Skip to main content

Sting vs. Bret Hart and Edge HOF


Hey Scott,

Read your review of Sting as WON HOF Contender and the unspoken name that kept coming up for me was Bret Hart. Basically, everything you could say for drawing Sting's power, it seems, would apply for Bret, plus, he only had, what, 8 years, tops, as a main event wrestler, versus Sting's bazillion years (Even if they were low-drawing). Yet Bret was in the HOF by '96, after just 4 sub-par (from a drawing standard) years as a main eventer, IMO.

Sure, Bret was probably a much better worker. But does that really justify him being (I assume) a first-ballot WON HOF'er while Sting can't even get past CM Punk or Lesnar.

And Edge? No offense, but WTF? How could Edge beat Sting?

​Edge isn't in either, but he's arguably a better worker and certainly drew better as champion than Sting did.  Edge is basically handicapped by being in the "WWE brand first, superstars second" era of the business, though, where the only one to escape the pack of 50/50 midcarders was John Cena.  

And yes, Bret being not just a better worker, but an elite-level worker more than justifies his inclusion on its own.  Even if he hadn't been in, Montreal alone would have made him a slam dunk inclusion for historical reasons alone.  ​

Comments

  1. Yeah, I support Sting as a candidate but Bret is more than "probably" a better worker.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The only explanation I have is that Sting must not have RSVP'd to Dave and Scott's Christmas party one year.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think you could make the case that edge is the most underrated wrestler of all-time given his accomplishments and the fact that he's in the rare breed of talent (hbk hart and hardy) to break out of a tag team and reinvent himself as a multi time world champ. If anything hurts Sting I would think its his inability to be an effective heel.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sting in '97 was the most over guy in the business at that time and probably would have been a hell of a main event draw for the bulk of that year had they decided to pull him away from his path to Starrcade '97 early and cash in. I hope the Monday Night War does a whole episode on him. I would be fascinated to hear some more back story on that run.

    ReplyDelete
  5. No way in hell would I ever place Edge over Sting

    ReplyDelete
  6. It's too early for these serious discussions

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wdi1M3pFJ-s

    ReplyDelete
  7. I love Sting, and could possibly be labeled a fanboy... but are you fucking me? Bret Hart, while modest, could draw a decent house compared to WCW's 500 people attended houses of 1990-1994. Plus he's arguably one of the best wrestlers of his generation, with his one negative being a bit lazy from time to time, but that's everyone.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Does Orton get in solely on how awesome those vine videos are?

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'm really hoping we get MNW episodes on Goldberg and Sting. If you're gonna do one on Foley, these guys should get one too.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Nah, more tired, rehashed Austin, Foley, Rock, and n.W.o. fluff. We only have a combined 23 DVD's devoted to them all.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You're right. "The nWo was big but only because of wwf." "WCW fucked up the cruiserweights but then wwf got them and it was great." That's about the most credit wcw will ever get.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Don't forget their attempts at trying to run Vince's poor Mom and Pop Company out of business by buying all the stars he created. stars like Diesel, who couldn't draw flies to horse shit as WWF Champion.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Who are you to doubt Bret Hart?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Oh FFS, I wouldn’t argue that Sting shouldn’t go into any
    HOF. I think that he probably should on
    longevity alone, but to compare these two is ridiculous. Bret > Sting in absolutely every way.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Bret Hart is a poor comp. The better arguments of talent versus fame would be Sting versus Jericho, who is already in.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Wait a minute...Jericho is in the WON Hall of Fame and Sting isn't? That's bullshit!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Okay, Sting isn't Bret Hart as a worker...but let's not act like he totally sucked. He was a good, athletic powerhouse wrestler who could fly and had some technical ability. This guy wasn't the Ultimate Warrior. He was more of a Cena-type worker.

    ReplyDelete
  18. The big difference between Sting and Bret was that Bret helped build the WWF and their revenue streams (not as a cornerstone to be sure, but as a dependable role player) whereas NWA/WCW built Sting (with a lot of help from Ric Flair). That's to take nothing away from Sting, who worked hard and took advantage of the opportunity. But Bret helped put Wrestlemania, Survivor Series, Royal Rumble etc. on the map, helped build the tag title and the IC title into coveted trophys, built viable new territories in Europe, and helped pioneer merchandising in the 80s. Pardon the pun, but he helped lay the foundation. (And I believe there's a place in his book where he also mentions inventing the internet.) The fact is, a wrestling organization doesn't do all that with a main eventer alone, anymore than a football team can win the Super Bowl with just a great quarterback. You need those other players that you can depend upon to their specialty, like that great possession receiver, that great deep threat, the guy who sacks the quarterback, etc. Bret did just about all the different specialties in the WWF: heel & face tag team challenger and champion, heel & face singles champion, guy who opened the shows, guy who was in the middle of the show, guy who closed the show, and he did them during the formulative national and world expansion years. As for Sting, he was acquired at the right time for WCW to build up him and use him as their face champion/challenger, and he did fine in the role.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I always enjoyed the Edge vs Cena feud. They really should have main evented one of the Wrestlemanias in a singles match

    ReplyDelete
  20. I personally enjoy a hall of fame that includes Jericho as the baseline for induction, but if he, Benoit, Eddie Guerrero, and Mick Foley are in, I don't really see how Sting falls so far short of them.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Hogan couldn't draw flies to horse shit with the talent surrounding Diesel in 1995.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I always thought Sting's character(s), look, natural charisma, and promos were better than Bret's.


    We can say he's not as good of a technical worker as Bret, and that's true, but let's not pretend he was in any way bad or mediocre in the ring. His matches with Flair and Vader were fucking awesome. His match with DDP in 99 was awesome. Even some of his TNA matches were solid outings.


    If nothing else, he deserves credit for having Flair-like longevity and consistency as a worker. Some people seem to think he's around the same age as fellow old guys HHH or Undertaker, but he's 10 years older than HHH and has been wrestling for three decades now. He's never had issues staying relevant in any era or headlining at the top of the card.


    I don't know why he wouldn't be in their HOF, but he should be. Edge, Punk, and Lesnar are all great, but putting any of them ahead of Sting is comical.

    ReplyDelete
  23. If Foley's in, then come on... why not Sting? I hate to bash Foley, but he had a relatively short "full time" career (13 years or so), was a fringe Main Eventer with three lackluster World Title reigns under the book of Vince Russo. Yeah, he was a great brawler and made people look good, but his resume' isn't leaving Sting in it's dust.

    ReplyDelete
  24. He popped a few good buyrates and ratings, but Hogan's WCW run wasn't anything special after the Flair program ended at Havoc '94. Numbers were OK, but his gargantuan salary meant PPV buys had to make a big leap from what they were trending with before he came aboard.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I don't think anyone is saying Sting is a bad worker. He was a good, sometimes great, worker, but being compared to Bret isn't fair. That's like comparing a popular, solid worker to Shawn Michaels and judging them on the same scale. It's not fair.

    ReplyDelete
  26. My Bret analogy is that he was like a great player on a rebuilding team. He was basically the Ernie Banks of pro wrestling.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Being a fringe main eventer of one of the biggest booms of our lifetime > being the undisputed main eventer when business is in the shitter. Same reason Nash isn't in the HOF.


    Also, it can't be overstated how monumental the success of Have a Nice Day was--it's still being felt today. Every single wrestling book of the past 15+ years owes its existence to that book. I'm not sure Foley wouldn't be a HOFer for Have a Nice Day even if he had an Al Snow/Test-type career.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I meant more about switching Nash with Hogan and you'd probably have numbers just as bad. Not saying Nash would have been an all-time draw or anything, but he was booked completely ass-backwards against a bunch of subpar heels nobody would pay to see. Meanwhile, all the biggest names were all on the same side of the coin, thus, couldn't feud and his big championship win was on a house show in an 8-second squash, his first defense ended up in a draw, his second defense was against a guy completely trying to show him up and the rest of the year he was feuding with slugs like Sid and Mabel or in meaningless tag matches. It's not like he had a lot to work with or anything.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Oh, my bad... yeah, Hogan wouldn't have drawn either, because the WWF (and WCW) had no clue what fans wanted anymore.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Never underestimate the value of "HOLY SHIT" moments, which Edge had plenty during his career vs Sting.


    Take the gimmicks out Edge matches and he is very pedestrian. Clearly he was hidden well. After the neck injury, it was all cheap heat and gimmick matches to produce the stars.


    Sting, classic babyface. Sucks as a heel. Very good matches (no gimmicks) with Flair/Muta/Vader/Rude/4H etc.


    Edge is probably the second wrestler to get an inflated sense of worth by fans.


    Babyface promos were mehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
    Heel promos were Memphis as fuck. And while they can appreciated, they weren't anything to write home about because he over enunciated ev-er-y-thing.


    Sting remained over without saying a word for 18 months. Edge had to talk for 3 years straight to get a shove.

    ReplyDelete
  31. Not to start something, but Nash was a fringe main eventer in the biggest boom, AND an undisputed main eventer when it was in the shitter. He doesn't belong in because he sucks donkey balls. It has nothing to do with business.


    It's the same reason why Sting should be in. Why the fuck is one criteria "how much you made the business" and another criteria "how good was your workrate". The two don't coincide. Hulk Hogan can't wrestle for shit, made a shit ton of money, and no one would dispute him being in the HOF.


    Who the fuck cares that Sting didn't make gaggles of money? Is that why you watched him or didn't watch him? Does the 10 year old me with the Sting figure give a shit if the gate was good for GAB 90'? No. It's ridiculous that he isn't in the HOF of a newsletter about a fake sport. Meltzer should get over himself.


    I'm not usually a ranter, but this annoys me.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Except the Cubs haven't won the World Series since 1908, so they've been rebuilding for 106 years.

    ReplyDelete
  33. On the subject of Sting's drawing... I'm not making excuses, but how much of his non-drawing is all his fault? WCW's notably poor attempts at promoting shows is legendary. If they weren't doing a poor job advertising local cards, they were constantly changing the promised lineup, burning the trust of fans. If they weren't doing that, they were filming Mini-Movies with ridiculous acting to push PPV's. As much as we give guys like Bret and Diesel and Shawn crap for their WWF failures on top, WWF TRIED to promote them to their best of their abilities. WCW just sucked at doing everything.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Sting's inclusion is debatable? Why?

    ReplyDelete
  35. How bout Don Mattingly on the Yankees? Great player in a failing environment... whoops, Donnie isn't in the Hall, either. Nevermind.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Right? How is Edge even more of a draw than Sting? Sure, he popped (hehe) a big rating for the Live Sex Celebration thing, but other than being champion on Smackdown and maintaining its 2.0 rating, how is Edge, alone, a bigger draw? I'm just so baffled by all of this.

    ReplyDelete
  37. That cruiser show was ass. Started out ok, but when, 12 minutes in, they were complaining that Dean Malenko never got to main event, I knew what I was in for. I really feel the only way WCW fucked up the cruisers was mixing them in with everyone else, where they often jobbed. They should have remained a mostly self-contained division, like in MMA.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I've said it before and I'll say it again, it's hard to say who drew money in the ppv era. It was one thing when you booked an arena monthly or weekly and told the fans who would be on the next card. Fans bought tickets. Tickets sales go down while A wrestles B, then you reevaluate whether A and B are draws. Once ppvs started there were too many factors to say who was or wasn't a draw. it's just to hard to look at data with all the variables in any sort of scientific fashion. Sure we know Hogan and Austin were draws. But after that, even guys like Rock, Undertaker, Cena, etc. aren't 100% locks as draws. At the same time you had the monday night wars era where Nitro/Raw/ppvs all sold out long before any matches were even announced. Same with most house shows. Most tickets were sold before a single match was announced and often without even promises of certain wrestlers. The company was the draw. And I would argue it still is in WWE today, not any one particular wrestler.


    So all that said, I think it is tough to blame Sting for WCW's financial woes. He didn't book the black scorpion angle. He didnt give himself shitty heels to work with. He didn't decide the time to be champ was when the industry was in the crapper. Maybe he was a horrid draw. Maybe he wasn't. But scientifically we simply can't prove it one way or the other And ironically some of the biggest critics like to put him down for being the "most over" (arguable) in his career for 18 months while not working. As if this proves he sucked and he just got over because people were thrilled to not see him wrestle.


    He was a solid worker, had a great look, great charisma, had a lot of achievments in the business, and was part of one of the biggest angles of all time. I think that makes him worthy of induction regardless of whether he wasnt the draw Hogan or Austin were and whether he was a terrible draw like Bret or Nash allegedly were. If Jericho is in, Sting should be in. I don't consider Jericho particularly influential and his kayfabe accomplishments are not up to Sting's accomplishments. Jericho is a better worker but not by that much and Sting was a main eventer for a far longer period of time. And I say all this being a mild Sting fan while Jericho is one of my top all time five favorites.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I don't think Edge's nine world titles is that impressive, since they came over a five-year period when the belts changed far too often. I wonder how many reigns he'd get if there was just one title like there is now.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Sting is what Scottie Pippen would have been without Michael Jordan.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Just because fans refused to accept him as a heel doesn't mean he couldn't be effective. He didn't need to be a heel. No one ever asked Ricky Steamboat to turn heel (or if they did, he never went that way). No, I'm not comparing them as talent, just the circumstances of face/heel.

    ReplyDelete
  42. A great player in an above-Average team?

    ReplyDelete
  43. Yeah, I feel the same. As a kid I watched wrestling because it was wrestling. There were guys I was more excited to see than others and guys who were more must-see than others but I watched it because it's wrestling. I watched pay per views because they were pay per views - some matches were more must see than others but I was going to watch it anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Mattingly had 8 years of a HOF career and then just lost it. Short career and 2 or 3 bad years at the end. I was sure he was a HOFer at one point before he went to hell

    ReplyDelete
  45. Im not saying you're lying but can you explain how you know edge was a bigger draw than sting

    ReplyDelete
  46. Gunther the Nasty LoserOctober 17, 2014 at 10:25 AM

    "Montreal alone would have made him a slam dunk inclusion for historical reasons alone."

    Is Wendy Richter in?

    ReplyDelete
  47. look at WM3. I bought it for Piper/Adonis. Yet Hogan gets credit for being the draw. Sure I was in the vast minority to be the most interested in this match (I actually wanted to see them all) but how do we know how many others thought Herc/Haynes was the draw or JYD/Race or Bundy with some midgets?

    ReplyDelete
  48. Maybe. Id like to see it

    ReplyDelete
  49. Agreed. I thought they should have done a Tommy Dreamer/Raven type thing with Edge/Cena where somehow Cena just can't get a clear victory over him.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Good point. There's been shows I bought in the Cena era despite the fact he was main eventing them. I thought Diesel was boring but I bought shows to see Shawn Michaels in the undercard. In the 2000's I was buying to see the whole show because it was typically solid top to bottom, it wasn't just to see The Rock or Triple H.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Edge can't be a draw because it's been universally accepted that WWE is the draw, and the wrestlers are all replaceable. Or was that the argument last week?

    ReplyDelete
  52. I think Edge was a bigger draw in the sense that he drew bigger numbers (ratings, ppv, etc) as champion than Sting did - but you have to take into consideration that 2006-2010 WWE was much bigger than WCW was during most of Sting's run and, as much as I love Edge, the WWE brand was the draw.

    ReplyDelete
  53. Who knows. I know edge's live sex celebration on raw got really good ratings but other than that I have never heard of anyone seeing edge as a draw and definitely not a bigger draw than sting. But I could always be wrong

    ReplyDelete
  54. Yeah, that might be the dumbest thing I've ever read from Scott.

    ReplyDelete
  55. That no good Moolah screwed her.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Has Edge had bad matches with guys who weren't good workers? All I remember is his stuff with Cena, Taker, and the Smackdown Six (five, whatever).

    ReplyDelete
  57. I think it's all grasping at straws. I could make reasonable arguments for and against everyone depending on level of petty bullshit I feel like using. If WWE or whoever promotes someone well enough that they connect with fans, then it draws. If they give the proverbial middle finger too many times, fans won't care and will stop coming back.

    ReplyDelete
  58. It had a huge impact on the business. Wendi Richter was quietly and easily forgotten. Too entirely different situations.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Yes. He had stinkers quite often with all sorts of guys. Kane, Regal, Albert, Booker T... he was good, but he wasn't a magic broom handler.

    ReplyDelete
  60. I don't think Bret Hart is nearly the legend he is today without Montreal.

    ReplyDelete
  61. So you think because Bret got screwed out of the title in Montreal that he deserves to be in HOF "just for that alone"? That makes sense to you?

    ReplyDelete
  62. I can believe that with wwe being the draw. Im just thinking about starrcade 97 and how many ppl wanted to see that just for sting and hogan but I've never heard of anyone buying a ppv just cuz they had to see edges match. But yea if we aren't looking at it from an individual wrestler perspective then I can see edge being a bigger draw.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Don't be so pedantic. The Ernie Banks/Cubs part isn't important. You can pick any player in any sport that fits the great player/shitty team label.

    ReplyDelete
  64. I guess that's my point, somewhat - if we're seriously considering workrate, it's not as if every Edge match was ***.

    It's like the arguments here against Sting are skewered to make it seem like he doesn't belong when 1) crowds chanted for YEARS "We Want Sting", 2) he was arguably the most over individual in TWO of the company's biggest storylines (nWo and DA), 3) he's been in the business for 30 years, and 4) he moves the needle everywhere he goes.

    He didn't draw like Hogan (but who does?), and he may not have been Bret Hart (but who can be without tears in their eyes?), but I think it's stupid to think that there's a strong argument to him not making it. His body of work isn't matched by many.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Not 100% agreed with it, but if his body of work was average and he had that, then yes, he belongs. The Screwjob is probably the most well known business back-stabbing, at least of the modern era, and it was done on live PPV to one of the most loyal employees Vince had. The fallout gave us Mr. McMahon and kicked the doors open for everyone's favorite era, the Era of Attitude (Note: I hated most of the Attitude Era, but that's just me).

    ReplyDelete
  66. It was a Cubs joke mainly. Sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  67. I understand that. It's just the way Scott worded it that makes it sound silly, I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  68. It all comes down to popularity and how you want to spin the argument. I think he belongs and his biggest fault, drawing ability, can easily be blamed on poor management in the head offices of WCW. He was a solid/borderline great worker for most of his career, his historical significance as the face of WCW makes him an Icon, and his feud with Flair is legendary.

    ReplyDelete
  69. I know WCW with the nWo was hot at the time, but when you go back and watch those shows Sting was getting Austin-like pops. People definitely bought Starrcade to see him.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Did Edge really draw better ratings and buyrates than Sting? 24 did a cunt hair over a million. I can think of two PPVs that Sting headlined off the top of my head that did much better. Might be a few more too.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Kinda sounds like Bret doesn't it?

    ReplyDelete
  72. I hated WCW, but almost bought Starrcade just to see Sting's in-ring return. Almost. We were poor and bought Survivor Series the month before and planned on buying the Rumble.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Eh... all Montreal did was keep Bret's name relevant past retirement. He was already considered a great worker.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Look, I have no idea what the criteria for the WON Hall of Fame is (never subscribed), and I've always thought all Halls of Fame are silly, but the fact that there's a debate over whether Sting qualifies as an inductee in any kind of wrestling Hall of Fame seems ludicrous to me.

    One of the most famous wrestlers to ever live gets in whatever Hall of Fame you've got.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Of course not. You can say about every wrestler and whatever happened during their career.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Sting was one half of one of the most successful matches of all time, producing an amazing buyrate at Starrcade and a great one at Superbrawl. I am pretty sure Bret Hart (even if I personally prefer watching him over Sting) hardly ever came close to that in terms of "drawing".

    ReplyDelete
  77. Sting is a weird case because much of his big time as a star was in either dying JCP, nascent/horrible promoted early WCW or the ratings-obsessed WCW. It might be better to look at TV ratings as his drawing power.

    ReplyDelete
  78. That about sums up my feelings. It's fucking Sting for Christ's sake.

    ReplyDelete
  79. Or look at the fact that he's Sting, aka one of about a dozen wrestlers that people who do not give a shit about wrestling know by name.

    ReplyDelete
  80. But still, even that might be overstating it a bit, because if he wasn't as popular as he was, and if he didn't do as much as he did, there'd be no way he'd sniff the top of the card.

    ReplyDelete
  81. "Sting isn't Bret Hart as a worker."


    and really, who is/was? one could argue that even Shawn Michaels, while great in his own "domain", couldn't do the same things Hart did (and vice versa).

    ReplyDelete
  82. What if: Vince steals Sting in the summer of 89 and builds him up and does Sting-Hogan at 6 and Sting wins the title, Does Sting become the biggest star of all time? Because I think he does.

    ReplyDelete
  83. One more thing - how many people were audibly disappointed that the newest 2K commercial with Sting didn't include a return to the ring for Sting? Sure he's not what he used to be, but people still cheer like nuts for Hogan, and I don't see anyone clamoring for him to win the title.

    It's ludicrous, and the idea for a wrestling HOF is kinda baffy to begin with, but W/E.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Agreed. I consider Bret and Shawn the best of their eras. Bret was a masterful technician who understood drama like few others (at least in the States. I never watched Puro or Lucha), and Shawn was the guy who dazzled fans with athleticism and showmanship.

    ReplyDelete
  85. That commercial was the biggest cock tease to Sting fans. Fucking 2K15...

    ReplyDelete
  86. Sting was also a main eventer during that boom period?! Starrcade, as horrible as that main event might have turned out, did one of the biggest buyrates ever.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Looking back now u made the right decision

    ReplyDelete
  88. Disagreed. Vince never bothered to build credible heels. Warrior failed because of it, and Sting failed because of the same in WCW.

    ReplyDelete
  89. As long as Hogan doesn't sabotage him, like he did at Starrcade.

    ReplyDelete
  90. The Horsemen, Vader, Cactus, and the Dangerous Alliance weren't credible heels?!?

    ReplyDelete
  91. Yea im pretty sure sting and goldberg were just as hot as austin and rock. But wwe is here and wcw isn't so sting and goldberg aren't even on their level.

    ReplyDelete
  92. If you believe Hogan, he wanted Sting to come in, put him over and then turn heel.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Edge could beat Sting like his first 8 title wins, as 'The Opportunist'. And Sting is the easiest wrestler ever to scheme against.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Not to say I don't believe you, but there's a reason why I have a salt packet around whenever Hogan speaks.

    ReplyDelete
  95. exactly. it's really not the screwjob itself that makes it so important but everything that came from it (in front as well as behind the scenes).

    ReplyDelete
  96. In 1990? No. The DA didn't exist, Cactus was a JTTS on loan from wherever he came from, Vader wasn't full time, and they had no interest in keeping Flair at the top. Other than Sid, an unproven threat, he had the mysterious Black Scorpion. So mysterious that the bookers didn't know who it was.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Him and Flair are the only WCW household names to people who, like you said, do not give a shit about wrestling.

    ReplyDelete
  98. There's a recent botchamania that had exactly that, including a caption about the bummed out crowd.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Hey Sting, look over there! (sucker punch)
    Did you do that?
    No
    OK (smirk)

    ReplyDelete
  100. one could even argue that during the "Austin era" people were so aware of how wrestling "worked" that he himself wouldn't have "drawn" the same way he did if they would have paired him with just some random guys (for example: WrestleMania XV would arguebly not have had a great buyrate if the main event had been Steve Austin vs. Mideon).

    ReplyDelete
  101. I don't blame Sting for bombing as champ in 1990. Ole Fucking Anderson was booking his title reign like it was a knock off episode of Scooby-Doo. Plus Sting was up against the Hogan/Warrior/Savage/Piper WWF.

    Nobody could have overcome the lame ass Black Scorpion angle and the WWF in 1990.

    ReplyDelete
  102. I just looked at the list of WON Hall of Fame members for the first time ever. These are the only names on the list that should be in a Hall of Fame over Sting:


    Andre The Giant
    Bret Hart
    Antonio Inoki
    Mil Mascaras
    Vince J. McMahon
    Vince K. McMahon
    Dusty Rhodes
    Roddy Piper
    Ric Flair
    Hulk Hogan
    Bruno Sammartino
    Randy Savage
    Steve Austin
    Mick Foley
    Shawn Michaels
    Triple H
    Undertaker
    The Rock
    John Cena


    Then Sting.


    Everyone else after that.

    ReplyDelete
  103. WWF in 1990 was tanking just as fast. Sting and Warrior's rise and reigns are eerily parallel.

    ReplyDelete
  104. Flair: "And I would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for those damn little stingers!!

    ReplyDelete
  105. well, they did try something like this with Cena/Punk.

    ReplyDelete
  106. answer: El Dandy.

    ReplyDelete
  107. I'm speaking overall, but 1990 wasn't great for Sting. And really, that was a heel territory, which goes to my point about Sting being a way better fit for how WWE did things.

    Also disagree with you about Warrior. He didn't fail, he just couldn't match Hogan. I find it hard to call that failing. And before he dropped the title, he was feuding with Rude, DiBiase, Demos, and Macho Man. Some pretty great heels there.

    ReplyDelete
  108. I love the ability of all those WWF heels, but booking your WWF Champion in 6-Man Tags against a Demolition consisting of Brian Adams is someones way of saying "we don't have faith anymore in Warrior on top."

    ReplyDelete
  109. What about Chris Benoit?.. Why did I open that can of worms.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Because you're a bad man! Bad!

    ReplyDelete
  111. the only difference, at least thats how it seems to me: Warrior was the victim of backstage politics, Sting of incompetence.

    ReplyDelete
  112. Even pre-murderer Chris Benoit is not close to the level of Sting. And Dynamite Kid? Kurt Angle? For all the (deserved) grief the WWE HoF gets for its goofiness, this is a goofy list for different, smark-y reasons.

    ReplyDelete
  113. Coincidence I never thought about: Both had the plug pulled the same week, (Sting lost to Flair in Meadowlands, NJ of all places the week of the 91 Rumble). I didn't know WCW ran that area, figured it was a WWF spot.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Wait, Ultimate Warrior isn't in this WON Hall of Fame either? Woo boy.

    ReplyDelete
  115. Personally I think Edge would have been a career IC guy if he'd come along at any earlier time.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Is Dean Malenko in? I would look but I'm lazy right now.

    ReplyDelete
  117. I dunno, Warrior+LOD is pretty fucking awesome.

    ReplyDelete
  118. I don't think that topic would trigger such a strongly argued debate. He was a below-average worker, an almost non-draw on top, had an incredibly short career, and was a poor ambassador to the "sport".

    ReplyDelete
  119. Verne, Heenan & Nick before as well, but a pretty solid list.

    ReplyDelete
  120. Dean Malenko is not. Nor is Dean Douglas. Or Simon Dean. (Sorry, I ctrl+F'd "Dean" and got zero results.)

    ReplyDelete
  121. I wonder if Arn got over on Sting like that backstage, rigged credit card roulette and the like.


    Oh who am I kidding, Flair was buying.

    ReplyDelete
  122. It was cool, but it shows a lack of trust in him as their Champion on top of the card. He's not only not defending it, but working against guys he has no business with. No rude, no Savage, no Dibiase... just the LOD's program with Warrior shoe-horned in.

    ReplyDelete
  123. Like I said below, I wouldn't call Warrior a non draw. He just wasn't Hogan. Would have business really changed that much if Hogan won that match at 6?

    ReplyDelete
  124. Again, I tend to think Halls of Fame should include the eligible participants with the most, for lack of a better word, fame. Actually, no, that's the perfect word.


    Ultimate Warrior is one of the most famous wrestlers ever.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment