Wrestling Forum banner

Should Business factors and Drawing ability be a criteria for Greatness?

Analyze This: Greatest of All Times

7K views 79 replies 28 participants last post by  Hawksea 
#1 ·
Before the start, please do not bring in names and make this a debate why a wrestler A or B is great or not. This is about the bigger picture where I want to open a discussion on what is the generally accepted and your individual criteria for calling someone Greatest of All Times in pro-wrestling in your opinion and since when did business and drawing became a criteria for Greatness overshadowing in ring talent and entertainment factor?

To me, Greatness criteria include the following:
  • In Ring Ability
  • Promo Skills
  • Ring Psychology/Storytelling
  • Gimmick/Character performance
  • Longevity (A one year run as a great entertainer is not enough for me to call someone G.O.A.T)

P.S: Please do not make this a A vs B discussion and keep it generic.
 
#53 · (Edited)
I would imagine that alot of this comes down to a generational thing.

Really the territorial era was more about the intensity of the fued, the wreslters charisma, and the ability to tell a story.

So in that reagard, as a child of the 70's I consider the great ones the guys who built a legacy based on those things. Heck we thought dropkicks were showstoppers. Most guys back then punched, kicked and clotheslined. It was a different time, and we did not care that no one did moonsaults. It was about the fued, and it made sense that when two guys hated each other they punched and kicked.

Today's internet fan is far more concerned about in ring ability, however I will say I don't think the average fan who is not a smart mark is concerend with that as much as the IWC fans are, but the fueds are not as intense. The era of Kayfabe is over. They do love the high spots.

But it boils down to this, we are all fans of the guys we grew up with. The guys from my era will never accept any argument that Flair and Thesz are not the greatest, but children of the 80's will prop up Hogan just as children of the 90's will cry Rock and Austin. In ten years their will be a huge rising of fans who actually will declare Cena as the greatest ever. I think that is crazy but they will not, and they will dismiss me as an old timer.

This website is living proof. While I know in my 40 years of wrestling fandom that Flair is the man (no offense to Thesz), bar none (even though I am not a fan of his), he will be ignored just as he is in the GOAT thread on this site in spite of all of the things we list as qualities of the GOAT.

So it is really about how old you are and less about what criteria you use for many fans. Try telling a kid from the 60's that the Packers are not the greatest team ever, or a child of the 70's that it's not the Steelers or 72 Phins.
 
#54 ·
While I know in my 40 years of wrestling fandom that Flair is the man
That is really quite subjective, though...and comparing it to football teams of certain years is a bit silly....anyone who looks at the team stats from those times and disagrees that those teams were anything but amazing are just idiots. The proof is right in front of their faces.

Saying a certain guy is 'the man' is just an opinion, though a lot of people share the same opinion of Flair, but that still does not make it 'truth'. It is still just an opinion. The stats of those teams are not an opinion, they are true stats.

IMO, though Piper is my favorite wrestler of all time, one of my top 3 favorites is Gorgeous George, and I would put him above almost everyone just for his take on wrestling and how he made it a show....which Flair can thank him since Flair partially took things from him and used it for his own character.
 
#55 ·
I'm a wrestling fan, not a shareholder, or a promoter so I don't give a damn about who draws. There's no way of telling anyway. Its not like people only go see one match at a time, people want to see entertaining cards, there more entertaining the card the more money you can make off it.

Besides over time, like now and maybe during the 90s, people are gravitating towards a specific BRAND of entertainment more than any one specific person.
 
#58 ·
I think when it comes to judging the overall G.O.A.T., impact should be taken into account, not necessarily drawing specifically (although that's certainly a facet of impact). Things like that do need to be included though. imo, when it comes to sheer talent, Eddie Guerrero had the most of it, but I can't really call him the G.O.A.T. since others have made a much bigger mark on the business. I don't think it's neessarrily a requirement for 2 - 5, but I think that number 1 spot needs it.
 
#60 ·
Boiling this all down to its logical baseline means that trying to name a greatest wrestler ever is like trying to name a greatest actor ever. You'll never have a consensus. It takes a Gretsky or Jordan in sports before you can even get a consensus on a non-scripted activity. Greatest Ever categories in scripted environments are always going to come down to matters of opinion, and cherry picked criteria.
 
#67 ·
Exactly. Unless we are wrestling historians and share the same amount of respect for each era, our answers are going to be biased based on what era we grew up in.

So IMO, there is no correct or incorrect answer. For example, if you were to say Lou Thesz or Bruno, I couldn't disagree because it was before my time and with the business taking off even more since, it makes their accomplishments and drawing power look inferior, eventhough they had some part in making wrestling popular long before guys like Hogan or Rock were around.

For example, I looked up drawing power and from what I've seen, Bruno was a HUGE draw consistently. But in years since, we tend to think that only recent guys are true draws simply because this is the era some of us favor and we choose not to look back at the true history of professional wrestling and how guys took it from a carnival act to a globally respected & profitable business. Hell, I've even read a report of matches between Frank Gotch and George Hackenschmidt in the early 20th century making front page news around the world on par with the World Cup or Super Bowl today. Gotch has since been referred to as "the Hulk Hogan of his day" and lifted the sport to new heights, back when it was a legitimate sport. But fans today won't really buy into that due to the culture, age difference or just plain disdain for wrestling pre-1984.
 
#68 ·
Great post by GreenLawler as usual though I believe Hogan was the greatest wrestler that I have witnessed.

To El Chapo-You are right about the performers before 1950.My great-grandfather was a small time wrestling promoter in 1920's and 1930's,though he didn't make it big.My dad used to tell me stories what his grandfather said to him.He said how people used to come in huge numbers to see Ed Lewis perform.I am not sure whether people have even heard of his name.
 
#70 ·
#72 ·
Wrestling fans shouldn't care about drawing power/ratings/buyrates etc. A lot of wrestling fans these days are starting to sound like WWE shareholders with their 'oh yah yah the WWE is a business' and thinking they're a knowledgeable wrestling encyclopaedia with their stupid words like 'climate' and 'product'. What is happening to wrestling fans nowadays?

There is no way in hell you can give a legitimate reason as to why you think Wrestler A is the best in the business, as mentioned before it's all subjective and makes for good discussion, but claiming that 'he's the best because he draws the most' is utterly stupid. It's a factor, but then there's about eight or nine others as well.
 
#75 ·
No,That's up to the writers and creative how they book the champion and how he becomes a draw depends on his charisma,mic skills,and lastly his in ring work.

Because charisma and mic skills is what draws people to watch so no i don't care if my favorite wrestler is not draw these things only the company should worry about.
 
#78 ·
I am much more concerned with in ring ability, mic skills, technical skills, etc. than I am with drawing power or ratings.

I could care less if a certain wrestler drew horribly as a World Champion as long as he was entertaining to me. If I worked for the company and my job relied on someone drawing well, it'd be different. But I'm just a fucking fan. Ratings and drawing power should mean shit to fans.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top