Skip to main content

WWE Rushmore

Im having a discussion on facebook about if there was a Mt. Rushmore for the WWE, who would be on it.

I said
Bruno
Hogan
Austin
Cena

And of course, people are discounting Bruno, so I ask you and the Blog, Who is the "WWEs Mt. Rushmore?" No revisionist history.

Shouldn't Vince be on there?  I'd say Hogan, Vince, Bruno and Austin.  Maybe Koko B. Ware as an alternate.

Comments

  1. Gotta agree with the Boss on this one. Cena is top guy for a while now, sure, and I don't dislike him nearly so much as many around here, but he hasn't exactly taken them to new heights.


    But my alternate is Ken Patera's afro.

    ReplyDelete
  2. WWE's Mount Rushmore should absolutely be McMahon, Hogan, Austin, and the fourth spot can be filled by any of the following: Undertaker, Rock, Cena, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Andre the Giant, Bruno, and any other person who can fairly be considered a legend/face of the company for an extended period of time.


    For me, a much more interesting debate would be WRESTLING'S Mount Rushmore. To use the same criteria as the actual Mount Rushmore, where two were picked from one major political party, and two were picked from another political party, I figure we'd have Hogan and Austin from WWE/WWF, and Flair and, I don't know Rhodes maybe, from NWA/WCW. What do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I like Bret and Shawn, but Bruno carried the company for the better part of 2 decades. You can't really put them up as equals. Like if they were building Rushmore today and couldn't decide between Lincoln and Clinton.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Lombardi, Horowitz, and The Mulkeys

    ReplyDelete
  5. Vince, Hogan, and Austin are the three most obvious ones, but it's really hard to pick that fourth spot.


    I want to say Cena, as he's been the only real "face" of the company in the same way that Hogan and Austin were, but he's just not on the same level as those two. Rock would be a contender, but I feel like he'd be like a "repeat" of Austin, in terms of representing the same era. A guy like Bruno or Backlund would make sense, but I feel like this idea should basically only be Vince Junior's version of WWE; i.e., only from "Hulkamania" forward.


    The only other one I can really think of is Taker, but, again, he was never the centerpiece of the promotion that Hogan, Austin, or Cena were. Same thing with Bret or Shawn.


    So, yeah, I'll say Vince, Hogan, Austin, and Cena.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Off-Topic: is it wrong of me to kind of hope Rikiski becomes a crack addict?


    Just to read why he was found sucking Jake the Snake off behind a convenience store... all together now...

    ReplyDelete
  7. "I did it for the sock", as the camera pulls back to reveal Socko with a handgun pointed at the weeping Rikishi.

    ReplyDelete
  8. He did it for the.....ooooooooh, I see what you did there.

    ReplyDelete
  9. The all-time company top four are Scott's choices of Hogan, Vince, Bruno and Austin. That's basically not disputable if you're talking about the promotion's entire 50+ year history. If you broke it down by eras...

    WWWF (1962-1982): Bruno, Morales, Andre, Backlund....hard to dispute this one


    WWF (Hulkamania through New Generation): Hogan, Savage, Hart, Warrior.....Piper, Andre again, even HBK have claims to spots on this list.



    WWF (Attitude era): Austin, Rock, Foley, Triple H...."quite frankly," I'm probably erring by not putting Vince on here ahead of Foley and HHH. Undertaker also has a strong case.


    WWE era (2002-present): Cena, Batista, Triple H, Michaels....could also make a strong case for Undertaker or Orton but I think these four are it.


    It's crazy to think Undertaker doesn't make it and HHH is the only guy who makes it twice.

    ReplyDelete
  10. All-time pro wrestling Mt. Rushmore.....Rikidozan, El Santo, Lou Thesz and either Flair or Hogan.

    ReplyDelete
  11. For me, it's Bruno, Hogan, Undertaker, and Austin. I view Vince as analogous to the Borglum family members who were responsible for doing the actual sculpting of Mount Rushmore. Putting Vince on there would be like the Borglums chiseling themselves next to Washington and Jefferson. Bruno, Hogan and Austin's spots are obvious; Taker gets the nod over Cena because the folks are right about Cena not really elevating the company to any new meaningful heights, while Taker has carved out a niche as an iconic figure and serves as a bridge between multiple eras (from Hulkamania all the way to the present).

    ReplyDelete
  12. Depends on who commissioned the work. If it's Vince himself, then it's Vince, HBK, HHH, and Cena.

    ReplyDelete
  13. This is probably the best approach because you really need to factor in the different eras - and the last decade is too soon to make decisions on people.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Bruno, Hogan, Austin, Cena seems like the best as they are the faces of their respective eras. If you started with Hogan, you'd probably replace Bruno with Hart, as he was the face of the era inbetween Hogan and Austin.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Yeah the e-mailer got it right. The more pertinent question is who equates to which president.


    Bruno = Washington (Obviously)
    Austin = Roosevelt (Bad Asses)


    Which means Hogan must be Lincoln?? (Wrestlemania 1 = Emancipation Proclamation)


    Leaving poor old Jefferson with Cena I guess.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Problem that many people forget about Mt Rushmore is why were those 4 faces chosen.

    ""The presidents were selected on the basis of what each symbolized. George Washington represents the struggle for independence, Thomas Jefferson the idea of government by the people. Abraham Lincoln for his ideas on equality and the permanent union of the states, and Theodore Roosevelt for the 20th century role of the United States in world affairs. "

    Thus I would pick Bruno, Hogan, Austin, and undertaker. Bruno basically led WWWF for the first 15 years; Hogan led the national expansion and wrestlemania; Austin represents the attitude era; Undertaker represents the importance of wrestlemania

    ReplyDelete
  17. Buddy Rogers, Bruno, Hogan, Austin.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Caliber_Winfield_69420BoobiesNovember 25, 2012 at 4:58 AM

    You should see Penn & Teller's episode of Bullshit on Mt. Rushmore. The original Rushmore had more western themed heroes, like Lewis & Clark, and some Indian folk whose names I've since forgotten. The sculptor they commissioned put the kibosh on the original choices.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Caliber_Winfield_69420BoobiesNovember 25, 2012 at 5:01 AM

    I have a feeling that Bruno is living with The Fuj.

    "Now you email them, Fuj! You tell'em, Bruno is Uno! You do it, otherwise I'll get on table and dance again!"

    ReplyDelete
  20. Wouldn't go with Vince. Rushmore is 4 presidents, so this should just be 4 actual wrestlers. Vince's part-time wrestler contributions aren't substantial enough for his inclusion.

    I would go with Undertaker or maybe HBK. Undertaker has been a draw for over two decades now (particularly for Wrestlemania, of course) and spanned his career across multiple generations.

    Including Cena over him seems absurd to me. Cena is the top guy for recent/current WWE just like George W Bush was our president for 8 years. Nobody is putting that clown on Mt Rushmore.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Why would someone discount Bruno?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Vince, Bruno, Hogan, and Austin.....though if they did a DVD on the subject, count on HHH and Steve Lombardi to do 95% of the comments on the documentary

    ReplyDelete
  23. i like the approach but theres only one mt. rushmore.

    thats why as the emailer of this question, i wanted to know a definitive answer.

    ReplyDelete
  24. *takes a bow*


    IT WAS ME ANDRE!!! IT WAS ME ALL ALONG!!!

    ReplyDelete
  25. LMFAO!!


    i dont even like bruno. i think he is terrible in the ring, but you can not discount that 8 year title reign.


    no bruno, no wwf

    ReplyDelete
  26. Because i belong to this pseudo-smark page on fb that think they know about wrestling.


    -think the miz is awesome
    -think ziggler is a terrible performer
    -LOVE Ryback
    -Doesnt recognize the contributions of Bruno.

    ReplyDelete
  27. If Vince is the one putting together the list, it'd be Vince, Steph, Linda, and either Shane or Vince again.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Caliber_Winfield_69420BoobiesNovember 25, 2012 at 9:13 AM

    Really? They think this stuff? Now I feel dirty for being part of it.

    Honestly though, I will concede and say you're right. Bruno does belong on there.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I've never heard this before.


    Source?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Hulk Hogan, Andre the Giant, "Rowdy" Roddie Piper, and Hillbilly Jim. We built this business on "Rock n' Wrestling".

    ReplyDelete
  31. This needs more love. God bless you sir.

    ReplyDelete
  32. WWE recently had this on their site, and had fans vote, it ended up being Hogan, Austin, Cena, and Taker.

    ReplyDelete
  33. No Shane. Hunter...his real son.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Because anything before Hogan's first run didn't happen to most fans. Hell, it is surprising to me how many younger fans discount anything pre-Austin.

    ReplyDelete
  35. And he was a pretty big white supremicist from what I remember.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Ugh. I got added to a FB wrestling group against my will by a friend, and I stayed on just to see how awful some of it is. My friend and his older brother post good YouTube links, and both are kind of in that gray-area smark zone where they know a little inside stuff and don't talk about it like it's real but don't actively follow the dirtsheet stuff or have the hivemind smark opinions, and then the rest are complete drooling CENA IZ THE BEST!!!!~@! LOL PUNKS A FAGGET! types. It's kind of fascinating.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Hogan, Andre, Rock, Austin. The four biggest stars to transcend wrestling and become household names in their own right. One could convince me to sub Savage for either Andre or Austin but those are the four I go with.



    Although somewhere on the ground, out behind the mountain, they need to chisel a smaller likeness of the people who really mattered behind the scenes and made WWF what it is: Pat Patterson, Jim Ross, Howard Finkel, and Vince himself.

    ReplyDelete
  38. If you are not including Vince... it has to be the four guys that represent different era's (and which were the most important times in the company's history) and were the outright faces of the company.


    So for me it comes down Bruno (Established the WWWF), Hogan (Represents the first truly Golden era for the company, 'Rock n Wrestling), Austin (The WWFs most successful period, the Attitude Era) and Cena (The PG era, keeping the WWE stable as a successful company for the best part of a decade).


    Their were transition era's like Bret/Shawn in the mid 90's (the new generation, but considered a less than successful time), the Rock whilst the face of the company at points was never the definitive figure of an era, the Undertaker whilst a highly successful performer, never dominated an era as the top face.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Hogan-Austin-Michaels-Rock. Three transcend wrestling and HBK is the GOAT. I guess that isn't the best way to look at it but there's no science to it.

    ReplyDelete
  40. How have they not yet figured out to do the joke where Daniel Bryan starts calling himself the "Greatest Of All Time" yet? I think he even used that expression once and no one picked up on it.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Surprised to see a few people suggest Undertaker. I wouldn't have even thought of him in the conversation. yeah he longevity and occasionally has been a main eventer, but honestly he's been pretty much a special attraction for most of his career. If we are going special attraction, then Andre is a better option than Undertaker.



    for me Austin and Hogan and Bruno are slamdunks. Each defined their era and are the three most iconic and successful WWF champions. The 4th spot could be anyone from Andre to Rock to Cena. There are even arguments to be made for Bret, Shawn, HHH, Piper, Savage, Backlund, Pedro, etc.



    Looking at it as a comparison to the Presidents, you can compare Bruno to Washington as the founding father as some have. But you can also compare Washington and LIncoln to Austin and Hogan, as the two most iconic and popular. Jefferson is the people's champ, which makes you think of Rock. Teddy was the guy in charge when it was commissioned, which makes you figure Cena.



    I guess for me, with my biases, Andre the Giant would be the 4th face, but I don't have much issue with those arguing for Cena or Rock or even Savage. Bret, Shawn, or Undertaker really seem a notch below those three. And then HHH, Backlund, Piper, Warrior, etc. would be the next tier.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I totally didn't get it at first.

    How random.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I'd go Hogan, Austin, Hart, and Cena.

    ReplyDelete
  44. More like Vince, Steph, Shane and Linda.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Ax, Smash, Crush and Fuji.

    ReplyDelete
  46. A WCW Mt. Rushmore (1991-2001)? Flair and Sting are no-brainers, Hogan has to be there for the importance of both his jump in 1994 and his nWo turn in 1996. I'd probably favour Goldberg for the fourth spot though you could make a case for Vader, DDP, Nash or even Luger.

    An ECW Mt. Rushmore is awfully difficult. Tazz, Douglas, Raven, Sabu, Sandman, RVD....six guys intrinsically tied to that company and you have to cut TWO of them.

    A TNA Mt. Rushmore is Jarrett, Styles, Angle and....Abyss? James Storm (part of two major tag teams and now a big singles star)?

    ReplyDelete
  47. The guy who wrote in pretty much nailed it. It's fucking obvious. Bruno led the early years. Hogan ran the '80s. Austin was the biggest moneymaker and the star of the '90s. And Cena is the new IT guy.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I'd throw in Sting's name for a TNA Mt.Rushmore too.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment