A-Grade Wrestlers

[S.J. Maximus]

A couple of days ago Mark Madden addressed the Bret Hart / Triple H drama by labeling both as B-plus wrestlers, saying that the last 20 years (1993-2013) has only produced four A-grade wrestlers: The Rock, Steve Austin, Undertaker, and Shawn Michaels. He says that A-grade wrestlers are superior with ring work, promos, look, persona, drawing power, track record, reliability, employability.

To be honest, I don't think any one man is superior in all of those categories, Austin walked out on WWE for almost a whole year. Undertaker's mainstream name value is minimal, the casual fan knows more about Bret Hart than Taker. Michaels' look leaves more to be desired and I wouldn't call him a big draw by any stretch of the imagination. Rock might be the closest but he was in and out of WWE since 2001 till now. So I'm going to define my grading system and show you how I'd do it:

I define A+ wrestlers as true icons that not just wrestling fans but the world recognizes as legends of the business and could come back at any time to make headlines worldwide.

A-grade wrestlers could be better than A+ wrestlers in some areas but simply don't have the mainstream appeal that A+ wrestlers have. They are our pro wrestling legends

A- wrestlers are very good, have been at the top of the card multiple times (and excelled there) but lack something key from making them a legend.


By my definition, there are only 2 A+ wrestlers in the last 20 years, Steve Austin and The Rock.

A's - The Undertaker, Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, Triple H, Mick Foley, Kurt Angle, Chris Jericho, Big Show, John Cena

'A-' - Batista, Edge, Randy Orton, Kane, JBL, Jeff Hardy, Rey Mysterio, Eddie Guerrero, Brock Lesnar, Booker T, RVD

I couldn't decide where to put CM Punk, I think he's an A- for now but by the time he retires he'll be an A.

So what do you think? Using either Madden's definition, my definition, or creating your own, tell me who you think the true A-grade wrestlers from 1993-2013 are!

 

[MCMG]

Actually very interesting. I would always think that John Cena is A-grade but if you look at the Madden definition he is probably A-. Madden is right about the four with his own definition although is "reliability" take into account injuries. Shawn Michaels missed 5 years of his career so technically he isn't "reliable" but i'm being very pedantic. Same could be argued with Austin.

Looking at Madden's definition, The Miz ticks all those boxes. Living in the UK he has appeared several times on Sky over-here promoting ppv's and I know he goes elswhere around the world. That is pretty big in my eyes; as well as his improving skills in the ring; the way he interacted with the guest hosts of Raw. He's has it all.

By your definition, I would class Taker, HBK, Cena and HHH in the A+ category. I think that these four as well as Rock/Austin are the biggest stars of the last 20 years and were the complete superstars. I think the Undertaker is very well known. If his name was to be mentioned, I'm sure people would instantly know whom you would be talking about.

I think you are being very kind to the Big Show by putting him in that company over the likes of Orton,Edge,Kane and even Jeff Hardy. If it were not for his personal issues Jeff Hardy would be massive. He was crazy over when he was world champ and would have been pushed beyond our imagination. I'm not going to say in the Rock/Cena section but he would have been just below it.

 

[Papa Pillman]

A couple of days ago Mark Madden addressed the Bret Hart / Triple H drama by labeling both as B-plus wrestlers, saying that the last 20 years (1993-2013) has only produced four A-grade wrestlers: The Rock, Steve Austin, Undertaker, and Shawn Michaels. He says that A-grade wrestlers are superior with ring work, promos, look, persona, drawing power, track record, reliability, employability.

To be honest, I don't think any one man is superior in all of those categories, Austin walked out on WWE for almost a whole year. Undertaker's mainstream name value is minimal, the casual fan knows more about Bret Hart than Taker. Michaels' look leaves more to be desired and I wouldn't call him a big draw by any stretch of the imagination. Rock might be the closest but he was in and out of WWE since 2001 till now. So I'm going to define my grading system and show you how I'd do it:

I define A+ wrestlers as true icons that not just wrestling fans but the world recognizes as legends of the business and could come back at any time to make headlines worldwide.

A-grade wrestlers could be better than A+ wrestlers in some areas but simply don't have the mainstream appeal that A+ wrestlers have. They are our pro wrestling legends

A- wrestlers are very good, have been at the top of the card multiple times (and excelled there) but lack something key from making them a legend.


By my definition, there are only 2 A+ wrestlers in the last 20 years, Steve Austin and The Rock.

A's - The Undertaker, Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, Triple H, Mick Foley, Kurt Angle, Chris Jericho, Big Show, John Cena

'A-' - Batista, Edge, Randy Orton, Kane, JBL, Jeff Hardy, Rey Mysterio, Eddie Guerrero, Brock Lesnar, Booker T, RVD

I couldn't decide where to put CM Punk, I think he's an A- for now but by the time he retires he'll be an A.

So what do you think? Using either Madden's definition, my definition, or creating your own, tell me who you think the true A-grade wrestlers from 1993-2013 are!

I think this is tough.

Obviously we would all have our own criteria. I think Madden's may be a little too restrictive. I think that the OP's grading scale is a little too inclusive.

However, I have one major question for you S.J. Maximus. I have to wonder, Where do you include Sting?? I have to think you must have just over looked him.

Surely if some of the guys you listed as A-level wrestlers rank that highly in your eyes, Sting would have to atleast be on their level.

As for who would be an "A", grading like that is flawed as everyone will have drawbacks(even Madden's four) no matter what criteria is used, so without attempting to develop some system, I'll just give you the list of guys that for whatever reason are seperate from the pack in the 90s till now era... Flair, Hogan, Austin, Rock, Sting, HBK, Bret, Taker, Hunter, Mick, Jericho, and Cena.

There are close possibilities after that list in Punk, Angle, Eddie, Randy, Benoit, RVD, Hardy etc. But for whatever reason they aren't completely in the class of the others I mentioned, and would all be in some lowered class for now(Punk obviously having the best chance to ascend into the upper class).

 

[Lburn]

Didn't realize Mark Madden's opinion carried any merit. However, I agree with your grading scale for the most part, except I would switch Big Show and Randy Orton, in terms of draw, fandom, modern relevance, but Big Show definitely has the better ring-work. In fact, Big Show fascinates me, his athleticism for his size AND age, his longevity as well.

 

[joduke41]

trying to figure out how Batista made the list.he couldn't wrestle with a thought.he was just HHH's workout buddy.CM Punk could be igher on the list if Vince had kept him a face instead of making him a heal just as he was pushing Cena off the mountain.

 

[Headman]

trying to figure out how Batista made the list.he couldn't wrestle with a thought.he was just HHH's workout buddy.CM Punk could be igher on the list if Vince had kept him a face instead of making him a heal just as he was pushing Cena off the mountain.

Punk had already faded as a face. Turning him heel saved his reign and got the fans to reinvest in him. Cena was in no danger of being replaced as top baby face. Punk was every bit as polarizing and only half as popular.

As for Madden's remarks... I agree with the other posters. Cena fits this criteria and should be on the list. But Madden is a moron and people shouldn't really care what he thinks anyway.

 

[lil bitch Kid]

Mark Madden makes himself relevant again? Really?

Clearly there are more than four "A Grade" wrestlers from the last 20 years. Now his way of phrasing it lends itself to some debate, because he says that the last 20 years have only PRODUCED four. That's a loaded statement meant to hide Madden's ignorance. Of course, Austin, HBK And Taker all started before 1993, so already we can drive trucks through his claims. Fact is that the was a guy named Flair that also started before 1993, and was a bit of an A grade star. You've got to know that Kurt Angle had every attribute Madden talked about. Jericho did too. HHH is right n thee as well. Currently there is a guy named Punk who has every quality as well. And this is use considering guys from the E. The guy is a douche.

 

[S.J. Maximus]

However, I have one major question for you S.J. Maximus. I have to wonder, Where do you include Sting?? I have to think you must have just over looked him.

Going off of Madden's article, I assumed the only wrestlers in contention were WWE superstars. If we were to include WCW, the list would definitely expand to include Sting as an A+, Goldberg as an A, and then Kevin Nash (maybe even Scott Steiner) as A/A-

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

I agree with your definitions and rankings for the most part.

I'd put both Brock Lesnar and CM Punk in the "A" category though instead of the "A-".

It's a good question though, where do you put Sting or Goldberg? For a brief period in the late 90s, they were no doubt "A+" wrestlers by this definition. But maybe over time they end up in the "A" category.

I do agree, there are few generational superstars: Hogan, Flair, Rock, Austin

A second level of top stars, guys who are capable of being the #1 guy in the company, but don't have the same mainstream attention: Savage, Ultimate Warrior, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels, Triple H, Undertaker, Mick Foley, Kurt Angle, Chris Jericho, Brock Lesnar, John Cena, CM Punk. You'd probably put all of Sting, Kevin Nash and Goldberg in here as well.

And then a lower level of guys who are no doubt main eventers, but who were more supporting stars rather than #1 guys: Batista, Edge, Randy Orton, Kane, JBL, The Big Show, Jeff Hardy, Rey Mysterio, Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit, Booker T, RVD, DDP, Scott Steiner.

You could potentially move Foley and Jericho down to the A- level, depending on opinion I guess.

 

[relentless1]

@ op, by your criteria, how can you not have hogan in the A+ column?! i assume as the other guy who mentioned sting did that you just overlooked Hogan and by your criteria only hogan and rock should be there in the A+ column BTW

by your definition of the "A's" id say they were something like this:

A+: Hogan and the Rock

A: Ric Flair, Sting, Stone Cold, Undertaker, Macho Man, John Cena (even though hes a goof), HBK, Bret Hart, HHH

A-: Kurt Angle, Chris Jericho, CM Punk, Randy Orton, Goldberg, Edge

 

[HBsam31]

I usually agree with madden on most thing, but in this case I really think he is being to restrictive in his picks. Cena has to be on the list. I think Kurt Angle would be on this list is well. Not sure how well Angle drew though in the years he was on top. I think you have to look at a star's supporting cast as well. For a time in the early 2000's I think HHH needs to be on this list to. It's really hard to grade all of these guys, but do think there were more than four.

 

[The Butcher]

Madden's entitled to his opinions, just as we are ours. And that's all rankings and lists and nonsense like this ever is, opinions.

Frankly, I like the fact that Madden makes his "A" wrestlers an exclusive group. The cream of the crop should be just that. I do think there are more than four "A" wrestlers in the last 20 years, but not 23, as in the OP's scale. Also, attendance should count (looking at you, Brock).

So anyway, I'd take the OP's A+ and A groups, drop Big Show, add Punk and as far as WWE-centric wrestlers of the last 20 years are concerned, that'd be my A-Grade list (I'll forgo the "+" or "-" gradations).

 

[tom9422]

Sorting into A+, A and A- just makes it too inclusive.

The thing i don't understand is how Madden can then rant on about how CM Punk doesn't have 'the look', but then include Shawn Michaels in that list of A-grade wrestlers.

 

[FlairFan2003]

I understood exactly what Madden was saying, Hart was a star but not a transitional star, not a cross generational star, he never was going to appear on the cover of Sports Illustrated (Hogan), star in box office busting feature films (Rock), he was never going to become a pop culture phenom (Austin), or a sports world culture icon who's very appearance tops the ratings on Raw over every other segment a many years after he was last a relevant member of the active roster (Flair). Hart essentially was in Madden's view hypocritical or maybe short sighted in denigrating a performer (HHH) whose performance as a drawing card and in ring ability were exactly equal if not slightly better than him. It would be like Flair doing an interview saying Hogan was never a major international star or Hogan saying Austin wasnt really a pop culture icon.

People who are nitpicking Madden over only picking 4 performers as "A" level by mentioning his exclusion of Hogan, Sting, Flair, or Savage (or for that matter Andre and Dusty Rhodes) are off base because Madden specified a time period of the last 20 years. Hart is in that time frame because in the 80s he was a mid card tag team wrestler who very slowly moved up the singles ranks, first becoming a legit top level star in 1992 (WrestleMania with Piper and SummerSlam vs Bulldog really elevated him into that tier, the title win over Flair was just the icing on the cake). Hogan reached top tier status in 1984 and probably reached his peak in 87. Flair climbed steadily in recognition through out the 80s, hitting peaks in 85 and 89. Savage didnt make that top tier till 87 and probably reached his zenith in 88-89. All of them had big matches, big moments, headlined major shows, etc through the 90s. In fact I would argue all three of them were bigger in the 90s than Hart. They were not however "created" or at least did not reach their zenith (like Austin, Hart, Taker, or HBK) during the last 20 years.

Die hard wrestling fans sometimes over estimate the importance of wrestlers. Simply put, Miz, Jericho, Orton, Edge are not A wrestlers and niether was Kurt Angle. They are good, they are successful, they are not as recognizable to casual fans or have cross generational appeal like Austin or Rock. Arguing that any of them be included on any list of "A" stars is like saying King Kong Bundy is equal among the stars of the 80s with Rhodes, Savage, Flair, & Hogan.

Last, any such list, based on opinion (no matter how well informed) will generate disagreement among those with differing view points. No one can say Madden is uninformed, he actively covered the wrestling industry for the better part of two decades for the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, writing feature articles on the economics and business aspects of WWE & NWA, covering various PPVs, and interviewing top stars like Flair, Terry Funk, & HBK. He probably knows more about wrestling than anyone posting on this sight, myself included. He's a blow hard who knows how to generate crowd response by being controversial (serves him well on the radio where he's made a nice career in Sports Talk, and in print, where among other things he was among the first columnists in the country to break the Jerry Sandusky story months before his arrest) but he is a passionate wrestling fan who has studied the industry longer than many of today's have been alive. He is a lot of things but he is not an idiot.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Mark madden is a fat sack of shit. He actually once said Orton was bad because he was a "think". Madden is lucky pro wrestling journalism isn't more popular or he'd be fucked. Cena is an A grade wrestler. Also "only"? Lol, use that criteria, you'd be hard pressed to find more than that in ANY era.

 

[justtxyank]

I actually agree with Madden's point. I think wrestling fans severely overrate their favorite wrestlers.

In general, wrestling has a niche audience that always watches. Whether John Cena is on top, HHH, Randy Orton, CM Punk, Kurt Angle, Jeff Hardy, etc. there fans that just watch. Very few of them actually move the needle significantly beyond what another in their place might do. Cena and Hardy might sell merchandise and a few more ppvs, but neither radically impacts the company.

I think since the 1980s, you can count the true needle movers on two hands. Hulk Hogan, Sting, Dusty Rhodes, Roddy Piper, Steve Austin, The Rock, The Undertaker, Randy Savage, and Goldberg.

As far as I am concerned those are the only names that have actually "drawn" for their company at a high rate beyond what someone else in their spot would have done and still fall into Madden's criteria. (I know some will laugh at Goldberg's inclusion as a ring worker, but Goldberg was one of the most believable wrestlers of the 90s.)

 

[Nadeem Ahmad]

I think since the 1980s, you can count the true needle movers on two hands. Hulk Hogan, Sting, Dusty Rhodes, Roddy Piper, Steve Austin, The Rock, The Undertaker, Randy Savage, and Goldberg.

The main thing, those guys you mentioned, had in common was that people who didn't watch wrestling might have known who they were, except for maybe Dusty Rhodes. But going on the criteria of "A-grade wrestlers" based on the requirements of Madden, which were

superior with ring work, promos, look, persona, drawing power, track record, reliability, employability

, and considering performers in the wrestling industry after 1993, I'd say he was pretty much spot on with whom he mentioned: Shawn Michaels, Undertaker, Steve Austin, and The Rock. Any other wrestlers mentioned, like Kurt Angle, Jericho, Edge, etc. simply don't make the cut, because of lesser drawing ability, most easily seen by how unknown they are to people who have no knowledge about wrestling at all.

As far as I am concerned those are the only names that have actually "drawn" for their company at a high rate beyond what someone else in their spot would have done and still fall into Madden's criteria. (I know some will laugh at Goldberg's inclusion as a ring worker, but Goldberg was one of the most believable wrestlers of the 90s.)

He was believeable, but a huge risky person to work with in the ring.

Sorting into A+, A and A- just makes it too inclusive.

It definitely does feel too inclusive that way. Personally, I think fans in general, including me, do overrate the wrestlers a lot, like a couple of others already mentioned. Instead of ranking them with grades, leave it to the shareholders and advertisers to rate whom is the best seller (excuse the pun), or whatever they consider these "non-athletes" or "performers" to be.

The thing i don't understand is how Madden can then rant on about how CM Punk doesn't have 'the look', but then include Shawn Michaels in that list of A-grade wrestlers.

You might not have taken a look at Shawn Michaels of 1993, when he was bulging with muscles, due to using steroids.

 

[justtxyank]

Yeah Nadeem, I agree with his list for post 93 stars (I assume that's what he means) except I would take HBK off the list. I have a lot of respect for HBK the performer, but I don't think he's really a draw. I don't think anyone that is not a "wrestling fan" would know who he was. I don't think anyone watches wrestling just to watch HBK whereas I think Austin and Rock could draw non fans to the sport to watch them. Taker to a lesser extent has that and I put Goldberg on the list.

 

[Nadeem Ahmad]

Yeah Nadeem, I agree with his list for post 93 stars (I assume that's what he means) except I would take HBK off the list. I have a lot of respect for HBK the performer, but I don't think he's really a draw. I don't think anyone that is not a "wrestling fan" would know who he was. I don't think anyone watches wrestling just to watch HBK whereas I think Austin and Rock could draw non fans to the sport to watch them. Taker to a lesser extent has that and I put Goldberg on the list.

Point taken. Could you say the same about Dusty Rhodes in the eighties (since you mentioned him)?

 

[Dirk]

I know it's super cool to hate Cena, because he's not a heel and we, the IWC only cheer heels, because we're dipshits, but I really believe Madden is being unfair to Cena. He really is this generation's Hogan. If WCW were to reopen and Cena were to jump ship, I really think he would also be a "needle-mover".