2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

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 » Wed Oct 18, 2017 2:58 pm

armsofsleep wrote:Shocked by how many people are pushing for Punk. He probably has a good case as an influence, but that's about it. His work doesn't hold up much at all.
To me, the influence case is a bit overrated with regard to Punk. His signing and subsequent push didn't really change very much with regard to who got signed and who got pushed. Only once he did the WWE summer of punk did he start to help make changes (which shouldn't be ignored, but should be contextualized). I also think he wasn't that far off from being the right size for a typical WWE guy.

Danielson always struck me as more clear bellweather for the sea change in WWE talent scouting. Because after he signed, it did seem like the door opened much wider for independent and smaller talent than prior to him. Further, once he ascended to the top of the card and forced WWE's hand regarding Mania XXX, it broke the dam.

Punk's case relies on whether you think his WWE run was HOF worthy or not. Without more, I'd say no.

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

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by armsofsleep » Wed Oct 18, 2017 3:23 pm

FWIW I think the same. I think his influence more comes from promo style/shooty stuff/the pipebomb and how everyone does that type of thing nowadays. I don't think he really created any of that but he definitely brought it into the internet era.

User avatar
cbacon87
Posts: 334
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 11:50 pm

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by cbacon87 » Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:02 pm

Punk's biggest strength probably is his mic work and that's not factored into the criteria, rightly or wrongly (I definitely think you could argue it's as important as in-ring work to how 'famous' a wrestler becomes if not more-so), unless you consider it to be tacitly factored into the drawing power section and assume that good mic work should be represented by good business. To be fair, I can't think of many HOF level talkers who weren't good draws of the top of my head, so maybe that's fair.

The influence thing is definitely iffy. Ring work is debatable because he's got the big matches to fall back on and cancel out the middle of the road stuff. To me it comes down to how you factor in his obvious strength at talking up matches when there's not the evidence of him 'talking people into the building' to convince people.

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

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by armsofsleep » Wed Oct 18, 2017 4:59 pm

The drawing/talking thing is pretty interesting. Ultimately, promos are just that. PROMO. They're a way to get something over. I unquestionably factor mic skills into my ballot, fair or not.

In terms of HOF level talkers who aren't necessarily great draws, I'll take Nick Gage over a lot of lauded HOF guys in that respect.

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 » Wed Oct 18, 2017 5:25 pm

mlev76 wrote: Punk's case relies on whether you think his WWE run was HOF worthy or not. Without more, I'd say no.
Agree, although I'd say he is someone where you could reasonably argue his indie run legitimately adds to his case. He was a pretty big deal during a very important era of indie wrestling and ROH specifically, and influential to the entire generation of guys who came after him. With that said, I am not a Punk voter and this doesn't put him over the top for me personally, although I do think it should be noted as a positive for him.

Also a reminder that nowhere on the ballot will you find the word "influence". We all talk about it, yet the criteria states nothing about it.

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

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by armsofsleep » Wed Oct 18, 2017 5:40 pm

"unless someone is so significant as a trend-setter or a historical figure in the business, or valuable to the industry, that they need to be included." I feel like that's pretty clear about it. I try not to focus super hard on the criteria anyway because Dave doesn't follow his own rules about stuff 80% of the time.

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 » Wed Oct 18, 2017 6:27 pm

armsofsleep wrote:"unless someone is so significant as a trend-setter or a historical figure in the business, or valuable to the industry, that they need to be included." I feel like that's pretty clear about it. I try not to focus super hard on the criteria anyway because Dave doesn't follow his own rules about stuff 80% of the time.
Yeah, I'm not trying to be pedantic, I just find it amusing that everyone (myself included) always tosses around "influence" yet the word never appears on the ballot.

User avatar
DylanWaco
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 5:56 pm

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by DylanWaco » Wed Oct 18, 2017 8:57 pm

I’ll probably write more later, but for now I’ll make the point I made last year, which is that if we accept a strict constructionist view of ballot verbiage and rate historical significance instead of influence, guys like Bearcat Wright, JYD, and Sputnik become far harder to argue against.

User avatar
thecubsfan
Posts: 357
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2015 10:29 pm

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by thecubsfan » Thu Oct 19, 2017 8:31 pm

BoxingRobes wrote:Interested in hearing @cubsfan's take on Mistico in as a candidate.
He's an easy Yes for me. From about 2005 to 2010, he was the top draw in his country during a boom. He was part of great matches. He was part of great matches, and he's a big influence on the lucha libre style. The drawing power is easier to document and should be enough to get in.

After the first FantasticaMania, Mistico got on a plane to Los Angeles to secretly join WWE and film his debut vignettes. If Mistico instead got on a plane to Bolivia and was never seen or heard from again (fading into Bolivian), he's breezes into this hall of famer. The WWE run is a negative, but he was still somehow over enough to sell lots of merch, enough so that they've gone out of their way to keep his character live even if no longer wanted him in it.

I think the knock on him are a comparison to Vampiro, as a guy who a big draw during a hot period of wrestling and did not do particularly well elsewhere. Mistico's run as a ticket seller last longer, he was part of better matches (and a bigger part of making them better), and Mistico has had a much bigger influence.

I think people feel like Mistico was a product of his booking. In the time since Mistico, I've seen CMLL try to recreate the magic with many others since 2005, with limited success. They've tried Mistico La Nueva Era, and it hasn't taken in a big way. They tried Magnus before him, it didn't work. Volador and Sombra are immensely talented luchadors, and they hit a wall of fan resentment being pushed in similar ways as Mistico until they turned heel. None of them crossed over near as much as the original. (La Mascara & Sagrado didn't really click as well before him either.) And it's not just CMLL - AAA tried a half dozen guys over a decade without finding one that worked out. Mistico was able to make a connection to the crowd that few others can.

He's not as big a star now as he was in 2010. But that just leaves him at about Atlantis' level, a nationally recognized famous luchador who can main event any show and any mask match he's in will be a huge deal. He's not giving up wrestling any time soon, so his longevity argument is just going to get bigger. He'll probably go up this year because people who see first ballot as a big deal will be freer to vote him, and he'll go up more over time as the WWE fades away and as people who don't want to vote for a guy still in the middle of his career see him move more towards the end. But I think he's going to end up as a guy who everyone wonders what took so long when he finally gets in.

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 Oct 20, 2017 7:29 pm

dave's HOF picks from this weeks WON:

"In the non-wrestler category I’ve got five votes, so I’m going with Brown, Crockett Sr., Crockett Jr, Gary Hart and Jarrett. It’s not meant as a slight to anyone else.

For wrestlers, my first round of picks are Pedro Morales, Bearcat Wright, Edge, A.J. Styles, The Sharpe Brothers, Minoru Suzuki, Kiyoshi Tamura, Ultimo Guerrero, Karloff Lagarde, L.A. Park and Los Misioneros, which makes 11. The final cut is hard, but I guess it’s Tamura for this year."

He broke down the entire ballot, excluding Europe & the MISC EVERYWHERE ELSE buckets, and I thought he did a fair & balanced job. Worth seeking out.

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 Oct 20, 2017 7:40 pm

thecubsfan wrote:
BoxingRobes wrote:Interested in hearing @cubsfan's take on Mistico in as a candidate.
He's an easy Yes for me. From about 2005 to 2010, he was the top draw in his country during a boom. He was part of great matches. He was part of great matches, and he's a big influence on the lucha libre style. The drawing power is easier to document and should be enough to get in.

After the first FantasticaMania, Mistico got on a plane to Los Angeles to secretly join WWE and film his debut vignettes. If Mistico instead got on a plane to Bolivia and was never seen or heard from again (fading into Bolivian), he's breezes into this hall of famer. The WWE run is a negative, but he was still somehow over enough to sell lots of merch, enough so that they've gone out of their way to keep his character live even if no longer wanted him in it.

I think the knock on him are a comparison to Vampiro, as a guy who a big draw during a hot period of wrestling and did not do particularly well elsewhere. Mistico's run as a ticket seller last longer, he was part of better matches (and a bigger part of making them better), and Mistico has had a much bigger influence.

I think people feel like Mistico was a product of his booking. In the time since Mistico, I've seen CMLL try to recreate the magic with many others since 2005, with limited success. They've tried Mistico La Nueva Era, and it hasn't taken in a big way. They tried Magnus before him, it didn't work. Volador and Sombra are immensely talented luchadors, and they hit a wall of fan resentment being pushed in similar ways as Mistico until they turned heel. None of them crossed over near as much as the original. (La Mascara & Sagrado didn't really click as well before him either.) And it's not just CMLL - AAA tried a half dozen guys over a decade without finding one that worked out. Mistico was able to make a connection to the crowd that few others can.

He's not as big a star now as he was in 2010. But that just leaves him at about Atlantis' level, a nationally recognized famous luchador who can main event any show and any mask match he's in will be a huge deal. He's not giving up wrestling any time soon, so his longevity argument is just going to get bigger. He'll probably go up this year because people who see first ballot as a big deal will be freer to vote him, and he'll go up more over time as the WWE fades away and as people who don't want to vote for a guy still in the middle of his career see him move more towards the end. But I think he's going to end up as a guy who everyone wonders what took so long when he finally gets in.
This was helpful. I'm not even going to vote in the region just because I don't think I will ever be able to do it justice but this was very informing regardless.

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 » Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:47 am

Joe Lanza wrote:dave's HOF picks from this weeks WON:

"In the non-wrestler category I’ve got five votes, so I’m going with Brown, Crockett Sr., Crockett Jr, Gary Hart and Jarrett. It’s not meant as a slight to anyone else.

For wrestlers, my first round of picks are Pedro Morales, Bearcat Wright, Edge, A.J. Styles, The Sharpe Brothers, Minoru Suzuki, Kiyoshi Tamura, Ultimo Guerrero, Karloff Lagarde, L.A. Park and Los Misioneros, which makes 11. The final cut is hard, but I guess it’s Tamura for this year."

He broke down the entire ballot, excluding Europe & the MISC EVERYWHERE ELSE buckets, and I thought he did a fair & balanced job. Worth seeking out.
I'm fascinated by him picking Pedro after his write up of him. His reasoning (that he's harmed by Vince Sr. wanting Bruno back while he was champion) seems odd since he says at the same time that Pedro was a huge draw in WWWF. Hope he does get in since he is consistently overlooked with regard to WWWF/WWF/WWE history.

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 » Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:02 am

mlev76 wrote:
Joe Lanza wrote:dave's HOF picks from this weeks WON:

"In the non-wrestler category I’ve got five votes, so I’m going with Brown, Crockett Sr., Crockett Jr, Gary Hart and Jarrett. It’s not meant as a slight to anyone else.

For wrestlers, my first round of picks are Pedro Morales, Bearcat Wright, Edge, A.J. Styles, The Sharpe Brothers, Minoru Suzuki, Kiyoshi Tamura, Ultimo Guerrero, Karloff Lagarde, L.A. Park and Los Misioneros, which makes 11. The final cut is hard, but I guess it’s Tamura for this year."

He broke down the entire ballot, excluding Europe & the MISC EVERYWHERE ELSE buckets, and I thought he did a fair & balanced job. Worth seeking out.
I'm fascinated by him picking Pedro after his write up of him. His reasoning (that he's harmed by Vince Sr. wanting Bruno back while he was champion) seems odd since he says at the same time that Pedro was a huge draw in WWWF. Hope he does get in since he is consistently overlooked with regard to WWWF/WWF/WWE history.
I was a Pedro voter before he was moved to the Historical group. I think his WWF title run is enough, but toss in the west coast stuff and it's icing.

I've stayed away from the historical group because there are always a few nominees that I'm not comfortable enough to assess, but since votes for non wrestlers that are considered "historical" candidates in essence make you a historical voter, I may vote Pedro again this year (among a few others, since I never seem to vte for more than 3 or 4 people total, and have plenty of room on my ballot).

User avatar
DylanWaco
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Jul 04, 2015 5:56 pm

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by DylanWaco » Sat Oct 21, 2017 4:35 pm

People - myself included - often talk about how loaded the lucha ballot is with good reason. But the historical candidates section is also getting very dense with names that are at minimum very much worth consideration. Of the 20 names in that section I'd say 10 of them are really good candidates. Someone like Rocky Johnson would probably be one of the three or four best guys on the modern performers list, and I'm not even including him in the top half of the historical candidates ballot. This trend is only going to continue as guys "time out" in modern performers and/or get added to the historical bucket with more research and thought (as an example, I could easily see Greg Valentine get added to that category, and while I'm not sure I'd vote for him he's a better candidate than a ton of people on the ballot already).

With this and the increasing push from newer voters for people to be considered on "work alone" we are probably heading toward a world where The Young Bucks get in, while The Von Brauners and The Andersons get forgotten. Your mileage may vary on whether you think the Bucks are HoFers but that debate is coming, and I'm not sure there is any sane historical argument that they are one of only a handful of teams in history that merit inclusion. For that reason I really would encourage voters to take a closer look at the historical candidates section. The modern performers section is so weak guys trying to justify getting a ballot by just checking off a name or two there they aren't even sure about would be better served researching guys like Torres who is honestly a pretty easy pick once you start digging. I get not wanting to vote for guys you haven't seen, but the idea of the HoF becoming a cakewalk for mediocre candidates because people want to vote for someone they know strikes me as antithetical to the idea of a HoF in the first place. Maybe I'm overthinking it.

In any event, Pedro is a good candidate, I just don't have room for him. I've kind of taken to the idea of historical significance being the most underappreciated portion of the HoF candidate puzzle, and for that reason I'll use my historical picks for Bearcat, Sputnik and Torres (though Torres and Bearcat would be strong candidates even without that claim).

User avatar
KLC
Posts: 142
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 12:40 pm

Re: 2017 WON HOF Ballot & Discussion

Post by KLC » Sat Oct 28, 2017 5:50 am

For Australia/NZ/Rest of the World voters, I'd recommend listening to this podcast which I think makes points worth considering re: Mario Milano http://www.abc.net.au/radio/programs/be ... re/9084322

Post Reply