Call to Arms for all TRUE wrestling fans! [Archive]

Slyfox696

03-24-2008, 02:33 AM

Watch it. Just because you can't wrap your head around enjoying the talent of a great Superstar that plays a good heel, doesn't mean you have to speak for the rest of us.

I completely enjoyed watching Owen Hart. He might not of been great, or the very best, but he was a lot better than most. He was enjoyable to watch, which is one of the main things that matters.Please. Nobody gave a rat's ass about Owen Hart until he died, and then all of a sudden he is considered a legend. He was average at best, ordinary at worst, and generally pretty bland.

So, William Perry, Bob Orton & "High Chief" Peter Maivia do? Bullshit. They induct random people in all the time, for the stupidest reasons. Owen Hart was a great Superstar and achieved many things in his short career.

No, he was never a Main Event wrestler and no he never won any World Heavyweight Championships. But neither did some of the already inducted members of the HOF.Terrible argument Will. Just because there are other disgraces in there, doesn't mean they have to continue to disgrace it. I mean, that's like saying "Well, we have a couple of spammers in the forum, so we might as well get rid of the spam rule and let anyone do it". Silly argument.

Owen is a multiple time Intercontinental Champion, a 4 time Tag Team Champion, a European Champion.. and a King of the Ring winner. So to say that Owen Hart doesn't deserve inducted because he never became a Main Event player, would be hypocritical to say the HOF isn't already rigged with stupid inductions as is. Bob Orton isn't half of what Owen Hart was. And Orton was around a hell of a lot longer.Like I said, Owen was a career midcarder. Everything you just said screams midcard.

And Owen DOESN'T deserve to be in the Hall of Fame, BECAUSE he wasn't a main-eventer. A Hall of Fame should be only the best of the best, not just anyone with a couple titles under their belt and who was killed in the ring. A Hall of Fame should be someone who was actually important to the business.

Which Owen never was.

TheOneBigWill

03-24-2008, 02:48 AM

Please. Nobody gave a rat's ass about Owen Hart until he died, and then all of a sudden he is considered a legend. He was average at best, ordinary at worst, and generally pretty bland.

Again, you really shouldn't speak for people whom you don't know. I honest to God did care to watch Owen Hart. And I'm definately sure thousands, if not millions of other did too. If they didn't, why was he on television so much? Why'd he receive as many pushes as he did? Why was he the top of the midcard for as long as he was?

Don't speak for me, because you don't know who I like or dislike. I loved Owen Hart from 1994 throughout. His heel turn was one of the all-time greatest, that alone should push him into the Hall of Fame. It was a landmark in Professional Wrestling.

Terrible argument Will. Just because there are other disgraces in there, doesn't mean they have to continue to disgrace it.

Agreed. Except Owen Hart wasn't a disgrace.

I mean, that's like saying "Well, we have a couple of spammers in the forum, so we might as well get rid of the spam rule and let anyone do it". Silly argument.

A rule, you yourself pushed to have lightened up on, if I do recall. :rolleyes:

Like I said, Owen was a career midcarder. Everything you just said screams midcard.

And Owen DOESN'T deserve to be in the Hall of Fame, BECAUSE he wasn't a main-eventer. A Hall of Fame should be only the best of the best, not just anyone with a couple titles under their belt and who was killed in the ring. A Hall of Fame should be someone who was actually important to the business.

If we go by this logic, then we might as well take out the following.

Andre The Giant
Chief Jay Strongbow
Gorilla Monsoon
Ernie Ladd
George "The Animal" Steele
Ivan Putski
The Grand Wizard
Jimmy Snuka
Johnny Rodz
Killer Kowalski
Big John Studd
Don Muraco
Greg "The Hammer" Valentine
Jesse "The Body" Ventura
J.Y.D.
Sgt. Slaughter
Billy Graham
Tito Santana
Pete Rose
Roddy Piper
Sherri Martel
Dusty Rhodes
Curt Hennig
..... and on, and on, and on.. I'm sure you've gotten the point.

Which Owen never was.

Summerslam 1994, World Championship: Bret Hart v. Owen Hart - Steel Cage. It was billed as a Main Event match. Might not of been "the" Main Event, but it was "a" Main Event. Best one of the night, as well.

klunderbunker

03-24-2008, 02:52 AM

Please. Nobody gave a rat's ass about Owen Hart until he died, and then all of a sudden he is considered a legend. He was average at best, ordinary at worst, and generally pretty bland.

Terrible argument Will. Just because there are other disgraces in there, doesn't mean they have to continue to disgrace it. I mean, that's like saying "Well, we have a couple of spammers in the forum, so we might as well get rid of the spam rule and let anyone do it". Silly argument.

Like I said, Owen was a career midcarder. Everything you just said screams midcard.

And Owen DOESN'T deserve to be in the Hall of Fame, BECAUSE he wasn't a main-eventer. A Hall of Fame should be only the best of the best, not just anyone with a couple titles under their belt and who was killed in the ring. A Hall of Fame should be someone who was actually important to the business.

Which Owen never was.

As far as no one caring about Owen until he died, I think it was more a case of not realizing what was lost until it was gone. Owen never was a huge star or incredibly loved but I wouldn't say the people couldn't stand to see him.

He was a career midcarder with the occasional flash at the bottom of the upper card. However he was one of the few people that once he got to WWE he stayed, which I think earns him some credit. His biggest accomplishment was probably winning the KOTR so its true he never really accomplished a great deal.

The problem I have with him not getting in just because he wasn't a main eventer is because like others have said it seems that several people have been inducted doing far less. I'm not saying Owen should 100% be in the HOF, but based on several other inductees, Owen belongs in.

Slyfox696

03-24-2008, 02:56 AM

Again, you really shouldn't speak for people whom you don't know. I honest to God did care to watch Owen Hart. And I'm definately sure thousands, if not millions of other did too. If they didn't, why was he on television so much? Why'd he receive as many pushes as he did? Why was he the top of the midcard for as long as he was?

Don't speak for me, because you don't know who I like or dislike. I loved Owen Hart from 1994 throughout. His heel turn was one of the all-time greatest, that alone should push him into the Hall of Fame. It was a landmark in Professional Wrestling.Face facts Will, Owen was not a draw, his pops were minimal compared to others during his time, and the guy was a disaster on the mic usually.

Agreed. Except Owen Hart wasn't a disgrace.Never said he was.

I just said that Owen Hart in the WWE Hall of Fame would be a disgrace.

A rule, you yourself pushed to have lightened up on, if I do recall. :rolleyes:Lightened and removed are different.

Additionally, we're not talking about something that caters to the masses. We're talking about something, by definition, caters to greatness. Owen Hart was decent, but never great.

Now, I'm not saying the William Perry was great either, but just because he's in, doesn't mean that Owen should be.

If we go by this logic, then we might as well take out the following.

Andre The Giant
Chief Jay Strongbow
Gorilla Monsoon
Ernie Ladd
George "The Animal" Steele
Ivan Putski
The Grand Wizard
Jimmy Snuka
Johnny Rodz
Killer Kowalski
Big John Studd
Don Muraco
Greg "The Hammer" Valentine
Jesse "The Body" Ventura
J.Y.D.
Sgt. Slaughter
Billy Graham
Tito Santana
Pete Rose
Roddy Piper
Sherri Martel
Dusty Rhodes
Curt Hennig
..... and on, and on, and on.. I'm sure you've gotten the point.No, actually you completely lost me.

With the exception of only a few, every one of those guys were more deserving than Owen Hart.

Summerslam 1994, World Championship: Bret Hart v. Owen Hart - Steel Cage. It was billed as a Main Event match. Might not of been "the" Main Event, but it was "a" Main Event. Best one of the night, as well.Being in the main-event, and being a main-eventer are two totally separate things, and you know it Will. Hell, the Spirit Squaded was in the main-event of Vengeance 2006, are we going to call them Main-Eventers now?

Owen was never a main-eventer, never great, and is only remembered today by most wrestling fans for the reason he got out of wrestling, not what he did in it.
As far as no one caring about Owen until he died, I think it was more a case of not realizing what was lost until it was gone. Owen never was a huge star or incredibly loved but I wouldn't say the people couldn't stand to see him.

He was a career midcarder with the occasional flash at the bottom of the upper card. However he was one of the few people that once he got to WWE he stayed, which I think earns him some credit. His biggest accomplishment was probably winning the KOTR so its true he never really accomplished a great deal.

The problem I have with him not getting in just because he wasn't a main eventer is because like others have said it seems that several people have been inducted doing far less. I'm not saying Owen should 100% be in the HOF, but based on several other inductees, Owen belongs in.

So, are you telling me then that Hacksaw Jim Duggan should be in the Hall of Fame?

Mighty NorCal

03-24-2008, 03:00 AM

I for one, also cared about Owen. he was part of two of the absolute best heel runs of all time, when he turned on his brother in 94, and the border war of 97. I wanted to MURDER Owne Hart during both of those periods. He was hated immensely when he threw in the towel for Bret Vs Bob Backlund at Survivor Series 94, and during the Canada Vs USA borderwar angle in 97. As will said earlier, he main evented SummerSlam, and main evented in The Canadian Stampede PPV one of the most highly regarded cards around. And he was even the guy picked to put the pin on Austin in that match. Owen may not have accomplished a GREAT deal, but he had some frenetic heel heat during his time, in tow angles that I would qualify as greatness.

True, the talk of Owens "greatness" may have only spiked after his death, but to say no one cared about him til after his death is absurd.

klunderbunker

03-24-2008, 03:02 AM

I'm saying that it seems to me, and I could be completely wrong on this, but it seems that some of the inductees are put in because of their names only. I'm not at all saying that many members of the HOF have accomplished nothing, but rather they haven't accomplished enough to be considered the best of the best. I see them as legends, but not as Hall of Famers.

TheOneBigWill

03-24-2008, 03:16 AM

Face facts Will, Owen was not a draw, his pops were minimal compared to others during his time, and the guy was a disaster on the mic usually.

This is only one aspect of something though. Again, if we used your logic, than only Hulk Hogan would be in the HoF because noone else received the "pop" he did.

Just because Owen Hart wasn't perfect, or great, doesn't mean he isn't deserving. You're claiming he isn't deserving, merely because he didn't Main Event. When the fact is, several wrestlers deserve to be in the HoF without even touching the Main Event.

Perhaps Owen should be inducted for being one of the greatest midcard "Main Eventers."

Never said he was.

I just said that Owen Hart in the WWE Hall of Fame would be a disgrace.

But by saying it'd be a disgrace to place him in, is thereby saying hes a disgrace in itself. Isn't it?

Lightened and removed are different.

Additionally, we're not talking about something that caters to the masses. We're talking about something, by definition, caters to greatness. Owen Hart was decent, but never great.

Depends on how you perceive it. You don't consider him great because he wasn't Main Eventing for years, or receiving tremendous pops. That doesn't mean he never has.

Hes Main Evented several times. Hes received great ovations in his home country, and all over the world. You just look at the "glass" being half empty, and refuse to see that it could be the other way around.

Now, I'm not saying the William Perry was great either, but just because he's in, doesn't mean that Owen should be.

Isn't this what it boils down to though? You aren't in charge of the HoF. They've let downright no-names into the thing, so when looking at it like that, wouldn't Owen Hart be a step (way) above the rest?

When you look at how stupid some of these entries are, how horrible would it be to allow Owen Hart in? Honestly, (as I've been informed) its likely NEVER going to happen due to his Wife anyway.. but seriously, what foul or trouble would it cause to let him in? None.

No, actually you completely lost me.

With the exception of only a few, every one of those guys were more deserving than Owen Hart.

Then I'll redirect you. vvvvvv

A Hall of Fame should be only the best of the best, not just anyone with a couple titles under their belt

Everyone in that list I named off didn't do hardly B.S. for the W.W.F. They were big names, some were Main Event-ish, but Owen Hart fits directly into the same type of catagory. All well known, all accomplishing their own specific things.

Being in the main-event, and being a main-eventer are two totally separate things, and you know it Will. Hell, the Spirit Squaded was in the main-event of Vengeance 2006, are we going to call them Main-Eventers now?

So you picked the worst one to be your spokesmen? The Spirit Squad aren't even on the same level as Owen Hart. If you want to drop this low, then yes.. a Main Eventer, be it one time or twenty, is a Main Eventer.

The fact is, Owen Hart was a great Superstar. He was admired and loved all over the globe. He was warshipped in Canada. Only in the United States did people not give him the respect he deserved.. and why.. because he was a heel.

Which, also by your logic, means he did his job to perfection. Because he made them boo him. He made them dislike him.

Owen was never a main-eventer, never great, and is only remembered today by most wrestling fans for the reason he got out of wrestling, not what he did in it.

I just named off some of the things Owen has done. I can list a ton that hes remembered for. Most notably, his feud with his older brother Bret. His Tag Team with his brother-in-law the British Bulldog.

His great technical matches with the same two. And multiple more. His King of the Ring victory, when the KOTR still meant something!

And yes, the downside of everything as well. Austin's broken neck. Owen's death. You take the good with the bad. You merely don't wish to accept all the great that hes accomplished, because you yourself can't get over how you always WANT to remember him.. which is falling to his death, in a gimmick outfit.

Slyfox696

03-24-2008, 03:34 AM

Just because Owen Hart wasn't perfect, or great, doesn't mean he isn't deserving. Umm, actually yes, that is exactly what it means.

This is a Hall of Fame Will, not a Hall of Recognition. To be truly credible, it should only include those people who were the best at what they did. Owen Hart was never the best at what he did.

Owen's job was to go out and entertain the fans to the best of his ability. And, I'm sure he did. His ability just wasn't good enough to get him in the Hall of Fame, whereas someone like Steve Austin's ability or Roddy Piper's ability or The Grand Wizard's ability or Jim Ross's ability is.

But by saying it'd be a disgrace to place him in, is thereby saying hes a disgrace in itself. Isn't it?Not at all. Owen wasn't a disgrace. He went out, did his job, and made a decent living at it.

But, when talking about a Hall of Fame, you're talking about the elite, the very best. And Owen was not.

Depends on how you perceive it. You don't consider him great because he wasn't Main Eventing for years, or receiving tremendous pops. That doesn't mean he never has.

Hes Main Evented several times. Hes received great ovations in his home country, and all over the world. You just look at the "glass" being half empty, and refuse to see that it could be the other way around.No, I don't consider him great because he didn't do his job near as well as others did theirs.

Isn't this what it boils down to though? You aren't in charge of the HoF. They've let downright no-names into the thing, so when looking at it like that, wouldn't Owen Hart be a step (way) above the rest?

When you look at how stupid some of these entries are, how horrible would it be to allow Owen Hart in? Honestly, (as I've been informed) its likely NEVER going to happen due to his Wife anyway.. but seriously, what foul or trouble would it cause to let him in? None.Let's put it this way.

If your best argument for Owen Hart to go in the Hall of Fame, is entirely dependent upon the poor quality of some already in the Hall of Fame, then you should know your position is not justifiable.

Then I'll redirect you. vvvvvv

Everyone in that list I named off didn't do hardly B.S. for the W.W.F. They were big names, some were Main Event-ish, but Owen Hart fits directly into the same type of catagory. All well known, all accomplishing their own specific things.Let me respond to that, in the way that I already have...

"With the exception of only a few, every one of those guys were more deserving than Owen Hart."

So you picked the worst one to be your spokesmen? The Spirit Squad aren't even on the same level as Owen Hart. If you want to drop this low, then yes.. a Main Eventer, be it one time or twenty, is a Main Eventer.No, it just proves there is a difference between main-eventing and being a main-eventer.

The fact is, Owen Hart was a great Superstar. He was admired and loved all over the globe. He was warshipped in Canada. Only in the United States did people not give him the respect he deserved.. and why.. because he was a heel.

Which, also by your logic, means he did his job to perfection. Because he made them boo him. He made them dislike him.But, the problem was that people didn't really boo him. They didn't really cheer him when he was face, and didn't really boo him when he was heel. They really didn't do anything for him. Oh sure, he received decent heat and pops, but you take a Roddy Piper, Hulk Hogan, Bret Hart, Bobby Heenan, Ric Flair, Harley Race, Rock, Steve Austin, Andre the Giant, Sgt. Slaughter, Dusty Rhodes etc., and Owen doesn't compare.

I just named off some of the things Owen has done. I can list a ton that hes remembered for. Most notably, his feud with his older brother Bret. His Tag Team with his brother-in-law the British Bulldog.

His great technical matches with the same two. And multiple more. His King of the Ring victory, when the KOTR still meant something!

And yes, the downside of everything as well. Austin's broken neck. Owen's death. You take the good with the bad. You merely don't wish to accept all the great that hes accomplished, because you yourself can't get over how you always WANT to remember him.. which is falling to his death, in a gimmick outfit.If Owen was so great, how come, at the time of his death, he had worked for the WWF for 9 years, had a brother who was a multiple time WWF champion, had a clean Wrestlemania victory over his brother who would go on to win the title, was put in multiple stables which were over with the fans, and was given numerous tag and IC title runs....if he had all of that, how come he was still working the midcard if he was so great?

Your wrong on this one Will. From every way you look at it, you are wrong.

klunderbunker

03-24-2008, 03:41 AM

TheOneBigWill

03-24-2008, 04:05 AM

Umm, actually yes, that is exactly what it means.

This is a Hall of Fame Will, not a Hall of Recognition. To be truly credible, it should only include those people who were the best at what they did. Owen Hart was never the best at what he did.

Owen's job was to go out and entertain the fans to the best of his ability. And, I'm sure he did. His ability just wasn't good enough to get him in the Hall of Fame, whereas someone like Steve Austin's ability or Roddy Piper's ability or The Grand Wizard's ability or Jim Ross's ability is.

The Grand Wizard? Please tell me you didn't. Thats low. What the hell did this guy ever do to deserve being inducted?

The fact is, Owen Hart WAS just as great as all the rest. Just in different ways. No, he wasn't Main Event calibur like a Steve Austin. No, he wasn't mic worthy, like Jim Ross. But he was one of the best technical stars around. He was one of, if not the best midcard Main Eventer the sport has ever seen.

The fact is, you and I both know the W.W.E.'s Hall of Fame isn't about the best of the best. So why are you fighting Owen Hart's induction? The HoF is shit as is, Owen Hart being added would be a blessing at this point, definately not a curse.

Not at all. Owen wasn't a disgrace. He went out, did his job, and made a decent living at it.

But, when talking about a Hall of Fame, you're talking about the elite, the very best. And Owen was not.

No Sly, when talking about the W.W.E. HoF, you're talking about the most note-worthy. The bigger names. Being the "best" has nothing to do with this HoF, so your debate on that matter has no standing within it. The HoF is already filled with shit.. Owen definately is NOT that, and I have already listed several reasons why he is a prime choice to go in.

Simply because he wasn't the very top, doesn't mean he was the bottom. And again, the HoF is already filled with holes.. Owen isn't a hole, but hes a leap above more than half of them. As such, should be a member.

No, I don't consider him great because he didn't do his job near as well as others did theirs.

Who are these others you speak of? Steve Austin, The Rock? Owen Hart wasn't given the role they were. He wasn't asked to do what they did. Owen did what he was asked, perfectly. He was the shadow, the undercard, the midcard. Owen was the "2nd in command" behind his brother. Its how it has always been, and being 2nd best is still being considered "best."

Let's put it this way.

If your best argument for Owen Hart to go in the Hall of Fame, is entirely dependent upon the poor quality of some already in the Hall of Fame, then you should know your position is not justifiable.

No. My argument is Owen Hart deserves to be in the HoF because hes a note-worthy name, who's accomplished a great deal. As I've said, and I'll repeat. Multi-time Intercontinental Champion. Multi-time Tag Team Champion. (several inductees were brought in, based on singular reigns in each division, Owen's had reigns in both) King of the Ring award winner, when the tournament still meant something.

I guarantee you, when Steve Austin & Triple H. are inducted into the HoF.. on the list of accomplishments for why.. will be "KOTR winner." Just because Owen wasn't ever a World Heavyweight Champion, doesn't mean he never would've been. Its a what if you have to live with. He was still great in several other aspects of the game.

Let me respond to that, in the way that I already have...

"With the exception of only a few, every one of those guys were more deserving than Owen Hart."

So then what are you debating? You, yourself admit the HoF being filled with crap. You, yourself claim it has names in it that don't belong. Are they going to take those names out, because the almighty Sly said so? No. Because (shocking development) they don't give a shit about your opinion.

The fact is, I AGREE that a true HoF should be for the very elite. Your Hogan's, your Austin's, your McMahon's, your Rock's, your HBK's. But this HoF isn't YOUR HoF. So your debate on it being "elite" and "the best of the best" doesn't hold water.

No, it just proves there is a difference between main-eventing and being a main-eventer.

Half the names in their weren't Main Eventers, nor did they even touch it. Owen Hart did. He was considered a prominent Superstar to take the next step into that level. His time was cut short due to an accident.

Look at the history. Owen gets a Main Event push against Bret in 1994, what stops it? Bret was more over, because he was the face and back then, the heels ALWAYS lost. Not Owen's fault. Owen was considered one of the best heels during that era.

1997, Owen Hart gets another Main Event push, what stops it? Bret Hart's feud with Vince McMahon, Owen Hart stays with the company.. they give him a shit storyline with HBK that leads to jobbing, then stick him in with a group of guys claiming the (white) "man" is against them. Irony? I'd say so. Finally, when he should've deserved another shot at Main Eventing, they drop him back into the Blue Blazer gimmick. Unknown as to why, because the storyline was cut short.

But, the problem was that people didn't really boo him. They didn't really cheer him when he was face, and didn't really boo him when he was heel. They really didn't do anything for him. Oh sure, he received decent heat and pops, but you take a Roddy Piper, Hulk Hogan, Bret Hart, Bobby Heenan, Ric Flair, Harley Race, Rock, Steve Austin, Andre the Giant, Sgt. Slaughter, Dusty Rhodes etc., and Owen doesn't compare.

What people? Did you not just read me say he was cheered religiously all over the globe and everywhere except the United States.. all because storylines can turn a crowd against you. The storyline was he loved the world, minus the U.S.A.. best way to make them boo the shit out of you, which they did.

Then, the crap with Bret went down, Owen took the downfall of it. They jobbed him out and stuck him in a group to be forgotten about. None of it was Owen's fault, he was a victim of circumstance.

If Owen was so great, how come, at the time of his death, he had worked for the WWF for 9 years, had a brother who was a multiple time WWF champion, had a clean Wrestlemania victory over his brother who would go on to win the title, was put in multiple stables which were over with the fans, and was given numerous tag and IC title runs....if he had all of that, how come he was still working the midcard if he was so great?

Owen Hart is one of the very best midcard performers out there. And I've listed all the other reasons as to why he likely never got that Main Event push. I'm not trying to discount that perhaps he wasn't "perfect" enough to not deserve it.. but this whole debate is over him deserving a HoF spot.

A spot that several guys have, and deserve, yet haven't touched the Main Event. They perfected their craft at the position they were at. Owen Hart was atop the midcard scene forever, and ruled it.

Your wrong on this one Will. From every way you look at it, you are wrong.

No Sly, I'm not. And if you think I am, then you're reading the wrong debate. Because this one is whether or not "The King of Harts" Owen Hart deserves to be in the World Wrestling Federation Hall of Fame.

NOT the World's Greatest Wrestlers of All Time.. Hall of Fame.

Face facts. This isn't YOUR HoF, Sly. This is everyone's HoF. As such, its a voting system.. your vote is against Owen. Some will side with you, most won't. You lose. Suck it up, be a trooper. And for the love of it all.. just flush already.. you nugget. ;)

rKo0019

03-24-2008, 04:05 AM

Whether or not Owen Hart was "great" by anyone's standards doesn't matter at this point. Everyone has their own opinion of what "great" is...so just drop it.

What we're talking about here is a man, a performer, who worked 300-plus days a year, busted his ass in some of the best technical matches of his time, and was involved in some of the best feuds of his time. He had multiple title reigns, was a King of the Ring, blah blah blah...the point is, the Hall of Fame should be there to recognize persons for their performance and their contribution to the company...regardless of whether they "main-evented" or got "pops," or whatever.

To say that Owen Hart doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame is pretty much saying his contribution to the WWE in his 9 years there was meaningless.

03-24-2008, 04:41 AM

Owen Hart should be in the hall of fame.As already mentioned pointless people(bob orton,rocky mavia etc)get it so why not A decent wrestler like Hart?I,ll admit I,ve seen one owen hart match(Hart and Bulldog vs HBK and Austin) and it was fanatasic.One of my favourite techincal matches of all time.Owen Hart had other great feuds and matches(which I haven,t seen) like Bret vs Owen and there matches at summerslam and wrestlemania.Owen could make any match great.Owen for HOF!

Shadowmancer

03-24-2008, 05:42 AM

The Grand Wizard was a Manager not a wrestler and was Inducted Post-Humously

* The Sheik
* Magnificent Maurice
* Johnny Berend
* Killer Kowalski
* Crazy Luke Graham
* Sgt. Slaughter
* Ernie Ladd
* Ox Baker
* Cowboy Bob Orton
* Don Muraco
* Ken Patera
* Greg Valentine
* Pat Patterson
* Stan Stasiak
* Superstar Billy Graham
* Ivan Koloff
* The Masked Superstar
* Prof. Toru Tanaka
* Mr. Fuji
* Blackjack Mulligan
* Beautiful Bobby
* Pampero Firpo
* Handsome Jimmy Valiant
* 'Cowboy' Bobby Duncum Sr.

That is a List of those who he Managed, I can see quite a few "Great" Wrestlers in there. I Do use the Quotation marks as that seems to be a question in Contention as to what Greatness is. Owen Hart, should be in the Hall of Fame based on the fact that he was really that good at what he did, so did all the names listed there. But as far as I know it is Owen's wife not letting Owen be inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame because of bad blood based on the fact that Owen fell to his death because the WWE were lied to by a technician about his experience in doing this sort of thing. The Guy had said that he had done the stuff for Stings entrances when he dropped from the Rafters. In reality he had done something related to it but not involved in the actual safety side of the Job.

NYSandman

03-24-2008, 09:50 AM

My question in this. Had Owen Hart not died in the ring, after he retired would we still be having this discussion? I think not.

It seems to me that any HOF should only have those persons who were just that, famous. This means they lit the world on fire, and fans of today remember their accomplishments long into the past.

It seems, however, that a lot of people wan't Owen in just because of the way he died. I honestly don't think Owen was great enough to be in the HOF. Yes, he was an EXCELLENT wrestler, and, yes, he had great mic skills and held many titles.

But, was he THAT good? Were his storylines and gimmicks and fan popularity/hatred big enough for him to be included? I think not.

If the WWE decides to put him in, it will probably be for the wrong reasons. Guilt, sympathy and the Hart name.

Slyfox696

03-24-2008, 12:06 PM

So Nikolai Volkoff, Mae Young, Bobo Brazil, Ivan Putski, Johnny Rodz, and Tony Atlas and several others were elite wrestlers or personalities? The idea that this HOF is for the absolute best is just flat out not true.Again, if your argument is that someone should belong in the Hall of Fame simply because of poor quality of others, then your argument fails.

The fact is, Owen Hart WAS just as great as all the rest. Just in different ways. No, he wasn't Main Event calibur like a Steve Austin. No, he wasn't mic worthy, like Jim Ross. But he was one of the best technical stars around. He was one of, if not the best midcard Main Eventer the sport has ever seen.I see.

So, we should start inducting guys because they sure did know how to keep their midcard spot and midcard status with the fans.

Great idea Will.

No Sly, when talking about the W.W.E. HoF, you're talking about the most note-worthy. The bigger names. Being the "best" has nothing to do with this HoF, so your debate on that matter has no standing within it.Being a big name IS what makes someone so good. I mean, using your philosophy, we should kick out Andre the Giant because he didn't put on good technical matches. That's silly.

In professional wrestling, there are two goals, one which follows the other. 1) Entertain the fans so you can... 2) make money.

Owen did neither of those things on a grand scale like most of the people already in. Take away his brother Bret Hart, and what did Owen do that was ever memorable?

Simply because he wasn't the very top, doesn't mean he was the bottom. Just because he isn't on bottom, doesn't mean he belongs with those on top.

Who are these others you speak of? Steve Austin, The Rock? Owen Hart wasn't given the role they were. He wasn't asked to do what they did. Owen did what he was asked, perfectly. He was the shadow, the undercard, the midcard. Owen was the "2nd in command" behind his brother. Its how it has always been, and being 2nd best is still being considered "best."He wasn't given the role because he wasn't good enough. How do you not understand this? And, he was never second best. He was behind Hart, HBK, Austin, Triple H, Undertaker, Mick Foley, Razor Ramon, Yokozuna, The Rock and others, depending upon what year you are talking about.

Being in the undercard making others look good is just fine, a noble job in the wrestling business. But, that doesn't make you Hall of Fame worthy.

No. My argument is Owen Hart deserves to be in the HoF because hes a note-worthy name, who's accomplished a great deal. As I've said, and I'll repeat. Multi-time Intercontinental Champion. Multi-time Tag Team Champion. (several inductees were brought in, based on singular reigns in each division, Owen's had reigns in both) King of the Ring award winner, when the tournament still meant something.All the accomplishments you just named were midcard accomplishments. Accomplishments held by one Shelton Benjamin, minus the KOTR.

Are you telling me that Shelton deserves to be in the HOF as well?

Your best argument, and the one you have used most often, is that and I quote you from above..."When you look at how stupid some of these entries are, how horrible would it be to allow Owen Hart in?". That's a piss bucket argument Will, and yet, it's your best argument.

I guarantee you, when Steve Austin & Triple H. are inducted into the HoF.. on the list of accomplishments for why.. will be "KOTR winner." Just because Owen wasn't ever a World Heavyweight Champion, doesn't mean he never would've been. Its a what if you have to live with. He was still great in several other aspects of the game.That may be. They just also happen to have the credibility of being top draws at some point in their career.

When did Owen do that?

So then what are you debating? You, yourself admit the HoF being filled with crap. You, yourself claim it has names in it that don't belong. Are they going to take those names out, because the almighty Sly said so? No. Because (shocking development) they don't give a shit about your opinion.What the hell are you talking about? You're the one crying about someone not getting in that you feel belong. I'm the one defending the WWE for not having him there.

The fact is, I AGREE that a true HoF should be for the very elite. Your Hogan's, your Austin's, your McMahon's, your Rock's, your HBK's. But this HoF isn't YOUR HoF. So your debate on it being "elite" and "the best of the best" doesn't hold water.And your argument that Owen should be let in because others are is ridiculous.

Look at the history. Owen gets a Main Event push against Bret in 1994, what stops it? Bret was more over, because he was the face and back then, the heels ALWAYS lost. Not Owen's fault. Owen was considered one of the best heels during that era.Just because heels always lost, doesn't mean that heels couldn't be over. Owen wasn't over as a heel.

1997, Owen Hart gets another Main Event push, what stops it? Bret Hart's feud with Vince McMahon, Owen Hart stays with the company.. they give him a shit storyline with HBK that leads to jobbing, then stick him in with a group of guys claiming the (white) "man" is against them. Irony? I'd say so. Finally, when he should've deserved another shot at Main Eventing, they drop him back into the Blue Blazer gimmick. Unknown as to why, because the storyline was cut short.Well, we're pretty certain we know why he was given the Blue Blazer gimmick again.

But, let's put it like this. What does it say about a man who is given multiple main-event pushes and still can't get fans to buy him as a legitimate main-eventer?

What people? Did you not just read me say he was cheered religiously all over the globe and everywhere except the United States.. all because storylines can turn a crowd against you. The storyline was he loved the world, minus the U.S.A.. best way to make them boo the shit out of you, which they did.I didn't say any of that. You're making things up now Will.

Then, the crap with Bret went down, Owen took the downfall of it. They jobbed him out and stuck him in a group to be forgotten about. None of it was Owen's fault, he was a victim of circumstance.Yeah, you're right. Despite the fact that the WWF and Vince McMahon turned on Bret, screwed him, criticized him, and completely buried him, obviously they were the ones who deserved to be mad at Owen.

That makes no sense at all, but then again, most of your argument hasn't.

Owen Hart is one of the very best midcard performers out there. And I've listed all the other reasons as to why he likely never got that Main Event push. I'm not trying to discount that perhaps he wasn't "perfect" enough to not deserve it.. but this whole debate is over him deserving a HoF spot.

A spot that several guys have, and deserve, yet haven't touched the Main Event. They perfected their craft at the position they were at. Owen Hart was atop the midcard scene forever, and ruled it.Again, your argument is based upon the lack of credentials of others already in. That's a terrible argument.

No Sly, I'm not. And if you think I am, then you're reading the wrong debate. Because this one is whether or not "The King of Harts" Owen Hart deserves to be in the World Wrestling Federation Hall of Fame.

NOT the World's Greatest Wrestlers of All Time.. Hall of Fame.

Face facts. This isn't YOUR HoF, Sly. This is everyone's HoF. As such, its a voting system.. your vote is against Owen. Some will side with you, most won't. You lose. Suck it up, be a trooper. And for the love of it all.. just flush already.. you nugget. ;)It's a Hall of Fame Will. It deserves to have the very best in it. This isn't YOUR Hall of Fame, where you can decide to put any midcarder with a couple of titles into it.

This is the WWE Hall of Fame, where people of "fame" deserve to be. Owen's fame is the way he died, not the way he did his job.

Whether or not Owen Hart was "great" by anyone's standards doesn't matter at this point. Everyone has their own opinion of what "great" is...so just drop it.

What we're talking about here is a man, a performer, who worked 300-plus days a year, busted his ass in some of the best technical matches of his time, and was involved in some of the best feuds of his time. He had multiple title reigns, was a King of the Ring, blah blah blah...the point is, the Hall of Fame should be there to recognize persons for their performance and their contribution to the company...regardless of whether they "main-evented" or got "pops," or whatever.

To say that Owen Hart doesn't belong in the Hall of Fame is pretty much saying his contribution to the WWE in his 9 years there was meaningless.So, you agree too that Hacksaw Jim Duggan deserves to be in the Hall of Fame?

How about Shelton Benjamin. If he retired tomorrow, I presume you would be the first one to shout that he should be in the Hall of Fame, correct?

My question in this. Had Owen Hart not died in the ring, after he retired would we still be having this discussion? I think not.I made this biggest, because everyone needs to read it.

You are 100% correct.

Wrestlefan73

03-24-2008, 12:53 PM

My main argument is that if WWE is going to induct Eddie Guerrero into the HOF not even 6 months after he died, then why not Owen? Is the HOF for WWF/E'ers only? If it is then I'll agree that Owen is not HOF material, but neither is over half the HOFers now. Think openly about this: I've read alot where people say because Owen never held a World title he isn't a HOFer? Does the World title REALLY make that much of a difference? Remember David Arquette was the World Champion...... And would Eddie REALLY have been World Champion if Brock Lesnar decided not to quit wrestling?
Compare Owen Hart and Eddie Guerrero. Both started around the same time, Owen in Canada in 1986 and Eddie in Mexico in 1987. Now, the list is way too long so just compare WWF/E championships and accomplishments:
Owen Hart:
WWF European Championship (1 time)
WWF Intercontinental Championship (2 times)
WWF Tag Team Championship (4 times) - with Yokozuna (2), British Bulldog (1) and, Jeff Jarrett (1)
King of the Ring (1994)

Eddie Guerrero:
WWE Championship (1 time)
WWE Tag Team Championship (4 times) - with Chavo Guerrero (2), Tajiri (1) and Rey Mysterio (1)
WWE United States Championship (1 time)
WWF European Championship (2 times)
WWF Intercontinental Championship (2 times)
WWE Hall of Fame (Class of 2006)
The two are almost identical. The US title Eddie held wasn't there when Owen was around, and the World title, again, would Eddie haven been World Champ if Brock didn't leave?

Slyfox696

03-24-2008, 01:03 PM

My main argument is that if WWE is going to induct Eddie Guerrero into the HOF not even 6 months after he died, then why not Owen?Because Eddie was a much bigger draw, much more important, much more over, and much more entertaining than Owen.

Although, his reputation has benefited from dying as well.

Is the HOF for WWF/E'ers only? If it is then I'll agree that Owen is not HOF material, but neither is over half the HOFers now.No, it's not.

Think openly about this: I've read alot where people say because Owen never held a World title he isn't a HOFer? Does the World title REALLY make that much of a difference? Remember David Arquette was the World Champion...... Unless my memory is bad, no one making the argument against Owen has said that.

What I've said is that Owen wasn't a main-eventer, wasn't a good draw, wasn't good on the mic, and contributed little to professional wrestling overall.

MattMoses

03-24-2008, 01:03 PM

Is the HOF for WWF/E'ers only?
Obviously not, since people such as Nick Bockwinkel and Verne Gagne have been inducted.

Think openly about this: I've read alot where people say because Owen never held a World title he isn't a HOFer?

Considering lots of the inductees have never won a World title, I don't think that's the case.

Does the World title REALLY make that much of a difference?

No.

Compare Owen Hart and Eddie Guerrero. Both started around the same time, Owen in Canada in 1986 and Eddie in Mexico in 1987. Now, the list is way too long so just compare WWF/E championships and accomplishments

Do you really think the WWE take into consideration their inductees accomplishments?

Owen Hart:
WWF European Championship (1 time)
WWF Intercontinental Championship (2 times)
WWF Tag Team Championship (4 times) - with Yokozuna (2), British Bulldog (1) and, Jeff Jarrett (1)
King of the Ring (1994)

Eddie Guerrero:
WWE Championship (1 time)
WWE Tag Team Championship (4 times) - with Chavo Guerrero (2), Tajiri (1) and Rey Mysterio (1)
WWE United States Championship (1 time)
WWF European Championship (2 times)
WWF Intercontinental Championship (2 times)
WWE Hall of Fame (Class of 2006)
The two are almost identical. The US title Eddie held wasn't there when Owen was around, and the World title, again, would Eddie haven been World Champ if Brock didn't leave?

What are you trying to show us here? Who won more titles in the WWE? I really don't see what that has to do with the Hall of Fame.

Edit: Goddamn Sly.

You need to look at it this way. There is no guidelines for inductees into the Hall of Fame. It's evident from inductees that amount of titles won, world heavyweight or not, doesn't influence the decision of inductees. How big a draw they was doesn't matter. Wether they reached main event status or not doesn't matter.

Do I think Owen has a chance of being inducted? It's possible, judging from past inductees. Do I think he should be inducted? Probably not. Am I going to quit watching the WWE and get my panties in a twist because Owen hasn't been inducted? No.

I_Like_All_Wrestling

03-24-2008, 01:21 PM

I'm sure Owen as a wrestler was better than most of the other guys on the roster. That however, is not how his character was portrayed. HOF guys should be huge draws and names and people who have amazing accomplishments. Owen is just not one of those guys. If he was not in WWE or had defected to WCW it would have likely made no difference whatsoever. Now, when you read other wrestlers books, they only have good things to say about Owen -- how he was one of the greatest rings workers, professional backstage and generally a great guy all around. That's all fine and great but he really didn't do much to the fans.

I do believe that there are a lot of guys in the HOF who don't necessarily deserve it, but we have to remember that the HOF is a sham and it's really only there for WWE to generate more money.

MattMoses

03-24-2008, 01:29 PM

HOF guys should be huge draws and names and people who have amazing accomplishments.

Then it would be a pretty limited Hall of Fame, wouldn't it?

What's your definition of 'amazing accomplishments'?

Now, when you read other wrestlers books, they only have good things to say about Owen -- how he was one of the greatest rings workers, professional backstage and generally a great guy all around.

Indeed, but I doubt other wrestlers thoughts contribute to the induction process.

I do believe that there are a lot of guys in the HOF who don't necessarily deserve it, but we have to remember that the HOF is a sham and it's really only there for WWE to generate more money.

I doubt they generate that much money from it. Remember, it's not like they release a DVD on its own, it's included with the yearly WrestleMania DVD.

It seems like it's more of Vince's personal Hall of Fame more than anything.

Pickle

03-24-2008, 02:10 PM

Owen Hart = Ted DiBiase

Both were gifted technical wrestlers who were put in heel positions most of their careers to make the faces look good.

Both were main-eventing for 1-2 years of their WWE careers, before just becoming permanent upper-midcarders.

DiBiase is remembered for kicking a basketball and buying the WWE title, Owen is remembered for kicking his brothers leg out and a 5-star match in which he almost won the title.

If Owen doesn't deserve to go in than neither does DiBiase.

MattMoses

03-24-2008, 02:29 PM

Both were main-eventing for 1-2 years of their WWE careers, before just becoming permanent upper-midcarders.

Owen was main eventing for two years? When was this? Owen was a permanent upper-midcarder? When was this?

If Owen doesn't deserve to go in than neither does DiBiase.

How so? DiBiase had been wrestling since 1975, has had many highly acclaimed feuds, is widely considered among the greatest heels of all time, won numerous championships from the NWA to WWF to AWJP, and has managed some of the biggest names in the wrestling industry. Rarely did he descend lower than an upper-midcard position throughout his wrestling career.

Again, this whole thing is subjective, but I can't for the god in me wonder why you would compare Ted DiBiase to Owen Hart.

John87

03-24-2008, 02:43 PM

those of you who bash Owen cause he was a midcarder are misguided. Owen was an amazing talent and deserves his spot with his brother Bret. And also to let you know, he was due for a WWE championship run. why the hell do you think Triple H took his spot? he cared more about Owen more than the other talent did. so he stepped up and did this for him. he even said it himself, the name of "The Game" was suppose to be for Owen. Everything HHH accomplished in the beginning was suppose to be Owen. so think before you talk. he was obviously something if that was suppose to happen.

MattMoses

03-24-2008, 02:49 PM

those of you who bash Owen cause he was a midcarder are misguided.

I'm not misguided and I'm not bashing him. It's a fact that he was a midcarder for the large majority of his career.

And also to let you know, he was due for a WWE championship run.

But face the facts - it never happened. Due or not.

he even said it himself, the name of "The Game" was suppose to be for Owen. Everything HHH accomplished in the beginning was suppose to be Owen.

Again, it never happened. Are they going to induct him into the Hall of Fame based on something that was meant for him, but never happened?

so think before you talk. he was obviously something if that was suppose to happen.

Once again, it didn't happen. They aren't going to induct him for something that never happened.

John87

03-24-2008, 02:54 PM

I'm not misguided and I'm not bashing him. It's a fact that he was a midcarder for the large majority of his career.

But face the facts - it never happened. Due or not.

Again, it never happened. Are they going to induct him into the Hall of Fame based on something that was meant for him, but never happened?

Once again, it didn't happen. They aren't going to induct him for something that never happened.

but why wouldnt they still induct him? they inducted other mid carders. not everyone of those superstars in the hall of fame ever became a wwe champion if not never holding a championship and they are still in it. Its WWE.

Wrestlefan73

03-24-2008, 02:54 PM

that[/I] much money from it. Remember, it's not like they release a DVD on its own, it's included with the yearly WrestleMania DVD.

It seems like it's more of Vince's personal Hall of Fame more than anything.

That's why the HOF is a complete sham. It's ALL about Vince making money. Verne Gagne couldn't stand Vince and said as much at his HOF induction. Vince inducted Verne because Vince wanted to buy the AWA's video library to make DvDs to.....make money. Vince inducted the Von Erichs because Vince wanted to buy the World Class video library to make DvDs to.....make money. Now Eddie Graham is being inducted. I'll bet anything we're going to see a DvD about Championship Wrestling from Florida before too long.

Derf

03-24-2008, 03:00 PM

I never watched wrestling during Owens time. But based on the arguments I've seen so far, I will have to say I think he deserves to be in the WWE Hall of Fame. And the key words there is "WWE". Their hall of fame is ment for people that the fans remember and have memories of. Some HOF'ers were great, some were medium, some were awful, and then you have Pete Rose.
Owen Hart's fame may have jumped from his death, but so what? If that made his name that much more known, more the reason to induct him IMO. Sly said it has to do with name value? Who the hell is Peter Miavia?!?! Until a few weeks ago, I'd never heard of the guy! I'm sure Sly will agree that alot of the people in the WWE Hall of Fame wouldn't go into a real Hall of Fame, but at the same time, some people will never go into the WWE HOF, even though they were the best at what they do (Savage and Benoit for example). The point od this thread is that we want Owne Hart in the WWE Hall of Fame. And if we had a poll here, I garentee that Owen being in would be ALOT higher than him being excluded.

MattMoses

03-24-2008, 03:02 PM

but why wouldnt they still induct him? they inducted other mid carders. not everyone of those superstars in the hall of fame ever became a wwe champion if not never holding a championship and they are still in it. Its WWE.

Personally, I don't think his career was Hall of Fame worthy. It's nothing to do with titles or accomplishments. I enjoyed watching Owen, but like some of the people already inducted, I just don't feel his career screams 'Hall of Fame' to me.

That's why the HOF is a complete sham. It's ALL about Vince making money. Verne Gagne couldn't stand Vince and said as much at his HOF induction. Vince inducted Verne because Vince wanted to buy the AWA's video library to make DvDs to.....make money. Vince inducted the Von Erichs because Vince wanted to buy the World Class video library to make DvDs to.....make money. Now Eddie Graham is being inducted. I'll bet anything we're going to see a DvD about Championship Wrestling from Florida before too long.

In the end, who cares? If Vince is buying these video libraries, at least there's a glimmer of hope we will one day see some footage from them, instead of all the tapes lying in some basement where they're no good and never going to be seen. If that's the sole reason Vince is inducting them people, more power to him. At least we get to see some of this classic wrestling stuff.

I_Like_All_Wrestling

03-24-2008, 03:06 PM

And also to let you know, he was due for a WWE championship run. why the hell do you think Triple H took his spot? he cared more about Owen more than the other talent did.

Are you saying that HHH our of the kindness of his heart decided that he would take Owen's title runs? What a nice thing for him to do.

People are not bashing Owen. But just like you said, it's what he was going to do, and those are things that didn't actually happen. Owen is no Jake the Snake, he's no Million Dollar Man, he's no Roddy Piper. And you know what, yeah, he probably is a better wrestler than those three, but he just didn't accomplish anything that significant or do anything to distinguish his character.

klunderbunker

03-24-2008, 04:05 PM

Sly, answer something for me. Why should people like Mae Young, Volkoff, Rocky Johnson, Peter Maivia, Arnold Skaaland, Bobo Brazil, or the JYD belong in the HOF?

Slyfox696

03-24-2008, 04:07 PM

Sly, answer something for me. Why should people like Mae Young, Volkoff, Rocky Johnson, Peter Maivia, Arnold Skaaland, Bobo Brazil, or the JYD belong in the HOF?I want you to understand something.

The credentials of other people, do not determine the credentials of Owen. I could explain why some of those should be in, and why some of those should not. But, it doesn't matter. We're not talking about them, we're talking about Owen.

Just because others are in with poor accomplishments, that does not mean that someone else should be in with slightly better accomplishments.

klunderbunker

03-24-2008, 04:13 PM

I'm not talking about Owen I'm talking about the HOF in general and what you said about it being for only the elite. Owen wasn't elite whatsoever, no question from me about that. Owen had an above average career, therefore based on the other inductions he should be in.

TheOneBigWill

03-24-2008, 04:58 PM

I see.

So, we should start inducting guys because they sure did know how to keep their midcard spot and midcard status with the fans.

Great idea Will.

I'm not saying Owen Hart should be in, because some other lack-luster names have been tossed in. I AM saying I don't see what it could hurt, when hes clearly a bigger draw and a bigger name than half those already inducted though.

And so what, if the guy was the top of the midcard for his entire career, then he was the best at that position. They induct Tag Teams for being quote unquote - "the best." But I guarantee you some of those teams definately don't deserve to be in there, when you compare them with other teams that could be.

Being a big name IS what makes someone so good. I mean, using your philosophy, we should kick out Andre the Giant because he didn't put on good technical matches. That's silly.

No, using YOUR philosophy, we should kick out Andre the Giant. Because he didn't hold any Championships, and was merely a "known name" in the business. THAT'S silly.

In professional wrestling, there are two goals, one which follows the other. 1) Entertain the fans so you can... 2) make money.

Owen did neither of those things on a grand scale like most of the people already in. Take away his brother Bret Hart, and what did Owen do that was ever memorable?

Yeah, and take away Hulk Hogan's Hulkamania years, Austin's Rattlesnake years, and The Rock's "eyebrow" and we're in the same spot. The fact is, everyone gets famous for something. Owen just got famous off his brother's name, then made a name for himself as the shadow. Its not a bad thing.

Owen Hart became known to the wrestling world as "The King of Harts" the moment he won the King of the Ring. He became one of the top heels in the business from 1994-1996. I'd say those are big moments. He played a HUGE role in the Border War, and people wanted to lynch him. I'd say that was pretty over.

He wasn't given the role because he wasn't good enough. How do you not understand this? And, he was never second best. He was behind Hart, HBK, Austin, Triple H, Undertaker, Mick Foley, Razor Ramon, Yokozuna, The Rock and others, depending upon what year you are talking about.

1994: Bret Hart & the Undertaker were the two top faces. Owen Hart was the top heel. Shawn Michaels, the Million Dollar Man and others were up there as well, but it was Owen's feud with Bret that was the biggest and best story of that year.

So big, that everyone was waiting and assuming Owen would finally defeat Bret to win the WWF Championship.

Being in the undercard making others look good is just fine, a noble job in the wrestling business. But, that doesn't make you Hall of Fame worthy.

:rolleyes: He was the best midcarder. ie. Best at his position, it deserves a spot.

All the accomplishments you just named were midcard accomplishments. Accomplishments held by one Shelton Benjamin, minus the KOTR.

Are you telling me that Shelton deserves to be in the HOF as well?

You act like the KOTR tournament wasn't a big accomplishment back then. That helped push Owen into his first big break. Look at the list of names he shares in those victories. Bret Hart, Steve Austin, Edge. YES, there were duds, Billy Gunn & Mabel.. but Owen wasn't a dud.

Shelton hasn't done half of what Owen has, as it relates with getting over either. 100 guys could probably have similar accomplishments, and Owen Hart holds more Championship reigns than some of those in the HoF.. so Championships don't mean a tremendous amount, however you're trying to disprove the fact that Owen wasn't a big star from 1994-1997, and beyond. When he was.

He deserves in for that. And I promise you, if he ever did get inducted, they'd run the clips from those years and push his feud with Bret as being one of the very best feuds of all time.

Your best argument, and the one you have used most often, is that and I quote you from above..."When you look at how stupid some of these entries are, how horrible would it be to allow Owen Hart in?". That's a piss bucket argument Will, and yet, it's your best argument.

No, you just fail to look at the other arguments because you know they're better and true. Owen Hart - 1994, Owen Hart - 1997. Arguably his best two years, and he was a top heel in the business. He WAS over, and that along with his accomplishments are what push him to deserve in.

That may be. They just also happen to have the credibility of being top draws at some point in their career.

When did Owen do that?

1994-1997. That span is when he was huge. Again, top heel in 1994, one of the top heels in 1997.

Just because heels always lost, doesn't mean that heels couldn't be over. Owen wasn't over as a heel.

See above.

Well, we're pretty certain we know why he was given the Blue Blazer gimmick again.

But, let's put it like this. What does it say about a man who is given multiple main-event pushes and still can't get fans to buy him as a legitimate main-eventer?

Why was he given the Blue Blazer gimmick again then?

And do you just block out 1994-1997 because Hulk Hogan wasn't on top? I think you honestly do, because your memory sucks of what Owen Hart did during that time.

It's a Hall of Fame Will. It deserves to have the very best in it. This isn't YOUR Hall of Fame, where you can decide to put any midcarder with a couple of titles into it.

This is the WWE Hall of Fame, where people of "fame" deserve to be. Owen's fame is the way he died, not the way he did his job.

Well, then Enough is enough and its time for a change. :p

And you just said it yourself. the WWE HoF is where people of "fame" deserve to be in. Owen Hart, be it his death or otherwise, became famous. So even if you want to be dull-headed enough and simple-minded enough to think his death was all that got him "over," or you wish to look at the facts of everything he did that were more than good enough. Owen Hart deserves to be in.

klunderbunker

03-24-2008, 05:06 PM

I had forgotten the border war for the most part. Owen did play a major role in that as well, just as he did in 1994. He's definitely not one of the all time best, but he is definitely better than some of the guys that are already in. You can base that on time spent in the main event or upper midcard, titles, fan reaction, legacy. Anyway you look at it, based on a combination of what Owen did and the apparent requirements for induction, Owen Hart is a Hall of Famer.

Slyfox696

03-24-2008, 06:20 PM

And so what, if the guy was the top of the midcard for his entire career, then he was the best at that position. They induct Tag Teams for being quote unquote - "the best." But I guarantee you some of those teams definately don't deserve to be in there, when you compare them with other teams that could be.Being the best of the midcard, is like having the most home runs for a minor league baseball player.

Congratulations, but your still not a big time player.

No, using YOUR philosophy, we should kick out Andre the Giant. Because he didn't hold any Championships, and was merely a "known name" in the business. THAT'S silly.Except that Andre was a main-event worker, adored by fans all over the world, was a mega drawn, and was one of the most entertaining workers in the history of wrestling.

No, under MY philosophy, Andre is in.

Yeah, and take away Hulk Hogan's Hulkamania years, Austin's Rattlesnake years, and The Rock's "eyebrow" and we're in the same spot. The fact is, everyone gets famous for something. Owen just got famous off his brother's name, then made a name for himself as the shadow. Its not a bad thing.
[/quote]The difference is that Hogan, Austin and, Rock all HAD those moments which set them out from everyone else.

Owen's moment vaunted him right into the middle of the pack as a career midcarder.

:rolleyes: He was the best midcarder. ie. Best at his position, it deserves a spot.The Brooklyn Brawler was the best jobber the WWE ever had. So, should he be in the WWE Hall of Fame?

Hacksaw Jim Duggan is the best jobber the WWE has right now. Should he be in the Hall of Fame?

You act like the KOTR tournament wasn't a big accomplishment back then. That helped push Owen into his first big break. Look at the list of names he shares in those victories. Bret Hart, Steve Austin, Edge. YES, there were duds, Billy Gunn & Mabel.. but Owen wasn't a dud.With the exception of Bret, none of those guys were main-eventers when they won. Instead, the KOTR was supposed to be a tournament which helped make midcarders into upper midcarders in the eyes of the fans.

Thus, it was still a midcard tournament.

Shelton hasn't done half of what Owen has, as it relates with getting over either. 100 guys could probably have similar accomplishments, and Owen Hart holds more Championship reigns than some of those in the HoF.. so Championships don't mean a tremendous amount, however you're trying to disprove the fact that Owen wasn't a big star from 1994-1997, and beyond. When he was.

He deserves in for that. And I promise you, if he ever did get inducted, they'd run the clips from those years and push his feud with Bret as being one of the very best feuds of all time.Shelton holds many of the same titles, and was every bit as over in 2005 as Owen was at any time.

But, I agree, Shelton should not be in. But, then again, neither should Owen.

Why was he given the Blue Blazer gimmick again then?Reportedly it was because he refused to do a storyline, which would involve him having an affair with Jarrett's valet Debra. Owen didn't want to do it because he was a family man.

And do you just block out 1994-1997 because Hulk Hogan wasn't on top? I think you honestly do, because your memory sucks of what Owen Hart did during that time.Hulk Hogan was on top. In fact, he was ruling the wrestling world.

However, I think your opinion of Owen is clouding your judgment of his abilities.

And you just said it yourself. the WWE HoF is where people of "fame" deserve to be in. Owen Hart, be it his death or otherwise, became famous. So even if you want to be dull-headed enough and simple-minded enough to think his death was all that got him "over," or you wish to look at the facts of everything he did that were more than good enough. Owen Hart deserves to be in.He's famous today because he died. Not because of his accomplishments in wrestling.

Soul Reaper

03-24-2008, 06:45 PM

WWE always put people in the hall of fame who dont deserve it like Bob Orton, Pete Rose, Junkyard Dog, and there are lots more. Owen accomplished more than Curt Hennig and Curt is in the Hall of Fame so why shouldn't Owen be in the Hall of Fame. Bob Orton never won a wwe title and he is in the Hall of Fame. Ernie Ladd never won a wwe title either but he is in the Hall of Fame. So if all these people are in the hall of fame why shouldn't Owen Hart

MattMoses

03-24-2008, 06:51 PM

WWE always put people in the hall of fame who dont deserve it like Junkyard Dog

What on earth? Why doesn't the JYD deserve his place in the Hall of Fame?

Owen accomplished more than Curt Hennig and Curt is in the Hall of Fame so why shouldn't Owen be in the Hall of Fame.

Including accomplishments outside the WWE, Curt accomplished more. But I thought people knew that amount of title wins doesn't really matter to be inducted into the Hall of Fame.

So if all these people are in the hall of fame why shouldn't Owen Hart

Because he hasn't been picked by Vince McMahon.

TheOneBigWill

03-24-2008, 07:12 PM

Being the best of the midcard, is like having the most home runs for a minor league baseball player.

Congratulations, but your still not a big time player.

Just because you aren't "in the big league" doesn't mean you aren't talented enough to be there. There are reasons for everything. One of them, you said yourself below. "Owen refused to do a storyline."

Because of that, he likely wasn't viewed very well.

Except that Andre was a main-event worker, adored by fans all over the world, was a mega drawn, and was one of the most entertaining workers in the history of wrestling.

Andre wouldn't of been anything without his size. He was more or less loved by everyone, because he was "unique".. not because he had any talent.

The difference is that Hogan, Austin and, Rock all HAD those moments which set them out from everyone else.

Owen's moment vaunted him right into the middle of the pack as a career midcarder.

He was still one of the very best at what he did. Induct him for being a great Tag Team worker. Induct him for being a tremendous midcarder. Hell, induct him along with the British Bulldog & Jim Neidhart as a member of the Hart Foundation, which was considered one of the greatest factions (not to mention wrestling Family's) of all time.

The Brooklyn Brawler was the best jobber the WWE ever had. So, should he be in the WWE Hall of Fame?

Hacksaw Jim Duggan is the best jobber the WWE has right now. Should he be in the Hall of Fame?

Sadly, you & I both know the W.W.E. would likely put both Jim Duggan (for winning the first Royal Rumble) and the Brawler (for being an incredible jobber) in the HoF.

Why? Because the W.W.E. doesn't think like you or I. They do things there own way. You said yourself there are several guys you wouldn't of put in, but they're in there, aren't they? Thereby showing that they don't follow your standards of excellence.

With the exception of Bret, none of those guys were main-eventers when they won. Instead, the KOTR was supposed to be a tournament which helped make midcarders into upper midcarders in the eyes of the fans.

Thus, it was still a midcard tournament.

The tournament did help push Owen Hart into becoming a Main Event player. But look at what happened during everything.

Owen won, received a Championship match and won "feud of the year" from P.W.I. magazine. (in 1994) In 1995, the Main Event scene changed to Kevin Nash, because of Vince's "bigger = better" theory. As a result, Bret was pushed down to midcard.. and Owen never stood a chance against Kevin Nash, as McMahon never viewed smaller wrestlers as good.

It wasn't Owen's fault he wasn't 7 ft. It wasn't Owen's fault he didn't weigh over 300lbs. And it definately wasn't Owen's fault that McMahon didn't see talent over size.

Shelton holds many of the same titles, and was every bit as over in 2005 as Owen was at any time.

But, I agree, Shelton should not be in. But, then again, neither should Owen.

I'm not saying you can't argue Owen Hart being in the Hall of Fame. Argue all you want. You host many theories that make sense. But I AM saying do not try to tell me, "I" can't argue or want Owen Hart in, because I have many points as well.

We're clearly not going to agree on things. You have your reasons for why you DON'T want him in. I have mine, for why I DO. You don't agree with my reasons, I don't agree with yours. As you can tell from others in this thread, many feel he should and shouldn't be in. Its a matter of opinion.

Reportedly it was because he refused to do a storyline, which would involve him having an affair with Jarrett's valet Debra. Owen didn't want to do it because he was a family man.

I see. So whats that say? Owen sucked? No.

It says the man had values, and McMahon shit on them by placing him in the worst possibly situation, for not doing what he wanted. So what if Owen didn't want to do a specific storyline.

There were many issues with wrestlers not wanting to do certain things. Hogan didn't want to job to Shawn Michaels at Summerslam. Shawn Michaels didn't want to lose the Championship to Bret Hart in 97. Bret Hart didn't want to job to Shawn Michaels in his hometown.

Does that mean all of them sucked? No. It means that they had opinions on what THEY wanted, and they had their own reasons and values for why they didn't want to do things.

The difference. Hogan, Bret & H.B.K. were all bigger names than Owen Hart. And had McMahon tried the same shit with them, he would've f'ed himself. (then again, there was that Mr. America storyline that was just horrible)

Hulk Hogan was on top. In fact, he was ruling the wrestling world.

Didn't the World Wrestling Federation own in the ratings until 1996, when Kevin Nash & Scott Hall debuted and started the n.W.o. stuff? Meaning Hulk Hogan wasn't on top.. he was merely waiting until he went back, by riding someone else there.

However, I think your opinion of Owen is clouding your judgment of his abilities.

Maybe so. But your opinion of Hulk Hogan does the same. To each their own.

He's famous today because he died. Not because of his accomplishments in wrestling.

So Eddie Guerrero deserved to be inducted the year of his death? While I AGREE that Eddie Guerrero deserved to be in.. should it of really happened THAT year? No.. but it did, because of ratings.

Everyone would've pushed hard for Owen Hart to be inducted the same year he died, had they of publicly did the HoF show on television.

Alex(Killer Of Dreams & Legends)

03-24-2008, 07:26 PM

Now im not saying that owen hart was not a great wrestler... if the wwe did induct him it may bring up some unwanted memories of his death ... and in my opinon they should have not inducted eddie before owen but besides the point he was good at what he did but he did not have as many rememrable matches .... amd at this point in time they are inducting people who were ground breakers and in the ground breaking matches ... but everyone needs to settle down owen will get in .... just maybe not as soon as people want . there is no need for a boycott . plus the way owen went out vince probly dose not want to do all the leagal trouble plus he might be upset bout all the money owen cost him and his company . and owen did not help give us people like the rock or people like rko thats y bob orton is in curt henning was just perfect so they put him in plus he was a awa world champion and wcw so he was more reknown than owen

Slyfox696

03-24-2008, 11:11 PM

Just because you aren't "in the big league" doesn't mean you aren't talented enough to be there. There are reasons for everything. One of them, you said yourself below.

Because of that, he likely wasn't viewed very well.So? How does that change what he actually did?

Andre wouldn't of been anything without his size. He was more or less loved by everyone, because he was "unique".. not because he had any talent.That's a crock and you know it. Andre had an ability to make fans all over the world love him.

C'mon Will, you're grasping at straws now.

He was still one of the very best at what he did. So is Hacksaw Jim Duggan.

The tournament did help push Owen Hart into becoming a Main Event player. But look at what happened during everything.

And it definately wasn't Owen's fault that McMahon didn't see talent over size.Hasn't this argument been debunked enough times for people to understand the ludicrousy of it?

Vince doesn't prefer size. Vince prefers those who are going to make him money. It's WRESTLING FANS who prefer size.

I see. So whats that say? Owen sucked? No.

It says the man had values, and McMahon shit on them by placing him in the worst possibly situation, for not doing what he wanted. So what if Owen didn't want to do a specific storyline.What are you ranting about here? No one said anything bad about Owen here. Go back and read what we're talking about.

The difference. Hogan, Bret & H.B.K. were all bigger names than Owen Hart. Exactly.

Maybe so. But your opinion of Hulk Hogan does the same. To each their own.I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that Hulk Hogan wasn't over in 4 different companies around the world, the biggest draw in wrestling as a face, and the biggest draw in wrestling as a heel, and the biggest draw in wrestling period.

When was the myth debunked?

So Eddie Guerrero deserved to be inducted the year of his death? While I AGREE that Eddie Guerrero deserved to be in.. should it of really happened THAT year? No.. but it did, because of ratings.Who said Eddie ever deserved to be inducted in the first place?

Everyone would've pushed hard for Owen Hart to be inducted the same year he died, had they of publicly did the HoF show on television.Which only serves to further my point, which is that Owen is being screamed to be put in the Hall of Fame based upon his death, and not his life.

Shadowmancer

03-25-2008, 05:59 AM

I wasn't aware that Hulk Hogan wasn't over in 4 different companies around the world

Just a quick Question here, what company was the fourth? I know there is the WWF/E, WCW and the AWA. Are you saying the fourth is NJPW, he didn't carry the company which he did for the other 3. He got over but not to the same degree as he did in the other 3.

Anyway can we end this argument because we all know that Owen Hart is not going to be inducted whether deservedly or not because his widow holds a grudge against the WWE.

The Real Call to arms would be for Wrestling Fans to try and get Bruno Sammartino to agree to be honoured by the WWE and accept the invitation into the WWE Hall of Fame. He may not agree with the way that Pro Wrestling is now conducted at the top level in America, but he was still a key figure in the History of the Company and should be publically honoured by the Company for 11 years as champ and more as a Wrestler in the company.

klunderbunker

03-25-2008, 08:36 AM

That's true about Sammartino, but the problem is with the HOF in general. The problem is that there is no criteria to be inducted and that it is more or less people that Vince or the people in charge thinks deserves in. What I'm worried about is that WWE may try to posthumously induct him, which to me would be the most disrespectful thing of all.

Slyfox696

03-25-2008, 08:53 AM

Just a quick Question here, what company was the fourth? I know there is the WWF/E, WCW and the AWA. Are you saying the fourth is NJPW, he didn't carry the company which he did for the other 3. He got over but not to the same degree as he did in the other 3.He was still very much over, and was still a big draw. You don't work with guys like Inoki regularly if you are not very much over.

The Real Call to arms would be for Wrestling Fans to try and get Bruno Sammartino to agree to be honoured by the WWE and accept the invitation into the WWE Hall of Fame. He may not agree with the way that Pro Wrestling is now conducted at the top level in America, but he was still a key figure in the History of the Company and should be publically honoured by the Company for 11 years as champ and more as a Wrestler in the company.I agree completely with this, but there's really nothing that anyone can do about it besides Bruno.

That's true about Sammartino, but the problem is with the HOF in general. The problem is that there is no criteria to be inducted and that it is more or less people that Vince or the people in charge thinks deserves in. That's not what is keeping Bruno out though.

But yes, it's about Vince or people in charge who thinks they deserve in. How is that different from any other Hall of Fame in the country?

What I'm worried about is that WWE may try to posthumously induct him, which to me would be the most disrespectful thing of all.If they cannot get someone who is kin to agree to induct him, they will not do it.

klunderbunker

03-25-2008, 09:08 AM

I know that at least a large part of what's keeping him out is his hate of the current product. It's different in that on other HOFs there are committees who vote on who they feel deserves to be in. People such as members of the media, other HOF members and people who are considered experts on the sport. Also in other HOFs there are benchmarks because athletes have stats which wrestling doesn't have. I hadn't thought about the relatives not agreeing to it. I don't know how comfortable his son is with the idea but hopefully he wouldn't do it.

Slyfox696

03-25-2008, 09:20 AM

I know that at least a large part of what's keeping him out is his hate of the current product. No, it's the only part.

It's different in that on other HOFs there are committees who vote on who they feel deserves to be in. People such as members of the media, other HOF members and people who are considered experts on the sport.Umm...that's pretty much how the WWE Hall of Fame is conducted as well.

Also in other HOFs there are benchmarks because athletes have stats which wrestling doesn't have.Sure they do. Titles, Title runs, drawing, moneymaking, number of great matches, number of great fueds, length of career, time on top of the card, overall entertainment value....plenty of "stats".

klunderbunker

03-25-2008, 09:51 AM

Slyfox696

03-25-2008, 09:54 AM

That very well may be how the WWE HOF is run, but there are still people that should be in more than likely never will be because of Vince's personal feelings for them or vice versa. That's very true about wrestlers having statistics, but not all of them are concrete. My overall opinion is that there are major flaws in the way the HOF inducts members and that there needs to be a concrete way of choosing inductees.How is that any different from the way Major League Baseball operates? I mean, Pete Rose will never get in, neither will Joe Jackson, Mark McGwire, and there's a very good chance Barry Bonds, the greatest offensive player in the history of the game, may not get in.

Politics plays a part of every Hall of Fame.

klunderbunker

03-25-2008, 10:00 AM

xfearbefore

03-25-2008, 10:07 AM

To begin with, to say Bonds is the best offensive player ever is just flat out wrong.

What?! Are you kidding me? I'm pretty sure those 700+ HRs and all of those HOF stats would beg to disagree with you. If Barry Bonds isn't the greatest offensive player of all time, then who the fuck is?

But Sly, what up with all the Owen hate? Of course people love him more now that he's dead then when he was alive, thats what happens to any celebrity or athlete, theres nothing we can do about that. But do you truly feel that Owen doesn't deserve to be in the HOF? After all he did for and in the company?

Shit, his feud with his brother alone qualifies him for the HOF IMO. You can't deny he was one of the company's biggest heels for a while, and his feud with Bret was a good draw.

Besides, the WWE HOF is a joke anyways. If fucking Rocky Johnson, who never accomplished anything noteworthy and is only being inducted because of the color of his skin, can be inducted, I think we can agree that Owen deserves to be in there.

Shit, if Rocky Johnson deserves the HOF, so does Barry Horowitz.

Who's joining me on the Barry Horowitz for WWE HOF bandwagon?

klunderbunker

03-25-2008, 10:13 AM

Babe Ruth is. You said best offensive player. Ruth had 714 home runs and a .342 average which is almost 50 points ahead of bonds, in 500 fewer games. Ruth also pitched for 9 years which would take away hundreds of hit at bats in his prime years earlier in his career. Not to mention that the ball parks ruth played in were freaking huge. It was damn near impossible to hit balls out back then. It was a completely different era and he revolutionized the game. Bonds is definitely a great offensive player, but to say he's the best ever is a joke. His batting title came under different rules than Ruth's. Ruth had inferior equipment, tougher competition, far better stats, and did it in less time. It's not even close.

Slyfox696

03-25-2008, 10:28 AM

To begin with, to say Bonds is the best offensive player ever is just flat out wrong. Those people you named more than likely never will be in the HOF but not so much because of politics, but because they broke various rules and are being penalized for it.What rule did Pete Rose break as a player? What rule did Barry Bonds break? What rule did Mark McGwire break.

You're wrong. None of those three broke any rules of baseball during their playing days.

But Sly, what up with all the Owen hate? Of course people love him more now that he's dead then when he was alive, thats what happens to any celebrity or athlete, theres nothing we can do about that. But do you truly feel that Owen doesn't deserve to be in the HOF? After all he did for and in the company?

Shit, his feud with his brother alone qualifies him for the HOF IMO. You can't deny he was one of the company's biggest heels for a while, and his feud with Bret was a good draw.

Besides, the WWE HOF is a joke anyways. If fucking Rocky Johnson, who never accomplished anything noteworthy and is only being inducted because of the color of his skin, can be inducted, I think we can agree that Owen deserves to be in there.

Shit, if Rocky Johnson deserves the HOF, so does Barry Horowitz.

Who's joining me on the Barry Horowitz for WWE HOF bandwagon?Owen Hart isn't deserving. I think I've properly explained my position. There are PLENTY of people out there more deserving the Owen, and always will be.

Take away Owen's feud with Bret, and you have NOTHING memorable about Owen's career. He was always second fiddle otherwise, always a step behind the main-event. Based on his current body of work, he doesn't deserve it.

Babe Ruth is. You said best offensive player. Ruth had 714 home runs and a .342 average which is almost 50 points ahead of bonds, in 500 fewer games. Ruth also pitched for 9 years which would take away hundreds of hit at bats in his prime years earlier in his career.
Not to mention that the ball parks ruth played in were freaking huge.Yes, it's so hard for a left handed batter to hit a home run out of Yankee Stadium. :rolleyes:

It was damn near impossible to hit balls out back then. It was a completely different era and he revolutionized the game. Bonds is definitely a great offensive player, but to say he's the best ever is a joke. His batting title came under different rules than Ruth's. Ruth had inferior equipment, tougher competition, far better stats, and did it in less time. It's not even close.Some things you need to remember here.

Pitcher quality was not as good as you are making out to be. There was no such thing as a slider during Ruth's time, there was no such thing as relief pitchers, and Babe Ruth was hitting in one of the fiercest lineups to ever play the game. Hell, the year he hit 60 HR, Lou Gehrig batted .373 and had 47 HR batting behind him. You going to try and tell me that Jeff Kent and Moises Alou had that kind of production?

Barry Bonds also has 500 steals to his name, the only person to be in the 500/500 club. He is the single season, and all-time leader in HR. He holds the single season record for walks. And he's done a lot of that playing parks that are just as unfriendly, if not more so, to left handed hitters than parks that Ruth played in.

When Babe Ruth was at the plate, he was dangerous. When he got on the bases, not as much. When Bonds was at the plate, he was every bit as dangerous as Ruth, not to mention much more likely to take a double or triple than Ruth ever was. And when Bonds was on the base paths, he was just as big of a threat to score as he was at the plate.

I hate Barry Bonds, but to call him anything other than the best offensive player ever is silly.

klunderbunker

03-25-2008, 10:44 AM

Rose bet on the game, which he has admitted, which means lifetime banishment from the game. Bonds has tested postive for amphetimines (sp) and has stated he unknowingly used steriods. McGwire took Andro, which is a banned substance.

I will give you the Yankee Stadium argument. Absolutely people like Kent and Alou aren't on that level, but Ruth often didn't have that kind of talent around him. For the first half of his career until around the mid 20s the talent around him was average at best. It should also be noted that rules for hitting home runs were different in Ruth's era. A ball that either hit the foul pole or hooked foul after going fair was considered foul. In just 1927, Ruth should have been credited with 104 home runs. Ruth wasn't as good of a base stealer as bonds that's true. As for walks, Bonds has more walks due to the hitters that were coming behind him. Ruth was on the murderer's row making walking him a nearly pointless idea, which isn't his fault. Ruth has about 100 fewer doubles, and more triples than bonds did in about 5/6 of the amount of games. Another factor is the amount of teams that played in Ruth's era. In 1927 for example, there were 8 teams in the American League. The talent is much more spread out today. It'd be like taking the Giants and Dodgers and putting their rosters together with only the best players getting spots. It allows for lower levels of talent to be on the roster. I also hate Bonds, but he simply wasn't as good of an offensive player.

Slyfox696

03-25-2008, 01:21 PM

Rose bet on the game, which he has admitted, which means lifetime banishment from the game. As a manager. That has nothing to do with his playing career.

Bonds has tested postive for amphetimines (sp) and has stated he unknowingly used steriods. McGwire took Andro, which is a banned substance. Banned by who? Steroids were not banned by baseball until 2003, and Andro was not only NOT banned by baseball, it was an actual LEGAL supplement.

Not one of the people you named did anything against baseball's rules during their playing days. But the point remains the same. They are being excluded because of politics, which is the same thing you are accusing the WWE of doing with their Hall of Fame.

I will give you the Yankee Stadium argument. Absolutely people like Kent and Alou aren't on that level, but Ruth often didn't have that kind of talent around him. They won 4 World Series titles during Ruth's days there. 1923, 1927, 1928, and 1932. 4 titles in 9 years, and you're telling me he didn't have talent around him?

Here, do me this favor. Follow the link I post, and gaze upon what you see there, then come back and try to tell me they didn't have talent.

http://newyork.yankees.mlb.com/nyy/history/championships.jsp

As for walks, Bonds has more walks due to the hitters that were coming behind him. Ruth was on the murderer's row making walking him a nearly pointless idea, which isn't his fault. You just told me that Ruth didn't always play on teams with all that talent around him.

Make up your mind. Which story are you going to stick with?

Another factor is the amount of teams that played in Ruth's era. In 1927 for example, there were 8 teams in the American League. The talent is much more spread out today. It'd be like taking the Giants and Dodgers and putting their rosters together with only the best players getting spots. It allows for lower levels of talent to be on the roster. Yeah, and the best players weren't making $20 million dollars. The money incentive to play professional baseball was minimal, which means that so many people were forgoing baseball to work at jobs that made money, not to mention the number of kids who had to works in farms and factories before even the age of 18 just to help family make ends meet, especially consider this was during the beginning of the The Great Depression, and right after the end of the first World war. There was no advanced minor league system, there was no relief pitchers, there was no advanced medicine to help pitcher's arms recover, and there was an overall lack of quality in the pitching ranks.

I mean, there is a reason that there were only 8 teams in each league.

I also hate Bonds, but he simply wasn't as good of an offensive player.[/QUOTE]

klunderbunker

03-25-2008, 01:42 PM

Actually he was a player manager at the time. It was just part time but he was a player. You're right about andro, I was mistaken. As for the walks, later in his career, around the late 20s, yes he had amazing talent around him. Earlier on in his career, nothing close to it. You're right about how there wasn't the incentive an no minor leagues, but this has nothing to do with not having that many teams. MLB hadn't been around long enough to have expanded that much yet. The west was a non factor.

Ruth's stats are simply better than Bonds. If you gave Ruth an extra 500 games, he would have approached 900 home runs. Also Ruth played in an era where nutrition and conditioning weren't nearly as important as they are today. Comparing the two of them on offense is a joke.

xfearbefore

03-25-2008, 01:53 PM

Actually he was a player manager at the time. It was just part time but he was a player.

What? No he wasn't. He had retired before he became a manager. Where are you getting your facts?

You're right about andro, I was mistaken. As for the walks, later in his career, around the late 20s, yes he had amazing talent around him. Earlier on in his career, nothing close to it.

You're just plain wrong. You're telling me the Yankees of the 20s weren't talented? You kidding me?

MLB hadn't been around long enough to have expanded that much yet.

What? MLB was founded in 1876...that's some 40 years they had to expand.

Ruth's stats are simply better than Bonds.

No, they simply aren't. Bonds has the better stats---how are you going to argue statistics?

If you gave Ruth an extra 500 games, he would have approached 900 home runs.

Thats a pretty big IF. And thats all it is---IF. But it didn't happen. So its an obsolete point.

Also Ruth played in an era where nutrition and conditioning weren't nearly as important as they are today. Comparing the two of them on offense is a joke.

How is it a joke? They're the two greatest offensive players of all time; unfortunately, Bonds is the better of the two. Don't be blinded by your hatred for Bonds.

Alex(Killer Of Dreams & Legends)

03-25-2008, 02:03 PM

Esteban Ochocinco

03-25-2008, 02:05 PM

:offtopic:

As good as the arguing is, it's getting to be way off topic. I'm pretty sure the sports arena is in need of a good argument, so you can continue the argument over there.

Anyways, please, back on topic with whether or not Owen Hart deserves to be in the Hall of Fame (which he does if freaking Rocky Johnson and Peter Maivia, Tony Atlas, William Perry, Pete Rose...are in)

Slyfox696

03-25-2008, 02:08 PM

:offtopic:

As good as the arguing is, it's getting to be way off topic. I'm pretty sure the sports arena is in need of a good argument, so you can continue the argument over there. We have already moved with several posts.

Anyways, please, back on topic with whether or not Owen Hart deserves to be in the Hall of Fame (which he does if freaking Rocky Johnson and Peter Maivia, Tony Atlas, William Perry, Pete Rose...are in)
That argument is terrible Shocky, and I'm surprised to hear you utter it. Why does the poor quality of others have to do with Owen getting in?

If Owen can't get in under his own credentials, and instead has to inducted simply because others were, what does that say about him?

Esteban Ochocinco

03-25-2008, 02:16 PM

That's just the thing, the WWE's standards are extremely low to begin with. The Sheik, why the fuck is the Sheik int he Hall of Fame. I agree with you Sly that Owen does not deserve to be in the Hall of Fame, but the WWE insist on putting guys that did little to nothing for the business to begin with in there. As far as my own personal taste, I enjoyed Owen more then some of the guys that are in there, and with the WWE's low standards (what are the standards anyways?) that Owen should be in there.

If this were a "real" hall of fame, then no way in hell does Owen get in, but then i would take out a good portion of the guys in there. Overall the WWE Hall of Fame is severly flawed, almost making it laughable, it is right up the road from the Hallmark Hall of Fame you know? If I were running it, Owen isn't in, and I'm a big Hart fan. The WWE's hall of fame is almost like everyone gets a trophy day. The WWE really, really needs to limit the amount of guys going in each year (four at most in my opinion), and really really raise the bar.

Oh and the off topic thign was just to make sure no one else continued down that path and to actually take notice that we do indeed have a sports section.

FTS

03-25-2008, 03:45 PM

A lot of guys have been inducted based on pre-WWE performances. The Sheik was incredibly over before the WWE became the global monster that it is. Tito Santana was always super-over in the AWA and early-WWF. Many guys are inducted for contributions instead of achievements. High Chief was the first native American to get over. Rocky Johnson advanced blacks in the business.

Own Hart did nothing except die in the ring and hurt Steve Austin. He was second fiddle his whole career. Owen is no more deserving than Marty Janneatty (sp?). Marty was second fiddle to HBK, lost his only meaningful feud (with HBK), and wasn't very entertaining.

I was never entertained by Owen Hart. His promo skills were questionable to me, and I think he was booed for Randy Orton reasons, because people hated him, not for Macho Man reasons, because people hated the character.

Shadowmancer

03-25-2008, 03:56 PM

Wait, wait wait. The Sheik is the Original Sheik not the Iron Sheik. And High chief Peter Maivia is Samoan not Native American. So how is either of your arguments there even relevant? And Why does noone take into account the fact that Owen Harts widow will not allow the WWE to induct him.

IrishEnglishman24

03-25-2008, 04:37 PM

Owen deserved to make it to the HOF on his ability in the ring. yes, he lived under his brother's shadow for the majority if not all of his career. but he was a talent in the ring and his death cut short what would have been most likely an amazing career.

as far as him being inducted into the HOF...i was of the opinion as shadow has alread said, that his wife refused to allow owen to be inducted following his death

Wrestlefan73

03-26-2008, 04:51 PM

Personally, I don't think his career was Hall of Fame worthy. It's nothing to do with titles or accomplishments. I enjoyed watching Owen, but like some of the people already inducted, I just don't feel his career screams 'Hall of Fame' to me.

In the end, who cares? If Vince is buying these video libraries, at least there's a glimmer of hope we will one day see some footage from them, instead of all the tapes lying in some basement where they're no good and never going to be seen. If that's the sole reason Vince is inducting them people, more power to him. At least we get to see some of this classic wrestling stuff.

I agree 100%! I love watching those DvDs about the old days. The ones on the AWA and WCCW are awesome. I am in no way complaining about that. That's the era I am from. But WWE doesn't need to insult us fans by making the HOF seem sincere. It's not. It's all a show.....it's the "Slammy's" of this generation. It was reported that when Vince was trying to buy the AWA video library from Verne Gagne, one of the stipulations was that if sold, Vince would induct Verne into the WWE HOF.

MattMoses

03-26-2008, 05:10 PM

Own Hart did nothing except die in the ring and hurt Steve Austin.

Nothing?

If I recall correctly, he won numerous championships throughout several different territories, and was voted as a part of 'Feud of the Year' on two different occasions, among other awards.

Now, if you ask me, that's doesn't equate to nothing. But it doesn't equate to Hall of Fame worthy neither.

His promo skills were questionable

I'd agree.

Owen deserved to make it to the HOF on his ability in the ring.

So now people should be inducted based on their in-ring ability? Well then, I guess Shelton Benjamin should be inducted then?

what would have been most likely an amazing career.

People need to stop with this 'would have been' crap. Basing what 'would have been' on something that hasn't, and never is going to happen is incredibly stupid.

It was reported that when Vince was trying to buy the AWA video library from Verne Gagne, one of the stipulations was that if sold, Vince would induct Verne into the WWE HOF.

Verne still has a long and storied career, and in many peoples eyes should have a place in the Hall of Fame. If Vince made that stipulation, it just goes to show how prestigous a place in it really is.

Wrestlefan73

03-26-2008, 05:21 PM

Verne still has a long and storied career, and in many peoples eyes should have a place in the Hall of Fame. If Vince made that stipulation, it just goes to show how prestigous a place in it really is.

No, it shows how cheap it is. If it was so prestigious, Vince wouldn't have to include it in the buying of a video library. Vince should have contacted Verne Gagne and said "Hey Verne, Vince here, I would like to induct you into the WWE Hall of Fame for all your accomplishments to professional Wrestling throughout your life. Would you please accept this honor?"

Instead, he said probably said something like this, "Hey Verne, Vince here, I'd like to buy your AWA video library. What's that Verne, you don't wanna sell? Well, how about this, if you sell me your video library, I'll add you into MY Hall of Fame and make a DvD about your legacy."

MattMoses

03-26-2008, 05:30 PM

No, it shows how cheap it is. If it was so prestigious, Vince wouldn't have to include it in the buying of a video library. Vince should have contacted Verne Gagne and said "Hey Verne, Vince here, I would like to induct you into the WWE Hall of Fame for all your accomplishments to professional Wrestling throughout your life. Would you please accept this honor?"

Instead, he said probably said something like this, "Hey Verne, Vince here, I'd like to buy your AWA video library. What's that Verne, you don't wanna sell? Well, how about this, if you sell me your video library, I'll add you into MY Hall of Fame and make a DvD about your legacy."

Sarcasm my friend. Basically, what I was saying is that Verne does indeed deserve a place in the Hall of Fame. And if Vince did actually say he would only induct him if he would give him the AWA video library, then it shows how prestigous a place in the Hall of Fame is - not very.

As for Vince saying something along those lines, do you have a source? It's the first I've heard of it. Or is this just an internet rumour?

Wrestlefan73

03-27-2008, 12:30 AM

Sarcasm my friend. Basically, what I was saying is that Verne does indeed deserve a place in the Hall of Fame. And if Vince did actually say he would only induct him if he would give him the AWA video library, then it shows how prestigous a place in the Hall of Fame is - not very.

As for Vince saying something along those lines, do you have a source? It's the first I've heard of it. Or is this just an internet rumour?

That was a sarcastic statement just to prove how phony the Hall of Fame is. Do you see what my screen name is? It's Wrestle FAN, not Wrestle INSIDER. I'm just that, a Wrestling fan. For the better part of 28 years I have watched and enjoyed every wrestling organization out there. And i've seen most of the people in the HOF wrestle back in their day and in my opinion some should be in and some shouldn't. Like Pete Rose. What the hell did Pete Rose ever do to get into the WWE HOF? Show up at 2 or 3 Wrestlemanias and get tombstoned by Kane? That is another example of how much of a sham it is.

Think about it. Name any other HOF that inducts people that are still active in that business. Should we look forward to seeing Jeter or Brady in their respective HOF's next year? No. When their career is OVER, then after a waiting period, they will be eligible. If Vince wants his HOF to be legit he should adopt guidelines for entry. That right there will eliminate all the arguments about who should or shouldn't be inducted.
And, while I'm at it about guidelines for getting in...shouldn't those same guidelines get you kicked out? Hear me out on this...Ric Flair is one of the greatest wrestlers ever. He is definately a HOFer, but when his matches are sloppy and he can't do more than a punch, kick, chop, and eye-poke, then he should walk away.....like maybe back in 2003. Since then I believe he has tarnished his HOF legacy.

Back to should Owen be in the HOF. Alot of people say no because he was never more than an upper mid carder. And? Does that mean that there should never be a tag team specialist inducted? I can't recall ever seeing a PPV where a real tag team.....not two single stars teamed together for a short program, but a real tag team, was the main event. In the end, the WWE HOF is a complete sham. Can I go and visit it on my next vacation, like the one in Cooperstown or Canton? No? Then it is only around for Vince ego. It is definately the Slammy's of this generation.

Luten

03-27-2008, 06:42 AM

I haven't got alot to say in this one apart from I think Owen SHOULD be in the hall of fame..He was a solid worker who died because he was performing a stupid angle for the business he loved..he held many titles and had red hot feuds. He was also loved by everyone backstage.

MattMoses

03-27-2008, 07:20 AM

Do you see what my screen name is?
Yes. Wrestlefan73.

It's Wrestle FAN, not Wrestle INSIDER.
I see that.

I'm just that, a Wrestling fan.
As I'm sure we all are on this forum.

For the better part of 28 years I have watched and enjoyed every wrestling organization out there.
I see. What does this have to do with the topic at hand?

Like Pete Rose. What the hell did Pete Rose ever do to get into the WWE HOF?
I'm quite sure I explained this in another thread with a one word answer. Nothing.

If Vince wants his HOF to be legit he should adopt guidelines for entry. That right there will eliminate all the arguments about who should or shouldn't be inducted.
Spot on.

http://forums.wrestlezone.com/showpost.php?p=392849&postcount=103

And, while I'm at it about guidelines for getting in...shouldn't those same guidelines get you kicked out?
What would be the point in this? Whatever happens outside the ring, or even in the ring once somebody has been inducted, it shouldn't affect their past achievements and merits which actually got them a spot in the Hall of Fame.

Hear me out on this...Ric Flair is one of the greatest wrestlers ever. He is definately a HOFer, but when his matches are sloppy and he can't do more than a punch, kick, chop, and eye-poke, then he should walk away.....like maybe back in 2003. Since then I believe he has tarnished his HOF legacy.
Maybe he should have walked away. But Ric Flair still entertains these fans week-in week-out. Don't believe me? Just listen to all those fan reactions he recieves.

'tarnished his HOF legacy'? Because he's past his prime? Because he's 59? Because he's got a limited move set, which most wrestlers do? I'm sure we could do without his last few years in the ring, but despite that, in my eyes, it hasn't tarnished his legacy one bit. He still wants to entertain fans at an age where he's very much limited, much more prone to injury, yet still loved. That alone deserves some applaud.

Back to should Owen be in the HOF. Alot of people say no because he was never more than an upper mid carder. And? Does that mean that there should never be a tag team specialist inducted? I can't recall ever seeing a PPV where a real tag team.....not two single stars teamed together for a short program, but a real tag team, was the main event. In the end, the WWE HOF is a complete sham. Can I go and visit it on my next vacation, like the one in Cooperstown or Canton? No? Then it is only around for Vince ego. It is definately the Slammy's of this generation.
Okay, tell me this. On what merits do you think Owen Hart should be inducted into the Hall of Fame?

I haven't got alot to say in this one apart from I think Owen SHOULD be in the hall of fame..He was a solid worker who died because he was performing a stupid angle for the business he loved..he held many titles and had red hot feuds. He was also loved by everyone backstage.
Do you people read this thread?

Are you telling me that because he won titles, he should be inducted? Or are you telling me that, because he died in the ring he deserves to be inducted? Or, are you going as far as to tell me he should be inducted because he was 'loved by everyone backstage'? Please.

Wrestlefan73

03-27-2008, 11:46 AM

Couldn't you have just quoted my entire statement instead of doing it sentence by sentence? If you would have done that you would've seen what I was meaning when I said I have been watching for 20 something years.

Owen Hart should be inducted into the HOF because he was the first westerner to win the IWGP Junior Heavyweight Title, and he was the first of only two Canadians to hold that title. Chris Benoit being the other. That alone is enough according to WWE standards. If WWE is going to induct Rocky Johnson (I'm assuming because he was the first African American to win the tag titles with Tony Atlas, because he did absolutely nothing else his entire career) then they should induct Owen for this historic accomplishment.

MattMoses

03-27-2008, 12:02 PM

Couldn't you have just quoted my entire statement instead of doing it sentence by sentence? If you would have done that you would've seen what I was meaning when I said I have been watching for 20 something years.

Does the way I address your post really matter?

Owen Hart should be inducted into the HOF because he was the first westerner to win the IWGP Junior Heavyweight Title, and he was the first of only two Canadians to hold that title.

So you believe Owen Hart should be inducted into the Hall of Fame based on a title accomplishment in Japan?

they should induct Owen for this historic accomplishment.

What's historic about being the first foreigner to win a championship title? I doubt most wrestling fans even knew Owen was the first Canadian to win the IWGP Junior Heavyweight Title.

And it's not like I think Rocky Johnson deserves a place in the Hall of Fame - we all know it's just to get The Rock to make an appearance. But, as Slyfox said in a earlier post;

The credentials of other people, do not determine the credentials of Owen. I could explain why some of those should be in, and why some of those should not. But, it doesn't matter. We're not talking about them, we're talking about Owen.

Just because others are in with poor accomplishments, that does not mean that someone else should be in with slightly better accomplishments.

Danmen001

03-29-2008, 01:53 AM

Whether or not Owen should be inducted into the HoF is a very debatable subject, because of his accomplishments (or lack of), and also how he died.

Reasons he should be inducted are that: Most importantly and obviously, how he died. Doing a poorly prepared stunt, falling to his demise. The wwe is liable to give his some recognition for that. Also, the pety things in his career, and just working for the WWE in such a stunt, althought that isn't a great reason tp put on his induction.

Reasons taht he shouldn't be inducted: He had a decent career at best, nothing totally memorable to say the least.

I believe the WWE will choose not to induct him, as they won't want to even bring up the issue of his death, and his career stats can't be put on the focus much either.

I believe that he SHOULDN't be inducted. It is totally now worth bringing th controversy out of the dirt and into the eyes of people. He hasn't done anything grat to remembered either.

THE Madcap

03-29-2008, 11:40 AM

Who's to say Owen hasn't been considered for HOF and won't be inducted in the future, once his wife allows it? I was under the impression that the WWE chooses to limit the number of deceased wrestlers inducted into the HOF each year because of the negative message it sends out about the wrestling business.

I for one look for Owen's name whenever inductees are mentioned and I will make sure I have an "Owen 4 HOF 2009" sign up at tomorrow's wrestlemania.

jontabs

04-03-2008, 07:21 AM

Just sticking my opinion in here.

Good arguments for both sides really. I do think that the "what if's" about Owen being a bigger star if he didn't die cannot be used. It didnt happen, his career was tragically cut short. Enough said.

True he wasn't a big draw, he wasn't cheered but that's because he was a great heel. People loved to hate him. But he was a great worker and his in-ring skill was good.

I like to hold him in the same vein as Mr. Perfect albeit without the charisma. They basically were great workers, great technical wrestlers, and put on great matches when needed. The one thing Owen did better than Mr. Perfect was be a great tag team wrestler. He went into Wrestlemania 3 times with 3 different partners, and each time he either won or was already a tag champ.

In my opinion, I think he should be in there, taking the WWE's current Hall of Fame standards.

But if we take the standards of other HoF's like the NBA or NFL, then he wouldn't make it, as that should be reserved for true greats, like Flair Hogan Hart HBK Austin etc......

jag27

04-03-2008, 10:36 AM

]What did Owen Hart ever do to be inducted into the Hall of Fame?

Owen Hart has contributed more to the WWE than let's say: William Perry, Pete Rose, and Gordon Solie.

What you say? Solie should definetely be inducted into the Pro Wrestling HOF, but WWE HOF? With all due respect to Gordon Solie, but he never even worked for the company-- ever. My point is that it seems they are inducting people now with little to no involment with the WWE. If that's their criteria then why shouldn't Owen Hart be in the HOF?

Slyfox696

04-03-2008, 10:48 AM

What you say? Solie should definetely be inducted into the Pro Wrestling HOF, but WWE HOF? With all due respect to Gordon Solie, but he never even worked for the company-- ever. My point is that it seems they are inducting people now with little to no involment with the WWE. If that's their criteria then why shouldn't Owen Hart be in the HOF?Just out of curiosity, did you even both reading the thread before posting this?

I'm guessing no, because if you had, you would have seen where I, numerous times, have stated that the qualifications of others has nothing to do with the qualification of one. And, the WWE is not attempting to be a WWE Hall of Fame, but rather a pro wrestling one. And, Gordon Solie is so much more deserving than Owen ever will be.

So, just because Perry is in the HOF, that doesn't mean that Owen should.

MattMoses

04-03-2008, 10:50 AM

What you say? Solie should definetely be inducted into the Pro Wrestling HOF, but WWE HOF?
It honors figures within the business who have contributed to wrestling and sports entertainment.

Now I don't agree that William Perry and Pete Rose deserve a place in the Hall of Fame, but because they're inducted doesn't mean Owen Hart deserves a place.

With all due respect to Gordon Solie, but he never even worked for the company-- ever
So? It's pretty well known that people have been inducted who have had a very little to no career within the WWE, but with other promotions.

My point is that it seems they are inducting people now with little to no involment with the WWE
Yet they're inducting people who had great careers within wrestling but outside of the WWE.

If that's their criteria then why shouldn't Owen Hart be in the HOF?
You tell me why he should be inducted.

EDIT: Goddamn Sly, again. I need to stop posting in here.

jag27

04-03-2008, 12:41 PM

It honors figures within the business who have contributed to wrestling and sports entertainment.So? It's pretty well known that people have been inducted who have had a very little to no career within the WWE, but with other promotions.

Alright,you make a good argument--fair enough.

You tell me why he should be inducted.

If we're basing this on Owen's Pro Wrestling accomplishments then it would be:

1988 - The 1st westerner to become the IWGP Jr. Heavyweight champion.

2nd stint in Stampede Wrestling His feud and matches with Dynamite Kid were talked about still to this day and were easily some of the best matches i have seen.

1994 King of the Ring winner.

2 time Intercontinental champion.

4 time WWF tag-team champion.

Headlining Wrestlemania X in MSG.

One of the best aerial, "high-flyer" wrestlers in North America at that time.

Originally, an underdog Vince had no faith in, to eventually becoming the top heel of the company in 1994.

Whether you agree with me or not, he definetely should get some consideration down the road.

MattMoses

04-03-2008, 03:45 PM

1988 - The 1st westerner to become the IWGP Jr. Heavyweight champion.
So when foreigners win championships in Japan, they should be eligible for a Hall of Fame induction? Come on, it's not really like it's a prestigous title, and he held it for less than a month. Does anybody remember his reign? Did he defend it once before losing it?

Absolutely does not warrant a Hall of Fame consideration.

2nd stint in Stampede Wrestling. His feud and matches with Dynamite Kid were talked about still to this day and were easily some of the best matches i have seen.
Rarely have I ever seen people talk about this feud. It's not like their feud spawned countless memorable five star matches.

1994 King of the Ring winner.
Maybe we should induct Billy Gunn into the Hall of Fame for winning the King of the Ring and for being a Intercontinental champion, yes?

2 time Intercontinental champion.
Two reigns that hardly anybody remembers about, except the time Austin beat him for it at Survivor Series? His second run last for a grand total of a month, and had no more than a title defense outside of his loss to Austin.

4 time WWF tag-team champion.
Hmm, lets see. Won his first tag-team championship with Yokozuna, held it for a few months in a reign absolutely nobody remembers, because they rarely defended the titles.

Second time round, held it for a grand total of what, half an hour?

Third run with Bulldog was great.

Fourth run with Jarrett lasted just over a month. Nothing great here.

So out of his four team-team accomplishments, only one of them was truly great.

Headlining Wrestlemania X in MSG.
He headlined? I thought him and Bret was on first?

One of the best aerial, "high-flyer" wrestlers in North America at that time.
So he should be inducted because of his style of wrestling?

Originally, an underdog Vince had no faith in, to eventually becoming the top heel of the company in 1994.
Um yeah, because Vince had no faith in him but proved him wrong, lets induct him for that.

So basically, you think he should be inducted on the merits of a Japanses title win, which didn't last long and nobody really even knows about, four tag-team titles, three of which really didn't mean anything, two intercontinental title wins where he was most remembered by losing it to Steve Austin, a KOTR win, which really wasn't all that great, the matches weren't exactly great, because he was a "high-flyer", and because he proved Vince wrong.

Hmm, I'd have to say no.

AnthonyM4

04-03-2008, 04:48 PM

It sucks that Pete Rose and William Perry are in the hof and not Owen, but that's not the reason we should boycott their product. Rather we should boycott because their product is a joke and they don't care what the fans want. Remember when Vince said "I don't ask my audience what they want, I tell them what they want" or something like that. How arrogant right?

I think if they were to induct Owen they'd have to have his wife or someone accept on his behalf, but Martha wants nothing to do with wwe. She hated them and hated that Owen was a wrestler.

jag27

04-03-2008, 07:10 PM

So when foreigners win championships in Japan, they should be eligible for a Hall of Fame induction? No, but he was the 1st.

Back then, most Japanese promoters were very hesitant on putting the strap on a Westerner, unless you made your bones in Japan from the very beginning of your career, it was very rare.

So yeah i would consider it a worthy accomplishment.

Rarely have I ever seen people talk about this feud. It's not like their feud spawned countless memorable five star matches.

The feud didn't spawn countless matches because Dynamite's body at the time was on the verge of eventual paralysis and was broken down enough where it was only a matter of time. However, Owen and Dynamite still brought the house down and produce solid, fast paced, high-flying matches during that time which were pretty memorable and a testament to both men's abilities.

Maybe we should induct Billy Gunn into the Hall of Fame for winning the King of the Ring and for being a Intercontinental champion, yes?

So you're comparing Billy Gunn's " let throw the strap on anyone right now as we don't have anybody else in our long-range plan" Attitude era to the mid 90's era when the actual KOTR tournament meant something and title didn't switch hands on a consecutive basis. Back then if you were chosen to go over and win the tournament, Vince had big plans with you.
[I]

Hmm, lets see. Won his first tag-team championship with Yokozuna, held it for a few months in a reign absolutely nobody remembers, because they rarely defended the titles.

Second time round, held it for a grand total of what, half an hour?

Third run with Bulldog was great.

Fourth run with Jarrett lasted just over a month. Nothing great here.

So out of his four team-team accomplishments, only one of them was truly great.

Obviously the reign with Bulldog stands out as the most important, however, the former reigns weren't as long because he was still feuding on again-off again with Bret; especially at house shows.His feud with Bret simplytdrew more money than to have him paired with Yoko, but if it could of been anybody at the time, then why didn't Vince put it on just anybody else then?

Two reigns that hardly anybody remembers about, except the time Austin beat him for it at Survivor Series? His second run last for a grand total of a month, and had no more than a title defense outside of his loss to Austin.

So, by your assertion, a guy like Ricky Steamboat who held his for only 2 months wasn't considered a great IC Champ because of his short reign? What's your point?

He headlined? I thought him and Bret was on first?

I meant headlining advertisements for WM X ,not the actual match order. C'mon, how many people either ordered the PPV or attended the event to watch Yoko/Luger/Bret?

Bret vs Owen was the USP Vince was selling to the public on his card, with the ladder match being a close 2nd.

So he should be inducted because of his style of wrestling?

A high-flying heel that reached main event status at that time when the status quo was 300 lbs monsters that dominated those spots. I'd say that worth mentioning.

Um yeah, because Vince had no faith in him but proved him wrong, lets induct him for that.

So basically, you think he should be inducted on the merits of a Japanses title win, which didn't last long and nobody really even knows about, four tag-team titles, three of which really didn't mean anything, two intercontinental title wins where he was most remembered by losing it to Steve Austin, a KOTR win, which really wasn't all that great, the matches weren't exactly great, because he was a "high-flyer", and because he proved Vince wrong.

Uhh...yes, i do.

MattMoses

04-03-2008, 08:13 PM

No, but he was the 1st.
No he wasn't. Stan Hansen, Austin Idol and Ted DiBiase are just a few names who come to mind who won championships in Japan prior to Owen.

So yeah i would consider it a worthy accomplishment.
Why though? He held the title for less than a month and lost it on his first defense. How's that a worthy accomplishment?

The feud didn't spawn countless matches because Dynamite's body at the time was on the verge of eventual paralysis and was broken down enough where it was only a matter of time. However, Owen and Dynamite still brought the house down and produce solid, fast paced, high-flying matches during that time which were pretty memorable and a testament to both men's abilities.
Lots of people have produced solid, fast paced, high-flying matches. How is theirs any different? I really don't understand why you'd use a few matches between Owen and Tom as a reason to induct Owen into the Hall of Fame.

Obviously the reign with Bulldog stands out as the most important, however, the former reigns weren't as long because he was still feuding on again-off again with Bret
There was only one occasion where Owen and Bret were feuding while Owen held a tag-team championship.

Owen had one great tag-team championship reign. Hell, he is recognised as a four time champion, yet one of those reigns didn't even last one hour. So when his reigns are that worthless, who cares?

So, by your assertion, a guy like Ricky Steamboat who held his for only 2 months wasn't considered a great IC Champ because of his short reign? What's your point?
The difference is, Ricky Steamboat put on match of the year with Savage when he won the title. He put on great macthes during his short reign. It's a well known fact that Steamboat was in for a long run as the Intercontinental champion, but he asked for time off to be with his wife who was expecting her first child, dropping the belt in the process.

People remember Ricky's reign for his phenomenal matches. People remember Owen's reign because he broke Steve Austin's neck. I doubt nobody even knew the feud behind either of his two wins, or whom his opponents were.

A high-flying heel that reached main event status at that time when the status quo was 300 lbs monsters that dominated those spots. I'd say that worth mentioning.
He rose to a main event status (albeit not for very long, why is that?) when Bret and Shawn were on top of the WWF, two relatively small guys.

Come 1995, it was dominated by Diesel and bigger guys. When Owen was reduced to the midcard.

michaelj817

04-06-2008, 03:53 PM

When it comes down to the bare facts, who is inducted is based solely on who Vince McMahon deems fit to be inducted. The HOF induction ceremony is WWE's version of a roast, and personally I think an actual roast would be much more entertaining. In a business that is a total work, it is only fair that the Hall of Fame is a total work as well. From that standpoint, Owen Hart could very easily be a Hall of Famer. However, after much deliberation on the topic, I'd have to say no to Owen Hart in the Hall of Fame. I am a huge Owen fan, and found him tremendously entertaining. But for how good he was, it isn't the "Hall of Very Good", it is the Hall of Fame.

This is a great topic. By asking whether Owen Hart should be in the WWE Hall of Fame, we have now called into question what a Hall of Fame Career is. WWE isn't the only guilty party in this. Most Hall of Fames are based more on politics for their respective sports, and who the sports writers deem fit to enter. For example: Several years ago Bill Mazeroski was inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown. Maz is arguably the greatest defensive 2nd baseman of all time, winning 8 Gold Gloves, and is most famous for his game winning, walk off home run in the bottom of the 9th inning of game 7 of the 1960 World Series, which gave the Pittsburgh Pirates a win over the highly favored New York Yankees. Being a native Pittsburgher, I was happy to see Maz finally get his due after waiting 20+ years to be inducted. However, as a baseball fan, I am disappointed. While Maz may have been the greatest defensive 2nd baseman to ever wear a glove, aside from his history making moment in the World Series, there is nothing remarkable about his career. This is not taking anything away from him. He was a great 2nd baseman, and a good player for his era. But once again...it isn't the Hall of Very Good.

This is the same situation with Owen. I and a lot of other people have a soft spot in our hearts for him as a performer. But a lot of people are confusing that soft spot, with true greatness, and aside from his feud with Bret and breaking Steve Austin's neck, there is nothing remarkable about his career.

I agree with Slyfox in that most of the arguments for Owen's induction are poor. Just because certain people in the HOF aren't considered worthy by the members of this board, does not mean that Owen Hart should go in too. However, everyone seems to have a different idea as to what makes someone a Hall of Famer.

In a business that is a work, it is very hard to argue that someone should be inducted based on accomplishments such as titles or wins and losses. What about a technical standpoint? Regardless of mic skills, should someone be inducted into the HOF based purely on their technical ability to tell a story in the ring? What about verbal skills? There have been plenty of great talkers who stunk up the ring, but were gold on the stick. What is it that truly makes someone a Hall of Famer?

For me it is a combination of all of those attributes; a Hall of Famer is someone who wrestles his or her style in a way that aptly tells the story they are trying to tell, someone who has at least moderately good mic skills, someone that consistently could draw, and staying power as a performer. As for Owen, I don't believe he had the drawing power needed to make someone a Hall of Famer, and his staying power as a performer is sadly due to the way he died and not his merits in a wrestling ring.

That's my opinion, but I personally feel that you cannot induct anyone, let alone Owen Hart into a Hall of Fame without first asking what it takes to get there. I'd be interested to hear everyone else's take on this. Take an arbitrary point of view, and I put the question the members of this board...

What makes a Superstar a Hall of Famer, why, and based on that who would you induct into the WWE Hall of Fame if you had the chance to start fresh?

Low_Ki

04-08-2008, 08:44 AM

I think that some people are overlooking the idea behind the Hall Of Fame here. The Hall Of Fame is about a wrestlers contribution to the business. Guys like Rocky Johnson may have only held the tag titles once, but he and Tony Atlas were the first black tag champions in the history of the WWE, and that to me, is a big deal. That was his contribution to the business. Breaking down the wall of race and being looked at for his ability.

Now do I think that Owen Hart belongs in the Hall Of Fame? Probably yes. The man was a solid worker who put over guys like Steve Austin. Okay, he broke Austin's neck, and I agree, he will be remembered for that, but I don't think that is how he should be remembered. He garnished a tremendous amount of heat in the mid-90's and if it wasn't for other's picking out his spot I think he could well have been world champion. One of my most memorable matches was his against his brother Bret at Wrestlemania (?) the number eludes me at the moment.

I don't really want to get bogged down with the whole 'boycotting' thing as I don't think it is warrented. Before this year I thought that Ric Flair deserved the honour of the Hall Of Fame before Hogan, but it never stopped me watching. Unfortunately, however much we bash the WWE product, its the only thing we got right now that comes close. TNA is a great second but that is all it is right now, second. I hope thry induct Owen at some point, and I shall be watching the WWE product when they do.

Lewisc3108

04-16-2008, 09:03 AM

Rated K for Kennedy... Kennedy!

04-16-2008, 09:17 AM

Owen Hart was great in the ring and had great mic skills. There are some wrestlers who only have one skill Owen had both in and out of the ring skills. He should get in and Brett Hart should be the one who inducts him. I did forget to mention he had great charisma and heat at the same time. He was the total package as a wrestler but underused. I can honestly say I never heard him get upset over his roles in the WWE. He was constant professional.

I gotta agree man, from everything I've read (from Foley's to Jericho's autobiographies) Owen was THE DEFINITION OF A PROFESSIONAL. He had some awful gimmicks but he never got upset, never took the business (or himself) too seriously, unlike a certain Hart. I don't believe in all honesty that anyone who saw the WHOLE of Owen's WWE career would say he was nothing but a non-heat getting midcarder, the man knew how to pop a crowd and was a constant heel-heat getter. I majorly respect Owen and if WWE do induct him I'd respect Vince a hell of a lot more, and while he's at it, how about an OWEN HART DVD?!!!??!?!?

michaelj817

04-16-2008, 08:03 PM

If Owen was so unimportant to the WWE then why did they fight so hard to make sure Owen couldn't leave when Bret left for WCW? They were more than Happy to let Bulldog and Anvil out of their contracts. It's well known that Owen was going to win the I.C title at Over the Edge and more than likely was going to get a massive push after that.

Owen was an important part of the then WWF. However, backstage opinion of the guy as a total professional aside, he wasn't much more than a good hand for the WWF. The reason WWF didn't let him go when he asked for his release, was due to Bret's falling out with Vince, and the way Bret left the company. Bret asked Vince to let Owen out of his contract, and he refused to do so just to spite Bret.

However, Bulldog and Anvil are a different story. Both men's years of hardcore drug abuse had caught up with them, and the fact that they both had been fired numerous times prior to that didn't hurt their respective cases for release. Both men were liabilities to the company and neither were able to carry a decent match at that point in their careers.

Reasons why Owen should be inducted into THOF:
1: He was an amazing heel who fans truly hated.
2: He had some of the best edge of your seat matches i have ever seen.
3: Owen was clearly a better performer than Bret, who could mix it up and work with almost anyone.
4: It's been made clear that winning titles in wrestling doesn't mean shit really (just look at how unimportant the ECW title is) so why should someone not be inducted just because they never held the world title.

After originally posting in this thread I went back and watched a bunch of old Owen matches and footage, and while he was a good technical wrestler, he wasn't much else.

1: He was an amazing heel who fans truly hated.

Actually he wasn't. He was pretty commonplace as a heel, and didn't do much to stand out, even for that era. His crowd reactions were never anything stellar as a heel or face, and the only time he got good face pops was in Canada.

2: He had some of the best edge of your seat matches i have ever seen.

I'd be interested to know what matches you are referring to, because unless he was working with Bret or Shawn Michaels, none of Owen's matches that I have ever seen stand out as that great. They were good, and they were by no means bad, but nothing that could be considered classic.

3: Owen was clearly a better performer than Bret, who could mix it up and work with almost anyone.

While Owen may have been more talented that Bret, he was by no means a better performer. Except for his matches with Bret, anytime Owen worked, he came off as the kid on the high school basketball team who was more talented than the rest of the team, but didn't want to practice and didn't play hard. To watch an Owen Hart match was to watch him go through the motions as a guy that was there purely to collect a paycheck. He may have been more talented than the rest of the roster, but his passion for the business is well known to have not been that great;even before Bret left WWF on bad terms, and it showed in his performance.

4: It's been made clear that winning titles in wrestling doesn't mean shit really (just look at how unimportant the ECW title is) so why should someone not be inducted just because they never held the world title.

As I stated in my previous post, winning titles in a fake sport does not qualify you as a hall of famer. He probably will be inducted eventually, and I will pay for a ticket to go because I was and am an Owen fan. However, I personnally don't feel Owen is a Hall of Famer. That doesn't mean he wasn't good, but his performances and career were nothing out of the ordinary. Just because the Hall of Fame is full of commonplace performers already doesn't mean that it should remain a tradition. Being part of the Hart Dynasty doesn't automatically make him a hall of famer either. Are Keith, Bruce, Wayne, Ellie, Georgia, and the rest of the gang Hall of Famers for being part of the Hart Dynasty as well?

If you are looking to induct any other Harts into the Hall of Fame, look no further than Stu Hart and his impact on the wrestling business with the 60+ years he spent wrestling, promoting, and building talent which went on to great success in the WWF. Also, I think a better case could be made to induct the Dynamite Kid into the Hall of Fame before Owen Hart, as he completely revolutionized wrestling in North America.

However, as I am writing this, I think they eventually might do something similar to what they did with Rocky Johnson/Peter Maivia and induct Stu and Owen together.