WON HOF 2016

[Dylan Waco]

I think Matt is drastically underrating Panther's popularity. In no way am I going to suggest that he's an all time top tier star in lucha or even close. And I could see an argument for him being the 10th or 11 best candidate in the lucha region. But that says more about the lucha regions quality and depth than it does about Panther as a candidate.

 

Panther has been widely regarded as a great worker forever. He was one of the first guys pitched to me as a great worker by lucha fans two decades ago, and up until the last couple of years this seems to have been the consensus position. He's always struck me as a guy who was more over than his push, which is saying something since CMLL is a promotion where virtually everyone could be considered a mid-carder because of the nature of the booking. When he has occasion for big matches - the Love Machine match, the 75th anniversary when he dropped his mask, the hair match v. Casas from a few years ago - the results have been big drawing shows where Panther was clearly seen as a star.

 

I see Panther as very analogous to Chris Benoit or Eddie Guerrero. I believe that if Panther had the exact same career in the States or Japan as he had in Mexico he'd have been in years ago. That said I do think it's possible and fair to argue that Benoit and Eddie are just below the cut off line as HoFers. I'm just not sure I buy the argument that someone knowledgeable on all three, could see Benoit and Eddie as definitely in and Panther as definitely out. At the very least I'd need to see a case presented to me.

 

On the point about W2TBD being upset by Bryan not getting in last year, I would submit that it likely had little to do with people undervaluing work as a criteria given the voting break down. The reality is that Bryan gets in if he had comparable support from his peers as he did from other categories. For whatever reason he didn't. It's a mystery to me as to why his peers didn't vote for him, but I find it hard to believe that contemporary wrestlers are combing over the drawing record of Bryan and saying "nah, fuck him." In theory they are the LEAST likely group to do that. Personally I didn't vote for Bryan last year in part because of the 15/50 rule but also because I saw no reason to rush. He's not Cena. I won't vote for him this year either, though I have zero objection to him getting in which I expect him to do rather easily.

 

On the broader subject of Bryan I suspect that his strongest influence is not necessarily going to be related to indie wrestling directly, but rather the change in fan culture that came with his ascent to the top. It's been said before, but the rise of Bryan showed the fans that they have a voice. People can complain about the "hard push" of Roman Reigns that doesn't actually exist, the failure to push Cesaro, et. but the reality is Bryan's popularity forced a change to the booking of a Wrestlemania, and has created a universe where hardcore fans know that they can kill or alter the landscape of a show if it deviates too far from what they want. It's hard to imagine a WWE with AJ Styles debuting on the main roster, Nakamura as the top star in the hardcore fan utopia that is NXT, the CWC, et. without the rise of the Bryan Fan Phenomenon

[Matt D]

On the broader subject of Bryan I suspect that his strongest influence is not necessarily going to be related to indie wrestling directly, but rather the change in fan culture that came with his ascent to the top. It's been said before, but the rise of Bryan showed the fans that they have a voice. People can complain about the "hard push" of Roman Reigns that doesn't actually exist, the failure to push Cesaro, et. but the reality is Bryan's popularity forced a change to the booking of a Wrestlemania, and has created a universe where hardcore fans know that they can kill or alter the landscape of a show if it deviates too far from what they want. It's hard to imagine a WWE with AJ Styles debuting on the main roster, Nakamura as the top star in the hardcore fan utopia that is NXT, the CWC, et. without the rise of the Bryan Fan Phenomenon

 

To play devil's advocate and potentially reference a monkey's paw, this is "Positive Impact?" Purely asking.

[elliott]

On the broader subject of Bryan I suspect that his strongest influence is not necessarily going to be related to indie wrestling directly, but rather the change in fan culture that came with his ascent to the top. It's been said before, but the rise of Bryan showed the fans that they have a voice. People can complain about the "hard push" of Roman Reigns that doesn't actually exist, the failure to push Cesaro, et. but the reality is Bryan's popularity forced a change to the booking of a Wrestlemania, and has created a universe where hardcore fans know that they can kill or alter the landscape of a show if it deviates too far from what they want. It's hard to imagine a WWE with AJ Styles debuting on the main roster, Nakamura as the top star in the hardcore fan utopia that is NXT, the CWC, et. without the rise of the Bryan Fan Phenomenon

 

See this is something I find really interesting to think about.

 

Its another one of the many examples of why it sucks voting on modern candidates of candidates theoretically in their prime and not having time to reflect and see how their influence manifests itself.

 

Because my first question in regards to Dylan's point would be: Is this a good thing for pro wrestling? That fans now know they can just reject and shit on things and WWE will cave and give them exactly what they want? Is that good for pro wrestling long term?

 

My next question would be something about the rise in social media and people using that as a form of instant protest and that's effect on the populous, especially the nerd culture populous (nerd culture which also was on the rise during Bryan's run to the top), and whether or not something like the Daniel Bryan movement was inevitable and Bryan just happened to be the right place/right time (not to discredit Bryan himself. Right place/Right Time is how everyone in the history of everything got ahead and its also Right Place/Right Time/Right Person and Bryan was unquestionably the right person). But I haven't figured out a good way to ask it so I give you that nonsense instead.

 

Anyway, this is more interesting than "what was ROH's biggest crowd?" (which to be fair was my least interesting question )

 

edit:

Or what Matt said, damnit!

[W2BTD]

 

 

On the point about W2TBD being upset by Bryan not getting in last year, I would submit that it likely had little to do with people undervaluing work as a criteria given the voting break down. The reality is that Bryan gets in if he had comparable support from his peers as he did from other categories. For whatever reason he didn't. It's a mystery to me as to why his peers didn't vote for him, but I find it hard to believe that contemporary wrestlers are combing over the drawing record of Bryan and saying "nah, fuck him." In theory they are the LEAST likely group to do that. Personally I didn't vote for Bryan last year in part because of the 15/50 rule but also because I saw no reason to rush. He's not Cena. I won't vote for him this year either, though I have zero objection to him getting in which I expect him to do rather easily.

 

 

 

I agree that wrestlers are very likely doing the least amount of research, but with that said, I can easily see the older, pre indie boom types totally disregarding Bryan (and anything ever done on the indies altogether) while muttering "that little dork never drew dime". Same for Punk (who I didn't vote for, just to be clear).

 

I think as time passes and more & more of the voter pool is made up of people who came from the indies, there will be a natural shift in the voting patterns of the wrestler component of the voting pool.

[ohtani's jacket]

 

The biggest run of his career was mostly due to the incredible charisma of Art Barr. Put another mid-card luchadore in that spot and I bet it would do the same business. Panther was a very talented, fundamentally sound wrestler who was very dependable and consistent. But does being a consistently good wrestler alone make you a Hall of Famer or just a "good hand?"

Think this is unfair to Panther. The mask vs mask with Love Machine drew a turnaway crowd to Arena Mexico, and that was for masked tecnico Art Barr. The people weren't there to see whether Love Machine kept his mask, they were there cheering on Panther. Barr's charisma didn't explode until he became a rudo.

 

Also I think this overlooks that part of what got Love Machine over was that he was competitive against someone as good and as popular as Blue Panther. You really think substituting for Panther with somebody like Bestia Salvaje would have had the same result?

 

 

It's possible. Might not have drawn as much as it wouldn't have been mask vs. mask but Pena had already created a string of successful gimmicks using the same formula. It depends on how popular the Love Machine gimmick was with the public. I don't think you can claim they drew a turn away crowd simply because he was programmed with Panther. If that were the case then surely Panther would have been booked in far more apuesta matches over the years. The Panther/Love Machine program was certainly successful. It drew in two different promotions and Panther certainly deserves some of the credit for that regardless of how hot Pena's booking was at the time. But it's offset by the fact that there were clear headliners like Caras, Aguayo and Konnan pulling the crowds. Panther/Love Machine is not that different from an IC title feud drawing during Hulkamania. None of Panther's other programs came close to touching it, and it doesn't really help that the matches are among his worst.

[Loss]

 

 

 

On the point about W2TBD being upset by Bryan not getting in last year, I would submit that it likely had little to do with people undervaluing work as a criteria given the voting break down. The reality is that Bryan gets in if he had comparable support from his peers as he did from other categories. For whatever reason he didn't. It's a mystery to me as to why his peers didn't vote for him, but I find it hard to believe that contemporary wrestlers are combing over the drawing record of Bryan and saying "nah, fuck him." In theory they are the LEAST likely group to do that. Personally I didn't vote for Bryan last year in part because of the 15/50 rule but also because I saw no reason to rush. He's not Cena. I won't vote for him this year either, though I have zero objection to him getting in which I expect him to do rather easily.

 

 

 

I agree that wrestlers are very likely doing the least amount of research, but with that said, I can easily see the older, pre indie boom types totally disregarding Bryan (and anything ever done on the indies altogether) while muttering "that little dork never drew dime". Same for Punk (who I didn't vote for, just to be clear).

 

I think as time passes and more & more of the voter pool is made up of people who came from the indies, there will be a natural shift in the voting patterns of the wrestler component of the voting pool.

 

 

Those wrestlers would be in a different bucket though, right? It seemed like he was getting support from guys who are currently active in wrestling. It genuinely surprised me.

[Loss]

I'd also like to talk more about Bryan Danielson as an indy figure, and put in context what guys like he and Punk and Low Ki and Homicide and Super Dragon accomplished after WCW and ECW folded, and we were left with an American monopoly.

 

If you look at the first six months or so of indy shows after this, they may have someone like Low Ki around, but the U.S. indies are generally are trying to copy the ECW style. King of the Indies changed that and gave birth to Ring of Honor. The shift in WWE culture I think has roots there, so this is something that has been built from the ground up for nearly 15 years.

 

The questions that are important I'd say is if that indy boom was going to happen regardless because of all the talent WWE wouldn't pick up, or if the indy boom can be attributed to the quality of the talent. If so, Danielson may not be the #1 guy on that list (he might be), but he's absolutely in the conversation. Now, there are guys who don't sign with WWE because they've found a way to make more money working the independents. Imagine that 15 years ago. I can absolutely see the argument for Wrestlemania 30 as something that should have launched a Hall of Fame run instead of ending a career, but if you look at WM30 as something that was in the making since King of the Indies 2001, it comes across as more of a culmination and Danielson's case seems much stronger. It wasn't just Danielson's journey there, but what the possibility that he could take that journey represented in a changing landscape.I don't know the answer to all of this, but I would like to ponder if Bryan Danielson made indy wrestling something bigger and more viable with a higher profile than it was in the 90s. It definitely meant way more than it did in the 90s -- the question is what made it mean more. Or, who made it mean more? Who ultimately gets credit for building up the profile of independent wrestling so much?

 

It is late and I am tired and I am probably not making much sense. I don't even really have a strong opinion on these particular factors right now. I just think there's a lot more to Bryan Danielson that's fun to talk about and weigh than his career match resume and the WM30 main event. Those are on one level where his case lies, but the environment in which he built that case really says none of that should have ever happened.

[Loss]

 

On the broader subject of Bryan I suspect that his strongest influence is not necessarily going to be related to indie wrestling directly, but rather the change in fan culture that came with his ascent to the top. It's been said before, but the rise of Bryan showed the fans that they have a voice. People can complain about the "hard push" of Roman Reigns that doesn't actually exist, the failure to push Cesaro, et. but the reality is Bryan's popularity forced a change to the booking of a Wrestlemania, and has created a universe where hardcore fans know that they can kill or alter the landscape of a show if it deviates too far from what they want. It's hard to imagine a WWE with AJ Styles debuting on the main roster, Nakamura as the top star in the hardcore fan utopia that is NXT, the CWC, et. without the rise of the Bryan Fan Phenomenon

 

To play devil's advocate and potentially reference a monkey's paw, this is "Positive Impact?" Purely asking.

 

 

It's an interesting question, and I don't want to answer this, but I do want to say that every person who has drawn huge has also had a long-term negative impact in other ways -- Hulk Hogan was the center of a drug scandal that sent the WWF off the rails for years and Steve Austin's swearing fostered a more adult presentation of the WWF that turned off sponsors in a way that they still haven't really recovered from. The same elements that caused WCW's greatest success destroyed it. Ric Flair is simultaneously the best drawing and worse drawing NWA champ of all time according to a Dave post a while back. We don't tend to look at the downside of people who were successful draws -- all the shows they've headlined that bombed, or that WCW declined quickly in 1999-2000 with Hulk Hogan on top. We only tend to remember the positives. So I wonder if we should hold everyone to that standard.

[cad]

 

 

The biggest run of his career was mostly due to the incredible charisma of Art Barr. Put another mid-card luchadore in that spot and I bet it would do the same business. Panther was a very talented, fundamentally sound wrestler who was very dependable and consistent. But does being a consistently good wrestler alone make you a Hall of Famer or just a "good hand?"

Think this is unfair to Panther. The mask vs mask with Love Machine drew a turnaway crowd to Arena Mexico, and that was for masked tecnico Art Barr. The people weren't there to see whether Love Machine kept his mask, they were there cheering on Panther. Barr's charisma didn't explode until he became a rudo.

 

Also I think this overlooks that part of what got Love Machine over was that he was competitive against someone as good and as popular as Blue Panther. You really think substituting for Panther with somebody like Bestia Salvaje would have had the same result?

 

 

It's possible. Might not have drawn as much as it wouldn't have been mask vs. mask but Pena had already created a string of successful gimmicks using the same formula. It depends on how popular the Love Machine gimmick was with the public. I don't think you can claim they drew a turn away crowd simply because he was programmed with Panther. If that were the case then surely Panther would have been booked in far more apuesta matches over the years. The Panther/Love Machine program was certainly successful. It drew in two different promotions and Panther certainly deserves some of the credit for that regardless of how hot Pena's booking was at the time. But it's offset by the fact that there were clear headliners like Caras, Aguayo and Konnan pulling the crowds. Panther/Love Machine is not that different from an IC title feud drawing during Hulkamania. None of Panther's other programs came close to touching it, and it doesn't really help that the matches are among his worst.

 

 

I'm not saying that Panther mask matches automatically generated sellout crowds. It was a hot feud in a hot period for the company, but not every Arena Mexico show sold out. Bestia Salvaje vs Huracan Sevilla drew what was reported as a below average crowd (for the time--I'm sure it was better than some of the crowds later in the year). That was what happened when genuine midcarders headlined at Arena Mexico in early 1992. Panther vs Machine headlined what I believe was the biggest and most anticipated CMLL card that year. And Machine wasn't popular at all with the crowd. Despite being a well-meaning tecnico who'd been with the company for less than half a year, he had a packed house hoping he lost. Okay, he was an American going up against a Mexican, but for that to happen you still need a rudo the fans want to get behind.

 

I don't think it follows that if Panther was primarily responsible for that crowd then he'd have been booked in more apuestas matches. For one thing he has as many to his name as Rayo Jr, Cien Caras, and Atlantis, and he didn't have much of an opportunity for them from 1995-97 because of the way he was hopping between promotions. As for the matches sucking, I don't see what that has to do with who was driving the feud.

[elliott]

I'd also like to talk more about Bryan Danielson as an indy figure, and put in context what guys like he and Punk and Low Ki and Homicide and Super Dragon accomplished after WCW and ECW folded, and we were left with an American monopoly.

 

 

This is exactly the sort of thing I wanted to talk about honestly and what my initial questions were really about.

 

The questions that are important I'd say is if that indy boom was going to happen regardless because of all the talent WWE wouldn't pick up, or if the indy boom can be attributed to the quality of the talent.

 

I think these ideas are connected and intertwined. It was a special group of wrestlers who were motivated and loved what they did and were unique both from what was going on at the time and in many ways from each other and filled a much needed void to a segment of the wrestling fan base. Absolutely. But there was also always independent wrestling. Even when WCW and WWF were both national companies there was successful independent wrestling. However. Because wrestling was so popular worldwide in the mid 90s and two national companies to fill out roster spots, the indies were depleted and while you couldn't have a Ring of Honor in the mid 90s, there was always talented independent wrestlers developing somewhere. Sabu, Al Snow, Waltman, Jerry Lynn which eventually led to Reckless Youth & the Omega crew and Michael Modest & Chris Daniels before finally the Boom Generation (sidenote, I dunno whether or not to include Daniels with the Ki/Danielson/Joe boom generation because he seemed a little older or more established than them but he is as important an early figure in the early part of the "indy boom" as anyone). Wrestling was more popular in 2001 than in 1995 but there were far fewer places to work. Which leads me to my next point..

,

I think the indy boom is also connected to the popularity of the attitude era due to the amount of time between the attitude era/death of wcw (monopolization of wrestling)/time of the indy boom in a way that isn't all that different from the relationship between the Mid 80s Crush Gals era of Joshi Wrestling and the 90s Boom Period of Joshi. These guys were in their formative years during wrestling's most popular time period ever and were at the age were they were just young and dumb enough to say "I wanna be a pro wrestler" and just old enough to go out and do it and get completely hooked on being a wrestler and wanting to be the best wrestlers.

 

Which leads me back to quality of talent. It wouldn't have been as big as it was if not for the quality of talent.

 

So like always, everything matters. Everything.

 

If so, Danielson may not be the #1 guy on that list (he might be), but he's absolutely in the conversation. Now, there are guys who don't sign with WWE because they've found a way to make more money working the independents.

 

Which is awesome. I know it was Low-Ki that got me hooked on independent wrestling. Bryan was great and a better wrestler but I always liked Low-Ki more because he was so unique. I think Danielson was generally though of as the best worker but Low-Ki seemed to have the most buzz in the early days with stuff like the Eddy Match, Red Match, Xavier Ladder Match, Homicide matches, and oh yeah all of those Bryan matches.

 

I do think Christopher Daniels is an underrated figure in this group as I said above but I dont want to go to bat for him anymore than I have already.

 

I can absolutely see the argument for Wrestlemania 30 as something that should have launched a Hall of Fame run instead of ending a career, but if you look at WM30 as something that was in the making since King of the Indies 2001, it comes across as more of a culmination and Danielson's case seems much stronger. It wasn't just Danielson's journey there, but what the possibility that he could take that journey represented in a changing landscape.

 

That's a cool way to look at it. I mean, I took a long break from watching wrestling and missed a lot of Bryan's more famed indy work but I saw the 2001 Super 8 show within a couple of weeks of the show (I was heavily into independent wrestling in the first few years of the boom). Bryan was 19 then and I was 16. I watched WrestleMania LIve. So I can get behind the culmination storyline. Its awesome because we were basically all there on the ground floor and watched him beat what we viewed as literal impossible odds to be the #1 guy. That's awesome. I like yours better but that just kinda makes the aftermath more depressing.

 

I don't know the answer to all of this, but I would like to ponder if Bryan Danielson made indy wrestling something bigger and more viable with a higher profile than it was in the 90s. It definitely meant way more than it did in the 90s -- the question is what made it mean more. Or, who made it mean more? Who ultimately gets credit for building up the profile of independent wrestling so much?

 

It is late and I am tired and I am probably not making much sense. I don't even really have a strong opinion on these particular factors right now. I just think there's a lot more to Bryan Danielson that's fun to talk about and weigh than his career match resume and the WM30 main event. Those are on one level where his case lies, but the environment in which he built that case really says none of that should have ever happened.

 

 

This. 100% this.

[Dylan Waco]

 

On the broader subject of Bryan I suspect that his strongest influence is not necessarily going to be related to indie wrestling directly, but rather the change in fan culture that came with his ascent to the top. It's been said before, but the rise of Bryan showed the fans that they have a voice. People can complain about the "hard push" of Roman Reigns that doesn't actually exist, the failure to push Cesaro, et. but the reality is Bryan's popularity forced a change to the booking of a Wrestlemania, and has created a universe where hardcore fans know that they can kill or alter the landscape of a show if it deviates too far from what they want. It's hard to imagine a WWE with AJ Styles debuting on the main roster, Nakamura as the top star in the hardcore fan utopia that is NXT, the CWC, et. without the rise of the Bryan Fan Phenomenon

 

To play devil's advocate and potentially reference a monkey's paw, this is "Positive Impact?" Purely asking.

 

 

I'm not sure we know the answer to this, nor am I sure we ever will.

 

I have made this comparison before, but in many ways I think Bryan is comparable to Foley. Both were ultimate underdogs in part due to aspects of their look, who through force of will, and there unique lovably liberal personalities, and obvious desire became the most beloved figures in the business during their respective eras. Neither was ever REALLY the top guy (at least not for any length of time), but they were both the hardcore fan picks. Foley came around at the advent of hardcore fandom having a significant impact on the shape of the business and his book sort of set the table for popularization of pulling back the curtain and humanizing the characters and world of pro wrestling. Bryan represented the logical endpoint of a world where "casual" fans scan WrestleZone for news, and YouTube makes every aspect of a performers career accessible (which in some sense was the World that Foley helped to create).

 

Is it possible that someone else could have connected the way Foley did and become the biographer and weirdo populist character that he was/is? Yes. Is it possible that someone else could have become the beloved figure Bryan was and a symbol of fan revolt that ultimately changed the way WWE engages with hardcore fans? Yes. But to me that isn't terribly relevant. What matters is what did happen. If you reject that narrative okay, but if you accept the narrative I think we have to give both credit, or at least acknowledge that they changed wrestling - at least in terms of how fans interact and understand it - in meaningful ways.

[elliott]

That Foley comp is right on the money.

[ohtani's jacket]

 

 

 

The biggest run of his career was mostly due to the incredible charisma of Art Barr. Put another mid-card luchadore in that spot and I bet it would do the same business. Panther was a very talented, fundamentally sound wrestler who was very dependable and consistent. But does being a consistently good wrestler alone make you a Hall of Famer or just a "good hand?"

Think this is unfair to Panther. The mask vs mask with Love Machine drew a turnaway crowd to Arena Mexico, and that was for masked tecnico Art Barr. The people weren't there to see whether Love Machine kept his mask, they were there cheering on Panther. Barr's charisma didn't explode until he became a rudo.

 

Also I think this overlooks that part of what got Love Machine over was that he was competitive against someone as good and as popular as Blue Panther. You really think substituting for Panther with somebody like Bestia Salvaje would have had the same result?

 

 

It's possible. Might not have drawn as much as it wouldn't have been mask vs. mask but Pena had already created a string of successful gimmicks using the same formula. It depends on how popular the Love Machine gimmick was with the public. I don't think you can claim they drew a turn away crowd simply because he was programmed with Panther. If that were the case then surely Panther would have been booked in far more apuesta matches over the years. The Panther/Love Machine program was certainly successful. It drew in two different promotions and Panther certainly deserves some of the credit for that regardless of how hot Pena's booking was at the time. But it's offset by the fact that there were clear headliners like Caras, Aguayo and Konnan pulling the crowds. Panther/Love Machine is not that different from an IC title feud drawing during Hulkamania. None of Panther's other programs came close to touching it, and it doesn't really help that the matches are among his worst.

 

 

I'm not saying that Panther mask matches automatically generated sellout crowds. It was a hot feud in a hot period for the company, but not every Arena Mexico show sold out. Bestia Salvaje vs Huracan Sevilla drew what was reported as a below average crowd (for the time--I'm sure it was better than some of the crowds later in the year). That was what happened when genuine midcarders headlined at Arena Mexico in early 1992. Panther vs Machine headlined what I believe was the biggest and most anticipated CMLL card that year. And Machine wasn't popular at all with the crowd. Despite being a well-meaning tecnico who'd been with the company for less than half a year, he had a packed house hoping he lost. Okay, he was an American going up against a Mexican, but for that to happen you still need a rudo the fans want to get behind.

 

I don't think it follows that if Panther was primarily responsible for that crowd then he'd have been booked in more apuestas matches. For one thing he has as many to his name as Rayo Jr, Cien Caras, and Atlantis, and he didn't have much of an opportunity for them from 1995-97 because of the way he was hopping between promotions. As for the matches sucking, I don't see what that has to do with who was driving the feud.

 

 

It's a shame that Bestia vs. Sevilla didn't draw more as that was a sweet little feud and an underrated hair match but it's not really surprising. I can only find a handful of instances of Sevilla working Arena Mexico in 1991 and most of those were in the opening bout. Bestia vs. Sevilla was more of an Arena Coliseo level feud.

 

I do think it's worth mentioning that Panther vs. Love Machine headlined the Arena Mexico Anniversary Show and was a fairly stacked card with Atlantis vs. Fiera and Konnan/Aguayo/Rayo vs. Los Hermanos Dinamita as the semi-mains. It's been a while since I watched the build-up to the match but wasn't Love Machine acting more and more like a rudo heading into the match? From memory, he more or less wrestles like one in the bout and the crowd are chanting "Mexico" from the start. That seemed to be an element in terms of it being a match that people wanted to see.

 

To be honest, I think Rayo, Caras and even Atlantis' apuesta records up until that point clearly outweighed Panther. The two biggest drawing gates of '89 and '90 were Rayo mask matches, and I believe that was in all of Mexico.

 

The match quality doesn't have anything to do with Panther's drawing power, that's true.

[kjh]

To add to what Dylan said about Bryan, which I totally agree with, I also think it should be viewed as a positive to his case that he rose to the top of the mountain, despite the company at many times booking him to fail or never being fully behind him, through the strength of his likable personality and his supreme working ability. I view that more favourably (making the most of a crap hand) than someone being tabbed for stardom from day one and never quite living up to the push they received (like Randy Orton, who I expect to eventually get in by virtue of longevity alone, whilst not particularly excelling in any category: drawing, working ability or influence).

[Matt D]

I think it has to be viewed as a positive for the WON HOF, because it's made the world better for the WON

constituency. I'm just not sure it made things better in general.

[cad]

I do think it's worth mentioning that Panther vs. Love Machine headlined the Arena Mexico Anniversary Show and was a fairly stacked card with Atlantis vs. Fiera and Konnan/Aguayo/Rayo vs. Los Hermanos Dinamita as the semi-mains. It's been a while since I watched the build-up to the match but wasn't Love Machine acting more and more like a rudo heading into the match? From memory, he more or less wrestles like one in the bout and the crowd are chanting "Mexico" from the start. That seemed to be an element in terms of it being a match that people wanted to see.

 

That's true about the card, but it's not that different from the previous year with Perro vs Konnan on top supplemented by Atlantis vs Emilio Charles and a six man with Rayo and Kamala. Even Perro and Konnan got support from underneath. For 1992, Fiera was a replacement for Bestia Salvaje, and even then Bestia's aborted challenge for Atlantis' belt had only one match's worth of build. I don't think it was much different from the 1991 Atlantis vs Charles match in terms of being a complementary piece of the card.

 

Love Machine generally wrestled like a tecnico during the matches but he had a bit of an edge. More than once he ripped Panther's mask off after the match, and somewhere in there was an interview with Panther that Machine interrupted with a shove and a challenge, and then they had a brawl. But there wasn't any Fabuloso Blondy stuff or even that much overt nationalism, aside from Machine being a known American who had red white and blue on his outfits. He wasn't a dud, he certainly did contribute to the feud, but I honestly don't see how what he did could have made him a star that quickly. There was appeal in seeing one of Mexico's own defend his mask against a foreigner, but I don't know how well that works if the Mexican is just a standard midcarder, especially a midcard rudo. Even Blondy went after Lizmark, Pirata, and Ringo rather than Angel Azteca, Hombre Bala, and Cachorro. I can't read the mind of anyone who was there, though.

 

To be honest, I think Rayo, Caras and even Atlantis' apuesta records up until that point clearly outweighed Panther. The two biggest drawing gates of '89 and '90 were Rayo mask matches, and I believe that was in all of Mexico.

 

That's fair, but you posed the question of why they didn't book Panther in more mask matches if he was a big part of the massive crowd. I was just pointing out that he didn't wrestle in an abnormally small number of mask matches. He had two in 1993, and then there were a few years where he didn't really stay in one place for long enough to build one up. By the time he settled down in the CMLL it was almost five years after his last match with Machine. Rayo I brought up specifically as someone who was in big matches and then didn't have a mask match for years.

 

Anyway I don't think he was a bigtime draw or anything. Saying he was kind of along for the ride with Love Machine shortchanges him a bit, that's all.

[Matt Farmer]

Drawing is quantifiable at least to some degree. I think that's why.

Exactly.

 

And work is subjective.

 

Another thing people tend to forget about is that the "work" is not only there to entertain. Above all else the "work" is there to get the largest number of people to part with their money and pay for the product. Of course a lot more goes into making money than just ones work. However what they do in the ring, how they project themselves to the audience (the "work") and how they are marketed (today) is the true barometer of someone's work.

[Loss]

There are lots of super talented performers in wrestling -- not just in-ring but talking and carrying themselves as stars -- that weren't really major draws. And if you look at why that is in most cases, it's because they weren't in the right place at the right time to fully capitalize on their talents. For me, personally, that's why I like to keep drawing in perspective. It's not like Steve Austin was a drastically different worker or talker than Arn Anderson, or that he understood some great secret to captivating the masses that Arn Anderson didn't. It's just that he was in the right place at the right time. It's why I feel like so much of the drawing money stuff is happenstance.

[Loss]

I should also add that doesn't mean we should use the HOF to right wrongs, so I'm not arguing Arn to go in. It's just that we tend to look at drawing big money as some type of major accomplishment, when it's often just performers doing their jobs. Sometimes it clicks and sometimes it doesn't, and the reason is usually something extraneous.

[shakla]

- Hayabusa, Chyna, Lord James Blears, Ed Francis, Bearcat Wright, Don Fargo, Kerry Von Erich, Yoshiaki Fujiwara, Fishman, Mistico, Steve Rickard, Blackjack Mulligan and I think Archie Gouldie are all additions this year. Notable here is that Fujiwara is finally on the ballot after being previously laughed off, the lucha logjam issue has gotten worse, and Dave brought Chyna on while openly mocking my half joking Tommy Rich suggestion on Twitter

 

Pretty sure the Stomper/Archie Gouldie was laughed off when someone asked in the mailbag before he died. Dave saying something like "there's hundreds of guys like the Stomper". Kinda surprised Ox Baker wasn't included with the other recently deceased names added.

 

This is Kerry's third time on the ballot. Looking at the Less than 10% post, there's a bunch of modern candidates likely added too early that are worth considering again. RVD, Dudleys, Steiners, etc.

 

Has Dave released any kind of statement/follow-up on Nakamura mistakenly placed on the ballot after his election last year? He may want to remedy that ASAP as he gets a decent amount of ballots quickly, as he's implied previously.

[W2BTD]

 

Drawing is quantifiable at least to some degree. I think that's why.

Exactly.

 

And work is subjective.

 

Another thing people tend to forget about is that the "work" is not only there to entertain. Above all else the "work" is there to get the largest number of people to part with their money and pay for the product. Of course a lot more goes into making money than just ones work. However what they do in the ring, how they project themselves to the audience (the "work") and how they are marketed (today) is the true barometer of someone's work.

 

 

Work is subjective. This is absolutely true. The problem I have, is I feel some people disregard work because it's subjective, when the voting criteria clearly states that it is to be considered. So until that is removed, I believe it is my responsibility as a voter to continue to vote for candidates who I believe to be all time, elite level workers, the same way I would vote for all time elite level draws. If someone is such a great worker that they can garner 60% based solely on work, then they belong in, and are no less worthy than a great draw who can't work at all. It bothers me when people knock someone like Eddy Guerrero being in because he never drew big, even when conceding he was great bell to bell, because you never hear the opposite complaint. Nobody knocks the great draws who weren't HOF level workers.

 

The second part, to me, speaks more to drawing ability. But to each his own when it comes to interpretation of what makes a great worker.

[W2BTD]

 

- Hayabusa, Chyna, Lord James Blears, Ed Francis, Bearcat Wright, Don Fargo, Kerry Von Erich, Yoshiaki Fujiwara, Fishman, Mistico, Steve Rickard, Blackjack Mulligan and I think Archie Gouldie are all additions this year. Notable here is that Fujiwara is finally on the ballot after being previously laughed off, the lucha logjam issue has gotten worse, and Dave brought Chyna on while openly mocking my half joking Tommy Rich suggestion on Twitter

 

Pretty sure the Stomper/Archie Gouldie was laughed off when someone asked in the mailbag before he died. Dave saying something like "there's hundreds of guys like the Stomper". Kinda surprised Ox Baker wasn't included with the other recently deceased names added.

 

This is Kerry's third time on the ballot. Looking at the Less than 10% post, there's a bunch of modern candidates likely added too early that are worth considering again. RVD, Dudleys, Steiners, etc.

 

Has Dave released any kind of statement/follow-up on Nakamura mistakenly placed on the ballot after his election last year? He may want to remedy that ASAP as he gets a decent amount of ballots quickly, as he's implied previously.

 

 

Yes. He sent a corrected ballot and email explanation to the people who received the first round of ballots that included Nakamura:

 

"Due to a mistake in deleting, on the ballot sent last night, in the Japan category, Shinsuke Nakamura was left on and Seiji Sakaguchi was deleted. Nakamura was already inducted and Sakaguchi should be on the ballot"

[kjh]

"Nobody knocks the great draws who weren't HOF level workers." - Get back to me when Big Daddy or the Junkfood Dog are in the Hall of Fame, brother.

[WrestlingPower]

Quick question: is Gorilla Monsoon supposed to be on the ballot? I looked at the 2015 thread & saw he was listed on the ballot. I'm not seeing him in the balloting results nor on this year's ballot. Was he supposed to be on the ballot last year and/or this year?

 

Thoughts on Danielson:

I'm curious how people would define an "indy boom" post-WCW/ECW. I think with the sheer amount of talented guys looking to travel the indies and make a name for themselves in the early-mid 2000s due to having grown up fans would have led to an upswing and "boom" at some level. ROH in particular was really good at getting the word out and due to RF & Gabe providing footage & news to Dave, the WON covered them extensively early on. Among the hardcore community, ROH and some of the other indies of the time would have established themselves to some degree regardless of having Danielson around. Low Ki and Chris Daniels were every bit the level of Bryan at that point in time. I think what sets Danielson apart was his ROH title reigns, certainly the most significant reigns in company history. But those reigns become a chicken/egg argument. He wouldn't have been booked to have such long/epic matches and long/epic reigns if he wasn't so good in the ring. Samoa Joe, Nigel McGuinness, and Low Ki are really the only other ROH champions in history that were really pushed as something different. We've just got more right place/right time stuff here with the way guys were booked, the talent themselves, and what we can only assume are good DVD sales.

 

Anyway, I think the indies were set to rise to a level of prominence. Whether they achieve the heights they did without Danielson, I would have to say most likely no. Maybe Samoa Joe & Low Ki as being different enough provide the spark but Joe didn't travel as much internationally as the other 2. Ki burned some bridges along the way, so you are left with Danielson. I'm not sure Danielson & the companies he carried along with him would have achieved the level they did without his Japan exposure.

 

Another factor no one has mentioned is the fact that Danielson DID clearly move the #s on indy shows he was booked on in the aftermath of his firing from WWE after the Nexus deal. Promoters were tripping over themselves trying to book him and he had the MOTYC match with Shingo too in that short indy period.

 

Danielson completely smokes guys like Punk that came from the indies. No way ROH & other indies would have really pushed Punk front and center of their alumni if he hadn't become a success later. I see Danielson as a success and a HOF worker regardless of him going to WWE whereas guys like Punk became successes on a national stage & then people went back & elevated their indy work after the fact.

[kjh]

I really think that's doing down Punk a bit: his feuds with Raven and Jimmy Rave, his series with Samoa Joe and his first Summer of Punk title run (plus more I'm likely forgetting), all brought ROH a ton of buzz in its early years, even though he clearly wasn't the most technically gifted worker on the roster.