only prepared to sign a one year deal so the fight fell threw. That may have been her best chance to be a significant draw prior to the inter-promotional period. One of the cool things about the Hokuto vs. Kandori feud is that it was very much a worked shoot. Kandori was unpopular in the pro-wrestling community and seen as an outsider from the Judo world who didn't have a true love for professional wrestling and Hokuto called her out on that in her promos.

 

There's no way Kandori was a HOF draw or even that big a star, but she was a regular on the late night comedy shows given many of the comedians were fans of wrestling and you can see some of that stuff on YouTube. You should watch Kandori and Kazama watching Fujiwara direct a porno, if you haven't. It's kind of ironic considering Kazama went on to do porn. And Fujiwara directing a porn is as great as you'd imagine. He sits in this chair drinking a bottle of whiskey and directing the sex scene. Anyway, Kandori was a regular on these type of shows and had a huge amount of charisma. Her nickname was Mr. Joshi Puroresu and they would often play off that image that she was more like a man than a female wrestler. She also gained some notoriety for running for the Upper House elections and eventually getting a seat as a Japanese lawmaker.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This week is the HOF issue. I thought it might be interesting to look at the ballot and see who is likely to get elected.

 

HISTORICAL

There are about two dozen candidates here, most of whom are similar as far as the merits of their candidacies. You have a lot of candidates that wouldn't look out of place, but none that stand out as obviously deserving. The problem in such a group is that votes get spread out and it is hard to form a consensus. Last year's top vote getter in this category was Enrique Torres (37%). Unless Pedro Morales gets a large percentage upon his return to the ballot, probably a shutout.

 

MODERN

 

Last year's vote getters ranked:

1. Daniel Bryan (54%)

2. Sting (51%)

3. Edge (44%)

4. Curt Hennig (30%)

5. Junkyard Dog (29%)

6. Sgt. Slaughter (23%)

7. C.M. Punk (22%)

8. Randy Orton (15%)

9. Ultimate Warrior (13%)

New to the ballot: Kerry Von Erich

 

Randy Orton was the only one to wrestle a match in the last year, unless Sting/Rollins slipped through the timeframe. Sting and Bryan retired. Bryan is probably a mortal lock as far as these things go. Sting jumped 18% last year. I doubt Edge will get in this year, but if he were to get about 50% he would probably get in eventually. I doubt Kerry gets much more than 20%, if that. Down ballot, it'll be interesting to see if Orton/Punk have any upward momentum in their second year.

 

JAPAN

The closest last year were three foreigners, the Sharpes and Volk Han. It's Volk Han's last year. He only gained 1% last year, but maybe voters will give him an extra look. With Nakamura off the ballot, there might be enough votes to push the Sharpes into the Hall. After those candidates, the highest vote getter last year was Minoru Suzuki at 36%. Yoshiaki Fujiwara is new to the ballot, and his vote total will be interesting. (And since Han and Suzuki rank high, that could bode well for a shoot wrestling pioneer.)

 

MEXICO

Last year Perro Aguayo Jr. rode into the Hall. Los Misioneros de la Muerte and Villano III both finished with 56%. A small nudge upwards gets them both in. Cien Caras has been stuck at 54% the last two years. Caristico is new and could be a first ballot inductee.

 

WORLD

Rollerball Mark Rocco got 42% in Europe last year. No one in this group looks immediately likely, so it'll mainly be interesting to see how the dynamics of this new (or adjusted) group works going forward.

 

NON-WRESTLERS

I think Gene Okerlund (58% last year) and Jim Crockett Sr. (57%) get in. Bill Apter and Jerry Jarrett are floating close behind. I doubt Chyna gets a significant vote here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking forward to seeing the results tonight. I wouldn't be surprised if no one gets in. Looking over the ballot again, to me the strongest candidate is Danielson. I would like to see at least one Lucha candidate go in. Wouldn't be surprised if a historical or non-wrestler goes in but no one strikes me as a no-brainer.

 

I'd expect Sakaguchi at least to drop off and probably some from historical or non-wrestlers. I'm sure Styles at the very least will go back on next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...