Originally Posted by Destor
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.
|