TPWW Forums

TPWW Forums (https://www.tpwwforums.com/index.php)
-   wrestling forum (https://www.tpwwforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   The GOAT (https://www.tpwwforums.com/showthread.php?t=138055)

Bad News Gertner 03-10-2021 01:05 AM

More about presentation

Sixx 03-10-2021 01:25 AM

Hogan. Even my mom knows who he is and she knows nothing about wrestling.

Mr. Nerfect 03-10-2021 04:04 AM

I have a trouble thinking in terms of absolute greatest, because there are too many metrics go crossover, so it is where you put emphasis. I put it on how good business is under you, because that’s the whole reason wrestling exists. It doesn’t matter if you tick all the other boxes — good look, good ring stuff, good talker, etc. — if people don’t give a shit, you aren’t clicking as a professional wrestler.

But that gets hard to dissect too. There are guys that drew everywhere as special attractions. There are guys who turned around shitty businesses. There are guys who did respectable business on top. There are guys who killed it on top in smaller markets, which is actually kind of more impressive in many ways — since you could argue the case that you’re more over per capita.

But then there is the quality of and timelessness of your work. There is how much everything you do stands out.


I don’t feel stupid saying names like Terry Funk, Ric Flair, Steve Austin and Hulk Hogan. The only name that I would throw out that hasn’t been said already, is maybe someone from Japan or even Jerry Lawler in Memphis. It feels like it’s own category though — maybe not GOAT. But there’s something about being so good you don’t need to go anywhere else that I feel deserves appreciation.

Jordan 03-10-2021 10:27 AM

I feel that as great as he is, it's easy to disqualify Terry Funk from GOAT. He is obviously a total legend and was awesome pretty much his whole career. He played his part perfectly always. The thing that knocks him off the top of the list for me is that he wasn't a MAJOR draw. Could you honestly say he was the reason 5-10,000 people went to the arena? As awesome as he was in Japan, those people would've been in the seats regardless, and likely the same for his NWA/WCW/ECW days. I think that he was on the cusp of MAJOR draw at times but ultimately was more of an attraction when compared to someone like Flair. Probably because the bulk of his career he worked heel and heels tended to your the territory's more than babyfaces who are clearly set up to be more successful in GOAT talks. All of that aside it's a real fucking shame that Vince didn't want to push Funk vs Hogan in the early days. It could've been so good.

xrodmuc316 03-10-2021 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordan X (Post 5434198)
I feel that as great as he is, it's easy to disqualify Terry Funk from GOAT. He is obviously a total legend and was awesome pretty much his whole career. He played his part perfectly always. The thing that knocks him off the top of the list for me is that he wasn't a MAJOR draw. Could you honestly say he was the reason 5-10,000 people went to the arena? As awesome as he was in Japan, those people would've been in the seats regardless, and likely the same for his NWA/WCW/ECW days. I think that he was on the cusp of MAJOR draw at times but ultimately was more of an attraction when compared to someone like Flair. Probably because the bulk of his career he worked heel and heels tended to your the territory's more than babyfaces who are clearly set up to be more successful in GOAT talks. All of that aside it's a real fucking shame that Vince didn't want to push Funk vs Hogan in the early days. It could've been so good.

It's a great point, and I think there are certainly different perceptions. Wrestling fans and people in the industry know what a legend he is.

On the other hand, people from the outside world would not know Terry Funk because not everybody can become a part of pop culture. Somebody who was never a wrestling fan is not going to know who Terry Funk is, but they will know Hogan, Austin, Flair, Rock, Cena, etc.

Bad News Gertner 03-10-2021 11:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jordan X (Post 5434198)
I feel that as great as he is, it's easy to disqualify Terry Funk from GOAT. He is obviously a total legend and was awesome pretty much his whole career. He played his part perfectly always. The thing that knocks him off the top of the list for me is that he wasn't a MAJOR draw. Could you honestly say he was the reason 5-10,000 people went to the arena? As awesome as he was in Japan, those people would've been in the seats regardless, and likely the same for his NWA/WCW/ECW days. I think that he was on the cusp of MAJOR draw at times but ultimately was more of an attraction when compared to someone like Flair. Probably because the bulk of his career he worked heel and heels tended to your the territory's more than babyfaces who are clearly set up to be more successful in GOAT talks. All of that aside it's a real fucking shame that Vince didn't want to push Funk vs Hogan in the early days. It could've been so good.



I can definitely say Terry was a great draw. He wouldn't have gotten a 14 month run with the NWA title if he wasn't. I've seen numbers but I gotta find them. I know Funk vs Flair was the highest drawing WCW feud from 89 to 96 and he and Onita drew 41,000 and drew 28,000 on top of an IWA show

drave 03-10-2021 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Gertner of TPWW (Post 5434204)
I can definitely say Terry was a great draw. He wouldn't have gotten a 14 month run with the NWA title if he wasn't. I've seen numbers but I gotta find them. I know Funk vs Flair was the highest drawing WCW feud from 89 to 96 and he and Onita drew 41,000 and drew 28,000 on top of an IWA show




Fuck me, that's one helluva stat right there. Never knew that, but dayam!

Bad News Gertner 03-10-2021 12:40 PM

He's not a Hogan/Austin draw but he's a great one

Jordan 03-10-2021 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Gertner of TPWW (Post 5434204)
I can definitely say Terry was a great draw. He wouldn't have gotten a 14 month run with the NWA title if he wasn't. I've seen numbers but I gotta find them. I know Funk vs Flair was the highest drawing WCW feud from 89 to 96 and he and Onita drew 41,000 and drew 28,000 on top of an IWA show

I'll be waiting for the NWA numbers please have them on my desk by midday.

Bad News Gertner 03-10-2021 01:00 PM

Haha I think it was something Meltzer posted a while back. I took the day off work to find this

Bad News Gertner 03-10-2021 01:36 PM

If I'm picking between Austin and Hogan I'm taking Hogan. When Austin got hurt during the "I did it for the Rock" it wasn't like business suffered. I'm pretty sure it actually went up.

You look at cards that didn't have Hogan on them compared to ones that did in the mid 80s and it's crazy.

I remember in 85 Hogan fought August and Sept at the Philly Spectrum and both cards drew between 14-15 thousand fans. October had no Hogan with Andre vs Piper as the Main Event and drew like 7000. Hogan was back in November and it drew 13-14 thousand again

Destor 03-10-2021 04:45 PM

dont have time to go into the weeds but Funk was absolutely a draw. no question. not a draw on par with hogan or bruno but there were absolutely sell out shows because funk was at the top of the card. not an all time great draw (an all time great everything else) but a draw for certain

Destor 03-17-2021 02:28 PM

Now that the conversation has died off Hogan had 4 votes for GOAT here. Flair is the only other guy to get more than 1 vote (3.)

Clearly those are the top 2 in my mind with no question. Its a debate that will last another 50 years.

Lock Jaw 03-17-2021 02:34 PM

What happens after 50 years?

Bad News Gertner 03-17-2021 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lock Jaw (Post 5436328)
What happens after 50 years?

Hogan vs Flair. This time it's personal!

Destor 03-17-2021 02:48 PM

people who lived it will be dead and time will only remember them as a lingering phantom replaced by whatever act the people of the day have the largest connection to.

Seanny One Ball 03-17-2021 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supreme Olajuwon (Post 5433984)
Didn’t read the other replies so my opinion is pure. It’s probably Flair. Taking into account talent, longevity, legacy, pop culture impact. I’d argue that Flair is more well known in popular culture today than any wrestler but Rock. And he passes Rock in other categories. He’s better in the ring than Hogan. He lasted longer than Austin He did it in multiple countries/promotions unlike Taker, Michaels, Cena. He’s still cool even though he’s like 97 years old.


Flair also did it in multiple centuries

Sixx 03-31-2021 08:40 AM

Flair is nowhere near as recognizable as Hogan.

drave 03-31-2021 09:15 AM

Flair's extra shit is the only reason I ordered the last WWE game, however long ago that was.


I remember not even finishing it because it was so bad. The Flair flair was cool AF tho.

Rammsteinmad 03-31-2021 09:38 AM

I think we all need to just face the fact that if you go by all the criteria set out already, John Cena is the GOAT. No single wrestle can be the top of every criteria, but if we look at a lot of them, Cena is up there as the best. Even if we don't want to admit it.

He's headlined two of WWE's biggest selling PPV's in terms of buyrates (Wrestlemania 27 and 29).

He's a 16-time world champion. A 5-time U.S. champion. A 2-time Royal Rumble winner. 10-time Slammy winner and has ranked No. 1 on PWI's top 500 three times.

He's was the main face and flagbearer of the WWE brand for close to 15 years, which is a major position to hold.

Has done endless charitable deeds for major organisations.

His name will only rise now to non-wrestling fans with his movie roles getting bigger and bigger, with roles in the Fast and Furious, Transformers and DC franchises.

He's had countless match-of-the-year candidates and can cut some fantastic promos when it's not scripted. He may not be as relevant to a 30+ year-old as Steve Austin or The Rock, but to millions of WWE fans who got into WWE after 2003, Cena is "the man".

I'm not the guy's biggest fan, but I do, having typed this post and thought about it, consider John Cena to be the GOAT.

Top five of all time? Easily Cena, Hogan, Austin and whoever else... But while everyone's strengths and weaknesses counter each other, I think Cena's strengths puts him at the top of that list.

Destor 03-31-2021 05:01 PM

too early to say imo. i dont know if his work will stand the test of time. not a lot of people rushing out to study cena tapes

Destor 03-31-2021 05:01 PM

but he's very reasonably top 5

Destor 03-31-2021 05:10 PM

my question for cenas legacy is exactly that: his legacy. he will be presented in video packages for eons as a huge figure but for those who lived his reign he was largely an after though for half the audience.



are the guys who will later go on to be the draws of tomorrow looking at his work for inspiration? what impact will he have on what comes out of talent going forward?


we cant say. so until we can i can put him at the top of the list. too fresh.

Sixx 03-31-2021 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5433724)
this brings up a solid thought:

is being your all time favorite the same as being the greatest? i see a large distinction between those two things. my personal favorite migh not be the greates that ever lived.


for example: beatles are the greatest band of all time. they shaped a culture shift that reverberated globaly.

queen is my favorite band. they bring me the most pleasure.

See, I actually think Queen are the greatest band of all time. With my favorite being Motley Crue. Every time someone tries to do Queen on karaoke nights I feel like murder.

Destor 03-31-2021 05:28 PM

i think freddy is the most talented lead man ever. the vocal range, the stage presence, the depth of his lyrics and the complexity of his arrangements. he's on a whole other level.


the beatles though...they changed the world. not only did they have an outlandish ammount of no.1s they spearheaded a massive cultural shift. theyre probably the most impactful artists in the last 150 years or more and im not talking just their music. im talking the whole of western culture.

Destor 03-31-2021 05:29 PM

but i love queen more

Sixx 03-31-2021 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5440482)
i think freddy is the most talented lead man ever. the vocal range, the stage presence, the depth of his lyrics and the complexity of his arrangements. he's on a whole other level.


the beatles though...they changed the world. not only did they have an outlandish ammount of no.1s they spearheaded a massive cultural shift. theyre probably the most impactful artists in the last 150 years or more and im not talking just their music. im talking the whole of western culture.

It's why I get mad at people trying to sing Queen songs. You can never do it anywhere near as good as Freddie. (Fuck you, Adam Lambert)

Destor 03-31-2021 05:33 PM

he's the most difficult talent to cover. you cant just replicate his sound even if you manage to hit the notes (and thats a tall order on its own)

Sixx 03-31-2021 05:35 PM

Also, I get bored by The Beatles.

Destor 03-31-2021 05:37 PM

i like the beatles well enough but even if i didnt id have to acknowledge their impact. its just so immense.

Sixx 03-31-2021 05:43 PM

I don't deny their impact, just not my "cup of tea".

Sixx 03-31-2021 06:02 PM

I've been treated with Queen since I was a kid, as it was both my parents' favorite band. Now my mom still loves them, while father loves whatever's on MTV. At 68.

Seanny One Ball 03-31-2021 06:05 PM

Don't mind me, came here for the rasslin' but stayed for the spontaneous Queen chat.

Deacon is criminally underrated as a bassist and sound engineer.

Sixx 03-31-2021 06:09 PM

You should see my dad drunkenly trying to bounce to Snoop Dogg.

Reacher 04-07-2021 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5433882)
This post is a good one to get into my thoughts.

I agree that draw shouldnt be the SOLE metric but i do feel that its the most important. Immediately guys who never drew are bumped out of contention. Bret, Angle, Jericho, HBK and to a lesser extent Savage all were phenomenal workers but as a draw they all fell short (Savage far less so than the others.) Some of the greatest workers between the bells but GOAT? they arent even in the conversation.

With the draw being the chief metric there's a short list I can pretty quickly go to: Andre, Bruno, Hogan, Flair, Inoki, Chosu, Rikidozan, Austin, Cena, Rock, Goldberg, Taker.

Rock was only a top guy for about 6 months and 80% of his draw was because Austin was so red hot. frankly Rock has been more successful in hollywood than he was in wrestling and I think a lot of that clouds how people view his run. Austin was the guy. Rock just fed off the flames he produced.

Goldberg was a flash in the pan. He drew crazy money for 18 months or so and then nothing.

Goldberg and Rock bring us to the next metric: LONGEVITY

Lasting power is intrinsically tied to drawing. A guy who can stay over longer must logically be better. Seems like a reasonable inference. Goldberg and The Rock didnt have any longevity whatsoever and sadly, neither did Austin.

Austin might have drawn more money in his career than anyone ever did. Staggering ammounts. The Austin character can very reasonably be argued as the cornerstone of the WWFs rise in the late 90s and the cause of WCWs eventual downfall. but the career just didnt last.

So we're left with Andre, Bruno, Hogan, Flair, Inoki, Chosu, Rikidozan, Cena, Taker.

The japs all have the same issue. Outside of Japan and Korea they werent really a thing. They were essentially regional. huge money was drawn in their region, on par with new york, but it was one market with no crossover. Its for this reason I also cross off Bruno.

Bruno had IMMENSE staying power. He was on top so long the company should have folded when he retired (and a lesser territory would have.) Bruno certainly had more travel potential than the Japs and even his peers of the same time before cable took prominence. Bruno would have in my mind been bigger than hogan if they were both in their primes in the 80s but at the end of the day Bruno was on top in the time frame he was on top and was limited by the technology of his era.

Andre, Hogan, Flair, Cena, Taker.

the top 5 is where this gets incredibly difficult to debate thats what we're here to do.

My next metric is influence. Who's mark has reverberated thoughout the ages of the industry. Cena is a bit too fresh to see what that is. I'd also argue that him spending so much of his career as a guy 30% of the audience rejected that I cant push him any further forward.

Taker certainly will be the bench mark for big men from now until the end of time.

Andre might be the most successful draw of all time when you consider that you could book Andre anywhere ON EARTH and you could sell out the building but because of the very factors that made him a draw he cannot be replicated and thus his influences on future generations is very limited.

So I arrive at Taker, Hogan and Flair.

Taker I eliminate at this point because next to the other two men his career simply doesnt match up. He spent a very small fraction of his career as the guy the show depended on. If he wasnt hot the gate didnt crumble. He simply wasnt as important.

Hogan and Flair.

Hogan transcended the industry in the same way the rock would do later. and that in turn clouds the conversation. its his successes beyond wrestling that bolster hogans mystique but imo the conversation should stay on wrestling. yes Hogan is more of a house hold name but that has as much to do with MTV as it does anything.

Ric Flair imo is the GOAT. he has the greatest single attendance of any show ever (190k [355k over 2 days]) His body of work has directly influenced how matches are constructed in a far grander scale than any worker ever. He is the model for what in ring work should be for 50 years. he carried the entire south on his back for 15-20 years. And his matches have stood the test of time and are still some of the first tapes guys go to when looking to study.

Ric Flair imo is the absolute bench mark for what success in wrestling should look like. Others may outshine him in one metric or another but when you add everything together no one is as complete of a package as Ric Flair. there is no metric that you can judge a wrestler on that flair isnt an automatic top 3 and in most a very reasonable top 1.

Much respect.

This is an awesome post and I completely agree with what you just said, although I’d probably have to give the slight edge to Hogan due to his worldwide stardom beyond the world of wrestling. Still - one of the better posts and analysis’ that I’ve read on here.

1) Hogan
2) Flair
3) Taker
4) Andre
5) Cena
6) Bruno
7) The aforementioned gooks
8) Austin
9) Rocky
10) Goldberg

Is probably how I’d rank them as well. (although I wouldn’t be opposed to seeing Goldberg dropping much further down)

Loose Cannon 04-07-2021 05:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5433882)
This post is a good one to get into my thoughts.

I agree that draw shouldnt be the SOLE metric but i do feel that its the most important. Immediately guys who never drew are bumped out of contention. Bret, Angle, Jericho, HBK and to a lesser extent Savage all were phenomenal workers but as a draw they all fell short (Savage far less so than the others.) Some of the greatest workers between the bells but GOAT? they arent even in the conversation.

With the draw being the chief metric there's a short list I can pretty quickly go to: Andre, Bruno, Hogan, Flair, Inoki, Chosu, Rikidozan, Austin, Cena, Rock, Goldberg, Taker.

Rock was only a top guy for about 6 months and 80% of his draw was because Austin was so red hot. frankly Rock has been more successful in hollywood than he was in wrestling and I think a lot of that clouds how people view his run. Austin was the guy. Rock just fed off the flames he produced.

Goldberg was a flash in the pan. He drew crazy money for 18 months or so and then nothing.

Goldberg and Rock bring us to the next metric: LONGEVITY

Lasting power is intrinsically tied to drawing. A guy who can stay over longer must logically be better. Seems like a reasonable inference. Goldberg and The Rock didnt have any longevity whatsoever and sadly, neither did Austin.

Austin might have drawn more money in his career than anyone ever did. Staggering ammounts. The Austin character can very reasonably be argued as the cornerstone of the WWFs rise in the late 90s and the cause of WCWs eventual downfall. but the career just didnt last.

So we're left with Andre, Bruno, Hogan, Flair, Inoki, Chosu, Rikidozan, Cena, Taker.

The japs all have the same issue. Outside of Japan and Korea they werent really a thing. They were essentially regional. huge money was drawn in their region, on par with new york, but it was one market with no crossover. Its for this reason I also cross off Bruno.

Bruno had IMMENSE staying power. He was on top so long the company should have folded when he retired (and a lesser territory would have.) Bruno certainly had more travel potential than the Japs and even his peers of the same time before cable took prominence. Bruno would have in my mind been bigger than hogan if they were both in their primes in the 80s but at the end of the day Bruno was on top in the time frame he was on top and was limited by the technology of his era.

Andre, Hogan, Flair, Cena, Taker.

the top 5 is where this gets incredibly difficult to debate thats what we're here to do.

My next metric is influence. Who's mark has reverberated thoughout the ages of the industry. Cena is a bit too fresh to see what that is. I'd also argue that him spending so much of his career as a guy 30% of the audience rejected that I cant push him any further forward.

Taker certainly will be the bench mark for big men from now until the end of time.

Andre might be the most successful draw of all time when you consider that you could book Andre anywhere ON EARTH and you could sell out the building but because of the very factors that made him a draw he cannot be replicated and thus his influences on future generations is very limited.

So I arrive at Taker, Hogan and Flair.

Taker I eliminate at this point because next to the other two men his career simply doesnt match up. He spent a very small fraction of his career as the guy the show depended on. If he wasnt hot the gate didnt crumble. He simply wasnt as important.

Hogan and Flair.

Hogan transcended the industry in the same way the rock would do later. and that in turn clouds the conversation. its his successes beyond wrestling that bolster hogans mystique but imo the conversation should stay on wrestling. yes Hogan is more of a house hold name but that has as much to do with MTV as it does anything.

Ric Flair imo is the GOAT. he has the greatest single attendance of any show ever (190k [355k over 2 days]) His body of work has directly influenced how matches are constructed in a far grander scale than any worker ever. He is the model for what in ring work should be for 50 years. he carried the entire south on his back for 15-20 years. And his matches have stood the test of time and are still some of the first tapes guys go to when looking to study.

Ric Flair imo is the absolute bench mark for what success in wrestling should look like. Others may outshine him in one metric or another but when you add everything together no one is as complete of a package as Ric Flair. there is no metric that you can judge a wrestler on that flair isnt an automatic top 3 and in most a very reasonable top 1.


I agree with pretty much all this, except I'd have Hogan as the GOAT.

Maybe because WWE was more mainstream then the NWA was in the 80's and maybe because to me he was the main reason for the nWo's (and WCW business in general) being so big in the 90's. When i talk to people who don't care for wrestling, it's always "oh the stuff Hulk Hogan does." even if Hogan hasn't really "done" it for like 20 years lol

Ric Flair's workrate is bar none light years beyond Hogan in the ring. But to me, Hogan is the face of PRO Wrestling over the past 50 years.

Destor 04-07-2021 07:00 PM

the argument for Hogan is so strong i wouldn't try to debate anyone who put him at the top. if you asked 100 people on the street to name a wrestler Hogan would probably win even today with Rock and Cena having much more current cultural significance.


my preference of flair in the debate is his influence on the people within the industry even on a subconscious level. his impact on the nuts and bolts of wrestling etc


but hogans star shines so brightly that i could never object to him being considered the goat. it would be ridiculous to try.

Reacher 04-08-2021 07:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supreme Olajuwon (Post 5434059)
Most sports don’t have a GOAT. It’s really only hockey. Every other major sport is debatable.

With respect to hockey, there are many people out there that consider Orr to be greater than Wayne and so I’d argue that the NHL is debatable as well. While Gretzky destroyed Lemieux in every statistical category, Lemieux was one of the only players in the NHL to have crazy stats during the “dead puck” era of the NHL (1995-2004), although in Gretzky’s defense, he was a little bit older during this time.

Reacher 04-08-2021 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord Gertner of TPWW (Post 5433956)
Do you think Flair's matches being a bit repetitive is a knock against him or a non factor in this discussion

I have Flair in my top 3

I’d say non-factor given the context of greatness that has been defined in this thread.

Reacher 04-08-2021 07:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5433882)
This post is a good one to get into my thoughts.

I agree that draw shouldnt be the SOLE metric but i do feel that its the most important. Immediately guys who never drew are bumped out of contention. Bret, Angle, Jericho, HBK and to a lesser extent Savage all were phenomenal workers but as a draw they all fell short (Savage far less so than the others.) Some of the greatest workers between the bells but GOAT? they arent even in the conversation.

With the draw being the chief metric there's a short list I can pretty quickly go to: Andre, Bruno, Hogan, Flair, Inoki, Chosu, Rikidozan, Austin, Cena, Rock, Goldberg, Taker.

Rock was only a top guy for about 6 months and 80% of his draw was because Austin was so red hot. frankly Rock has been more successful in hollywood than he was in wrestling and I think a lot of that clouds how people view his run. Austin was the guy. Rock just fed off the flames he produced.

Goldberg was a flash in the pan. He drew crazy money for 18 months or so and then nothing.

Goldberg and Rock bring us to the next metric: LONGEVITY

Lasting power is intrinsically tied to drawing. A guy who can stay over longer must logically be better. Seems like a reasonable inference. Goldberg and The Rock didnt have any longevity whatsoever and sadly, neither did Austin.

Austin might have drawn more money in his career than anyone ever did. Staggering ammounts. The Austin character can very reasonably be argued as the cornerstone of the WWFs rise in the late 90s and the cause of WCWs eventual downfall. but the career just didnt last.

So we're left with Andre, Bruno, Hogan, Flair, Inoki, Chosu, Rikidozan, Cena, Taker.

The japs all have the same issue. Outside of Japan and Korea they werent really a thing. They were essentially regional. huge money was drawn in their region, on par with new york, but it was one market with no crossover. Its for this reason I also cross off Bruno.

Bruno had IMMENSE staying power. He was on top so long the company should have folded when he retired (and a lesser territory would have.) Bruno certainly had more travel potential than the Japs and even his peers of the same time before cable took prominence. Bruno would have in my mind been bigger than hogan if they were both in their primes in the 80s but at the end of the day Bruno was on top in the time frame he was on top and was limited by the technology of his era.

Andre, Hogan, Flair, Cena, Taker.

the top 5 is where this gets incredibly difficult to debate thats what we're here to do.

My next metric is influence. Who's mark has reverberated thoughout the ages of the industry. Cena is a bit too fresh to see what that is. I'd also argue that him spending so much of his career as a guy 30% of the audience rejected that I cant push him any further forward.

Taker certainly will be the bench mark for big men from now until the end of time.

Andre might be the most successful draw of all time when you consider that you could book Andre anywhere ON EARTH and you could sell out the building but because of the very factors that made him a draw he cannot be replicated and thus his influences on future generations is very limited.

So I arrive at Taker, Hogan and Flair.

Taker I eliminate at this point because next to the other two men his career simply doesnt match up. He spent a very small fraction of his career as the guy the show depended on. If he wasnt hot the gate didnt crumble. He simply wasnt as important.

Hogan and Flair.

Hogan transcended the industry in the same way the rock would do later. and that in turn clouds the conversation. its his successes beyond wrestling that bolster hogans mystique but imo the conversation should stay on wrestling. yes Hogan is more of a house hold name but that has as much to do with MTV as it does anything.

Ric Flair imo is the GOAT. he has the greatest single attendance of any show ever (190k [355k over 2 days]) His body of work has directly influenced how matches are constructed in a far grander scale than any worker ever. He is the model for what in ring work should be for 50 years. he carried the entire south on his back for 15-20 years. And his matches have stood the test of time and are still some of the first tapes guys go to when looking to study.

Ric Flair imo is the absolute bench mark for what success in wrestling should look like. Others may outshine him in one metric or another but when you add everything together no one is as complete of a package as Ric Flair. there is no metric that you can judge a wrestler on that flair isnt an automatic top 3 and in most a very reasonable top 1.

Hey Destor was just curious - where would you put Sting here? Do you think he could supplant Goldberg in that #10 spot? Outside of Hogan, Sting was pretty much the face of WCW during its formative years was he not? If we’re talking about it a guy that was “the face” of a company and was synonymous with a major brand, then Sting would have to rank up there somewhere right?

Ruien 04-08-2021 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reacher (Post 5443046)
With respect to hockey, there are many people out there that consider Orr to be greater than Wayne and so I’d argue that the NHL is debatable as well. While Gretzky destroyed Lemieux in every statistical category, Lemieux was one of the only players in the NHL to have crazy stats during the “dead puck” era of the NHL (1995-2004), although in Gretzky’s defense, he was a little bit older during this time.

There is no debate for the NFL GOAT anymore. You can't argue against Brady anymore.

Don't think anyone really argues against Babe Ruth for MLB. If Trout ever gets on a winning team he might enter the discussion but he is with the Angels so no one has to worry about that.

NBA is contested by two people with a few long shots thrown in every now and then.

Reacher 04-08-2021 12:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ruien (Post 5443056)
There is no debate for the NFL GOAT anymore. You can't argue against Brady anymore.

Don't think anyone really argues against Babe Ruth for MLB. If Trout ever gets on a winning team he might enter the discussion but he is with the Angels so no one has to worry about that.

NBA is contested by two people with a few long shots thrown in every now and then.

Agreed about Brady.

I would actually go as far as saying that he may have surpassed Michael Jordan and Pele in the terms of being the GOAT for all sports.

wwe2222 04-08-2021 01:14 PM

I give credit to Hogan kicking off the two biggest booms in wrestling history. The 80s with Hulkamania, and the 90s with the NWO.

The only guy that could've made that NWO angle blow up like it did by turning heel was Hogan. That led into the Monday Night Wars and the Attitude Era. Im not sure you get the 90s boom without Hogan turning.

Destor 04-08-2021 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reacher (Post 5443049)
Hey Destor was just curious - where would you put Sting here? Do you think he could supplant Goldberg in that #10 spot? Outside of Hogan, Sting was pretty much the face of WCW during its formative years was he not? If we’re talking about it a guy that was “the face” of a company and was synonymous with a major brand, then Sting would have to rank up there somewhere right?

Ive had this conversation about Sting on here a few times and no one ever agrees but I stand by it:

Stings career is one night away from putting him in a whole other category. Starrcade 97 is imo what lost WCW the war. Hogan and Sting went out and delivered a big turd on a night that had more eyeballs than they ever had. had that night delivered on the (truly excellent) build the 90s could very reasonably went VERY differently. But it went the way it went and it goes down in my mind as the single most significant blunder in wrestling history and with it puts a great failure on Sting's resume.

Conversely its Goldberg that kept WCW in the game throughout 98. Without him getting red hot when he did Id wager WCW would have collapsed much sooner without any baby face you could push. DDP got hot around this time so you might have been able to lean on him but we start getting into the weeds with what ifs at this point and this conversation is about what was and not what could have been.

Ultimately I put Sting in the camp with the Michaels and the like. Great talent but never broke through to be one of the Legends amongst Legends. But he was so close.

And Goldberg was 90% booking and marketing. There's a reason he burnt out so quickly and it also why he just baaaaaaaaaarely squeaks into the conversation. But the money generated in that time was fucking wild and I cant just ignore it because he was so mediocre in the ring. You go back and listen the those crowds in mid 98. It was a special kind of over few ever reach.

Destor 04-08-2021 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wwe2222 (Post 5443089)
I give credit to Hogan kicking off the two biggest booms in wrestling history. The 80s with Hulkamania, and the 90s with the NWO.

The only guy that could've made that NWO angle blow up like it did by turning heel was Hogan. That led into the Monday Night Wars and the Attitude Era. Im not sure you get the 90s boom without Hogan turning.

its a storng argument. IMO it was a large portion of the WCW audience leaving Nitro for Raw that put the WWF on top...but what weight do we attribute why they left being BECAUSE of Hogan? Im of the opinion that as much as he drew them in his inability to put Sting over (and just having an AWFUL "mania" [see: starrcade] match in general) is why they left.

Should that not factor against him in equal parts?

Jordan 04-08-2021 03:31 PM

That is a good point. Which I why I think you could consider the guy next to Hogan is Cena. Cena consistently kept WWE above average numbers for years and years. Longer than Hogan or Austin/Rock combined. His longevity at the top, huge merch numbers and consistent house show/attendance has to be a consideration. The thing is with Hogan/Austin/Cena the fans all grew "tired" of them at some point. With Cena though it happened earlier rather than later. As time went on he eventually gained the respect of the internet fans and was consistently having great PPV matches. I know it's kind of crazy to say it because we didn't "grow up" with Cena and most of rolled our eyes for years every time we heard his music play, but he's in a league of his own in a lot of ways.

Bad News Gertner 04-09-2021 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5443114)
Ive had this conversation about Sting on here a few times and no one ever agrees but I stand by it:

Stings career is one night away from putting him in a whole other category. Starrcade 97 is imo what lost WCW the war. Hogan and Sting went out and delivered a big turd on a night that had more eyeballs than they ever had. had that night delivered on the (truly excellent) build the 90s could very reasonably went VERY differently. But it went the way it went and it goes down in my mind as the single most significant blunder in wrestling history and with it puts a great failure on Sting's resume.

Conversely its Goldberg that kept WCW in the game throughout 98. Without him getting red hot when he did Id wager WCW would have collapsed much sooner without any baby face you could push. DDP got hot around this time so you might have been able to lean on him but we start getting into the weeds with what ifs at this point and this conversation is about what was and not what could have been.

Ultimately I put Sting in the camp with the Michaels and the like. Great talent but never broke through to be one of the Legends amongst Legends. But he was so close.

And Goldberg was 90% booking and marketing. There's a reason he burnt out so quickly and it also why he just baaaaaaaaaarely squeaks into the conversation. But the money generated in that time was fucking wild and I cant just ignore it because he was so mediocre in the ring. You go back and listen the those crowds in mid 98. It was a special kind of over few ever reach.

I 100% agree with you about Sting

Destor 04-09-2021 03:00 PM

bout time someone did

IC Champion 04-09-2021 03:17 PM

You’re all wrong.

The correct answer is Danhausen.

IC Champion 04-09-2021 03:17 PM

Love that Danhausen.

Fignuts 04-09-2021 03:18 PM

Sting was never even that great in the ring. Maybe with the right people in the ring with him (flair). But on his own he's good, but not great.

Destor 04-09-2021 03:24 PM

sting was as good as who he was working. sting didnt need be carried but he couldnt carry. either put him with someone who can work or dont expect much.

Destor 04-09-2021 03:25 PM

sting is like silly putty. you rub flair on him youll get a flair match. you rub luger on him youll get a luger match.

Destor 04-09-2021 03:26 PM

but there isnt really a sting match

Bad News Gertner 04-09-2021 05:02 PM

I've looked at Sting in ring the same way I look at Triple H for the same reasons Destor stated. He'll keep his end of the bargain.

It's a real shame that he blew out his knee at the Clash X

Destor 04-09-2021 05:19 PM

i think H until 2000 or so was putting together really clever stuff. you could always tell his matches had clear influences (which is to say a bit derivative) but he put them together in fresh ways. i think after the quad tear in.. 01? he wasnt the same worker. a guy who didnt have his position would have struggled to hold that spot.

Destor 04-09-2021 05:20 PM

which isnt to say he was bad. he was never bad. he just was out paced by a lot of guys on the roster.

Destor 04-09-2021 05:22 PM

but after that run he used a lo more gaga and gimmicks.

Destor 04-09-2021 05:24 PM

gone were the days of H vs X for 25 min telling a story through holds. he found ways to stay over though to his credit. despite his position in the company he kept working hard. he could have gotten away with be very lazy. a criticism i dont think anyone could fairly lob at him.

Destor 04-09-2021 05:25 PM

but for my money he doesnt come up in the GOAT convo

IC Champion 04-09-2021 05:35 PM

After his quad tear I feel like the combination of his injury plus putting on so much muscle mass really hampered his mobility and agility. I don’t think anyone in the 90s would ever accuse him of being slow and plodding, but his later run he just didn’t have it anymore, and it could often make for a long, boring affair.

thekrow 04-09-2021 05:36 PM

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2OzKzdWhiUc" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

When I hear THE GOAT, the only thing that comes to mind first, is THE GOAT James Blade.
One of the most charismatic people to ever step into a wrestling ring. This man on the microphone is up there with the greats and he is a good wrestler too. There's a reason he is THE GREATEST OF ALL TIME and ready for prime time!!!!!

Destor 04-09-2021 05:37 PM

yeah. thats a good call. I'll go edit my post. :y:

Bad News Gertner 04-09-2021 06:30 PM

Check and mate

Destor 04-09-2021 06:36 PM

we should prolly close the thread. the matter has been settled.

Mr. Nerfect 04-10-2021 08:25 PM

The answer is Kenny Omega:

-Nobody has had as many 5+ star matches as him.

-Legit main eventer in two promotions that were built on his back, essentially. New Japan had been around for years, obviously, but was struggling and he increased their business. They are still benefiting!

-Was a bad promo, maybe, in his ROH days, but is now hilarious on the mic and delivers in a unique and eloquent way. “69 me, Don!” :lol:

-Looks like a star. Was on billboards and fucking trains in Japan. You can’t buy that sort of publicity!

-And he’s obviously great in the ring. No one has ever been smoother. Makes Kobashi look like a fucking brick.

-Can work any style. Never saw Terry Funk do lucha.

Austin may have sold more t-shirts with the WWE platform behind him. Terry Funk was pretty good for a territory rassler. Ric Flair is mainly remembered because of nostalgia and the WWE giving him a push in the 2000’s. Hulk Hogan didn’t have workrate and needed Vince to get over. The Rock has had a more successful movie career (so far), but think about it: Is there anything any of them they can do what Kenny can do?

The answer is Kenny Omega. End (see what I did there?) of discussion.

Jordan 04-11-2021 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Nerfect (Post 5443827)
-Can work any style. Never saw Terry Funk do lucha.

:rofl:

IC Champion 04-11-2021 12:28 AM

I can remember when Noid wasn’t completely insane.

Seanny One Ball 04-18-2021 06:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Destor (Post 5443483)
but there isnt really a sting match


Sting wins.

That's a Sting match.

Jordan 04-21-2021 06:52 PM

I retract my vote for Hogan in this topic and apologize. It's Austin, Austin is the GOAT. There is no debate.

Lock Jaw 04-21-2021 07:06 PM

Charlotte is the GOAT

Bad News Gertner 04-21-2021 08:20 PM

It's JBL


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:51 AM.

Powered by vBulletin®