Guest Brian Report post Posted August 23, 2005 They missed the boat on so many guys. I'm surprised no one has brought up Angle and Trips. Does anyone actually think TAKA's match with Trips was memorable? Maybe because he sold a load more than anyone else did, or because he showed up on HEAT, but it hardly rates among a ton of TAKA's work. And while their long-running feud was a big part of the WWE/F, how many Rock/HHH matches would you rate highly and call memorable? Kane and Taker? Even Austin? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stahl 0 Report post Posted August 23, 2005 how many Rock/HHH matches would you rate highly and call memorable? IC ladder match, Iron Man match. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Brian Report post Posted August 23, 2005 how many Rock/HHH matches would you rate highly and call memorable? IC ladder match, Iron Man match. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Problem with those two matches is that they're not only good at best, but don't hold up to any of their contemporaries of the same gimmick. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
stahl 0 Report post Posted August 23, 2005 Problem with those two matches is that they're not only good at best, but don't hold up to any of their contemporaries of the same gimmick. In your opinion maybe. Most people Ive discussed these matches with think they are some of the best matches they have ever seen, and the best matches between the two. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Danville_Wrestling 0 Report post Posted August 23, 2005 I loved both the SummerSlam '98 ladder match (b/c I was a mark at the time and hated the Rock) and when I became a smark the Iron Man match had a lot of innovative spots. I was worried they'd go the boring 0-0 tie like Bret-Shawn @ WM 12, but it was a great match (save for the cruddy finish w/UT) with a lot of crazy moments (HHH winning a fall with a sleeper, Rock getting a DQ fall after being hit w/a chair by HHH, and then HHH getting a pinfall after hitting the Rock with the chair). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Hunter's Torn Quad 0 Report post Posted August 23, 2005 I'm not a big fan of their Iron Man match. It's better than you would think a one hour match between the two would be, but it's not that hot upon second or third viewings. Some of the flaws I felt the match had included Hunter having a lot of babyface spots when he's the heel, and Rock's selling being spotty at best for most of the match. Their ladder match was good, but it doesn't match up to Razor v Michaels II, Jericho v Benoit, or even RVD v Christian. The crowd pop for Hunter winning was huge though, I'll give it that much. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dangerous A 0 Report post Posted August 23, 2005 Actually, the Summerslam 98 Ladder match was Hunter's better "gutsy" performance. The '01 tag match against Benoit/Jericho gets the lip service because of HHHim continuing on through the torn quad, but before the ladder match, Hunter's knee was fucked 6 ways from Sunday and he gutted out a decent ladder match pretty much on one leg. He was out until January after that match IIRC. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
KTID 0 Report post Posted August 23, 2005 A point about this Hall of Fame... Firstly, a story. A few years ago, the football (soccer) team i support failed to qualify for any European competitions. Our league position at the end of the season wasn't good enough to qualify. Our team as a whole simply weren't good enough that year. A problem many of you can presumably relate to. Fast forward a couple of weeks, and we learn that we have been entered into the EUFA cup due to being the recipients of UEFA's "Fair Play Award". I was genuinely appalled to learn that such a back-door into the competition existed. The WON Hall of Fame criteria allows a similar back-door entrance for those who aren't qualified. A (hypothetical) wrestler can train for years, turn pro at 19, wrestle all over the world, be a world-class worker, be considered one of the best of all time even, having a career spanning 14-years. A (similarly hypothetical) individual can have no interest in wrestling whatsoever, receive no training, have no ability, and wrestle one single individual wrestling match, likely of negligible quality, at the age of 36. When voting commences for that years WON Hall of Fame, only one of those hypothetical people are eligible for entry. As you'll surely agree, that is very wrong, and exposes a flaw in the voting system. It is this particular flaw which allows Kurt Angle and HHH to be in the Hall of Fame, and which has us all debating for 3 pages whether or not the latter deserves such an honour. Now, in answer to the question of whether or not HHH should be in the Hall of Fame, no he shouldn't. If the second part of the voting criteria didn't exist then it wouldn't be an issue now. If, in a few years time when HHH (and later Kurt Angle) meet the first part of the criteria, they are still considered HOF worthy, then they should be voted in at that time. Not sure if this made any sense, so please hit me with the feedback. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
