A Little Reality About Ric Flair's Title Reigns

klunderbunker

Welcome to My (And Not Sly's) House
People constantly talk about how today's title reigns mean so much less because they're so short. Here are a few numbers that might be interesting to you. The following are the number of days that Ric Flair held some of his world titles (in chronological order by governing body):

NWA

44
69
45

WCW

26
78
28
7
0

WWF

77
41

In other words, about half of Flair's title reigns didn't even make it three months. But he's Flair so holding him to the same standards as Cena and Edge and HHH isn't fair right?
 
Not to be argumentative, KB, but how exactly does Flair have a zero day reign? Like, he won it, then lost immediatly?
 
Not to be argumentative, KB, but how exactly does Flair have a zero day reign? Like, he won it, then lost immediatly?

Wikipedia says that Kevin Nash defeated Jeff Jarret and Scott Steiner on an episode of Thunder on May 24, 2000. Says that Nash gave title "back to Flair" on May 29, 2000 on an episode of Nitro. Then it says Jarret got it on the same night.
 
I always thought the whole "the title meant more back in the day because the reigns were longer" was total bullshit, but I don't think it makes Flair's accomplishments or legacy any less great. A short title reign can have just as much meaning because of the way it was won. Most recently it was seen with Punk beating Cena at Money in the Bank. You can't tell me that win wasn't a huge deal just because he lost the title a month later to Alberto del Rio!

I still think it's ridiculous that John Cena is that close to beating Flair's record, and he's been wrestling for maybe 1/4 the time Flair has... After looking up some info, Flair started wrestling in 72, and won his first World Heavyweight title in 81. That's about the time John Cena has been with the WWE total... He won his last title while with WCW in 2000. So 16 World title reigns in 19 years, compared to Cena's 12 in 6 years... And I like John Cena, I'm just saying it's a little much.

Congrats on your 15,000th post by the way!
 
The difference is Flair has five title regins that lasted over 400 days. Here are his longest:

476
793
412
452
426

Edge's longest is 105 followed by 76. It's not so much the quantity but Flair has many more quality reigns. Just goes to show comparing different eras is like comparing apples to oranges.
 
A little more perspective. Ric Flair held the NWA world title for 2859 out of 3215 days from September 17, 1981 – July 7, 1990. That means there was only a combined 356 days during that stretch he did not have the title. That’s dominance.
 
Oh totally. That wasn't what I was getting at and I intentionally left those out. My point is that not all of Flair's reigns were such huge ones. If you look at the amount of long reigns that he had, it's only about 6-7. The implication you get normally is that FLair's shortest reign was like a year.
 
That's true. Only about half his reigns would be considered "quality reigns" I suppose. The problem with Edge is he doesn't have any "quality reigns." I guess he does by today's standards. The variable is how the definition of "quality reign" has changed over the years. Edge's best reign would be considered mediocre years ago but would be considered a normal reign by today's standards.
 
Cena has at least two great regins by today's standards. His first and third (I think it was his third) were awesome. As for a timeline of great reigns I'd say it was a couple years in the 80s and before, nine months to a year in the 90s, and anything over four months in the 2000s and beyond. Cena's year long reign from September 2006 - September 2007 is probably a modern day equivalent to the four year Hogan reign of the 80s. The probelm geeks like me have is being able to separate these eras. I still think of four months as a weak reign even though that's been average to better than average for ten years now.
 
This should sum up things for you: Miz's title reign lasted roughly five months which is the longest reign in about 4 years.
 
I wish we didn't measure reigns by lengths but rather than the amount of defences. I'm sure Cena defended his belt more in his year reign than Flair did in his 793 day reign.
 
I wish we didn't measure reigns by lengths but rather than the amount of defences. I'm sure Cena defended his belt more in his year reign than Flair did in his 793 day reign.

I highly doubt that. They had a ton of house shows back then and Flair would constantly be wrestling long matches almost nightly. Cena had more televised defenses, but I'd be stunned if Cena had more total.
 
Another thing to think about is that Flair (as far as I know) didn't lose the title just to win it back immediately as in quite a few recent cases lately. Edge being the prime example and Cena a close second.

I don't have anything against short reigns but when stuff like the Rey Mysterio deal earlier in the year happens, I lose it. There is no real reason for it to happen.
 
I highly doubt that. They had a ton of house shows back then and Flair would constantly be wrestling long matches almost nightly. Cena had more televised defenses, but I'd be stunned if Cena had more total.

Plus, with moving from territory to territory and facing each top guy, he would have faced a far more diverse selection of opponents than John and, going by the house show reports I see in PowerSlam, today's house show Main Events are also more likely to be Tag affairs than in Flair's time (so the belt isn't on the line).

As such Flair would actually have wrestled more title matches over comparable periods than Cena (week on week, month on month).
 
The difference is Flair has five title regins that lasted over 400 days. Here are his longest:

476
793
412
452
426

Edge's longest is 105 followed by 76. It's not so much the quantity but Flair has many more quality reigns. Just goes to show comparing different eras is like comparing apples to oranges.
The difference being Cena works in front of a worldwide audience every week, whereas Flair did not.

A little more perspective. Ric Flair held the NWA world title for 2859 out of 3215 days from September 17, 1981 – July 7, 1990. That means there was only a combined 356 days during that stretch he did not have the title. That’s dominance.
No, that's a lack of national television exposure.

Make no mistake about it, if Flair had been on TV every week, sometimes two or three times a week, he wouldn't have held the belt that long. In fact, I daresay Flair's legend would be lessened quite a bit had the old NWA had a national television booking schedule.

I wish we didn't measure reigns by lengths but rather than the amount of defences. I'm sure Cena defended his belt more in his year reign than Flair did in his 793 day reign.

I highly doubt that. They had a ton of house shows back then and Flair would constantly be wrestling long matches almost nightly. Cena had more televised defenses, but I'd be stunned if Cena had more total.

And Cena probably works 3 or 4 house shows a week as well.
 
The difference being Cena works in front of a worldwide audience every week, whereas Flair did not.

No, that's a lack of national television exposure.

Make no mistake about it, if Flair had been on TV every week, sometimes two or three times a week, he wouldn't have held the belt that long. In fact, I daresay Flair's legend would be lessened quite a bit had the old NWA had a national television booking schedule.





And Cena probably works 3 or 4 house shows a week as well.
Yeah probably, but not enough to have more defenses than Flair had in a two year reign.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,846
Messages
3,300,834
Members
21,727
Latest member
alvarosamaniego
Back
Top