Boxer 0 Report post Posted September 20, 2007 In pro wrestling as a whole, what do you need to do to be a called a legend? Are there too many wrestlers out there that are using that monkier but don't deserve it? Who are borderline "legends" that really shouldn't attach that name to them. I'll start with one example. Is Sid a "legend"? Also, can you personally define the term legend? Multiple championships? Drew crowds? Ratings champion? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
alfdogg 0 Report post Posted September 20, 2007 Basically, I would say a legend is a guy who had a reasonably big role in a promotion, and has their image stamped on some defining moments/matches or a defining era in wrestling history. Titles aren't always necessary, as in the cases of guys like Andre the Giant and Roddy Piper. Sid held a few World titles, but they weren't impactful at all (in fact, I think his longest clocked in at a whopping 2 1/2 months) in terms of either money-drawing or memorability. So (and I'm probably one of the biggest Sid marks you'll find here ) I wouldn't consider Sid a legend by those criteria. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Dobbs 3K 0 Report post Posted September 24, 2007 I would say someone who carried, or helped carry a company, for at least a while. Maybe that's a little vague, but I think that's a good qualifier, at least. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Corey_Lazarus 0 Report post Posted September 24, 2007 I would say anybody that has had a lasting impact on the business, be it in the form of innovation, overness, or match quality. Dean Malenko didn't make much of a difference to the business overall, but he did help bring technical wrestling to the forefront after years of punch/kick being the norm, so I'd say that makes him a legend. Raven didn't get over that well in the WWF, and his push ended in WCW when he called Bischoff out on the glass ceiling, but he did usher in more cerebral promo's and helped define "hardcore wrestling," so he's a legend. On a more recent note, Ron Killings was the first black man to hold the NWA World Heavyweight title, so he's a legend by proxy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Buzz 0 Report post Posted September 24, 2007 I consider guys like Flair, Hogan, Bret Hart, Sting, The Rock, Austin. HBK, Undertaker, Savage, Steamboat, Race, Vader, etc etc as Legends. I guess my criteria for a legend is they either have made a lasting impact, held world championships, drew big money, changed wrestling, all the above, etc, etc. I'd say a guy like Raven is a future legend for what he did in ECW and TNA, and to a lesser extent WWF and WCW. I can see how you'd classify Malenko, Benoit, Guerrero, Jericho, etc. as legends as they helped break the mold of what a top guy should look like or wrestle like. To an extent you'd have to call Brian Pillman legendary for doing the style he wrestled and then the style of character he later became. Sid was money, had charisma, held the strap for both companies. Regardless of what the higher ups or some smarks might want to say...I think he's pretty close to legendary if not legendary. However, a guy like say...Bill Demott...while I liked him, especially during the tail end of WCW he never drew huge money, held mid-card gold, and was basically in the same position his entire career. A guy like that would be someone who deserves respect for what they've done, but is not legendary. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cheech Tremendous 0 Report post Posted September 24, 2007 I wouldn't define Raven, Malenko or Killings as legends. For me, the wrestler has to have made a major impact in a national promotion. I think multiple world titles or main event feuds that drew money in addition to influencing the business in a major way. Since 1985 (when I started watching), I'd define the following as legends (not a complete list, btw): Hogan, Savage, Warrior, Andre, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, the Undertaker, Austin, the Rock, HHH, Flair, Goldberg, Steamboat and Sting. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
foleyfanforever88 0 Report post Posted September 24, 2007 For me, it's mostly about whether or not the guy will truly be remembered many years down the road, and for what reasons. Rock, Taker, Foley and Austin will be legends someday if not already. Triple H, maybe. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest cacheton Report post Posted September 24, 2007 I'd say Hillbilly Jim is the standard bearer for the term LEGEND. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Report post Posted September 24, 2007 Scott Hall, Raven and Jake Roberts are probably the lowest I'd go as far as calling somebody a legend. Also, you can be a legend for reasons good or bad, IMO. You have to be able to take your character to a different level than that of an average guy. Malenko is an in-ring legend. He's a great worker, but he's not one of the legends of wrestling. His in-ring work is what defined him. If he was a world champ, I'd feel differently. Raven OTOH, he took his character above and beyond the norm. He was unique. Not just what he did on the mic, but where he was able to take his character in the ring, angles and the like. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Corey_Lazarus 0 Report post Posted September 24, 2007 I wouldn't define Raven, Malenko or Killings as legends. For me, the wrestler has to have made a major impact in a national promotion. I think multiple world titles or main event feuds that drew money in addition to influencing the business in a major way. Not trying to start an argument, but two of the three I mentioned that you replied about could classify as legends using your criteria. Raven was a multiple-time ECW World champion, and was involved in THE feud of '95, '96, and the first half of '97. While he was in ECW, they went from a small, cult following in Phildalephia and New York to being on Pay-Per-View. Killings, to a much lesser extent, was a primary focal point of TNA at its inception, and proved to be the company's first breakout start (predating AJ Styles' rise to dominant popularity by a few months), as well as, you know, being the first black man to hold the NWA World Heavyweight title. That alone will make him go down in record books, even if his career outside of the first 6 months of TNA's existence isn't worth shit. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cheech Tremendous 0 Report post Posted September 24, 2007 I wouldn't define Raven, Malenko or Killings as legends. For me, the wrestler has to have made a major impact in a national promotion. I think multiple world titles or main event feuds that drew money in addition to influencing the business in a major way. Not trying to start an argument, but two of the three I mentioned that you replied about could classify as legends using your criteria. Raven was a multiple-time ECW World champion, and was involved in THE feud of '95, '96, and the first half of '97. While he was in ECW, they went from a small, cult following in Phildalephia and New York to being on Pay-Per-View. Killings, to a much lesser extent, was a primary focal point of TNA at its inception, and proved to be the company's first breakout start (predating AJ Styles' rise to dominant popularity by a few months), as well as, you know, being the first black man to hold the NWA World Heavyweight title. That alone will make him go down in record books, even if his career outside of the first 6 months of TNA's existence isn't worth shit. I understand your argument, but I don't agree with you. To me, ECW was a nice northeast indy promotion with a rabid fanbase and following, but overall just a bit player in the national wrestling scene. I don't consider the ECW title to be a "World" title and I don't think that were any "draws" in the company, at least in a national sense. I loved Raven and respect everything that he did, but I'm just not that loose with calling someone a legend. Killings won the NWA title when it meant absolutely nothing. It's like trying to argue that Dan Severn should be a legend. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Boxer 0 Report post Posted September 24, 2007 I wouldn't define Raven, Malenko or Killings as legends. For me, the wrestler has to have made a major impact in a national promotion. I think multiple world titles or main event feuds that drew money in addition to influencing the business in a major way. Since 1985 (when I started watching), I'd define the following as legends (not a complete list, btw): Hogan, Savage, Warrior, Andre, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, the Undertaker, Austin, the Rock, HHH, Flair, Goldberg, Steamboat and Sting. I agree with your whole list except the Warrior. Did he really draw? His career was really short in terms of the WWF, and he was only a champion once. I'm not saying he isn't a legend, but there's a lot of stuff out there that goes against him being called a "legend" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Buzz 0 Report post Posted September 25, 2007 (Regarding Warrior)He's relevant still today, and his biggest accomplishment was Winning the World Title years ago, and having a best selling comic book for a few weeks. People still bring his name up today when he's out of the business whether it be to drag it through the mud or to praise him. There is also a reason why his action figures sell so well. So to be blunt whether you consider him legendary for his charisma, fire, etc. Or you consider him legendary for all the rumors about his behaivor...he's a legend. As far as whether Raven is a legend or not. He's not with some of the other guys listed in terms of status. But the fact that he's held World Titles in two of the four major promotions in the United States in the past 15 years, and held singles titles in the other two...I mean that right there is pretty unique. Hell to be honest he's the only man to hold a singles title in all four of those promotions. That's not even including his insane character development, promos, and sometimes good ring work. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
luke-o 0 Report post Posted September 26, 2007 He's also the only wrestler to have an action figure of him in the top 4 companies. Extreme Championship Wrestling ECW World Heavyweight Championship (2 times) ECW World Tag Team Championship (4 times) – with Stevie Richards (2), Tommy Dreamer (1), and Mike Awesome (1) Extreme Wrestling Federation EWF Heavyweight Championship (1 time) Heartland Wrestling Association HWA Tag Team Championship (1 time) – with Hugh Morrus Mid-Eastern Wrestling Federation MEWF Mid-Atlantic Heavyweight Championship (1 time) National Wrestling Federation NWF Heavyweight Championship (1 time) NWA Midwest NWA Central States Heavyweight Championship (1 time) Pacific Northwest Wrestling NWA Pacific Northwest Heavyweight Championship (3 times) NWA Pacific Northwest Tag Team Championship (3 times) – with Top Gun (1), The Grappler (1), and Steve Doll (1) NWA Pacific Northwest Television Championship (3 times) Peach State Wrestling PSW Cordele City Heavyweight Championship (1 time) Pro-Pain Pro Wrestling 3PW Heavyweight Championship (1 time) Total Nonstop Action Wrestling NWA World Heavyweight Championship (1 time) King of the Mountain (2005) United States Extreme Wrestling USXW Heavyweight Championship (4 times) United States Wrestling Association USWA Tag Team Championship (1 time) – with Brian Christopher World Championship Wrestling WCW Light Heavyweight Championship (1 time) WCW United States Heavyweight Championship (1 time) WCW World Tag Team Championship (1 time) – with Perry Saturn World Wrestling Federation | World Wrestling Entertainment WWF/E Hardcore Championship (27 times)1 Pro Wrestling Illustrated PWI ranked him # 168 of the 500 best singles wrestlers during the PWI Years in 2003. I know a lot of those don't really matter in the history of wrestling, but it's pretty impressive none the less. I'd also add Sting to the list of someone I'd consider a "legend" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites