2009 WON HOF thread

[Bix]

Well, now we know where Dave got the idea, since Terry Funk was also the source of "Jumbo is lazy." I love Terry Funk, but...

 

Oh, and if we're talking about intentional bad performances, then Owen Hart did that regularly, too, and he's not faulted for it.

 

Maybe it's different if they have an intentional bad match specifically because they know Dave is watching...

[Herodes]

So what is the case against Cien Caras? The numbers he drew speak for themselves, he has longevity (set Arena Mexico record in 1990, Mexico record in 1993, was on top or just underneath from the 80s until 2005 when he still drew huge against Perros del Mal), top heel during first EMLL TV boom in 1990 and AAA boom in 1993, drew big in the US when AAA ran there too (outdrawing WWF and WCW at the time)...has he ever been on the ballot, has Dave ever talked about him not being in?

[tomk]

Case against Cien pretty much amounts to Konan being a Meltzer source.

 

Meltzer on Konnan:

 

Konnan

 

Strengths: Drawing power. Biggest draw in wrestling in 1993 and 1994, and biggest draw historically over a period of many years who isn’t already in. Helped create AAA, helped book the rise of smaller wrestlers, and helped book during the heyday of the promotion, plus the person most responsible for opening up the U.S./Mexico borders that had been closed for talent since the 70s. Is as big a long- time draw as anyone who isn’t in.

 

Weakness: Not a Hall of Famer in the U.S., where he spent much of his career. Not a Hall of Fame worker at any point. His candidacy solely based on drawing power and historical importance. Polarizing figure, some feel his changes have been negative for business in Mexico by moving away from so much of the traditional style and bringing in U.S. extreme style.

1993:

 

Konnan vs. Cien Caras (Mexico City Plaza de Toros - 48,000 - set all-time Mexico attendance record )

 

Konnan vs. Cien Caras vs. Jake Roberts (Los Angeles Sports Arena - 17,500)

 

Keep in mind the Mexico wrestlers except the ones from 1990 on are going to be ranked too low (and for someone like Perro Aguayo Sr., even though he did well after 1990, he’s ranked too low)...Cien Caras, if full records were available, would probably fair significantly better than he’s listed. But Caras got virtually no support among his peers in Mexico, with the feeling he was always on top with people like Mil Mascaras, Dos Caras, Canek and Konnan because he was a rare tall heavyweight with a good body. He was absolutely a star, but was more a good opponent for genuine draws, and not that charismatic or much of a worker.

Konan in the 90s was the rare Mexican heavyweight with fully roided body, he was always on top with people like Cien and Perro Aguayo, genuine charismatic draws who were better workers. He has a series with Vampiro that draws well based on unique relationship between the two. And then after that I don't get the impression that he means much more as a draw then Latin Lover or La Parka Jr.

[ohtani's jacket]

Has anyone seen stuff from Funk where he dogged it?

[Dylan Waco]

I've never seen Funk dog it. I don't doubt that he may have, but I've never seen it.

 

And on the subject of Goldberg v. Graham, honestly as an in ring wrestler I have no clue how anyone could make the case for Graham even if they loathed Berg. The only watchable Graham matches I've ever seen were v. Dusty and they were watchable for reasons that had little to do with in ring action.

[El-P]

Was Konnan a good worker at any point of his career ? I ask because I don't think I've seen one match when I though that he was even decent or put on a good performance.

[Bix]

At the beginning of both WCW runs he'd do some fun lucha-style matwork in addition to flying moves that were impressive for a guy of his build. Even after he turned heel and joined the Dungeon of Doom, he'd have good matches when in with his friends like Super Calo. It seemed like try less and less as he got more over. He said in his '94 Torch Talk that he didn't do as much as he could because he was already over like crazy and there was no point to him in doing it.

[stunning_grover]

The only negative that he ever really harps on is "When he wanted to be bad, he was absolutely terrible." I'm not even sure how true that is. J.J. Dillon said that Murdoch "liked to clown around" and that kept him from getting NWA World Title consideration, but that's the only time I've ever seen someone mention it.

Terry Funk said it too, but differed on the opinion of why Murdoch never got the belt. A quote from his autobiography here:

Dick Murdoch was really one of the greatest workers in the entire business, but he was tempermental. If Dick, for whatever reason, decided he was going to go out there and have a stinkeroo of a match, he'd have one. It would be stinkier than what anyone else in the world could do...

 

..His name actually came up once in the early 1970s as a possible NWA world's champion, but he just didn't have the political allies even to be strongly considered for it. The world title was a very political deal, as I would find out first-hand.

A page later, he even talks about Murdoch and the HoF.

Murdoch should be remembered, but there are things like the Wrestling Observer Gall of Fame, where Murdoch's not in, and I don't think he'll ever make it in. I'd like to tell Dave Meltzer, the editor, to put him in, but he can't just do that. He has to go by the balloters. I do think if you had the boys in the business vote, they'd vote him in. But you don't have a true, balanced hall of fame if it's just the boys voting.

Not sure if I agree with all that, but it's an interesting perspective from a guy who knows the situation well.

 

I've heard similar things before. Jake Roberts mentioned in one of his shoot interviews that he feels that there were nights were Dick Murdoch was one of the best workers in the business, but that there were also nights where he wasn't even trying to the point that he was making himself look ridiculous.

[Dylan Waco]

Murdoch as lazy guy is something I find really uninteresting for the reasons Bix mentioned. Murdoch not wanting to work hard because he thinks his opponent is the shits or because he's pissed off about a payoff strikes me as less absurd than Owen and Foley working a shit match with popcorn plunder spots just so Meltzer would LOL at the ridiculousness of it.

 

I"m actually fairly down on Murdoch as a worker at this point as people keep pointing me to great Murdoch performances that I just don't enjoy very much, but laziness is not something that I would consider a defining trait of his work.

[Johnny Sorrow]

Owen and Foley working a shit match with popcorn plunder spots just so Meltzer would LOL at the ridiculousness of it.

Actually, that's not the story. The story is that they'd been doing this comedy match around the horn, and one night Meltzer was at a show. Foley asked Owen if they could do a serious match because Dave was there and Owen said, "Sure." Then Foley thought about it and basically said, "Ah Fuck that." cause he felt bad about trying to impress Dave, so they did their comedy match as planned.

[sek69]

At times? Try telling any non-fan that the foremost expert in the wrestling field believes pro wrestling and MMA are the same thing

No he doesnt. In certion aspects he sees similarites but to say he thinks they are the same thing simply isnt true.

 

 

He's on record on numerous occasions stating that MMA should promote itself like pro wrestling (in terms of personalities, not "it's a work"), so I think sometimes it's more like he believes MMA basically turning itself into more or less real pro wrestling is the best way for it to gain in popularity.

[rovert]

At times? Try telling any non-fan that the foremost expert in the wrestling field believes pro wrestling and MMA are the same thing

No he doesnt. In certion aspects he sees similarites but to say he thinks they are the same thing simply isnt true.

 

 

He's on record on numerous occasions stating that MMA should promote itself like pro wrestling (in terms of personalities, not "it's a work"), so I think sometimes it's more like he believes MMA basically turning itself into more or less real pro wrestling is the best way for it to gain in popularity.

 

That is not the same as saying they are the same thing. Anyways sports do thrive on personalities especially combat sports.

[kjh]

I think Dave has an underlying problem with reality at times.

Doesn't everyone who has been so intensely involved in the business for over 25 years?

[Cox]

At times? Try telling any non-fan that the foremost expert in the wrestling field believes pro wrestling and MMA are the same thing

No he doesnt. In certion aspects he sees similarites but to say he thinks they are the same thing simply isnt true.

 

 

He's on record on numerous occasions stating that MMA should promote itself like pro wrestling (in terms of personalities, not "it's a work"), so I think sometimes it's more like he believes MMA basically turning itself into more or less real pro wrestling is the best way for it to gain in popularity.

 

I think his talking point is more "MMA does pro wrestling better than pro wrestling does pro wrestling" as the UFC seems to do a better job promoting personal grudges between fighters to set up more interest in fights than pro wrestling does in setting up fake versions of the same thing, and is thus much more successful as a result.

[S.L.L.]

At times? Try telling any non-fan that the foremost expert in the wrestling field believes pro wrestling and MMA are the same thing

No he doesnt. In certion aspects he sees similarites but to say he thinks they are the same thing simply isnt true.

 

He has outright said in the past, in no uncertain terms, that MMA is what pro wrestling would be if it were legit. Admittedly, that's not the exact same thing as "MMA = wrestling", but it's close enough.

[Bix]

A former wrestling star talks Hall of Fame balloting

 

Recently I have heard the different measuring standards and opinions that are used by the voters for the Observer HOF. The main discussion is if many of the current generation of wrestlers are currently Hall Of Fame worthy or not. Even I have difficulties in voting for many of the current wrestlers, despite them being innovative and possibly even more superior to wrestlers from the previous generations.

 

I always try to use these criteria's to make my selection when it comes to selecting a wrestler on my ballot: were they a drawing card, a top notch worker, or a very important person to the industry? Unfortunately the majority of the current wrestlers are not major drawing cards on their own. They are a piece of the machine that draws based upon all of the parts. For example Chris Jericho, John Cena, Rey Mysterio, & Edge are major players to the WWE product. Their work rate is decent. They sell tons of merchandise and their television appearances' can move ratings. My question is if any of them are not on a WWE house show, does the arena business decrease by any noticeable difference? Usually the answer is no. If you compare the house show drawing power for example with Jerry Lawler, Hulk Hogan, or any regional draw, their lack of an appearance can have a major effect on the gate. I just see the criteria for drawing power for the current U.S. wrestlers to be not an issue any longer, since most of them are not genuine draws without the WWE machine behind them.

 

It's not like if Chris Jericho or Rey Mysterio jumped to TNA for example, would TNA attendance escalate to WWE numbers. I’m guessing that the answer would be no. It's not like attendance or buy rates jumped noticeably when Kurt Angle who met the HOF criteria jumped to TNA.

 

Unfortunately world titles don't really mean much in the way promotions utilize them as a drawing card. Superstar Billy Graham drew excellent numbers during his ten month title reign in WWWF. After he lost the title, he only drew decently in the core of the WWWF market. He became a mid carder almost every where he went after he left WWWF. Keep in mind that wrestlers like Chris Jericho & Rey Mysterio were obviously more superior to Billy Graham in many different aspects & had the world title on their resume. Plus they helped contribute to drawing more houses than Billy, but yet they don't meet the criteria in being selected by a majority vote.

 

Many people in the industry respect certain wrestlers to a high degree for being great technicians or the ability to carry anybody. They got al of the talent in the world, but they were usually missing a variable or never received a major push to match the talent that almost every insider/industry worker recognized. If you ask almost any 1980's-1990's wrestler about their opinion on Owen Hart, Arn Anderson, Bobby Eaton, Barry Windham, Ricky Morton, Curt Hennig, etc., you will get glowing responses about their respective talents. When you ask why none of them are in the Hall of Fame, the usual answer is that they never drew on their own. There are times that I draw that same conclusion when I try deciding on voting for the current wrestlers VS. the wrestlers that never got voted in from the territory days.

 

One also must question what type of wrestling does the voter watch. I rarely watch Lucha Libre or Japanese wrestling, so my selections are usually going to be bias against voting for a wrestler that I don't watch. I did vote for Paco Alonso last year, despite not watching EMLL. I voted for him strictly on the longevity he had as a wrestling promoter and nothing else. A voter can also be bias based upon not voting for wrestlers that worked in an era before they watched wrestling or even before videos were available.

 

When I vote for a booker or a promoter, I usually base my criteria on how long was the territory successful, how long were they in business, and how large were their biggest houses. I voted Jerry Jarrett this year on my ballot. He promoted a successful territory that drew decently, but not great against in comparison against the WWF gates. But one must recognize that drawing large masses of people to weekly shows can get difficult. The gates are indicative based upon the booking and wrestlers that are featured. Jerry Jarrett did respectable business by pretty much promoting low rent wrestling in comparison to what everybody else was drawing in the dying days of the territory system in the 1980's and the over saturation of big league television product that was available with cable television.

 

I voted for Don Owen, despite only watching bits & pieces of his territory off of youtube. My only criteria were based upon him running a small time territory for over forty years. It would be equivalent to honoring a mama & pop store that ran for decades in comparison to a major retail that was in more markets but ultimately went out of business in less than ten years.

 

I also noticed varying opinions on regional drawing cards. The usual argument was that they had long stints as a main eventer based upon being the booker or owner of their territory. Guys like Big Daddy, Carlos Colon, & Otto Wanz are not regarded highly by insiders & wrestlers for their work rate. Keep in mind that any votes they receive can be justified on the longevity that they drew on top, despite inferior work rate or politics. I only seen a clip of Big Daddy and he was awful. But his notoriety was what most people use to identify his style of wrestling.

 

One must consider that the availability of video footage or television exposure can be an important part for a person’s judging criteria. I always heard about the technical prowess of Johnny Saint. I recent looked up a few of his matches youtube & found them to be technical master pieces for him time that still holds up today. To my knowledge, Saint is not on the ballot. I never heard much about Saint, until recently with his style being an inspiration to several wrestlers that were looking for something different to emulate.

 

Last year Martin Karadagian was nominated. I never seen or heard about Titanes Del Ring until I read the bio. Obviously this was due to my lack of exposure to the product. But thanks to youtube, I was able to watch clips of Martin & the style of wrestling that he promoted.

 

My point is that the current generation of wrestlers & possibly some of the legends that fell thru the cracks will get nominated with tons of footage being available from their respective careers.

 

Carlos Colon drew stadium crowds that most successful regional drawing U.S. wrestlers never drew. Crowds in the excess of 20,000 or more was done on multiple times would make you a decent draw & promoter by my standards. He’s not in the HOF for his lack of business morals. Unfortunately if we omitted promoters for stiffing or short changing wrestlers, I think we would only be left with Sam Muchnick or Paul Boesch based upon their reputations. But than again, none of them promoted a murderer that is now considered a regional hall of famer or refused to help expedite the body of several decease wrestlers that had worked for his company [Michelle Martel, Bruiser Brody, & Eddie Gilbert]

 

My major question is how the current generation of fans & experts are going to vote in the next ten years? Wrestlers like Samoa Joe, A.J. Styles, Bryan Danielson, Nigel McGuinness, etc. are all top wrestlers. But none of them drew any money in comparison to a mid card or top card WWE wrestler. Does the wrestler that works for a lower profile company get discarded as a Hall Of Fame choice in comparison to the wrestler that received more exposure by working for the bigger company? I guess this is another question to ponder and argue about in upcoming years.

 

Another question is how do you gauge a wrestler if they never worked anywhere prior to the WWE? Their legend status is indicative on how well they are booked. For example, Edge, John Morrison, John Cena, & others didn’t have much of a career prior to WWE. It’s not like in comparison to a wrestler that had to get himself over in several territories to be recognized as a drawing card and a main eventer.

 

One must also question on who is involved on the voting process. Some wrestlers vote based on the familiarity on the wrestling that they were around. Most wrestlers did not watch much wrestling on their off days. I’m pretty sure the majority of wrestlers don’t watch every TV show, Japanese wresting, Lucha Libre, etc. This can make their opinion to be limited. Some devoted fans in comparison might watch every TV show, DVD, and every genre of independent & international wrestling and have a better grasp on what are the qualities of a Hall of Famer. One must find a happy balance on who is involved on the voting.

[rovert]

At times? Try telling any non-fan that the foremost expert in the wrestling field believes pro wrestling and MMA are the same thing

No he doesnt. In certion aspects he sees similarites but to say he thinks they are the same thing simply isnt true.

 

He has outright said in the past, in no uncertain terms, that MMA is what pro wrestling would be if it were legit. Admittedly, that's not the exact same thing as "MMA = wrestling", but it's close enough.

 

It pretty much is especially when you compare it to some bouts in the early part of the century.

 

A former wrestling star talks Hall of Fame balloting

Is that Missy Hyatt again I take it?

[Boondocks Kernoodle]

Yeah, I was also thinking it was Missy since she did the "Name withheld" thing last year. I suppose it's better to go anonymous than to risk your chance of becoming the oldest WWE Diva in history.

[WrestlingPower]

Late to this thread so a few thoughts on things I read throughout:

--Has Meltzer said whether the British candidates will have their own group like the Japanese do? So they're only getting a percentage of the vote based on ballots that include British performers? If so, what if only like 5 people vote for any Brits, 3 votes for one guy would get them in.

 

--The Edge/Murdoch debate here has centered around their work but to me it's a stardom thing. I'll admit I haven't watched the product much at all during Edge's years on top, but more than just Meltzer rank him as one of THE top stars of the past few years. I never saw Murdoch as more than a 2nd tier guy, whereas Edge is one of a half dozen of the top stars & most consistent performers in the world's largest company over a several year period. I see him as being in

 

--Regarding Rick Rude I also see him as a second tier guy and would probably argue Jake Roberts deserves it more than him, but Rude had more titles and more times pushed closer to the top. But I still see both as second tier, and this is a Hall of Fame, not a Hall of the Very Good. I agree with the guy that wrote that there are probably dozens of luchadores who would go in if you dropped it to Hall of the Very Good level.

 

--Also curious why all the Meltzer hate and the HOF is a joke talk? Not to pick a scab, but why is Angle being in a joke and is that the reason "the HOF is a joke"?

 

--Anyone want to offer opinions on Kensuke Sasaki? I see him as making a strong case for himself in the past 5 years, but I could see the argument of the scene over there isn't what it once was and he floated up the cards just based on attrition.

[Bix]

Late to this thread so a few thoughts on things I read throughout:

--Has Meltzer said whether the British candidates will have their own group like the Japanese do? So they're only getting a percentage of the vote based on ballots that include British performers? If so, what if only like 5 people vote for any Brits, 3 votes for one guy would get them in.

Yes, Europe is a separate "region."

 

--The Edge/Murdoch debate here has centered around their work but to me it's a stardom thing. I'll admit I haven't watched the product much at all during Edge's years on top, but more than just Meltzer rank him as one of THE top stars of the past few years. I never saw Murdoch as more than a 2nd tier guy, whereas Edge is one of a half dozen of the top stars & most consistent performers in the world's largest company over a several year period. I see him as being in

Edge has been a consistent main eventer for about 3.5 years, at least about 1/3 of which has been spent injured. He wasn't an HOF level worker at all beforehand. As a main eventer, he didn't affect business close to the levels of Cena, Rey, or Eddy at the height of their drawing powers as far as WWE guys in recent history go.

 

His ringwork has also been pretty inconsistent, as one week he'll be this annoying Nova-ish guy whose offense looks like it can't break an egg, the next week he's having an awesome match with Batista (or more recently John Morrison).

 

--Also curious why all the Meltzer hate and the HOF is a joke talk? Not to pick a scab, but why is Angle being in a joke and is that the reason "the HOF is a joke"?

Meltzer stuff: For starters, he seems to have no idea how British wrestling worked as a business and makes direct comparisons to the US, Japan, and Mexico about how they can't be big deals if only 2 or 3 shows from Joint Promotions ever drew 10,000 people or more.

 

Angle: Voted in after 5-6 years in the business. The rules were immediately changed after he was voted in, changing the requirements from 35 years old or 15 years experience to 15 years experience or at least 40 years old with at least 10 years experience, which wouldn't have made him eligible until this year. I have no idea if Angle would get voted in if he first became eligible this year, but he mostly likely wouldn't have gotten in as easily.

[Dylan Waco]

--The Edge/Murdoch debate here has centered around their work but to me it's a stardom thing. I'll admit I haven't watched the product much at all during Edge's years on top, but more than just Meltzer rank him as one of THE top stars of the past few years. I never saw Murdoch as more than a 2nd tier guy, whereas Edge is one of a half dozen of the top stars & most consistent performers in the world's largest company over a several year period. I see him as being in

 

--Also curious why all the Meltzer hate and the HOF is a joke talk? Not to pick a scab, but why is Angle being in a joke and is that the reason "the HOF is a joke"?

1) The problem with the stardom argument is that it applies to a whole lot of people. For example if you are going by "stardom" as some sort of indicator I don't see how Edge is a better candidate than Sid. Sid was always insanely over wherever he went, was always hovering around the main events, won World titles in both promotions, headlined several ppvs, worked on top in two of the largest houses in wrestling history, et. Obviously Edge was a better in ring worker - though Sid has been in an unusually large number of solid matches for such a poor in ring talent - but if "stardom" is the issue that's not applicable. So if "stardom" is the metric, I think you open the doors for Luger, Sid, Nash and any other number of guys that most people would think have no business in the HoF.

 

2) Angle is a terrible candidate for an HoF and definitely discredited the entire project.

 

I'm hesitant to run down a laundry list of why I don't think Angle belongs in the Hall, because I think the better way to look at it is "what is the argument for him being in?" I have never seen anyone articulate it.

[Bix]

Bryan Alvarez has argued that Angle at his peak was so far beyond anyone ever in the ring that tenure doesn't matter and he's an HOFer.

[Dylan Waco]

Bryan Alvarez has argued that Angle at his peak was so far beyond anyone ever in the ring that tenure doesn't matter and he's an HOFer.

That's not a credible argument, thats just evidence that Alvarez is an idiot.

[Eduardo]

What do you guys think is the main reason why Atlantis never really comes close to getting voted in? The lack of support he gets has always been puzzling to me. 25 years as a featured charismatic player in Arena Mexico and a guy who is one of the elite trios workers in the history of lucha libre, he just seems like a far better pick than a lot of guys in the HOF. Meltzer says he's "not a Hall of Fame worker" but he is an excellent matworker (he probably works better with Blue Panther than anyone else ever), is a great brawler (has some awesome trios brawls against Villano III and of course the famous match from 2000), and was a spectacular high flier in the 1980s. I've seen Atlantis in some trios matches that featured Santo/Casas working against each other and Atlantis has stolen the show from them. His body of work includes some of the best title matches, mask vs mask matches, trios matches and tag team matches of the taped era of lucha libre.

[Bix]

Bryan Alvarez has argued that Angle at his peak was so far beyond anyone ever in the ring that tenure doesn't matter and he's an HOFer.

That's not a credible argument, thats just evidence that Alvarez is an idiot.

 

Oh, I know. Just felt like mentioning it.

 

It was actually much worse in context, if you can believe it.