Who Was Better: Honky Tonk Man, or Jerry Lawler?

[Tenta]

Yes, we got some fessin' and some feudin' amongst families here. These men are cousins, but in truth, to the best of my knowledge, they flat out dislike one another. Honky ripping Jerry, Jerry taking a shot at the Honky Tonk Man. It just doesn't all add up at this point. But since we can't mitigate families, let's do the best to at least solve one problem: Who was better? The Honky Tonk Man, or Jerry "The King" Lawler?

Now, honestly, this isn't that fair of a fight, with how I figure it. I'm going with Lawler, mainly because of how Jerry was able to work as a face in Memphis, and a heel everywhere else. If you ever watch his work from 1993 in the WWE, and compare it to his work in the USWA that same year, you'd feel like you were watching almost completely different wrestlers. You rarely see someone that's so versatile like that, let alone at the exact same time he's working as both a heel and a face. As a face, King is good, but as a heel, he's marvelous. His selling is spot on, and though his offense is limited, it's effective, and makes you feel as though you're watching a story unfold right before your very eyes. Such tactics as hiding under the ring, or other such things, make King a very entertaining superstar. Plus, he's had the USWA Title, what, fifteen billion times?

As great as Honky was at entertaining, Bret was always right... Honky is pretty soft, and just doesn't seem believable. That's why, in this one, I have to go with the king, Jerry Lawler.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Jerry Lawler was better. Honky Tonk Man may have had that long run with the Intercontinental Championship that Santino tried so hard to beat last year.... but my vote definitely goes to Jerry Lawler because of his accomplishments. He would be a candidate for the most title wins ever, with more than 140 title victories to his name. Let's see Triple H ever beat THAT record. So, yeah. Lawler was better because he accomplished so much more.

 

[PEP3]

Without going too greatly into the details of why, it's hands-down Jerry "The King" Lawler.

While I don't use his 7,000 USWA Heavyweight title reigns -- or the 10,000 times he held the Southern Heavyweight title (basically the pre-cursor to USWA) -- as a determining factor, that could come into play as well. Primarily my determination is based on the fact that this man remained one of (if not the) country's top regional talent for nearly 30 years. During that time, he faced a veritable who's who of the industry, taking people like "Handsome" Harley Race and Ric Flair to time limit draws for the NWA World Heavyweight title, worked an amazing angle with Bret Hart in the WWF and, of course, won his single World Heavyweight title in the AWA.

Honky Tonk Man was a great as well, in his own right, but when it comes down to a point of which man has the most historically significant impact on the industry, I have to go with "The King." There'll never be another like him!

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

It's Jerry Lawler hands down. Not many people can say they WERE their territory. Lawler can. If you're a wrestling fan and you think of Memphis Wrestling, you think of Jerry Lawler. He's an icon in Memphis and in that town, he could beat or draw nearly ANYONE. Sure his title reigns are inflated, but the man worked as hard as anyone during his time. He feuded with anyone and everyone in his territory and he should have had a run with the NWA Worlds Title. It's a shame he only got to be AWA World Champion while the company was going under.

Honky Tonk Man was more mainstream, but not as successful. He never was a World champion. Lawler was. And Lawler made more money. In a smaller territory. Honky Tonk Man headlined quite a few house shows when he was IC champion and his gate wasn't as big as Lawler's were in Memphis on a weekly basis. SO this goes to Lawler and it's not very close.

 

[jmt225]

In my opinion, the Honky Tonk Man is the greatest, most successful comedic character in the history of professional wrestling. But don’t fool yourself, he was a comedic character and nothing more. His matches sucked, and his run didn’t last very long, because as great as he was with that character, it existed for comedic relief and nothing more. It was just fortunate for Honky that the people hated his and Jimmy Hart’s guts, more so than any comedic character has and will ever be hated.

Jerry Lawler, on the other hand, is a little bit of everything. He was a TREMENDOUS wrestler in Memphis for YEARS and YEARS. That territory lasted longer than any other, and it was all because of Lawler’s greatness. The man knew how to draw, knew how to book in fresh, creative feuds, he could wrestle his ass off, and his promos were fantastic. However, his success doesn’t stop in Memphis… he was great in WWE, as well, where just like his cousin, he was a comedic relief more than anything (and he was damn good in that role, too). However, he eventually found his way to the commentators booth, where he would become one of the greatest color commentators of all time.

So, to recap, Lawler had a legendary run in Memphis for nearly 20 years, and is now reaching the 20 year mark as a WWE performer. He is as successful as anyone has been throughout the history of the business. That’s a fact. His cousin, Honky, while he left a mark on this business with his character, and while he was fun while he lasted it, the fact remains that he was only around for a couple of years, and after that he wrestled nothing but shitty indy shows. That’s his career. And when you compare the careers, it’s an indisputable fact that Jerry Lawler > Honky Tonk Man in every conceivable way.

 

[Hartfan]

Lawler is good no doubt there, however Honky was the guy we all just wanted to take his guitar away and smash him over the head. There has been nobody else to hold the IC belt as long as honky did and that is a fact. And the only reason he lost to the warrior is that his gimmick had finally ran its distance and he had become stale.... If lawler is so great, then how come he was never given a title when he still wrestled for the WWE?

 

[XgringolocoX]

Hartfan, a title reign does not a great wrestler make. Lawler was great in the WWF without a title. On the other hand Honky needed that reign to be anything. Think about it. The ONLY claim Honky has is holding the IC title way longer than he should have. He fit a story, it's not a truely deserved reign. Nothing he did stuck out in my mind.
Lawer though.....he's brilliant. He put talent over time and again playing a motherfucker. His feud with bret Hart was awesome. One of my favorite feuds to date.
So while it does look like it's a bandwagon thread the answer is clear. And that correct answer is Jerry Lawler hands down with out a shadow of a doubt is WAAAAAY better than Honky, period.

[edit] In addition to the title thing. Tommy Dreamer hasn't held to many titles. ECW champ for a few minutes, Hardcore Champ for a few days, Ecw tag champ for a cup of coffee....he was and will always be way over without a title because titles don't make a star. Character, attitude, charisma and good ring work make a great wrestler.

 

[InterestingDrug]

Lawler was hands down the better wrestler than Honky. I disagree that Lawler was ever a legit World Champion. The state of AWA at the time was extremely poor. It looks good on the resume, but it was really not a world class territory at the time.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Overall, I have to go with Jerry Lawler. While Lawler's most successful territory as a wrestler was in Memphis, one look at all the various title reigns he's had over the course of his career and it's easy to see that Lawler was a pretty big star just about everywhere he wrestled. Lawler had well over 100 reigns with major wrestling championships throughout the 70s and 80s and that's impressive. Don't get me wrong, title reigns don't necessarily equal greatness but the sheer number of titles he won is quite impressive. While he won many of those titles in Memphis, he was a huge draw in Memphis as well.

Particularly in Memphis, Lawler feuded with just about every American wrestling legend of the past 40 years at one point or another while wrestling in Memphis and generally did come out on top. Jos LeDuc, Terry Funk, Hulk Hogan, The Fullers, The Mongolian Stomper, Bob Armstrong, The Briscos, Paul Orndorff, Jimmy Valient, Toru Tanaka, Nick Bockwinkel, Dutch Mantel, The Von Erichs and so on and so forth. I could be here all night listing the great feuds Lawler had.

Lawler wasn't really a great technical wrestler or anything, he didn't really have a good physique and wasn't really a great athlete. But, he could talk a blue streak, could brawl with the best of them and always managed to get crowds interested in what he did.

As for the Honky Tonk Man, his biggest claim to fame is the fact that he's the longest reigning Intercontinental Champion in history. Granted, his title reign came about during a time when the title was nearly as important as the WWF Championship and it's a run that's withstood the test of time. However, HTM was also a comedic heel. Quite possibly the greatest comedic heel of all time, but a comedic heel just the same. Over the course of his career, I can't really think of very many memorable feuds the guy had over his time as IC champ, no matches that stand out and withstand the test of time. Let's face it, HTM's run as IC champ is the single biggest and greatest thing he's ever done whereas Jerry Lawler had well over 20 years of runs with dozens of different titles, drew a lot of money and his feud list reads like a who's who list of American professional wrestling of the past 25 years.

Honky was very good for what he was, but 14 months of glory can't compare to Lawler's 25 year legacy.

 

[burnout4200]

Sorry but I gotta go with Honky. As an extremely young child I was actually a huge fan of his. At that age you never like the heel especially in that era. Elvis was one of the most famous people in the world and creating a character off of him was a smart move. Whenever Honky Tonk Man was on TV I got excited. When The Ultimate Warrior stomped him in 20 seconds I got a new favorite thanks to Honky. Besides I never watched Memphis wrestling and neither did most of you guys. You're making your pick due to word of mouth not because of what you saw. Lawler's "25 year legacy" was vastly untelevised. What did he do in WWE when he wrestled there? Nothing. Any good feuds? I don't know of any. He wrestled in front of the same crowd most of his career so of course he's gonna win their hearts eventually.

All in all I'm not afraid to admit I might be wrong, but I'm not gonna base my opinion on everyone else's opinion. If only a handful of people saw it then odds are it's been exaggerated. Honky Tonk Man captured my imagination as a child. Lawler didn't. He never sold me so it's an easy decision. Besides in the last 10 years all Lawler does is lose. He beat Kendrick on his way out and the fact that he lost to Lawler was supposed to be embarrassing. Whatever legacy he had is ruined ... a loss to Lawler is supposed to embarrass you now.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Besides I never watched Memphis wrestling and neither did most of you guys. You're making your pick due to word of mouth not because of what you saw.

That's a bold statement, too bad you don't have anything to back it up. Not only did I watch Memphis wrestling, thanks to the miracle of bootleg VHS tapes back in the day, but I attended a number of shows as a kid.

Lawler's "25 year legacy" was vastly untelevised. What did he do in WWE when he wrestled there? Nothing. Any good feuds? I don't know of any. He wrestled in front of the same crowd most of his career so of course he's gonna win their hearts eventually.

It doesn't sound as though you know very much about the territory system. It wasn't until the 80s, for the most part, that cable television ultimately became the media forum that it is. Prior to that, you had various local television stations that would broadcast shows over certain geographical areas. The CWA was shown on television in the western half of Tennessee so, yeah, it was televised. It wasn't until the mid-80s that the WWE began to be televised on a national basis. Before that, it was regulated to regional television broadcasts just as every other wrestling company that used television was. And no, I'm afraid Lawler didn't wrestle for the same crowd for most of his career. Like every other wrestler in the territory system, he traveled to a lot of different promotions throughout the country. It's true that Memphis was his most successful territory, but most of your biggest stars were only "huge" in certain places. The Von Erichs were big in Texas, The Briscos were big in Florida, so where the Grahams, Ric Flair was big in the Carolinas and Virginias, and so on and so forth. That's how it was really up until the mid to late 1980s. By the time Lawler came to the WWF in the early 90s, he'd been wrestling for more than 20 years and yes, his best days were behind him.

All in all I'm not afraid to admit I might be wrong, but I'm not gonna base my opinion on everyone else's opinion. If only a handful of people saw it then odds are it's been exaggerated. Honky Tonk Man captured my imagination as a child. Lawler didn't. He never sold me so it's an easy decision. Besides in the last 10 years all Lawler does is lose. He beat Kendrick on his way out and the fact that he lost to Lawler was supposed to be embarrassing. Whatever legacy he had is ruined ... a loss to Lawler is supposed to embarrass you now.

Nobody's saying you're wrong, you're entitled to your opinion after all. I'm not saying that Jerry Lawler is the best of all time. Far from it, but he did far more with his career than the HTM ever hoped to. As for Lawler losing now in the WWE, what do you expect him to do? Have him beat 25 year olds? It's simply not good business to have your younger wrestlers lose to a 60 year old that's well past his physical prime. Besides, you're making it sound like that Lawler is an active member of the wrestling locker room in the WWE, when he very rarely has some sort of match on Raw in which he always loses. I can count the number of times on one hand that I've seen Jerry Lawler wrestle in the WWE this past decade. Putting over young guys, giving them a little bit of a rub doesn't tarnish Lawler's legacy, it only shows that he's willing to put his ego aside and do what he can when called upon to possibly help younger guys out. If more older wrestlers were willing to do that, there's always a good possibility that WCW wouldn't have gone down the toilet.