MINISTRYrising
Championship Contender
Ricky The Dragon Steamboat is a legend in wrestling and is a wwe hall of famer. But should he have been world champion.
Should Ricky Steamboat have been World Champion?
- Thread starter MINISTRYrising
- Start date
closet_fan
Mid-Card Championship Winner
As much as I loved Steamboat, I think he was better off being the IC champion instead. He was a great technical wrestler and his entire program with Savage was one of the best, but I couldn't see him being champion. Especially since his time at the top was at the same time as Hogan's. He was also so-so on the mic. Savage was great, Steamboat wasn't in that same class.
I know he was NWA/WCW champion. His matches with Flair were great, but that federation was totally different than what the WWF was doing at the time. They relied more on WRESTLING and not cartoon characters. So Steamboat fit in great.
But the upper mid-card was where Steamboat belonged.
I know he was NWA/WCW champion. His matches with Flair were great, but that federation was totally different than what the WWF was doing at the time. They relied more on WRESTLING and not cartoon characters. So Steamboat fit in great.
But the upper mid-card was where Steamboat belonged.
amodernphoenix
Occasional Pre-Show
Why do you and people like you keep posting these threads about whether or not somebody "deserved" the title. Nobody deserves the title, it's a prop to further the business by building a mid-carder up to the main event level during lean times and to sell merchandise, increase buyrates and put rear ends in seats when it's on a proven money maker. That's why it was worn by people like the Ultimate Warrior, who never earned a damn thing in his years in the WWF, but DID sell a lot of merchandise and bring in viewers.
The strap is not the World Series Trophy, the Stanley Cup or the Vince Lombardi trophy. It's no longer awarded to an individual by the vote of a committee prior to matches, it's given to "champions" by television writers who script out typically 3-6 month story lines. The days of title reigns like Bruno Sammartino's legendary 7 and a half years are long gone and if you asked Ricky Blood he'd tell you that himself.
The true champions in the 80s and 90s did not wear the belt, they made the person wearing the belt look good.
The strap is not the World Series Trophy, the Stanley Cup or the Vince Lombardi trophy. It's no longer awarded to an individual by the vote of a committee prior to matches, it's given to "champions" by television writers who script out typically 3-6 month story lines. The days of title reigns like Bruno Sammartino's legendary 7 and a half years are long gone and if you asked Ricky Blood he'd tell you that himself.
The true champions in the 80s and 90s did not wear the belt, they made the person wearing the belt look good.
TheHitMark-SirJoseOle
A Fan Of Wrestling Not Backstage BS
Here's my take on the World Title and its status (and this goes for any organization), I don't like using the term "prop'. I prefer plot device, because when used right any title can serve as an integral part to a storyline. Although there are Hall Of Famers, current and future (i.e. Roddy Piper, Scott Hall, and Jake Roberts) that were massively over without ever having been World Champion. The idea of rising to the status of World Champion is a tried and true trope, and each character's path towards that accolade can and has been told in varying ways.
Which brings me to Ricky Steamboat, and by the way OP, the next time you decide to do a "Should they have been World Champion?" thread, like you did with Vader yesterday, and Ricky Steamboat today. Make sure that you've verified they were a World Champion in another organization prior to creating your thread. It would make your post a lot more accurate, and more insightful. That's just a nickel's worth of free advice. Do with it what you will. If that comes off snarky, forgive me. But despite the fact that WCW is defunct, and that the NWA is no longer the wrestling force it was in yesteryear does not mean that legends in the business that have held either of those organizations' World Titles should be ignored. There were organizations other than (W)WWF/E in the past, that were just as heralded. Therefore, just because Ricky Steamboat's World Title reign never occurred in the World Wrestling Federation, doesn't mean it's any less credible in a storyline sense.
But to get back on point about the whole idea of being a champion and what not, while it's true that you can't put the World title on the same level of an NBA Finals ring or a World Series trophy, it still has a certain amount of merit to it anyway. Case in point, the storyline between Ricky Steamboat and Ric Flair. Since "The Dragon" is the focus of this thread, we might as well discuss his rise to winning a World Title that the OP didn't bother to acknowledge. Makes sense, right?
Anyway, the Flair and Steamboat characters were such polar opposites. Ric Flair, no matter what disposition he chose was always a consumate in ring performer and the staple of Jim Crockett Promotions (what WCW used to be called before Ted Turner's buyout of the company, for those that are not aware) and there was no one since Harley Race and Lou Thesz that was more associated with that title. But Flair's methods of winning in the storylines and his attitude (that of being a self-serving, egocentric philanderer amongst other things) were most of the time very devious and underhanded. That's where Ricky Steamboat comes into play, he was a cleancut, wholesome and by the book type of wrestler. A true sportsman, if you will.
What made the 80s version of their feud (as opposed to their equally exciting 70s encounters) was that these polar opposites were played off of. And after having left the WWF the previous year (WrestleMania IV's World Title tournmaent was Steamboat's last major WWF appearance until his arguably dreadful and brief 1991 return.) had made a comeback to JCP/WCW. The World title was a focal point of this storyline, and the whole question was if Steamboat could defy the odds and come through against a resourceful and treacherous Ric Flair, and there was no doubt about it, the NWA World Title was a major plot device. When Steamboat won the strap, it was an exciting moment. Sure, it's not a TRUE championship in the sense of actually winning it. But it was a feel good story, and as we know the title eventually went back to Ric Flair (as it was always the case, very much like Hulk Hogan's WWF World Title runs) but it was a very entertaining and a memorable storyline.
It would have been nice for Ricky Steamboat have gotten that same honor in WWF, but it doesn't make his career any less memorable or legendary. But just the same, while the World Title isn't something legit in the sense of competition as most of us fortunately know, its use in storylines and how a said story can be told can be very well done if handled properly. Steamboat's NWA World Title amongst others is one example of this.
Just food for thought, because I feel calling the title a mere prop doesn't do justice to several storylines we've seen unravel in the past. However, in today's wrestling world, I'd have to concede and admit that today's titles are props with how often they are either ignored or how often they change hands. That's my two cents.
Which brings me to Ricky Steamboat, and by the way OP, the next time you decide to do a "Should they have been World Champion?" thread, like you did with Vader yesterday, and Ricky Steamboat today. Make sure that you've verified they were a World Champion in another organization prior to creating your thread. It would make your post a lot more accurate, and more insightful. That's just a nickel's worth of free advice. Do with it what you will. If that comes off snarky, forgive me. But despite the fact that WCW is defunct, and that the NWA is no longer the wrestling force it was in yesteryear does not mean that legends in the business that have held either of those organizations' World Titles should be ignored. There were organizations other than (W)WWF/E in the past, that were just as heralded. Therefore, just because Ricky Steamboat's World Title reign never occurred in the World Wrestling Federation, doesn't mean it's any less credible in a storyline sense.
But to get back on point about the whole idea of being a champion and what not, while it's true that you can't put the World title on the same level of an NBA Finals ring or a World Series trophy, it still has a certain amount of merit to it anyway. Case in point, the storyline between Ricky Steamboat and Ric Flair. Since "The Dragon" is the focus of this thread, we might as well discuss his rise to winning a World Title that the OP didn't bother to acknowledge. Makes sense, right?
Anyway, the Flair and Steamboat characters were such polar opposites. Ric Flair, no matter what disposition he chose was always a consumate in ring performer and the staple of Jim Crockett Promotions (what WCW used to be called before Ted Turner's buyout of the company, for those that are not aware) and there was no one since Harley Race and Lou Thesz that was more associated with that title. But Flair's methods of winning in the storylines and his attitude (that of being a self-serving, egocentric philanderer amongst other things) were most of the time very devious and underhanded. That's where Ricky Steamboat comes into play, he was a cleancut, wholesome and by the book type of wrestler. A true sportsman, if you will.
What made the 80s version of their feud (as opposed to their equally exciting 70s encounters) was that these polar opposites were played off of. And after having left the WWF the previous year (WrestleMania IV's World Title tournmaent was Steamboat's last major WWF appearance until his arguably dreadful and brief 1991 return.) had made a comeback to JCP/WCW. The World title was a focal point of this storyline, and the whole question was if Steamboat could defy the odds and come through against a resourceful and treacherous Ric Flair, and there was no doubt about it, the NWA World Title was a major plot device. When Steamboat won the strap, it was an exciting moment. Sure, it's not a TRUE championship in the sense of actually winning it. But it was a feel good story, and as we know the title eventually went back to Ric Flair (as it was always the case, very much like Hulk Hogan's WWF World Title runs) but it was a very entertaining and a memorable storyline.
It would have been nice for Ricky Steamboat have gotten that same honor in WWF, but it doesn't make his career any less memorable or legendary. But just the same, while the World Title isn't something legit in the sense of competition as most of us fortunately know, its use in storylines and how a said story can be told can be very well done if handled properly. Steamboat's NWA World Title amongst others is one example of this.
Just food for thought, because I feel calling the title a mere prop doesn't do justice to several storylines we've seen unravel in the past. However, in today's wrestling world, I'd have to concede and admit that today's titles are props with how often they are either ignored or how often they change hands. That's my two cents.
amodernphoenix
Occasional Pre-Show
TheHitMark- You made some great points and I will stipulate to "plot device" rather than "prop." Storyline-wise, they are the same and as you so articulately noted, they should be the end goal of a character's journey. You also made a great point about the other organizations, though I believe it was lost on the guy who started this thread, since he had started a whole series of them.
By the way, I loved that you mentioned Lou Thesz, one of the greatest wrestlers to ever grace a wrestling ring. The fact that he is not in the WWE Hall of Fame and Abdullah the Butcher is... well, it's pathetic.
By the way, I loved that you mentioned Lou Thesz, one of the greatest wrestlers to ever grace a wrestling ring. The fact that he is not in the WWE Hall of Fame and Abdullah the Butcher is... well, it's pathetic.
FlairFan2003
Mid-Card Championship Winner
There are a lot of guys who get World Title runs, one individual run really doesnt mean a guy was great, often it is the culmination of a story, etc.
In the "modern era" of wrestling, circa 1980 and on, the time when Vince Jr was taking over WWE and Jim Crockett Jr was taking over as the NWA's top guy, there have been a small group of guys who have dominated as World Champions, Hogan, Flair, Hart, HHH, Cena. Maybe you put Savage and HBK in there. Many other guys have had a run, Ultimate Warrior, DDP, Steamboat, Ron Garvin, St Slaughter, The Mizz, Big Show, Kevin Nash, Austin, Taker, Edge, numerous others. The first group dominated the title scene for a decade plus because they could consistently elevate ratings and crowds. You can argue about various things and the normal ups and downs of the business but every name in that first group consistently made money for the company, which is the ultimate goal of the top guy in the stories.
In that second group there are guys who had great careers and helped draw good money but never dominated as champion. Austin (injuries) & Rock (quit business) could have joined that 1st group if some things worked out differently. Taker's character always seemed better chasing someone than being chased, the reason his reigns often were short and uneventful even though his feuds to win the title often were very popular and drew well. Many of the other guys never "had the it" to be a long term answer at champ, although they often had compelling stories leading into their title runs.
Does a guy deserve the title ? Well, is he over with the crowd, do you have a compelling storyline that will interest people ? If so, then that guy is worthy of the belt. Now Steamboat had those qualities and his title win came off great, it was an awesome moment. He did not however in my opinion have enough charisma to carry a promotion long term, through multiple opponents and stories. I believe this is why his run was short, ultimately putting over Flair, who went on to have strong feuds vs Terry Funk, Lex Luger, & Sting consecutively over the next year, plus a short run vr Great Mutah as well. Did Steamboat deserve to be champ ? Id say so, did he deserve a long running dominant title run ? I dont think so.
Now should he have been WWE Champ ? He would have been the same thing, a great short term run, not a long term answer. He was very limited in his ability to portray anything other than a squeaky clean family guy, he lacked Hogan & Flair's charisma, and honestly HHH's as well. Even Hart had the ability to portray a villain, or at least inject some nuance into his character. Either during the "Hogan Era" or "Hitman Era" I think Steamboat could have been good for a short term but he wasnt better than either of those guys, same as he wasnt better as an overall performer than Flair. Staying in WCW he was not as entertaining as Sting and if he had gone back to WWE he would have been a touch below HBK & Kevin Nash in terms of overall entertainment value.
In the "modern era" of wrestling, circa 1980 and on, the time when Vince Jr was taking over WWE and Jim Crockett Jr was taking over as the NWA's top guy, there have been a small group of guys who have dominated as World Champions, Hogan, Flair, Hart, HHH, Cena. Maybe you put Savage and HBK in there. Many other guys have had a run, Ultimate Warrior, DDP, Steamboat, Ron Garvin, St Slaughter, The Mizz, Big Show, Kevin Nash, Austin, Taker, Edge, numerous others. The first group dominated the title scene for a decade plus because they could consistently elevate ratings and crowds. You can argue about various things and the normal ups and downs of the business but every name in that first group consistently made money for the company, which is the ultimate goal of the top guy in the stories.
In that second group there are guys who had great careers and helped draw good money but never dominated as champion. Austin (injuries) & Rock (quit business) could have joined that 1st group if some things worked out differently. Taker's character always seemed better chasing someone than being chased, the reason his reigns often were short and uneventful even though his feuds to win the title often were very popular and drew well. Many of the other guys never "had the it" to be a long term answer at champ, although they often had compelling stories leading into their title runs.
Does a guy deserve the title ? Well, is he over with the crowd, do you have a compelling storyline that will interest people ? If so, then that guy is worthy of the belt. Now Steamboat had those qualities and his title win came off great, it was an awesome moment. He did not however in my opinion have enough charisma to carry a promotion long term, through multiple opponents and stories. I believe this is why his run was short, ultimately putting over Flair, who went on to have strong feuds vs Terry Funk, Lex Luger, & Sting consecutively over the next year, plus a short run vr Great Mutah as well. Did Steamboat deserve to be champ ? Id say so, did he deserve a long running dominant title run ? I dont think so.
Now should he have been WWE Champ ? He would have been the same thing, a great short term run, not a long term answer. He was very limited in his ability to portray anything other than a squeaky clean family guy, he lacked Hogan & Flair's charisma, and honestly HHH's as well. Even Hart had the ability to portray a villain, or at least inject some nuance into his character. Either during the "Hogan Era" or "Hitman Era" I think Steamboat could have been good for a short term but he wasnt better than either of those guys, same as he wasnt better as an overall performer than Flair. Staying in WCW he was not as entertaining as Sting and if he had gone back to WWE he would have been a touch below HBK & Kevin Nash in terms of overall entertainment value.
Well as others have said, he was world champion. But if the question is should he have been the WWF champion, then no. No other babyface besides Hulk Hogan had the drawing power to be WWF champion at the time. Randy Savage was the 2nd most over guy in the company and yet he still never main evented a major show as champion without Hulk Hogan.
I agree with the people that said he would have been good for a short term WWE title run, but Hogan was the guy then. Steamboat was a lot better chasing Ric Flair then as champion, and I think the same would hold true in WWE. Some guys are just better when they are chasing, but I think he definitely deserved a short term run in WWE.
yoshi_doce2006
Getting Noticed By Management
Yet both Flair, Rhodes, and Steamboat made opponents look like pure gold as champ. Seems like the champ back then was better at making people look good than the challengers.
Mossmaniac75
New Member
His style fit when he was NWA world champ. His matches with Ric Flair were some of the best of the eighties. They worked well together and the NWA did a heck of a job have them feud. They had great matches together in the early eighties as well. As a WWF world champ his style wasnt what the WWF may have been looking for at the time.
justtxyank
Championship Contender
No. I'm a HUGE Steamboat fan. He was my favorite wrestler as a kid. I loved his action figure.
But...during his time in the WWF he was never over enough to be a world champion. His first run ended too quickly to get over enough and his second run was an embarrassment at the hands of Vince.
Was he good enough to be champion? Heck yeah! He was the best. But he wasn't popular in the WWF the way he was in NWA/WCW. For him to work as a champion you would have needed a heel champion for him to feud with and take the belt from. He could have done his Flair feud (arrogant heel vs clean cut babyface) with Ted DiBiase EASILY, but then you are talking about taking time away from Hogan and Savage to fit in reigns for both DiBiase and Steamboat all while taking the time to build Steamboat to greater WWF popularity than he had thus far reached.
But...during his time in the WWF he was never over enough to be a world champion. His first run ended too quickly to get over enough and his second run was an embarrassment at the hands of Vince.
Was he good enough to be champion? Heck yeah! He was the best. But he wasn't popular in the WWF the way he was in NWA/WCW. For him to work as a champion you would have needed a heel champion for him to feud with and take the belt from. He could have done his Flair feud (arrogant heel vs clean cut babyface) with Ted DiBiase EASILY, but then you are talking about taking time away from Hogan and Savage to fit in reigns for both DiBiase and Steamboat all while taking the time to build Steamboat to greater WWF popularity than he had thus far reached.
Jack-Hammer
YOU WILL RESPECT MY AUTHORITAH!!!!
Steamboat is someone that I could never buy into as a long term World Champion. His time as NWA World Heavyeight Champion during his feud with Ric Flair in 1989 produced some incredible matches but, let's face it, a big reason that the feud was so successful was because it involved Ric Flair.
From an in-ring perspective, Ricky Steamboat was phenomenal. It was just flat out fun to watch Steamboat wrestle inside a ring. Hell, he showed that he's still pretty damn good a few years back during the legends' feud with Chris Jericho, which culminated at WrestleMania.
However, Steamboat's one real flaw was the fact that the man had no personality. I'm sorry, but the man had the charisma of a jar of mayonaise left out in the sun for about a week. If you can't cut promos, if you can't really just draw fans into who you are as a character; then you're not going to be a long term main eventer.
If Steamboat had won the title and then moved onto feud with someone like maybe Barry Windham or Lex Luger; then I don't think we'd be remembering his one run as NWA WHC with nearly as much sentiment. Without Flair to help prop him up, Steamboat just didn't have the juice.
However, I think this is a good opportunity to bring up a point on something. It seems that, for some odd reason, there's an attitude among internet wrestling fans that a wrestler isn't a star or can't have a great career if he wasn't a main eventer. I'm sometimes guilty of this myself, I just don't think about it at times. Steamboat was a great talent, that isn't diminished just because he never really had the charisma to be the top guy for any real length of time. There've been LOTS of great wrestlers that never made it to the main event scene and were firmly planted within the mid-card or tag team scenes just as there've been some guys here and there elevated to main event status when they really shouldn't have been.
From an in-ring perspective, Ricky Steamboat was phenomenal. It was just flat out fun to watch Steamboat wrestle inside a ring. Hell, he showed that he's still pretty damn good a few years back during the legends' feud with Chris Jericho, which culminated at WrestleMania.
However, Steamboat's one real flaw was the fact that the man had no personality. I'm sorry, but the man had the charisma of a jar of mayonaise left out in the sun for about a week. If you can't cut promos, if you can't really just draw fans into who you are as a character; then you're not going to be a long term main eventer.
If Steamboat had won the title and then moved onto feud with someone like maybe Barry Windham or Lex Luger; then I don't think we'd be remembering his one run as NWA WHC with nearly as much sentiment. Without Flair to help prop him up, Steamboat just didn't have the juice.
However, I think this is a good opportunity to bring up a point on something. It seems that, for some odd reason, there's an attitude among internet wrestling fans that a wrestler isn't a star or can't have a great career if he wasn't a main eventer. I'm sometimes guilty of this myself, I just don't think about it at times. Steamboat was a great talent, that isn't diminished just because he never really had the charisma to be the top guy for any real length of time. There've been LOTS of great wrestlers that never made it to the main event scene and were firmly planted within the mid-card or tag team scenes just as there've been some guys here and there elevated to main event status when they really shouldn't have been.
Owen 3:16 says I just stole your Slammy!!
Pre-Show Stalwart
He was where he needed to be. He was not on the same level as Hogan or Savage. Also, Steamboat was not popular as was Warrior. Anyway's, didn't Steamboat leave the company shortly after he won the IC belt?
Steamboat was great as an NWA World Champion. I think his title reign should of been longer. He was the kind of wrestler that was perfect for NWA main events at the time. He could go 60 min no problem. The WWF in the 80s was a different story. Hogan was the man. Steamboat was an ideal IC champion. The IC championship was the workhorse title at that time. Once again I wish Steamboat had a longer reign as IC champion. It's funny because a lot of former IC champs would of made great NWA Champs. To answer the question, yes he deserved to be NWA Champion but wouldn't of worked as WWF Champion during the 80s.
pretty sure Rick Steamboat was World Champion in 1989, he defeated Ric Flair for the belt.
As far as WWE, no he did not "deserve" to. Hulkamania was running wild, Savage was the heir apparent. A high flying mid carder would have failed massively in the cartoon world of WWE in the 80s. The only guy who may have been a solid champion in that timeframe was Ted DiBiase, he would have been a killer heel WWE Champion in 1988-1989, pity in never happened
As far as WWE, no he did not "deserve" to. Hulkamania was running wild, Savage was the heir apparent. A high flying mid carder would have failed massively in the cartoon world of WWE in the 80s. The only guy who may have been a solid champion in that timeframe was Ted DiBiase, he would have been a killer heel WWE Champion in 1988-1989, pity in never happened
THTRobtaylor
Once & Future Wrestlezone Columnist
Steamboat was someone who could be a wonderful "chaser" of a title but never a serious long-term draw as a champion. It's not so cut and dried that it was impossible, indeed it was a toss-up at one point as to whether Savage or Steamboat would be "the guy" after Hogan... Serious thought was being given to a rematch at WM4 for the World title. BUT Ricky wanted his time away and that killed his chances of ever getting a WWE belt again. He got it in WCW and again, brilliant chase, short reign worked for him.
As to belts themselves, the proper term (as coined by Hitchcock) is "The McGuffin". The item of the quest, purpose of the story or simply "The Prize".
In movies, TV, sports indeed life itself, the McGuffin is clear... You go to uni, get a degree... you get a scroll on Graduation Day... it's a McGuffin to quantify something that is not tangible. In Indiana Jones there is always an item to find...in Football a trophy and in wrestling it's belts.
Where wrestling used to get it right was that few people got one, it was hard, so someone like Steamboat, who overcame the throat attack and all the humiliations Savage bestowed got "the prize" at the end of his quest. I would argue his treatment of the IC title was what planted the seed for the negative change, it took a good 10 years but once he got it, he didn't want to defend it, he wanted to change diapers... in itself worthy, but it ruined the mystique of titles, in that they were now disposable and the winning was more important than the defending.
What does Indy hope todo when he gets the objects, he normally sells them to the museum. Sure people get to see it, but the thing is degraded cos it's now just an object that can be bought and sold. Kinda the same thing...
As to belts themselves, the proper term (as coined by Hitchcock) is "The McGuffin". The item of the quest, purpose of the story or simply "The Prize".
In movies, TV, sports indeed life itself, the McGuffin is clear... You go to uni, get a degree... you get a scroll on Graduation Day... it's a McGuffin to quantify something that is not tangible. In Indiana Jones there is always an item to find...in Football a trophy and in wrestling it's belts.
Where wrestling used to get it right was that few people got one, it was hard, so someone like Steamboat, who overcame the throat attack and all the humiliations Savage bestowed got "the prize" at the end of his quest. I would argue his treatment of the IC title was what planted the seed for the negative change, it took a good 10 years but once he got it, he didn't want to defend it, he wanted to change diapers... in itself worthy, but it ruined the mystique of titles, in that they were now disposable and the winning was more important than the defending.
What does Indy hope todo when he gets the objects, he normally sells them to the museum. Sure people get to see it, but the thing is degraded cos it's now just an object that can be bought and sold. Kinda the same thing...