2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

User avatar
FlyingMaiden
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2017 11:41 pm

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by FlyingMaiden » Sun Oct 29, 2017 2:33 pm

Can anyone educate me on the cases against Pedro Morales and Dick Hutton? I can't seem to find very much info that would explain their lack of support among voters.

For Dick Hutton, I've seen passing mentions that he was not considered on the charisma/drawing level of the other champs of that era and that he only had the title because he was Thesz's boy. Is there more to it than that? If his reign was a failure, why wouldn't the NWA change the title sooner?

For Morales, the argument seems to be that the WWWF still needed Bruno to heat things up during his run. Though that could also be said of Backlund, and the voters still saw to elect him. Meltzer also seems to support voting for him.

I ask for no other reason than my ignorance of their respective eras/territories. They both seem to fit the basic profile of a strong HOF candidate, so I assume there is an inside reason.

User avatar
JML
Posts: 931
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2015 12:37 am
Contact:

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by JML » Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:53 am

This article puts up an argument for Pedro being in the HOF http://www.f4wonline.com/other-wrestlin ... hof-245351


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

User avatar
Joe Lanza
Site Admin
Posts: 2732
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:00 pm

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by Joe Lanza » Mon Oct 30, 2017 5:43 pm

FlyingMaiden wrote:Can anyone educate me on the cases against Pedro Morales and Dick Hutton? I can't seem to find very much info that would explain their lack of support among voters.

For Dick Hutton, I've seen passing mentions that he was not considered on the charisma/drawing level of the other champs of that era and that he only had the title because he was Thesz's boy. Is there more to it than that? If his reign was a failure, why wouldn't the NWA change the title sooner?

For Morales, the argument seems to be that the WWWF still needed Bruno to heat things up during his run. Though that could also be said of Backlund, and the voters still saw to elect him. Meltzer also seems to support voting for him.

I ask for no other reason than my ignorance of their respective eras/territories. They both seem to fit the basic profile of a strong HOF candidate, so I assume there is an inside reason.
Hutton was considered a bomb at the box office and a failure as champion. Opinions on his work vary, but nobody really considered him a kick ass worker or anything like that. I'm guessing he held the title for as long as he did because Thesz had his back. Thesz obviously loved the fact that he was a three time NCAA champ because Thesz was all about being legit. A good comparison for Hutton would be Ultimate Warrior, in that they both won the title from an established mega star champion, but failed to get over as expected and business declined. It's hard to call someone a Hall of Famer who got one shot and didn't make it work. And unlike Warrior, who McMahon would try again with several times over the years to varying degrees of success, Hutton largely faded away. He's on the ballot because he was an NWA champ during the glory days of the title, but there's really nothing else on the resume and there are tons of people from the same era with much better HOF credentials who never held the world title.

I'm a Pedro voter, so you won't hear a counter argument from me. I would've voted for Backlund too had I been a voter in those days.

User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2571
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by mlev76 » Mon Oct 30, 2017 8:06 pm

FlyingMaiden wrote:Can anyone educate me on the cases against Pedro Morales and Dick Hutton? I can't seem to find very much info that would explain their lack of support among voters.

For Dick Hutton, I've seen passing mentions that he was not considered on the charisma/drawing level of the other champs of that era and that he only had the title because he was Thesz's boy. Is there more to it than that? If his reign was a failure, why wouldn't the NWA change the title sooner?

For Morales, the argument seems to be that the WWWF still needed Bruno to heat things up during his run. Though that could also be said of Backlund, and the voters still saw to elect him. Meltzer also seems to support voting for him.

I ask for no other reason than my ignorance of their respective eras/territories. They both seem to fit the basic profile of a strong HOF candidate, so I assume there is an inside reason.
If you look at the attendance records for MSG in the Pedro era (they're pretty incomplete, but there are some especially in his first year), there doesn't seem to be any dropoff. In fact, Pedro set a couple of records there as his reign went along.

Dave says that Bruno being brought back was basically a show of lack of confidence in Pedro, but it looks more like Vince Sr. wanting Bruno back for the sake of having him back rather than it being a knock on Pedro.

User avatar
elloziom
Posts: 113
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2016 3:54 pm

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by elloziom » Sat Nov 25, 2017 1:47 pm

So according to Daily Update 5 guys got in this year. The results will be on Wednesday. Any predictions on who it's gonna be?

User avatar
mlev76
Posts: 2571
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:32 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by mlev76 » Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:55 pm

2017 Inductees:

AJ Styles (US Canada Modern)
Mark Lewin (Australia/New Zealand)
Mike & Ben Sharpe (Japan)
MInoru Suzuki (Japan)
Pedro Morales (US Canada Historical)

Gotta say, I get all of these to a certain extent with the exception of Suzuki. Especially considering his career is ongoing, his sudden jump in voting and ultimately induction is very odd to me.

User avatar
Garuda
Posts: 776
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 8:15 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by Garuda » Thu Nov 30, 2017 11:52 pm

I don't know anything about Mark Lewin, so I can't comment, but yeah Suzuki...... to jump from 37% to passing is strange in this year of all years. I don't think this year has been kind to his resume.

I salute the other three. AJ I'm anxious always about a current wrestler going in, but I do think the man's earned it. If somehow no one cares or mentions him in ten years it may look strange, but that's a tough prediction to bet on.

User avatar
Rich Kraetsch
Site Admin
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 7:12 pm
Location: Wheaton, IL
Contact:

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by Rich Kraetsch » Fri Dec 01, 2017 7:58 pm

We tried to figure out the Suzuki jump on this week's show. Is it simply that a ton of people REALLY loved Okada/Suzuki and that put him over the top? It was an awesome match but not the transcendent "OKAY NOW HE'S AN ALL-TIMER" type match... but I suppose it was to some people? That's all I can come up with for his ridiculous jump in %.

User avatar
armsofsleep
Posts: 368
Joined: Mon Mar 27, 2017 3:48 pm

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by armsofsleep » Fri Dec 01, 2017 8:06 pm

Rich Kraetsch wrote:We tried to figure out the Suzuki jump on this week's show. Is it simply that a ton of people REALLY loved Okada/Suzuki and that put him over the top? It was an awesome match but not the transcendent "OKAY NOW HE'S AN ALL-TIMER" type match... but I suppose it was to some people? That's all I can come up with for his ridiculous jump in %.
I REALLY don't think that's it.



Not to say this is some sort of conspiracy, but if you look at the voting breakdown of which groups voted for what, the people that Dave votes for/pushes on the audio a lot tend to be the people that get big jumps. It feels like he almost always picks a guy or two to bang on throughout the voting period, and then the voting can take shape around that push. Atleast in the Journalists category. And Dave 10000% counts MMA shit in his thinking (and has a lot of journalist friends who do the same).

If anything, you'd think this year would've hurt him. I mean, I know some people loved Okada/Suzuki, but it was probably the most hated (by the people who did hate it) major NJPW match of the entire year. And he had quite a few straight up bad matches.


The jump from nearly off the ballot to miraculously saved for Nagata is also a little fishy. Like, who are these people who all of a sudden think Nagata is deserving? Even after a great year, it makes no sense.

User avatar
Rich Kraetsch
Site Admin
Posts: 2173
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2015 7:12 pm
Location: Wheaton, IL
Contact:

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by Rich Kraetsch » Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:01 pm

That makes sense only because he was going to fall off the ballot. We've seen a similar phenomenon for the baseball HOF, people on the threshold always get a bump. There are likely a lot of people who don't 100% think Nagata is a HOFer but wanted him to remain on the ballot for now.

That jump doesn't bother me, nor does the Don Owen bump which is exactly the same. People want to ensure those guys don't drop off even if they haven't voted them in previous years or aren't likely to think of them as no doubt HOFers.

User avatar
Joe Lanza
Site Admin
Posts: 2732
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:00 pm

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by Joe Lanza » Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:03 pm

Unless you are voting for the max ten and WANT to vote for Nagata or Owen or whoever but they aren't in your top ten, I will never understand why you aren't voting for them in previous years, but trying to "save" them when their time is up. You either think someone is a HOF'er or you don't.

User avatar
Garuda
Posts: 776
Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 8:15 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by Garuda » Fri Dec 01, 2017 10:27 pm

Like you suggested in the audio this week, Joe, I think the level of conscious thought people give the voting is probably not as rigorous as we imagine, on the average.

To think about a guy and say "yeah he's awesome" and then to stop your knee-jerk urges and go "OK, objectively, does he fit the criteria as laid out?" takes a certain amount of will that people may not care to spend on a wrestling HOF vote.

I'm sure there's a broad spectrum of how much people gut check it versus how much people brain-check each candidate, even before the fact that people come up with different responses with their guts and brains alike. I think people are more influenced by something like Dave talking up Suzuki more then they care to let on, and whatever the reality is of how people determine their votes "on average" are probably very different then whatever we can imagine.

User avatar
Matt Farmer
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Aug 16, 2015 5:06 pm
Location: Seattle WA
Contact:

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by Matt Farmer » Mon Dec 04, 2017 7:36 pm

mlev76 wrote:
FlyingMaiden wrote:Can anyone educate me on the cases against Pedro Morales and Dick Hutton? I can't seem to find very much info that would explain their lack of support among voters.

For Dick Hutton, I've seen passing mentions that he was not considered on the charisma/drawing level of the other champs of that era and that he only had the title because he was Thesz's boy. Is there more to it than that? If his reign was a failure, why wouldn't the NWA change the title sooner?

For Morales, the argument seems to be that the WWWF still needed Bruno to heat things up during his run. Though that could also be said of Backlund, and the voters still saw to elect him. Meltzer also seems to support voting for him.

I ask for no other reason than my ignorance of their respective eras/territories. They both seem to fit the basic profile of a strong HOF candidate, so I assume there is an inside reason.
If you look at the attendance records for MSG in the Pedro era (they're pretty incomplete, but there are some especially in his first year), there doesn't seem to be any dropoff. In fact, Pedro set a couple of records there as his reign went along.

Dave says that Bruno being brought back was basically a show of lack of confidence in Pedro, but it looks more like Vince Sr. wanting Bruno back for the sake of having him back rather than it being a knock on Pedro.
I'm not sure I buy the "Pedro wasn't drawing" claim that has been around forever. I'm sure that's what Vince told Bruno the reason for bringing him back though. Pedro at MSG still to this day has one of the best percentages of sellouts of anyone, and even holds the most number of sellouts in a row.

The argument has always been that Pedro didn't draw well in other towns. I'm not sure if I completely buy either as it seems many of the towns do just as well and some even appear to do better. Though something was up, because when Vince brought Bruno back he brought him back on a reduced schedule and with a higher percentage of the gate (6% of the gate and %5 of MSG) which is a pretty damn good living and made Bruno probably the highest paid person in wrestling that wasn't an owner.

Post Reply