View Single Post
Old 01-26-2017, 09:40 PM   #31855
#1-norm-fan
Resident drug enabler
 
#1-norm-fan's Avatar
 
Posts: 45,473
#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)#1-norm-fan makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wishbone View Post
In all fairness your definition of mainstream star means that literally no wrestlers outside of the Rock, Hogan, and maybe Andre the Giant were ever mainstream stars then. Household names are people who the vast majority of the general populace can identify without any background information given. I'd argue that many modern day pop stars and tv/movie stars don't even meet that requirement. Like, Michael Jackson is a household name, but Justin Bieber? Not so much. That doesn't mean Bieber isn't a superstar, but he's nowhere near as well known as Jackson.
Pretty sure most people know who Justin Bieber is but that's beside the point. My definition of "mainstream star" is not THAT high. I also don't think you need to be a mainstream star to be worth a shit. I don't think Goldberg is a mainstream star but he's a big enough deal to possibly bring that "big fight feel" a WrestleMania main event should have. I was just responding to the idea that Bryan was a mainstream star. I think you'd have to bring the standards pretty low to include him. Punk was closer to being a mainstream star.
#1-norm-fan is offline   Reply With Quote