The GOAT
 

Gertner inspired this thought


I'll post mine later because i dont want to start the dialogue with my opinions.


Im not simply asking who is the GOAT but what makes someone the GOAT? What are the criteria for the greatest and by that criteria who is the greatest in your opinion?


Should be fun to see how everyone arrives at their choice.

I think the criteria that rings true for me is star quality, success and longevity. With that in mind there are four guys since 1980 that stand out. Hogan, Cena, Taker and Flair. I really cannot pick Cena even though he is definitely a much bigger mainstream star than Hogan is, but he's close in that in the past decade his name is probably the closest association with wrestling among the average person. He also has a longevity that rivals Hogan. Taker was very consistent and seemed to get better about 20 years into his run, and also has a certain name recognition amongst non fans/sports fans. Flair is definitely the most talented of the group I picked but I feel I probably the least successful. He wasn't a Mania main eventer which is definitely the pinnacle of pro wrestling to me.

I thing that success, longevity and star power out weigh "work rate" so it's not a big part of my answer. So I say the GOAT is Hogan. He carried WWF for nearly 10 years and then challenged and nearly defeated them with WCW for another five. Then he was able to return to WWE and close out his in ring career in a pretty fantastic way having his best matches in over a decade. In my heart the answer is easy, Hogan.

I don't pick Austin or Rock because their careers were too short. HBK and Bret Hart were two of the best wrestlers ever no doubt but they didn't have the success or star power as the four I mentioned.

I mentioned this earlier but Terry Funk

I'll clarify this before I start: Terry Funk was not the greatest draw. The correct is probably whoever drew the most money, but just for discussion purposes I'll list my reasons.


Accolades: Multiple time NWA Champion. Won titles pretty much everywhere he went One of the most popular Gaijin in Japan (they LOVED Terry), drew money in multiple territories.

Adapted throughout the years, could wrestle any style, absolutely dynamite on promos, never felt stale, always gave back to wrestling, longevity, leaves behind a lasting legacy. He's got legendary matches like the Empty Arena match with Lawler and the I Quit match with Flair. Just so multi dimensional.

Terry is the best IMO, but I wouldn't fault anyone for picking Flair, Lawler etc..


I guess my criteria is "Who was the most Complete Package"

I have to go Rock. Every measurable there is, he crushed it.

10 World Titles, headlined multiple Wrestlemanias, buyrates, ticket sales, merch, mainstream appeal, memorable moments, high motor, technically sound, smooth moveset, looked like a champ.

He also has that Jim Brown/Barry Sanders retiring early/while on top. If he stayed a full time wrestler he would probably be a 25 time World Champ by now.

The Destroyer

Too tired from PT to make up a long post on why. Gartner and Destor will know why.

I would add his selflessness to that list.

Basically all the metrics Gertner used to come to Terry being his GOAT. But they end up with Chris Jericho as my personal GOAT. Has held a ton of titles, headlined tons of shows for multiple companies, has been going strong for 30 years, almost always cuts a great promo and has been in tons of incredible matches across the world.

If there is one thing holding him back its that he has never been a big draw like some of the people around him in his earlier days were. Kinda sucks tbh because in terms of pure skill he was better than any of them imo (talking about ppl like Rock, Austin) but they also had a certain X factor at the time so it is what it is.

I don't think Chris has been the best at any one particular area. But he has been consistently great enough at all of them to qualify as the best overall to me. For the longest time I would have said HBK was my GOAT for a lot of these reasons but I also knew a long time ago that at some point Y2J was gonna take that spot from him in my rankings.

Feels like its Ric Flair but need to put a lot of thought into this and probably would end up with someone else instead.

Like Seph, Jericho would be my GOAT based on personal preferences since I've been highly entertained throughout his lengthy career. Not only has he managed to be great wherever he went, he's also managed to excel at redefining himself multiple times to keep his career fresher than other notable people who had lengthy careers like Big Show and Undertaker.

Nobody has a bad word to say about him.

I wish Backlund and Funk would have had a run in 1980-81 WWF. He's the one opponent I wish Backlund would have faced

He actually came to mind when I was posting some of Funk's Japanese matches in another thread.

so is your criteria reinventing yourself or...?

For personal preference, my main criteria would be whoever entertained me the most during their career and was at least at a high level as a star. Being able to reinvent yourself to keep your lengthy career fresh is very helpful and not make it feel more like an old guy who is well past his expiration date in the ring and/or as a character.

Like Undertaker's lengthy career would be looked upon more fondly had he retired after his Mania streak was over since that was the last meaningful thing about his career.

Was Jericho ever really on top? Or did he just work with the guys who were? I’m not questioning his greatness, I love Jericho’s body of work but I feel like maybe people are over valuing his longevity here. He was never at any point the number 1 draw in the business, or 2, or probably 3, or even 4. He’s not the worker an HBK or Flair was, or the draw that the rock or Austin were.

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.

jericho was never a top guy in the fed. they tried to make him one for about 4 months. gave up. he was never ever to give them a reason to try again.


great hand obviously. not a top guy. AEW/NJPW he's a top guy. depends on if you consider them bush league or not though

You’re not asking what makes my favourite wrestler the greatest?

i didnt think i was but i guess its subjective

He’s should have beat HHH at mania!!

even if he had jericho had lost all his steam before the bell rang

Don Muraco and JBL/Bradshaw are my favourite wrestlers and they're definitely not the greatest

<iframe width="1129" height="635" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/duouDyS9sI4" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That could one of those yes & no type answers since its possible for your all-time favorite to also be the greatest of all time as well depending on the circumstances.

Like as Pats fan, Tom Brady is my favorite player ever and a strong case could be made that he's also the GOAT in football.

For baseball, Ken Griffey Jr. is my favorite all-time player but I wouldn't put him as the GOAT in baseball from a non-personal perspective. Had Griffey's body not fallen apart post-Mariners career, he probably would have had a very strong case to be a potential GOAT in baseball.

I never really felt it had much steam to begin with. Probably shouldn’t have been booked against HHH at mania I guess would be a fair point to make, but like you said it wouldn’t have mattered anyway.

i agree. my favorite is also my pick for the goat. so we circle back to jericho. you said he was the goat because he entertained you the most but you acknowledge that the metric can run parallel with being the greatest but isnt in itself what makes them the greatest.

what makes jericho the greatest thats ever lived?

yeah they were banking tha the belts would make him. it didn't take so much. anything he gained from it was quickly lost. definitely not a career highlight in hindsight. its only an achievement in the kayfabe lense. its honestly his greatest career failure...which is ironic since in kayfabe its his crowning moment.

(wanna be clear here: im not disputing if jericho is or isnt the goat just trying to suss out the why of it all)

Everything Kurt Angle brought to the table but also longevity.

Kurt really could have had a career worth discussing...such a travesty

Jericho is my GOAT from a personal preference but wouldn't actually put him as the GOAT for a serious discussion or answer. For something like that, he'd be more like one or two tiers below it. Like someone you'd easily consider worthy of a Hall of Fame spot but not any higher for real all-time legendary status.

Currently leaning towards Flair as my serious answer but would really need to think about it.

Prob Hogan.

I think just going by the money they drew and how they changed the business is fine but for the sake of discussion, I think you can throw in the “popular doesn’t always mean right” factor. Of course “right” is subjective but if you think of the most popular/biggest draw when it comes to movies, TV, music, etc. and then think of the greatest, chances are they won’t be the same. Larry the Cable Guy is not one of the greatest comedians of his time, Goddammit.

And with wrestling, it’s even less clear because there are SO many more factors that come into play. If Austin says “fuck this shit” and quits the business altogether after his Ringmaster run, he certainly doesn’t show up on many GOAT lists. But he’s the same guy. He just never found the right path to show it. How many guys were GOAT material and we’ll never know because the timing was never right? (*cough*Fandango)

So yeah, basically there’s a compromise between your personal favorite and the biggest draw that you can use.

I don’t think accomplishments should factor in too much though. Especially after a certain point. Everyone gets a turn with a world title in this era. It doesn’t mean much. If it did, we’d have to throw The Miz in the discussion.

And since you didn’t ask, my GOAT is Shawn Michaels. He is also my favorite. Purely a coincidence.

Hogan because of Suburban Commando alone

Bobby Jaggers.

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.

Flair did not draw that audience in Korea communism did. And the only reason Flair took the job is cause Hogan wouldn't.

moot points all around. what happened happend.

I think it’s Hogan Flair or Austin.

healthy top 3

More like UNHEALTHY

lol i see what you did there

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 dont. id argue that his matches are no more similar than anyones (ignoring that all matches are structurally the same.) what he did popularize is having routine spots. in flairs case the comeback. i think having routine spots is a good thing as much as bret hart would disagree. flair taking the bump off the top for example is always over. if it gets a pop for 30 years its working. theres no reason not to do it other than kayfabe. "it doesnt make sense."

hogan is another guy who had routine spots. cena. austin. rock. hhh. it just works. some used it more than others over the years but i dont count it as a negitive. if it works it works. i dont think anyone can argue flairs routine spots didnt work. so it comes down to a snobbish critique.

even if it were valid i dont think you cant argue that flairs matches were more similar than hogans so it certainly wouldnt change my vote.

That's true. I've heard the analogy that you don't tell Nolan Ryan to stop throwing a fastball and throw a changeup

I don't think it's a factor. Great Flair matches are great matches. I think it's the opponent that brings the variety. Same thing with Cena and Taker. I think if Flair had stayed in WWF longer and stayed at the top he'd be a bigger contender for GOAT for me. He just rode a lot of lows in WCW after he returned from WWF. Hogan was never not the main event.

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.

I have a Japanese blind spot but I’d still say Flair over Inoki, Misawa, Mutoh

I will say that if Lesnar, Angle, or Styles were born 20 years earlier we may be having a different discussion. I’d say Bryan too but let’s be honest he would’ve head butted his way into Dynamite Kid territory.

Sure if I was from Japan Inoki, Misawa or Kenta Kobashi could be on my list but I didn't follow their careers nearly as close as US rasslers.

i have a lucha blind spot. cant stand the style. working the opposite side makes my brain hurt.

I don't consider it the same thing tbh. Lucha is Lucha rasslin is rasslin.

styles career would have been worse if he'd been around much earlier. only time he might have faired better is death thralls wwf in the early to mid 90s. like the magic hour for guys 5'9 who could go.

Ditto for lucha libre. I see stuff from El Santo I’m like really? That guy? But whatever man the people like it.

but any other time he wouldnt have even made it as a job guy.

Yeah Lucha is not my strong point as well, but guys like Negro Casas and Atlantis are fucking amazing.

Yeah that’s fair. Ok then just Lesnar and Angle.

lesnar and angle would have done fine in any era

Assuming he kept the same high flying wrestling style of his pre-WWE days, Styles probably would have been a way more influential X-Pac/1-2-3 Kid of his generation.

Instead of WCW's cruiser division, X-Pac, or early ROH being the inspiration for the generation of wrestlers post-Attitude Era favoring a more action-based or lucha-based style, it likely would have been Styles instead.

Waltman was hugely influential going back to the early 90's. Pre 123 Kid.

You know who else deserves some consideration: Rey Mysterio Jr.

He ticks off pretty much every box

he never held the weight of the company on his shoulders and i think that's important. cant argue with those merch sales though.

eddie i think would have entered into the convo had he kept going. the hispanic market was booming when he was on top. ive often wondered how much the demo would have shifted had he not died so early. anytime they got anywhere near texas the gate was balooning

For all people talk up Lesnar, Eddie did way better numbers than Brock. It's why they moved the title off Brock to Eddie.

at the time absolutely. post ufc lesnar is a draw though.

SD probably could have supplanted RAW earlier than it did as the new flagship show for WWE assuming they stayed on UPN.

Eddie and Mysterio were huge ratings generators for WWE's latino tv market and more importantly that group (and African Americans to a degree) acted as a big stabilizer for SD's ratings while RAW was suffering big yearly declines. Eddie dying and SD moving to USA Network hampered the big impact WWE's latino market had on their ratings.

Not until the Women's Revolution/Evolution movement did WWE have another demo group act as a key stabilizer for their declining ratings.

I think Rey's place is as an innovator or ground breaker rather than a GOAT. Maybe among Mexican American's he's THE GUY. He is a draw for sure though, and a major one there is no arguing that.

I’m not sure why Rey is even being talked about in this thread.

i mean we talked about jericho

:lol:

(obviously he doesnt make my list but im just taking the piss. everyone should be discussed. the debate can be fun regardless)

Can you imagine Lesnar in the 80s. Or in the Dangerous Alliance. He would’ve been even more of a revelation than he is now

I can easily imagine Lesnar doing a lot of things.

The more I think about it, the more a good case could be made that there really isn't a single GOAT for wrestling.

Unlike with the major sports, wrestling has too many dominate styles and none really hold that lasting overall top dominate spot. Like with baseball, the GOAT is a MLB player since MLB has been the top dog of baseball since the late 1800s with some brief exceptions. College, minor leagues, and non-MLB leagues all play the exact same style of baseball as MLB with some very minor differences.

A wrestling expert in Japan would make just as strong a case that the GOAT is a puro wrestler using the same criteria a NWA/territories expert would use to claim that its a 60s-80s US territories era wrestler instead. Same goes for experts for lucha, pre-tv era wrestling, modern era, and others.

Most sports don’t have a GOAT. It’s really only hockey. Every other major sport is debatable.

Because he's a once in a generation talent?

I will never be able to use draw when trying to discuss how individually skilled someone is. It's just not a good metric for me. You could have someone come along right now that is far and away the best ever in the ring, on the mic, has the best look, everything, literally the best at everything and they will never draw anywhere near what people like Austin, Rock or Hogan did. It's a different era now and to discount people because of ratings is insane to me.

Well god damn, so was Mark Henry and so was Big Show. Let’s debate their merits as goats next.

Mark Henry wouldve been a legend in the 80s

name of the game is to con people out of their money. in baseball you talk home runs and no hitters. in wrestling you talk tickets. the good ones connect to their audience and you judge that connection off who convinced people to spend money on them. if no one wants to buy what you're selling youre not good at this job.

Imagine Mark Henry showing up and just wrecking the Von Erichs by himself because he’s such a monster.

So are you asking who sold the most tickets and was the biggest draw? Or are you saying that’s what you value?

There have been plenty of strongmen and giants with just as much if not more success than Mark and Big Show

Plenty of giants as successful as big show? Name 5.

That's where I'm stuck. Because as it is it seems like the GOAT could only ever come from pretty much the 80's or 90's if thats your metric. Everyone else, regardless of skill or talent or anything, is automatically discounted because they will never ever draw anywhere near what the guys at the peak of rasslins popularity did.

Money vs art.

Do you think being the greatest means you drew the most for the longest period of time, or on top the longest. Or do you value the quality of performance, ei who you may subjectively think is the greatest performer, or you thought was the most entertaining.

Or you could be a centrist and think you need to balance both.

Forgot where I read it before but if you go by adjusted box office then the GOAT would be either Austin or Hogan since nobody really drew the same level of gate revenues those two did during their time on top at least in the US. Between the two, think Austin outdrew Hogan using the same adjusted metrics.

Cena has both beat based on pure drawing revenues but not when you adjust for inflation and the rising costs of tickets and PPV prices during Cena's era.

It was talked about. But I don't have him in my conversation. He's outside about everyone on THE LIST MANNNNNM. Still great though and his AEW Championship run was brilliant, MAYBE his best run. That's up for debate because be did a lot of great things in the E.

Cena's longevity definitely makes him a contender IMO. And I think it's debatable he superceded Austin and The Rock. But there is something about Hogan that is just massive in some way. Sure he wasn't a brilliant wrestler but he played his part amazingly. His classic matches are untouchable in their own ways.

Andre the Giant
Undertaker
Don Leo Jonathan
Ernie Ladd
Kane
Killer Kowalski


Other than Eddie, name 1 Luchador/Mexican wrestler that was as successful in the US as Rey

</td><td class="alt1" style="border: #405174; border-left: 0px; border-top: 0px" align="right"> </td></tr></tbody></table>
Im saying it has be part of the conversation. It cant just be who made you pop the most. But i dont think its the only metric that matters. what i do think is its the largest part of the pie and by a wide margin. a guy putting on the same caliber matches as bret hart in front of 200 people in a highschool gym clearly isnt the GOAT no matter hard you nut for him. Ignoring drawing power completely isnt reasonable or objective.

and there's just as much art in getting over as there is in clever chain wrestling. the only difference is you dont respect one for whatever reason

if the conversation was purely money it would be either hogan who drew the most money for the longest time or austin who drew the most per night ever but i definitely think the conversation is more nuanced than purely gates.

(and i think i summed up my thoughts pretty well on pg1)

Hogan made events bigger that's why I picked him.

Hogan is definitely a guy no one can dismiss out of hand. Any GOAT conversation not only has to include him it has to actively defend why he isnt at the top of the list.

to circle back to the comment that "only guys from the 80s/90s can be the GOAT if you go by the gate" id like to point out that the WWF was going under before Austin got hot. a show no one was watching to the hottest act of all time. Thats WHY he's GOAT tier. he got so outrageously over that he turned the business around...and thats why no one today can crack that list.


they arent over.

I think what we are seeing in this thread is exactly why even in the business they qualify greatest of all time.

Austin is easily the GOAT drawing star within the industry. Nobody in wrestling reached a higher peak.

Hulk is still the GOAT associated/recognizable to the average person.

Shawn is the GOAT in ring worker.

Flair is the GOAT successful Pro Wrestler.

Cena is the GOAT successful Sports Entertainer.

Undertaker is the GOAT character.

Jericho is the GOAT at reinventing his character.

Rock is the GOAT for biggest star that came from wrestling.

Angle is the GOAT for most successful athlete that became a wrestler.

Lesnar is the GOAT for most successful athlete after he left pro wrestling.

That is leaving out HUGE names that were great, had success in and out of the ring, and we're good enough to be in that discussion.

It's why I picked Rock, because he was near the top of every qualification the other wrestlers talk about.

It also depends on how Giant is defined. If we are not going just by height, guys like Yokozuna and Vader and Earthquake are absolutely up there. If just by height, I'd rank Kevin Nash's career above Big Show as well.