WON Hall of Fame voting results

[Shanghai Kid 0]

Nevermind, I was wondering if you knew this guy Optimus cause he's like the biggest wrestling expert I know on the net.

 

 

Carry on with the conversation...

[Damaramu 0]

Ok...anyways Shawn.

Yes Shawn did do it. He was the cruiserweight that got to bump for the big men and got them to sell for him. But that still doesn't make him any better than the others. I mean it's like "Yeah I did it but anyone could've done it. I was just in the right place at the right time!"

Plus if you wanna compare Shawn to cruiserweights he's not even in the Top 10 of Greatest...hell he's not in the Heavy Top 10....

[Prophet of Mike Zagurski 0]

It wasn't Shawn Michaels fault he couldn't draw. Who heck wants to go to a show and watch Mabel vs Tanaka?

 

My favorite Shawn Michaels match was the Mind Games match vs. Mankind.

 

But, before any of you get angry,

 

 

Benoit = greatest wrestler ever

 

My favorite Benoit matches are the Owen Hart Memorial match against Bret and Angle at Wrestlemania 17.

 

Peace out, smarks

[Shanghai Kid 0]

I don't look at Shawn as a cruiser, he could wrestle that style, but he could wrestle the heavyweight/brawling style just as good.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

he didn't wrestle either style particularly well. He had weak heavyweight and weak cruiserweight moves.

[Shanghai Kid 0]

Sort of like Jericho?

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Yep.

 

You have this weird notion that I like Jericho..

[Shanghai Kid 0]

No I haven't even brought up Jericho before, but he's also a 'tweener'.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Ah, I was thinkin bout Iggy who made the same point...

 

I DON'T LIKE JERICHO! Throwing him out as a rebuttal is of no concern of mine. His moveset is weak as well.

[Shanghai Kid 0]

It's not a rebuttal, because thiers nothing to rebutt. Shawn mixed a cruiser style with the ability to do the heavyweight style also. He's got a good catalogue of matches, arguably better than Brets, and the people have spoken in voting him in. He's a good worker, nobody can really provide points that are going to change my mind on that.

[Guest Ray]

He's got a good catalogue of matches, arguably better than Brets

I'll argue that any day.

 

I'll say again, Bret's best match is easily better than Shawn's.

 

 

He's a good worker, nobody can really provide points that are going to change my mind on that.

 

There is a difference beween good and great.

 

Benoit = great

Liger = great

 

Shawn = good

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

So what was the point of saying Jerichos moveset was weak? It didn't inflate HBK's one bit. Meanwhile, guys like Eddie, Lyger, Misawa have been able to mix up highflying and manage to maintain a credible heavyweight moveset. THEY were able to change it up, Shawn was heavyweight-lite and cruiserweight-lite. His biggest high flying move was a moonsault

 

Of course I can't convince you of Shawns overblown matches, you're clearly an HBK mark and I clearly don't like HBK... but you might want to refine your definition of worker... maybe "in-ring worker", since good "workers" don't fake injuries or run away from doing jobs or are scared to drop titles.. even then, you might want to limit the time period shawn was a good in-ring worker as I have heard stories about him dogging it on the house show circuit and with non-buddies around the 96/97 period. And his time as a "top" worker was very short as well. Not only in the world, but in north america, and even in his own company (and THAT period of time when he was a top worker in the WWe was when the WWE was at its LOWEST).

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

Why are there so many debates going on about who's better than HBK? That's not the point here. The fact is that HBK should be in. Is he better than Steamboat? NO, but just like other sports it doesn't matter. Does that mean Barry Sanders shouldn't make the HOF because Jim Brown was better? There is your answer.......

[Guest BionicRedneck]

I'm glad Shawn got in. At least it means an end to the annual "Should HBK be in the HOF" debate.

[The Robfather 0]

Congratulations to Shawn.

 

The voters have spoken and the smarks whine. I love it.

[bob_barron 0]

Bulldog was not an absolute slug in 1997.

 

This is the guy who put on a MOTYC in February of 1997 against Owen, was involved in another MOTYC on RAW in 1997 and had many great matches that year.

 

1998 was when injuries and abuse caught up to him and he became an absolute slug.

 

Bret Hart also got terrific matches out of Taker-and he's better then him.

Um, go back and REWATCH his work from 1997. Bulldog was nigh useless, with the exceptions of the Owen match, his tag match v Asutin & HBK, and his match with HBK at KOTR.

 

Bret v UT was hardly "great" wrestling and Michaels, honestly, blows Bret out of the friggin' water. Hart went through the motions in LOTS of matches.

-=Mike

I have seen many of Bulldog's matches from 1997.

 

And he faced HBK at King of the Ring 1996 NOT KOTR 1997.

 

He also dragged a decent match out of Ken Shamrock at Summerslam 1997.

 

I think someone who had a MOTYC in 1997, and was involved in a tag MOTY in one year can hardly be considered "useless slug."

 

And rewatch the KOTR 96 match- HBK isn't doing all the work

[Guest nikowwf]

People arguing that HBK wasn't having good matches is asinine...thats like saying Kobe Bryant isn't a good basketball player. You can argue hes not hall of fame, fine - but you can't argue match quality. Sorry....but being the 1% arguing against the 99% and sticking to your guns doesn't make you anything except the 1% thats wrong.

 

niko

[bob_barron 0]

Shawn outworked Bret every day of the week. Bret v a slug was, at best, a 50-50 shot of being good.

 

Shawn v a slug was almost always good.

-=Mike --- who likes Bret's work

Shawn's matches against so-called slugs are quite overrated.

 

Bret/Austin was better than anything Shawn ever did.

 

I fail to see how Shawn "outworked" Bret so much.

Shawn's 2 best matches --- v Mankind at Mind Games and v UT at Badd Blood, were hurt because Russo has this thing about screwjob finishes when they are not needed.

 

BOTH of those matches were better than Hart v Austin at WM13.

-=Mike

Vince Russo wasn't even too involved with the booking then.

 

You can clearly see Vince McMahon change the finish on the fly at the commentary table

[Guest BionicRedneck]

BOTH of those matches were better than Hart v Austin at WM13

 

You really think HITC I is better than Bret/Austin? Bret/Austin is one of the greatest matches I have seen in North America. Michaels/Taker...erm...isn't.

 

It's basically a 30 minute squash. Michaels ridiculously oversells every move, Taker sells nothing, Michaels takes a beating, horrible finish. It's not even in Bret/Austin's league. Not even close.

[bob_barron 0]

But it also fit the storyline. Just like, say, Austin vs Vince. That wasn't a wrestling match, it was an ass beating, which fits the story.

 

But that's because Vince was a non-wrestler and couldn't do anything. They booked the match to hide the limitations- just like they did with Austin v. HHH- since both guys were injured.

 

 

The announcers frequently mentioned Austin showing that he could wrestle.

 

Benoit was the one who interrupted Austin and wanted to show him he was the best technical wrestler. Benoit's storyline was the more important.

 

That doesn't mean Benoit (or anyone) carried him.

 

Austin was awful until he met up with Benoit. Do the math.

 

 

Yes....because I am right...and I don't give up. When the names Angle or Benoit appear, the word carry inevitably follows.

 

I don't know about Angle but I do know Benoit has been able to drag good matches out of people.

 

 

 

 

 

Of course Benoit worked harder against Austin than Rikishi did. Still doesn't = carry.

 

You don't know that- Rikishi tried his hardest in those matches (He gigged, took chairshots etc) but given Austin and his own limitations- He's not that adept at getting a good match out of him.

QUOTE

Austin didn't really start having good matches until the beginning of 2001- The first guy to really get something out of him was Benoit

 

You still say GET...as if Austin is doing nothing and Benoit must pull something out of him.

 

Austin was doing plenty...

 

You mean by wrestling in gimmicky matches, 8 man tags or 3 minute squashes v. Guerrero?

[Guest BionicRedneck]

Austin was awful until he met up with Benoit

 

?

[bob_barron 0]

I'm referring to after he came back from neck surgery

[Guest BionicRedneck]

Didn't YOU rate his Mania match with The Rock *****? Hardly "awful"

 

Austin/Benoit on SD is Austin's match, not Benoit's. Benoit was really banged up by that point and Austin delivered a classic heel performance. If anyone was doing the carrying it was Steve.

[bob_barron 0]

He wasn't awful for his complete run- but when he first came back- the man sucked.

 

We're talking about 11.20.00 match- not the 5.31.01 ten germans match

[Guest Loss]

Shawn Michaels is the most naturally talented wrestler I've ever seen. Whether that makes him the best or not is another issue altogether, but as far as the "it" factor, Michaels had it in spades.

 

I remember Shawn having a match with Ken Shamrock at the DX PPV. He was upset that Shamrock was out of place for a spot and started screaming spots to embarass him. I remember him having a temper tantrum mid match when Vader was out of position for a spot. I remember him throwing a temper tantrum at Beware of Dog because he wanted more time for his match.

 

Compare this to Ric Flair, who had to wrestle a coked Kerry Von Erich in 60-minute draws and never lost his cool and was still able to get a great match out of the situation.

 

Shawn's matches always focused around Shawn. If he was getting his ass kicked, his opponent never looked better for beating him, Shawn simply looked better for absorbing so much punishment. If he was on offense, the story was never his opponent's ability to absorb punishment, but rather Shawn's awesome offense. I remember ZERO title defenses he had where he was pushed to the limit by a challenger and retained by the skin of his teeth, with the story being that his opponent is someone for whom to watch out in the future. The Mind Games match is the sole exception, and probably the true shining moment for both guys. Contrast this to what Bret Hart did in TV title defenses against guys like the 1-2-3 Kid and to me, you know all you need to know.

 

I think Shawn's problem was ultimately that he was too good for his own good.

[Shanghai Kid 0]

Ravishing, I'm not an HBK mark, an HBK mark would say that he's the best wrestler ever, or even top 5. I'm just in the majority, that actually thinks Shawn is not overrated and that he does have a good enough catalogue of work to be in the HOF. Obviously the people were polled, wrestlers, observers, and they felt the same way. So your in the minority. No one is saying he's better than Benoit or Liger, your just getting defensive because you don't like Shawn and want to get your point of view across that he's not good enough for the HOF. But this is not a debate, becuase he's IN the HOF, and it's obviously not cause of his drawing powers or his attitude, so it must all be based on his work.

[Vern Gagne 0]

Does the WON HOF have a seperate category for non-wrestling personalities? I noticed Jesse Ventura's name on the list, and no way he belongs in any HOF has a wrestler.

[Shanghai Kid 0]

By the way, one of the major complaints was that all Shawn did was bump around and let himself get whooped, but what about Mick Foley?

[godthedog 0]

what about him? we never say foley is one of the top wrestlers EVER, and nobody even says he was better than michaels.

[Shanghai Kid 0]

But he's in the HOF right? So why is it even a debate for Shawn to be in it?