The Wrestling Observer Newsletter’s Rookie of the Year award is often one of the most debated pieces of (imaginary) hardware in that set of awards, with no shortage of criticism of various candidates.
The difficulties with the award stem from many issues beyond the control of Dave Meltzer or anyone else – they stem from the fact that it is an attempt to apply a shoot-sport award to the world of pro wrestling.
Over the past three years, I’ve made my best attempt at putting together lists of candidates and sending them to Meltzer, in large part because I was curious about who would be eligible and what the thought process would be for putting together a list of candidates. I’ll reference some of my experiences doing this and what I’ve learned as I write this article.
And as a point of clarity before I hear from anyone after this article: yes, I make suggestions, not the final list. That’s at Dave’s discretion, as they’re his awards. As soon as I send him my suggestions, I proceed to do something else that’s equally dumb, like die a lot in Hades 2.
The award is currently given to someone who debuted with a major company on or after October 1 of the year preceding the awards. That is the entirety of the criteria.
After a few years of focusing specifically on this award, I believe the eligibility criteria would benefit from some revisions.
When is a rookie not a rookie?
Debates often arise about how long someone should be considered a rookie before they are no longer one. The most hardcore purists will point out that in Japan, rookies often debut immediately for a major company, and it’s unfair to compare someone from that group with someone who has spent years working their way up the ladder to a larger promotion in the U.S. (or Europe, or Mexico).
But these awards are given by an American publication with a predominantly American audience. The path taken by talent outside of Japan tends to follow something more akin to Major League Baseball – a player debuts in rookie or A ball, and then slowly works their way up to the majors.
Exposure matters. Being able to watch the candidates for an award and make an informed decision matters. And the exposure received by someone who spent nine months as a weekend warrior in indies near Fargo is not remotely equal to the exposure received by a young lion working in New Japan or a former athlete debuting directly in NXT.
This path leads you to a list of winners that would almost exclusively be from those two groups, with the occasional celebrity who pops their head in for a handful of matches. It’s not good for the award when it’s won by someone like Pat McAfee, who comes in for a single high-profile match or two but isn’t remotely close to being a full-time performer.
It’s for this reason that it’s important the award not take the most stringent stance on who should be eligible for it.
When is someone too experienced to be a rookie?
This brings us to the other end of the spectrum: when someone has spent a long time in the proverbial minor leagues before getting to a spot in a major company.
I think it’s perfectly logical not to want the Rookie of the Year award to go to a 38-year-old who is in their seventeenth year as a pro because they finally worked in a promotion of size. It’s cool that LaBron Kozone, who debuted in 2012, finally got attention in 2022 because of his work in Deadlock Pro, but it’s also not really fun to compare him to someone like Bron Breakker or Hook who were eligible that year.
Technically, Kozone should have been eligible for 2022 (and maybe not even until the next year), but it’s not fun to vote for him alongside a much less experienced worker like Breakker. It undermines the award to an extent.
A cap on prior experience before the eligibility rule should be implemented. I’ve previously used 10 years as my cutoff, but I think reducing it to 8 or even 5 years would be reasonable. I estimate three years as being a bit too restrictive.
When has someone debuted?
One person I mentioned to Dave as a possible candidate this year was BEEF for his work in Ring of Honor. I’ve seen criticism for his inclusion due to his previously working for MLW prior to the eligibility period for the 2025 awards, but I believe that three matches in a minor role is insufficient to burn someone’s eligibility.
(For sticklers on BEEF: I included him because it’s been nine years since his debut, and I was using a ten-year cutoff for proposals this year.)
I strongly believe that saying someone can’t be a Rookie of the Year candidate because two years prior they jobbed on AEW Dark twice is nonsense. They should be required to have a regular role in a major promotion, rather than a one-off appearance to be stepped on by Omos in 2021 or whatever.
I do think it’s entirely possible for workers to get the necessary exposure to be considered candidates without ever working regularly in a major promotion.
Mad Dog Connelly and Adam Priest are both examples – I don’t think either spent much time in a major promotion prior to 2025, but both feel too experienced to be considered for this award in 2025. Ideally, adding these types of candidates to the list of those eligible when they occur would be good. Realistically, it’s a bit harder to determine than the traditional group.
When is a company major?
So there are obviously major companies – WWE, AEW, CMLL, NJPW, Stardom, etc. Then there’s companies that are obviously not major – your local indie that draws 18 people at the armory.
The in-between is messy, and there’s never going to be a clean solution for it. This is akin to the Supreme Court ruling Jacobellis v. Ohio regarding obscenity, where Justice Potter Stewart said, “I know it when I see it.”
I like to point to PWG as a good example here. It clearly became a major company by the mid-2010s, but I don’t think it was a major company from the first show. When did this change?
I believe that a company qualifies as major when there’s a decent amount of discussion of that company, at least among more hardcore fans. This is where Dave has to draw the line, since it’s his awards, but in my opinion, I think these are some reasonable examples to use as guidance:
- IWA MS and CZW were major companies in the early 2000s, but eventually lost relevance and ceased to be major companies.
- OTT was a major company in 2019 and stopped being one basically as soon as COVID-19 and Speaking Out happened.
- Beyond might have been a major company in 2019, but clearly wasn’t once the pandemic occurred. It could be one again if IWTV gains prevalence.
- Ice Ribbon was once a major company, but hasn’t been for a few years.
- Deadlock Pro was a major company in at least 2024 and 2025, if not earlier.
- GWF in Germany is probably not yet a major company, because it doesn’t have much buzz, but it has the potential of cresting that hill soon.
- Modern AAW is short of major status and has been since the pandemic.
- West Coast Pro is not yet a major promotion, but could get there with a big year.
- Being WWE ID talent by itself does not necessarily make you major; working in major promotions as part of that should be what defines your exposure level.
In my opinion, the following promotions should be classified as major in 2025. I emphasize that it’s my opinion because wrestling fans love yelling about this kind of thing, and I definitely need to die more in Hades 2:
- U.S.: WWE (including EVOLVE), AEW, TNA, RoH, MLW, NWA, GCW, Deadlock Pro
- Mexico: CMLL, AAA
- Europe: RevPro, Progress, wXw
- Japan: NJPW, NOAH, Dragongate, AJPW, DDT, Stardom, Marigold, TJPW, Marvelous, Sendai Girls
My proposals for the award are as follows:
- Create a hard guideline for how much time someone can spend in the “minors” but still become eligible for this award. I personally favor cutting someone off somewhere around five years after their debut; allowances for injury time or hiatuses should be made in a commonsense manner. I can see the argument for extending it to as much as, say, eight. I think restricting it to three would possibly be too limiting to the field, but this would warrant further examination.
- A list of what counts as a major should be printed in the description of the award and updated annually.
- Consider renaming the award to “Best New Star” or something similar, to move it away from the fights that focus entirely on what a rookie year is. I’m not sure if this actually solves an issue or just tries to dance around it.
- Also, the Most Overrated/Underrated awards are more desperately in need of being renamed to Most Overpushed/Underpushed.
