Wrestler of the year for 2004?

[JoeDirt 0]

This topic is blatantly stolen from the DVDVR board, where Mike Rome posted about why Samoa Joe is the wrestler of the year.

 

http://board.deathvalleydriver.com/index.php?showtopic=24164

 

Who do you think is the wrestler of the year, and why?

[Guest bigm350]

Benoit. For his good run as champ and putting on stellar matches. I watch very little outside of the WWE right now, so I have a pretty close-minded view.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

If the wrestler of the year is the wrestler that is most valuable, then Samoa Joe and Kenta Kobashi are about the only legitimate candidates out there. While WWE, New Japan, etc could survive the loss of any one wrestler without much damage, if Joe or Kobashi were to be taken out for any length of time, then ROH and NOAH would lose serious business. Both wrestlers mean just that much to their respective promotions.

[Guest LooneyTune]

Wrestler of the Year PERIOD? Jesus, 4,000,000 people to choose between, but of course, only about 20 of them matter. Something like this is hard to do, but I'll do a different way...

 

Mainstream US: Chris Benoit.

Independents US: Samoa Joe.

 

I don't watch Puro much, so I can't comment on that matter.

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

I would have to agree with HTQ here and say it's pretty much between Joe and Kobashi. They have had longer title reigns than anyone, and both are responsible for some of the year's greatest matches.......

[Guest krazykat72]

Assuming We're going on WON letter WOTY qualifications, Joe's not a contender at all. He'd be more in line for Most Outstanding (best worker) than WOTY...he's my C'n'P job from Wrestling Classics...

 

Samoa Joe and Bryan Danielson have *no* business getting votes for this particular award.

Like stated earleir, they are two deserving candidates for the Most Outstanding Award (especially Danielson), but being part of a popular part time indy federation that draws a few hundred people at a time, with no real national relevence is mind boggling.

The fact that they're being discussed in comparison to Kobashi, or even The WWE guys and Sasaki is puzzling. I think people need to think about where ROH really is on the spectrum before voting in this category.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

Assuming We're going on WON letter WOTY qualifications, Joe's not a contender at all. He'd be more in line for Most Outstanding (best worker) than WOTY...he's my C'n'P job from Wrestling Classics...

 

Samoa Joe and Bryan Danielson have *no* business getting votes for this particular award.

Like stated earleir, they are two deserving candidates for the Most Outstanding Award (especially Danielson), but being part of a popular part time indy federation that draws a few hundred people at a time, with no real national relevence is mind boggling.

The fact that they're being discussed in comparison to Kobashi, or even The WWE guys and Sasaki is puzzling. I think people need to think about where ROH really is on the spectrum before voting in this category.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

I don't think it's unreasonable to count Joe at all. Considering he's been on top of the best booked promotion in the US for the entire year. Not to mention that but the quality of his matches are among the best of every worker this year as well. That's simply what I base the Wrestler of the Year, so my choice might not be correct in others eyes.

[Guest krazykat72]

Assuming We're going on WON letter WOTY qualifications, Joe's not a contender at all. He'd be more in line for Most Outstanding (best worker) than WOTY...he's my C'n'P job from Wrestling Classics...

 

Samoa Joe and Bryan Danielson have *no* business getting votes for this particular award.

Like stated earleir, they are two deserving candidates for the Most Outstanding Award (especially Danielson), but being part of a popular part time indy federation that draws a few hundred people at a time, with no real national relevence is mind boggling.

The fact that they're being discussed in comparison to Kobashi, or even The WWE guys and Sasaki is puzzling. I think people need to think about where ROH really is on the spectrum before voting in this category.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

I don't think it's unreasonable to count Joe at all. Considering he's been on top of the best booked promotion in the US for the entire year. Not to mention that but the quality of his matches are among the best of every worker this year as well. That's simply what I base the Wrestler of the Year, so my choice might not be correct in others eyes.

I prefaced it by saying I was going on WON WOTY criteria, and by that there's no real reason a part time indy wrestler should win WOTY. Match quality plays a part, but ROH is a niche, not national promotion and it's arguable it's better booked than OVW.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

[Toshiaki Koala 0]

Assuming We're going on WON letter WOTY qualifications, Joe's not a contender at all. He'd be more in line for Most Outstanding (best worker) than WOTY...he's my C'n'P job from Wrestling Classics...

 

Samoa Joe and Bryan Danielson have *no* business getting votes for this particular award.

Like stated earleir, they are two deserving candidates for the Most Outstanding Award (especially Danielson), but being part of a popular part time indy federation that draws a few hundred people at a time, with no real national relevence is mind boggling.

The fact that they're being discussed in comparison to Kobashi, or even The WWE guys and Sasaki is puzzling. I think people need to think about where ROH really is on the spectrum before voting in this category.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

I'm actually kind of glad I don't know what the "WON qualifications" are. Makes me feel somehow pure, virginal...

[SamoaRowe 0]

I don't have any final pic, but I would nominate:

 

Chris Benoit

Eddie Guerrero

Samoa Joe

Triple H

 

I'm sort of reluctant to throw in Triple H, but he really did have a good 2004. The quality of his matches went up (though that had a lot to do with quality of opposition) and he actually let the World title belong to someone else for six months.

 

Benoit and Eddie are easy picks because they were both finally allowed to become main eventers.

 

Samoa Joe, because he is the longest reigning champion in North America, and because he is so respected. When Triple H or Jeff Jarrett have long title reigns, everyone grumbles. No one is complaining about Samoa Joe though, he is the backbone of ROH.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

As someone brought up the Observer qualifications for Wrestler Of The Year, I thought people should know what they are, seeing as the person bringing them up never actually said what they were:

 

The Lou Thesz/Ric Flair Award: This is open to both worked and shoot performers. It's for being a combination of both an important and influential performer in a positive manner over the past year, some box office impact as well as strong match quality and overall strong value to the company.

 

Well, going by that, Samoa Joe is most definitely an important and influential performer, as his work and presence in ROH was absolutely important and influential to the promotion, in terms of storylines that played a major part of the group, ie. Jushin Liger coming in, the feud with the Briscoe Brothers, his series with Punk, etc. His box office impact on ROH is really without doubt, as I absolutely feel he means a great deal to ROH by being on cards. As for his match quality, that speaks for itself, as he’s had good to great matches with just about everyone he’s faced. Add all that up, and I’d say that Samoa Joe definitely has a great deal of value to ROH, and, for me, gives him a great case for being Wrestler Of The Year, at least by the requirements given.

 

From what’s been written here, it seems like certain people’s reasons for not thinking Joe is Wrestler Of The Year having nothing to do with whether he meets the Observer’s criteria, which is the standard they seem to be judging by, as he very clearly does, but more to do with some elitist attitude, due to Joe working for a “popular part time Indy federation that draws a few hundred people at a time.” I think it’s those people that really need to think before voting.

[Sass 0]

Eddy Guerrero.

 

While he only had a short-term run, ratings and attendance *increased* while he was on top and not booked badly. He drew. Ratings and attendance increased. Eddy was the only person who was seen as a clear cut draw in a company where no one else's name on cards got people to line-up and see them like Eddy's name did.

 

There was no spike in attendance for the 7/10 Tokyo Dome show with Kobashi vs. Akiyama or any other major show Kobashi was booked on. Attendance for shows did not increase after his opponents were named as NOAH had hoped. There has been no considerable spike or difference seen in any ROH shows with Joe on top. They've drawn well, really, based on name recognition and being a wrestling fan's haven. Joe would be my runner-up behind Eddy.

 

Ratings did not increase or decrease while Benoit was on top. Then again, it's hard to gauge for any impact Benoit had since he was given the Randy Savage title. HHH never stepped down while Benoit was the champ and often overshadowed Benoit and his matches with his prolonged feud with HBK, just like Hogan did when Savage won his first title.

 

Eddy drew. Things improved when he was on top. Attendance and ratings were on the rise for the short time he was booked well.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I'm a huge Eddie fan, but to say ratings increased with him on top is not true. If you go and check SD's ratings from when he became champion, they actually began to slide a couple of weeks after he won the WWE Title, and beyond the 3/19 episode, the ratings during his reign were lower then they were before. That's not to say that Eddie was driving them away, as I think the SD product of the time was doing that, but to say ratings increased during his reign is incorrect.

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

Just to add this as well, I like Eddie as much as the next guy and I don't really know how fair this is to him, but it is fact that the PPV's that he headlined as champion are some of the lowest buyrates in WWE history.

 

Also it's not fair to say that Kobashi hasn't spiked the attendence for any of the show's he's headlined either as most people realize that WITHOUT Kobashi on top NOAH would be drawing a considerable amount less than they are drawing right now.

[Sass 0]

Misawa is the stand-by. He wouldn't draw much differently than Kobashi probably. Joe looks stronger this year after improving as a worker as well as helping make those he works with look strong.

 

IIRC, didn't some of Eddy's segments on SD! have the best ratings on the show?

 

Eddy vs. Angle after Wrestlemania would have probably kept the ratings strong instead of chucking Bradshaw into the top heel spot with out much build-up. Eddy really should have feuded with Cena after Mania and have a champion vs. champion deal going. That could have been interesting to see after Cena beat Eddy in the US title tourney.

[Precious Roy 0]

Chris Benoit. He carried the world title with class, put on classic matches at the Rumble, Mania and Backlash, and was consistently involved in the "match of the week" for mainstream US wrestling. It seemed like every week he was involved in a ***+ match on RAW.

[Guest Thrashist]

Only follow the American scene, so take this for what you will, but Chris Benoit by far. No one else is even close.

[Lt. Al Giardello 0]

Eddy vs. Angle after Wrestlemania would have probably kept the ratings strong instead of chucking Bradshaw into the top heel spot with out much build-up. Eddy really should have feuded with Cena after Mania and have a champion vs. champion deal going. That could have been interesting to see after Cena beat Eddy in the US title tourney.

A) Angle had to get surgey after WM20, and could not compete, as he took on the "GM" role.

 

B) Eddy never beat Cena in the US tourney. Billy Gunn beat Cena

[Sass 0]

I was talking hypothetically about Eddy vs. Angle after Mania and I assumed that would have been known. My fault.

 

I went back and checked out the US title tourney results and Cena did indeed lose to Gunn. But that's not the tournament I'm thinking of.

 

Cena beat Guerrero in one of the SD! tourney's from last year I thought. That was the one where the Undertaker beat Rey Misterio in convincing fashion. I'm drawing a blank on the rest of it right now.

[Guest LooneyTune]

I remember Cena beat Undertaker and Benoit in the last 2 rounds to get the Title Shot. The first round I draw a complete blank on.

[Guest krazykat72]

Well, going by that, Samoa Joe is most definitely an important and influential performer, as his work and presence in ROH was absolutely important and influential to the promotion, in terms of storylines that played a major part of the group, ie. Jushin Liger coming in, the feud with the Briscoe Brothers, his series with Punk, etc. His box office impact on ROH is really without doubt, as I absolutely feel he means a great deal to ROH by being on cards. As for his match quality, that speaks for itself, as he’s had good to great matches with just about everyone he’s faced. Add all that up, and I’d say that Samoa Joe definitely has a great deal of value to ROH, and, for me, gives him a great case for being Wrestler Of The Year, at least by the requirements given.

 

From what’s been written here, it seems like certain people’s reasons for not thinking Joe is Wrestler Of The Year having nothing to do with whether he meets the Observer’s criteria, which is the standard they seem to be judging by, as he very clearly does, but more to do with some elitist attitude, due to Joe working for a “popular part time Indy federation that draws a few hundred people at a time.” I think it’s those people that really need to think before voting.

I'd say he means little to ROH box office. Like WWE, it's the ROH brand that "draws". ROH is not a big time organization. It's a part time indy company that draws a few hundred people per show and has modest success because of their business operation selling tapes.

To compare him to a mainstream wrestler in WWE< NOAH, New Japan etc is a complete joke, since those companies run significantly more shows and on occasion run multimillion dollar shows. You can pull out the "part time indy wrestler " card against me, but that's exactly what he is.

He's a great performer, but the most important wrestler of the year?

Please.

If ROH was becoming a national force or showing some signs of really breaking out, then *maybe* you could make this argument. They aren't.

Guerrero, who didn't have a great year as a draw, drew more people on PPV for a low end show (No Way Out) and more people ordered that than have been to all the shows Joe's ever been on combined. Please don't try to make it out like he's drawing thousands and thousands of people to the arenas.

His workrate is great, and that's a compnent, but that's why I suggeted him for Most Outstanding Wrestler.

The delusions about ROH being a big deal are kind of scary. It's a nice little promotion that puts on good cards and has no national relevance.

Serisouly, there is *no* way Joe should get consideration above someone like Kenta Kobashi (no one's really close actually) or even guys like Benoit and Guerrero.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

[Guest OSIcon]

I'd say he means little to ROH box office. Like WWE, it's the ROH brand that "draws". ROH is not a big time organization. It's a part time indy company that draws a few hundred people per show and has modest success because of their business operation selling tapes.

To compare him to a mainstream wrestler in WWE< NOAH, New Japan etc is a complete joke, since those companies run significantly more shows and on occasion run multimillion dollar shows. You can pull out the "part time indy wrestler " card against me, but that's exactly what he is.

He's a great performer, but the most important wrestler of the year?

Please.

If ROH was becoming a national force or showing some signs of really breaking out, then *maybe* you could make this argument. They aren't.

Guerrero, who didn't have a great year as a draw, drew more people on PPV for a low end show (No Way Out) and more people ordered that than have been to all the shows Joe's ever been on combined. Please don't try to make it out like he's drawing thousands and thousands of people to the arenas.

His workrate is great, and that's a compnent, but that's why I suggeted him for Most Outstanding Wrestler.

The delusions about ROH being a big deal are kind of scary. It's a nice little promotion that puts on good cards and has no national relevance.

Serisouly, there is *no* way Joe should get consideration above someone like Kenta Kobashi (no one's really close actually) or even guys like Benoit and Guerrero.

 

In your opinion then, should Hogan have won the award some of those years that Flair won it? Specifically years like 1984, 1985, 1986 or even 1989 and 1990. The reason I ask is because on a national scale, Hogan was much more important to wrestling than Ric Flair and a much bigger draw, yet he often didn't even finish in the top 2 or 3 just because he wasn't as good of a wrestler. Dynamite Kid came in *second* in 1984 yet his appeal and importance at that time wasn't that great on a national scale nor was he any bit of a draw.

 

My point is, that if you look at the voting history for this award, how good the wrestler is in terms of ability seems to be the top consideration. Whether that is within the spirit of the award or not doesn't seem to really matter since that is how the voters have seemed to interpret is throughout the years. Heck, Sabu came in second in 1994 based soley on the fact that he was innovative. No, he didn't deserve that spot and I am not suggesting that people vote for Joe or any other "unworthy" canidate just because of Sabu's high finish in 1994. I am just making the point that the history of the award tends to show that the voters have interpted the award differently than you. Doesn't really matter who is right or wrong, it is just that a vote for Joe isn't as proposterus as you make it seem, given the voting history of the award.

 

Really, the wording for the award is so vague that is allows the voters to chose for themselves what is most important. That is a problem in my book as you have some people who are voting for the biggest box office draw, some who are voting for the wrestler with the best in-ring work over the course of the year, some who are voting for the most influential/innovative, and some who are voting for wrestlers with a combination of those.

 

A case could easily be made for Joe having one of, if not the, best year in terms of in ring performance. In terms of being a draw, *something* has to be said for the fact that he has been the champion of ROH for two years and during that time, the promotion has increased its fanbase and there hasn't been any large out cry to take the title off of him. While your point that the promotion has a whole draws might be valid, that doesn't diminish the fact that Joe is the *face* of the promotion (in that Joe and ROH are synonymous). In that regard, some credit has to be given to Joe as a draw unless you believe ROH would be doing just as well with any wrestler up top. His "importance" is his weakest attribute, though even there he has some strong points. He has the second longest title reign in the US in 20 years and has the longest title reign of anyone holding the promotion's top belt in quite some time (RVD has a longer ECW TV title reign). In a day of quick title changes, that *is* important. He also had an influence on the wrestling style and booking trends in the indies these day. While addmitingly small, that still should count for something.

 

I am not even sure if I'd vote for Joe for wrestler of the year. However, to say that Eddie and Benoit are MUCH more logical choices than Joe strikes me as pretty odd when the only things those two have on Joe is the fact that they work for a major company. They aren't any more of a draw (well, at least Benoit isn't. A case could be made for Eddie). Joe's body of work is stronger. Neither have really had that much influence or importance this year, but I'd still give the edge to Joe there. Kobashi is the only caniudate who I see has being clearly at and above Joe's level.

[Guest Dynamite Kido]

Paul apparently it doesn't even matter in your criteria that a company makes money, as it has been said that NJPW has been in the red for sometime now. Plus people saying that ROH is the draw and Joe isn't is just an assumption and not a fact. How can you base that opinion considering that there is nothing to compare it to. Joe has been the champion of ROH for almost two years and they've only had two champions before him. Their reigns weren't enough to prove anything as far as a champion with drawing power. Also, if Joe never became the champion or even held it the length he has........who knows if ROH would have even survived. I'm not saying that Joe is easily the wrestler of the year, but you will have to come up with better evidence against him than than to prove your point.

[Guest Contentious C]

Assuming We're going on WON letter WOTY qualifications, Joe's not a contender at all. He'd be more in line for Most Outstanding (best worker) than WOTY...he's my C'n'P job from Wrestling Classics...

 

Samoa Joe and Bryan Danielson have *no* business getting votes for this particular award.

Like stated earleir, they are two deserving candidates for the Most Outstanding Award (especially Danielson), but being part of a popular part time indy federation that draws a few hundred people at a time, with no real national relevence is mind boggling.

The fact that they're being discussed in comparison to Kobashi, or even The WWE guys and Sasaki is puzzling. I think people need to think about where ROH really is on the spectrum before voting in this category.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

I don't think it's unreasonable to count Joe at all. Considering he's been on top of the best booked promotion in the US for the entire year. Not to mention that but the quality of his matches are among the best of every worker this year as well. That's simply what I base the Wrestler of the Year, so my choice might not be correct in others eyes.

I prefaced it by saying I was going on WON WOTY criteria, and by that there's no real reason a part time indy wrestler should win WOTY. Match quality plays a part, but ROH is a niche, not national promotion and it's arguable it's better booked than OVW.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

Slick as ever, Paul. This here thread says "who do you think is wrestler of the year," not "who should win the WON award for it."

[Guest Contentious C]

Chris Benoit. He carried the world title with class, put on classic matches at the Rumble, Mania and Backlash, and was consistently involved in the "match of the week" for mainstream US wrestling. It seemed like every week he was involved in a ***+ match on RAW.

Is this out of ******??

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

It's probably between Kobashi, Joe and Benoit for me.

[Guest krazykat72]

In your opinion then, should Hogan have won the award some of those years that Flair won it? Specifically years like 1984, 1985, 1986 or even 1989 and 1990. The reason I ask is because on a national scale, Hogan was much more important to wrestling than Ric Flair and a much bigger draw, yet he often didn't even finish in the top 2 or 3 just because he wasn't as good of a wrestler. Dynamite Kid came in *second* in 1984 yet his appeal and importance at that time wasn't that great on a national scale nor was he any bit of a draw.

 

My point is, that if you look at the voting history for this award, how good the wrestler is in terms of ability seems to be the top consideration. Whether that is within the spirit of the award or not doesn't seem to really matter since that is how the voters have seemed to interpret is throughout the years. Heck, Sabu came in second in 1994 based soley on the fact that he was innovative. No, he didn't deserve that spot and I am not suggesting that people vote for Joe or any other "unworthy" canidate just because of Sabu's high finish in 1994. I am just making the point that the history of the award tends to show that the voters have interpted the award differently than you. Doesn't really matter who is right or wrong, it is just that a vote for Joe isn't as proposterus as you make it seem, given the voting history of the award.

 

Really, the wording for the award is so vague that is allows the voters to chose for themselves what is most important. That is a problem in my book as you have some people who are voting for the biggest box office draw, some who are voting for the wrestler with the best in-ring work over the course of the year, some who are voting for the most influential/innovative, and some who are voting for wrestlers with a combination of those.

 

A case could easily be made for Joe having one of, if not the, best year in terms of in ring performance. In terms of being a draw, *something* has to be said for the fact that he has been the champion of ROH for two years and during that time, the promotion has increased its fanbase and there hasn't been any large out cry to take the title off of him. While your point that the promotion has a whole draws might be valid, that doesn't diminish the fact that Joe is the *face* of the promotion (in that Joe and ROH are synonymous). In that regard, some credit has to be given to Joe as a draw unless you believe ROH would be doing just as well with any wrestler up top. His "importance" is his weakest attribute, though even there he has some strong points. He has the second longest title reign in the US in 20 years and has the longest title reign of anyone holding the promotion's top belt in quite some time (RVD has a longer ECW TV title reign). In a day of quick title changes, that *is* important. He also had an influence on the wrestling style and booking trends in the indies these day. While addmitingly small, that still should count for something.

 

I am not even sure if I'd vote for Joe for wrestler of the year. However, to say that Eddie and Benoit are MUCH more logical choices than Joe strikes me as pretty odd when the only things those two have on Joe is the fact that they work for a major company. They aren't any more of a draw (well, at least Benoit isn't. A case could be made for Eddie). Joe's body of work is stronger. Neither have really had that much influence or importance this year, but I'd still give the edge to Joe there. Kobashi is the only caniudate who I see has being clearly at and above Joe's level.

Yes Hogan should have won at least a few of those years.

It's a joke for you to even compare Joe being on the level of Flair

since Flair was in a National Company drawing some of the higest ratings on Cable in the country. Sabu was an aberration in '94.

There has never been anyone who has won this award that has not been in one of the top companies in thier country. From Flair to Misawa to Choshu to Angle to Kobashi to Race etc. I'd actually say that plays a huge part in what I'm saying.

so shold this, ROH is a *nothing* company in this country that caters to a few dedicated fans. It has excellent workrate, but it's an indy, probably the best one, but an indy with no real impact on anything.

You say they've increased business? Really? There's no imminent expansion.

They're not even at TNA level in the public eye, which is nothing and the biggest shows they run are too small for even the smallest WWE house show.

That means Joe's "drawing" is meaningless. Benoit and Guerrero in the main events have drawn more people in one night *No Way out*, *Backlash* than Joe has drawn in his life. Give me a break they're not more qualified.

I've never argued Joe wouldn't be a fine pick for Most Outstanding, but anyone pimping him for WOTY is out there. He has no influence or drawing power which last I checked were two important criteria. He has the workrate and that's it and compared to people with more pressure on them, who draw more money, and are of the same caliber worker (Kobashi, Kenta) he fails badly.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

 

-Paul Jacobi-

[Guest Salacious Crumb]

Have you seen some of the recent WWF attendance? They're doing similar to RoH at several shows now.

[bob_barron 0]

With Joe as champion-

 

ROH has made successful expansions to the midwest. They also were a hit in Maryland until they had some trouble with the promoter.

 

ROH drew 1800 for At Our Best. Has a WWE show really done that badly?

[Guest krazykat72]

The lowest (14-1500) would be bigger than every ROH show. (with the possible exception of the March Rexplex show) has ever done.

When ROH at a total nadir is drawing 170,000 people to watch a Tuesday PPV show

or hell even the 35k that ordered NWA-TNA we can start talking about them in a different light. Also, ROH probably averages 4-600 per show, the WWE is doing nowhere near that.

 

-Paul Jacobi-