Jump to content
Pro Wrestling Only
NintendoLogic

2020 Wrestling Observer Hall of Fame

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Al said:

By the same token Roman Reigns apparently falls off the ballot with less than 10%, and it seems like an issue for that to happen when someone is actively building their resume.

Reigns will be put back onto the ballot in a couple of years and will get in easily.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For being a complete failure as the top WWE guy ? I mean, his main event single push was the beginning of the audience turning on the company and the company trolling booking, which has slowly led to the pathetic state the company is in today (their financials have nothing to do with him and everything to do with the TV rights economic bubble and a criminal regime wanting some propaganda work). As a worker he's nothing special at all. Surefire Hall of Fame candidate. :lol: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kenny being in is both a no brainer choice and also an indictment of how silly it is for the age threshold to be only 35. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Especially now when it's obvious a post-40 years old career can still be stellar and actually add to someone's body of work, which may not have been the case 20/30 years ago (for various reasons).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, NintendoLogic said:

Also on the ballot for the first time: Nikki Bella. In fairness, she's probably a stronger candidate than Big Daddy.

You laugh, but Trish Stratus got more votes than Roman Reigns, so I am looking forward to Nikki-sawa doing better than Roman Reigns as well. 

Akiyama getting in but poor Taue still being out hurts my soul.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, sek69 said:

Kenny being in is both a no brainer choice and also an indictment of how silly it is for the age threshold to be only 35. 

IIRC, it was originally 35 because the Joshi girls used to mandatorily retire at 25. That hasn't been the case for decades now, and thus the age limit is so obviously silly, I dunno why Meltzer doesn't change it beyond the fact that he is stubborn and obstinate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it's worth, I've seen speculation that Kota Ibushi's appearance works against him in HOF voting. Because he looks so young, he's perceived as a young up-and-comer rather than a guy in his late 30s who's been a main event star for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, NintendoLogic said:

For what it's worth, I've seen speculation that Kota Ibushi's appearance works against him in HOF voting. Because he looks so young, he's perceived as a young up-and-comer rather than a guy in his late 30s who's been a main event star for years.

It wouldn't surprise me if people pass on him because "he's young, there's still time" not realizing he's older than he looks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, El-P said:

Waiting for the incoming shitstorm about Kenny Omega in 5... 4... 3...

I have zero problems with Omega, personally. Can't deny what he did in Japan. But man, the Taue omission is pretty glaring. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All I can say is that when Dave says "it's the voters' decision, not his" when he responds to people like Ole Anderson criticizing "his" WON HOF, Dave leaves out how influential he is.

It's even in WON's article: "A fifth entry, early 20th century wrestler Dan Koloff, was also inducted based on Dave Meltzer’s historical analysis and research."

In other words, Dave and the historians make a case for the voters and they sway votes. It doesn't happen all the time (Dave seemed big on Randy Orton last year more than voters) but it surely happens for obscure names and his vote of no-confidence for people like Moolah, Slaughter, the Andersons, et al.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, War is Raw said:

All I can say is that when Dave says "it's the voters' decision, not his" when he responds to people like Ole Anderson criticizing "his" WON HOF, Dave leaves out how influential he is.

It's even in WON's article: "A fifth entry, early 20th century wrestler Dan Koloff, was also inducted based on Dave Meltzer’s historical analysis and research."

In other words, Dave and the historians make a case for the voters and they sway votes. It doesn't happen all the time (Dave seemed big on Randy Orton last year more than voters) but it surely happens for obscure names and his vote of no-confidence for people like Moolah, Slaughter, the Andersons, et al.

I do recall Dave making a case for Suzuki after the New Beginning 2017 match with Okada and he was inducted that same year. I was half-expecting Ishii to go in this year due to Dave arguing he was more deserving that Edge after the Cobb G1 match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Robert S said:

Reigns will be put back onto the ballot in a couple of years and will get in easily.

Unless he has a really strong heel run, you're in for a rude awakening in a couple of years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have a strong opinion on him one way or the other (on the one hand he has main evented four straight Wrestlemanias and will main event more, on the other hand this is the age of the Brand, where individual guys don't matter), I just meant that in a couple of years people will ask Dave to put him back on the ballot (with the argument being that since his last time on the ballot he had more time on top of WWE - which he will have by all likelihood) and he will do so.

Someone how I am surprised to have dropped of the ballot due to less than 10% of the votes is Mario Milano. Wasn't he THE guy in Australia for some time, or am I confusing him with someone?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Robert S said:

I don't have a strong opinion on him one way or the other (on the one hand he has main evented four straight Wrestlemanias and will main event more, on the other hand this is the age of the Brand, where individual guys don't matter), I just meant that in a couple of years people will ask Dave to put him back on the ballot (with the argument being that since his last time on the ballot he had more time on top of WWE - which he will have by all likelihood) and he will do so.

Someone how I am surprised to have dropped of the ballot due to less than 10% of the votes is Mario Milano. Wasn't he THE guy in Australia for some time, or am I confusing him with someone?

Oh Reigns will certainly return to the ballot. He won't "get in easily" without an incredibly strong heel run though. 

According to the promoter himself, Jim Barnett, the top babyface in Australia during that era was Dominic DeNucci, followed by Spyros Arion, and then Mario Milano in 3rd. I'm actually pleased Milano has been knocked off because it may lead to more votes consolidating behind DeNucci, who should've been in ages ago but is hurt by the fact that most voters aren't aware of his success in Australia while being very aware of him being a mid-card tag team guy in the US. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing with Reigns is, as has been mentioned, the brand is the more important factor than the individual in today's WWE. He was picked to go on last at Mania 4 times but you could easily argue that he wasn't the actual draw for any of those. For example, Shane vs Undertaker in the cell was clearly the draw in 2016 and Ronda's first match was clearly the draw in 2018. 2015 also saw a big Cena match and Sting's first WWE match. Just being picked to go out last doesn't mean you're the main attraction. Besides, no matter how you want to judge those matches, the guy will have the stench of failure on him for a long time due to the crowd rejection and not getting over to that John Cena level that they clearly expected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another oddity regarding his rule of guys dropping off the ballot after 15 years (or having to get 50%) is it's 15 years from their first ballot appearance, NOT 15 years on the ballot itself.  For example, if Reigns doesn't go back on the ballot for 2 years, that year would be considered his 4th year on the clock, not his 2nd.  Not saying this is a factor for Reigns one way or the other, but it is an oddity of the rules.

My guess on why he won't change the age 35 rule is it would be considered changing the standards and would mean anyone getting in after the change weren't judged on the exact same criteria as others already in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get the impression Dave pushes the historical candidates because he feels (probably rightly) they'll be forgotten to time otherwise. He honestly doesn't seem to think he has any effect on the more recent candidates despite him clearly pushing for certain guys in most years.

On the other hand, the folks he lobbies for don't always get in so I suppose that could be an indication he doesn't have as much influence as we think after all.

I will say it is going to be extremely difficult for anyone who's body of work is entirely or primarily post 2000s WWE to get in since no one is built to be a star and the brand is the main attraction. The way they run the company now more or less eliminates at least 2 of the WON HOF's criteria for entry, so how is anyone going to be able to get in? John Cena is the last WWE centered person who I would consider a "lock" to get in, and he's already in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say Daniel Bryan, but that's splitting hairs and the point still applies.

The biggest obstacle to changing the age requirement now is if you do it you effectively create a five year dead zone before anyone new becomes eligible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should be noted Medico Asesino, Karloff Lagarde, Dan Koloff were not even on this site's Top 557 Master List for the Greatest Wrestler Ever project. That means we have no footage and they weren't even big enough to consider even as a historical curiosity. But, now, years later, thanks to intrepid historians WON has found hidden gems. Of course, they are at the expense of some more recognized wrestlers.

It's intellectual elitism.

WON's nomination process has been hijacked by a handful of good intentioned and knowledgeable historians (or hobbyists) on WrestingClassics and Dave's board. But hijacked nonetheless.

Even Mike Tenay confronted Dave about putting Omega on the Japanese section of the ballot, not the US modern one. Based on raw totals, he would not have had the 60%, so IMHO he was backdoored in- enabled by Dave.

Yeah, so, sorry, but I'm that person who is going to criticize Dave's HOF. There are too many names on there and arguments are made for only a few of the candidates. Like as much as I liked him, why is Kamala even on the list of nominees? And are the inclusions of JYD, Kevin Nash, and The Ultimate Warrior to make up for Dave making fun of them when they were active?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, War is Raw said:

Should be noted Medico Asesino, Karloff Lagarde, Dan Koloff were not even on this site's Top 557 Master List for the Greatest Wrestler Ever project. That means we have no footage and they weren't even big enough to consider even as a historical curiosity. But, now, years later, thanks to intrepid historians WON has found hidden gems. Of course, they are at the expense of some more recognized wrestlers.

 Or, alternatively, it means that whoever put together that list didn't know as much about wrestling as you think they did. My evidence is short and sweet: no Jim Londos. The greatest draw in pro wrestling history. Credibility = shot out the window. I say this with as much respect as possible, if you managed to find 557 wrestlers ahead of Jim Londos in a "greatest ever" list then you simply don't know enough about pro wrestling. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, ethantyler said:

 Or, alternatively, it means that whoever put together that list didn't know as much about wrestling as you think they did. My evidence is short and sweet: no Jim Londos. The greatest draw in pro wrestling history. Credibility = shot out the window. I say this with as much respect as possible, if you managed to find 557 wrestlers ahead of Jim Londos in a "greatest ever" list then you simply don't know enough about pro wrestling. 

 

The project was based on footage for 70% of the voting base. Period. It was just poorly named. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Matt D said:

The project was based on footage for 70% of the voting base. Period. It was just poorly named. 

Yup, it was already pointed out to Raw is War previously in another thread that the GWE project was based on watching footage when they started going on about how "most GWE voters didn't value historical significance, drawing power, star power, importance outside of wrestling, name recognition or pushes." 

So not sure why, in a project based on watching footage, you would add someone as a "historical curiosity"?

If you're going to start talking or referencing GWE at least get the details of the project correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/14/2020 at 7:49 AM, ethantyler said:

Oh Reigns will certainly return to the ballot. He won't "get in easily" without an incredibly strong heel run though. 

According to the promoter himself, Jim Barnett, the top babyface in Australia during that era was Dominic DeNucci, followed by Spyros Arion, and then Mario Milano in 3rd. I'm actually pleased Milano has been knocked off because it may lead to more votes consolidating behind DeNucci, who should've been in ages ago but is hurt by the fact that most voters aren't aware of his success in Australia while being very aware of him being a mid-card tag team guy in the US. 

Milano was accused basically of sexual assault a couple years ago by Shazza McKenzie. I'm not blackballing him, but I'm less than enthused about Milano's candidacy right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/16/2020 at 12:06 PM, War is Raw said:

Even Mike Tenay confronted Dave about putting Omega on the Japanese section of the ballot, not the US modern one. Based on raw totals, he would not have had the 60%, so IMHO he was backdoored in- enabled by Dave.

If like 99% of his body of work was in Japan, why shouldn't be be on the Japanese section of the ballot? I don;t think the last year of AEW was what put him over the top. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×