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.