Christian is going to fall into this category now, I wouldn't call him great in terms of Mr. Perfect, Owen and others etc, but a guy can only be compared to his peers, and well with some of the stuff that has had a title the past 6-7 years, he certainly does deserve a run, but probably won't get one at this point. Good on mic, solid worker, not a whiny bitch, no real controversy.
Nobody. By that logic, Steve Austin would've never became world champion, and pretty much everybody that's any good gets the title eventually unless they're blatantly held down like Christian or they just keep getting setback after setback like Anderson. Besides in the 1980's when only the #1 and #2 man in the company got the belt.
Wade Barrett doesn't need the belt to dominate the company.....for now, but it's getting to the point where it's becoming stupid to not do so. If he hasn't won the belt by the EC then something is drastically wrong.
HBK has 4 big ones to prove it, along with several other accolades.. (first grand slam champ, innovator of every match there is, etc.) I think you gotta look at John Morrison. He's as over as Rey Mysterio in a San Diego fifth grade classroom and not a single WWE title or World title to show for it. JIP!
Morrison isn't even in the same universe as Rey Mysterio when it comes to overness. What have you been watching the last 5 years? He's not even THAT over right now, Kofi Kingston is destroying him in reactions and he hasn't won the belt either. Morrison would've had the belt multiple times by now if he were over to the degree you think he is.
LOL I guess I can't argue with the guy with 45000 posts can I? Then I would appear silly. I was trying to answer this poorly asked question. "Who doesnt need a title reign to prove whatever" and then cite HBK? I call shenanigans right away. Whos more over than Morrison without a title reign? Besides charity cases like Santino?