Does Shawn Deserve To Headline A HOF Class By Himself?

[schaeffershawn]

Ok, lets set the record straight right now. HBK was a first ballot Hall of Famer even before he returned. Hello, Ladder matches, Iron man Match, Hell in a Cell, first Grand Slam Champion. How many people even before he came back said he was their best match. The guy went out in 1998 and was the absolute best in the business.

Now lets talk about politics. Name one star who has not played them. Hogan, Piper, Flair, Sting, Nash, Rock, Austin and even the "saintly" Bret Hart played politics. So to judge HBK for doing the same damn thing every major star in the history of the business has done is border line ******ed.

As far as him headlining the show. That is what HBK does. You put him in a match even after a four year lay off and the man stole the fucking show. It did not matter if he was the first match or the last match he stole the show. There has never been a better in ring performer. If Shawn who literally broke his back to keep the company in business does not deserve to headline a hall of fame ceremony who the hell does? The very fact that a bunch of fat, lazy internet nerds who could not even lace his boots are even raising such a ******ed question just shows whats wrong with the IWC

 

[JJ15776]

At first I wondered if you were asking the question along the lines of should he be the only one inducted this year and have the spotlight entirely on himself. Which would have been a valid question. But to ask if he should headline the class, of course he should are you nuts? Just based on what he has done this decade would be enough to validatate his status. Anyone name a top 10 moment/match feud list since 2002 and guaranteed his name is on at least half the submissions, enough said.

Yeah, that was my thought exactly. I thought the question was does HBK deserve to be the only member of his induction class, not does he deserve to headline class. What the hell is wrong with people? That's not a question you ask. That's not a debate. There is no argument to be made that he doesn't deserve to headline a class.

I am SO sick of this crap about what a bad guy HBK is, and all the politics he played, and blah blah blah. This is not directed at the OP, but are you people ******ed? Do you have ANY idea what Hulk Hogan has done? He did what HBK did for 5 years, except he's done it for 25 and counting. Why doesn't anybody complain about his politics? Or Stone Cold Steve Austin? How many times can a guy get a free pass for quitting on his company? Or even the precious Bret Hart...I know he's the reason people are so blatantly biased against HBK, but guess what? If Bret Hart didn't try to play politics, he wouldn't have got screwed! You say HBK would've gone to WCW if he could have with Hall and Nash...Bret Hart DID go to WCW! So did Hogan! So it's bad that HBK would have if he could, but it's perfectly acceptable for other people to actually DO IT? Hogan tried to put the WWF out of business, for fuck's sake! Did you ask if he deserves to headline a Hall of Fame class?

It truly baffles me. PLEASE explain to me why HBK is any worse than Hogan, Austin, etc. The truth is he's not. The only thing that's different about him is that he grew up, felt bad about the way he acted for about 4 years there, and spent 8 years making up for it. Seriously, have you watched the WWE in the last decade? HBK had a World title for a grand total of 28 days, and that was within a year of his return. Other than that, he spent the vast majority of his return putting person after person over. It honestly seems like people hate him more for trying to do the right thing in the second half of his career. I guess you just chalk that up to ignorance, but still. It's be nice if people used some common sense every once in a while.

 

[Fallen Angel 21.3]

I think its a little early for Shawn to be inducted into the HOF. When i look at the Hall of fame its older wrestlers to make one last apperance. Shawn is different, Shawn can still move in the ring even after not wrestling for 4 years he could still go. For me HOF is for wrestlers who are forgotten by younger fans and can have a night where the older fans are just happy to see there heros again. I am truly happy for Shawn, now i can say that both of my heros are into the HOF which is i always wanted. I just don't want Shawn to be forgotten because that is what happens to wrestlers once they do enter the HOF. We all know that there will never be another Shawn Michaels. but they need to show the whole HOF show not just the final hour. I just would like to see some of the other people are in the class with him get there final 15 minutes again. The whole show should not just about one man or one person it should be about everybody. Everybody has gave there blood, sweet, and tears for this bussiness and should get the same amout of time. Should Shawn go last on the HOF show, OH HELL YEAH, should the show just be about Shawn, HELL NO!!!

 

[C.M.Savior]

In response to THTRobTaylor:

Before I respond to this thread,I just want to say that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I am not trying to completely bash the OP’s opinion.People can believe whatever they want to and I am not trying to say that they are wrong or do not know what they are talking about.However,I strongly disagree with almost all of the points and statements that the OP has made.

After reading the thread,I was pretty outraged because I strongly disagreed with the statements that were made.I really wanted to go on a rant and state my opinion but I decided that I didn’t feel like taking the time to do so.I then read the OP’s second post that he made and decided that I needed to respond.

First and foremost,does Shawn deserve to headline the HOF class by himself?.... Absolutely!!! His first run through 98 alone,merits a HOF spot.Lets look at what he accomplished in his first run: 3 time Champion,3 time IC Champion,2 time back-to-back Royal Rumble winner in 95 and 96 (one of which he entered at number 1,the only person to do so to date.) For 4 years straight,from 93-94,PWI voted him as match of the year.These are quite the accomplishments that some already in the HOF have neveraccomplished. There are many in the HOF that have never even been a 1 time champion!

You can say what you want about his personal behavior behind the scenes, but that means nothing to what he accomplished in the ring,on television,and in front of the fans.Shawn then left the WWE in 1998 to what many believed would be the last time he would be the last time that we would ever see him step foot in a ring to compete again.He made an amazing return in 2002 and although many thought it was just a one-time/short-term return,He was a mainstay until 2010.He would go on to have some of the most memorable matches and feuds in his career and run the title 2 more times.He has won match of the year for the last 7 years straight,bringing his total to a record setting 11 match of the year award victories.If you had to say which of his 2 runs was more deserving or meaningful,I would agree that his 2nd run was more meaningful and deserving than his 1st run,but you can’t ignore his accomplishments during his first run just because of personal issues and behavior behind the scenes.

Now to some of the points that you made in your threads.You state, and I quote,“That the WWF won the wars in Shawn’s absence is telling really.” As the Miz would say,Really?,Really?,Really!?You seem to be implying that Shawn was so bad for business that he was hurting the WWF and is the reason that they were getting beat every week by WCW the reason the WWF starting winning the war was because he was gone.If Shawn was not as good as he was during that time period,there would probably not be a WWE today.He is the one thing at that time that held the company together through the rough times and kept the company afloat.There is not one superstar on the WWE roster that could have beaten/competed with Ted Turner,his money,and the WCW.The WCW had Hulk freakin Hogan,Macho Man,Sting,Nash,Hall,and Luger. They created one of the most successful and entertaining concepts to this day by turning Hogan heel and creating the NWO.Nobody was going to beat/compete with that at that time.You claim that if HBK could have went to WCW with Hall and Nash that he would have in a heartbeat.How do you know that he didn’t have any offers or chances to go to WCW?I’m sure the WCW at one point took a chance or made an offer to try and get Shawn,and if he really wanted to go to WCW I’m sure he would have.Instead, he stayed loyal to Vince and the WWF.Instead of selling out, he was one of the few that stayed and to say that he was the reason they were losing the war is both ridiculous and an insult to what he was doing in the ring night after night at that time.Shawn was the top guy and they main reason the WWF started to go into a different direction and enter the attitude era.He turned the WWF into a new direction and set up what lead to the WWF finally taking over WCW in ratings.He was a creative mind behind DX which was insanely popular at that time and one of the main reasons people would tune into RAW every week.He talked Vince into during more edgy storylines and angles and was a revolutionist and essential part for the WWF heading into the attitude direction.He was also involved in what I believe is the single most important moment in wrestling history….The Montreal Screwjob.He and Vince came up with the plan to do what they did to Bret because Bret was leaving for the WCW like so many others. In my opinion, this really started the attitude era.It made Vince Mcmahon the heel that we know him as today and really got people interested and watching the WWF product.This is what turned the corner for the WWF and without that taking place,Vince would not have been the heel that he was which would have meant that the attitude era probably wouldn’t have grown into something as big and controversial as it was because without Vince being a heel,there would be no Austin Mcmahon feud that really made the WWF what it is today.And Shawn was a very essential part in all of that.

You also claim that Brian Pillman is the reason for the successes of such stars as Shawn,the Rock,Austin,Vince,and Edge. You claim that Pillman is the sole reason for the success of DX and the attitude era and that without him, none of those would have existed. You also claim that if he had been around longer, he would have surpassed Shawn in the ring. Again, Really? ,Really? ,Really?!Don’t get me wrong, I think Pillman was extremely talented and had loads of potential.He was also ahead of his time and if he had came around a bit later he might have been a big star.Unfortunately, Pillman died at the age of 35 in 1997 and now the two words that are synonymous with Brian Pillman’s career are “what if?” While Pillman was entertaining and very controversial and edgy,he was nowhere near the same level as Shawn or anyone else in the attitude era.Those moments you talk about when Pillman said “I respect you bookerman” to Kevin Sullivan and trying to piss on the ECW ring where not that big of moments in wrestling history and were not the reasoning for the WWF to enter the attitude era.The attitude era was more of a combination of a response to WCW and the NWO angle that they were doing and what ECW was doing at that time.The business needed to change and that’s what they did.They still would have done the all the things they did if Brian Pillman never existed.No matter what in the wrestling business,the talent is not going to get over or become successful without execution.You can have the greatest gimmick/character or storyline in the world and if the talent/superstar does not execute it properly,it will fall short from what it was supposed to be or fail.They could have given the Stone Cold or Undertaker gimmick to other superstars and it would have failed because the execution of those 2 superstars were phenomenal.The talent has to get their character and storyline over and to credit someone else for their creation and success is a joke.

And Pillman would have surpassed HBK in the ring??? Pillman was no slouch in the ring,but even in his prime before injuries, he was no Shawn Michaels. That’s no insult because there is no one,IMO, that can’t match Shawn in the ring.You think Pillman would have surpassed HBK, a guy who had some of the most memorable and fantastic matches during the first half of his career through 98 (ladder matches,iron man match,HITC,matches with Diesel and Austin) then took a 5 year hiatus and came back only to have even more memorable matches.He has a record of 11 PWI match of the year awards,an award that he has won for the last 7 years straight.One of those matches was his Wrestlemania match with Vince Mcmahon.Who else could win match of the year in a match with Vince Mcmahon.Sorry but Pillman wouldn’t have came close to Hbk.

Finally,you also say that you would like to see Pillman as the number 2 headliner if they do not induct Sting this year.However your reasoning against HBK headlining the HOF this year is because of personal issues and backstage problems.It was no secret that Pillman also had personal issues and problems behind the scenes.He had a very bad drug problem and had a reputation of doing things that were unplanned and disrespectful.Again, I don’t think that it matters what someone does behind the scenes or on their own time to be inducted into the WWE HOF (unless it is something extremely serious such as in Benoits case) so all of that means nothing to me, but I just didn’t understand your logic when Pillman was not much different. After all, guys like Babe Ruth, Mickey Mantle, Ty Cobb, and Reggie Jackson are in the baseball HOF and all of those guys had character and personal issues with things such as alcohol, affairs, and attitude problems. Those issues did not change what they did on the baseball diamond and it’s no different in wrestling. You claim that you do not hate Shawn Michaels….. Tell us how you really feel?

I know some people might take offense to this, but I’m not even sure that Pillman deserves to be in the HOF. Again, he was extremely talented and entertaining, but he failed to accomplish much and his career was cut short due to injuries and his death. I do not believe you should induct someone just because they passed away and their career was cut short. You should not induct them based on the “what-if?” or the potential or achievements that someone might have had if their career was not cut short. You claim that you do not hate Shawn Michaels….. Tell us how you really feel?

 

[THTRobtaylor]

This is a beyond ridiculous statement.. A big part of why WWE was in trouble?? He was one of the few reasons they were even staying afloat as a company!



The answer to your insane question is YES!!! Bam Bam.. Davey and Candido would be just as dead today. Candido's was an accident caused by a blood clot after a flight.. And to blame Michaels for Davey and Bam Bam's own personal mistakes is sickening. People need to take responsibility for their own actions.



You of course didn't address what I said about flawed people being in the Music or Film HOF's.. I'd love to know your thoughts on why Shawn and other entertainers should be treated differently?



Honestly.. and Im not flaming you here.. But you have no clue what you are talking about... Brian Pillman was a minor blip on the pro wrestling radar. Was he talented?? Yes.. But Brian Pillman was always a "what could have been story" rather than a "what he was" Shawn owes BP absolutely...nothing.

I do know what I am talking about on a lot of aspects here...

Shawn's first run as champion was not blockbuster... it did not make huge money because his character had become so watered down as a face and it was at odds with the increasingly bad behaviour that was leaking out. The net was just really taking off, so a lot of it was out there.

I am not saying that people would not be dead... but those people mentioned directly suffered as a result of Shawn Michaels backstage politicking. Davey Boy for example never got over Shawns forcing him to lose the Euro title in front of his dying sister... despite it being previously agreed he would go over.
Shawn didn't cause his death... but he did cause some of the problems the man was self medicating. Bigelow was never given a chance as a main eventer cos the Kliq and mainly Shawn refused to give him a chance... which was selfish as half of them left soon after... Had Bigelow, or Candido not suffered at Shawn and the Kliqs hands they may have still blown their chances... but sometimes one persons actions send you down a path...


Pillman was far more than a blip and I suggest you go back and watch him properly. Before him, no one dared break the 4th wall, most fans didn't know what a "Booker Man" was... He caused the first F bomb in wrestling from Bobby Heenan, Pillman turning up in ECW paved the way for Austin 3:16...AND D-Generation X... The lewd, authority spurning, swearing gimmick was pioneered by Pillman without doubt. He opened the door, took the heat so others could later do it with impunity... So yes Shawn does owe him something... Austin was his friend and would induct him for sure as Austin wouldn't have been what he was without Pillman either. And even if that doesn't convince you... as a tale of overcoming adversity, a baby who beat cancer to play in the NFL and be a player in wrestling deserves it.

 

[ipswichicon80]

Shawn's first run as champion was not blockbuster... it did not make huge money because his character had become so watered down as a face and it was at odds with the increasingly bad behaviour that was leaking out. The net was just really taking off, so a lot of it was out there

It's well known that Shawn's first run was not a big drawing one.However I disagree that it was due to his backstage antics. The business was changing and Shawn was a "white meat" babyface, a character the audience had grown sick of. Look at Rocky Mavia, who's first night with the company was the same night shawn's title reign ended. Soon there were posters at events saying "Die,Rocky,die". Fan's hated him because he was playing the typical babyface character(much like Shawn) with no edge to him. That(and the re-emergence of WCW) in my opinion is why Shawn didn't draw,his character was the problem,it was outdated and uninteresting(it certainly wasn't due to the matches which were fantastic).

Also whilst the Pilman storyline was innovative and interesting,let's be honest it never drew a dime. Also,if you want to bring back stage behaviour into play how about the fact Pilman talked Bischoff into legitimately releasing him from his contract under the pretence of making the storyline look more legit,when in reality, he just wanted his release to make a big money move to WWE?

As someone else pointed out,all the big name players have pulled the sort of crap Shawn did.Hogan refused to allow MR.P to win the 1990 rumble,winning it himself instead,despite the fact he was already champion,the planned match between him and Warior would draw money whatever the outcome and it could have taken Perfect to the next level. Does such a selfish act(along with ensuring pushes for his pals) disqualify Hogan from headlining a HOF? No of course not.
Does Austin refusing to put over Triple H at SS 99 leaving us with an anti-climatic finish to a major PPV only for Hunter to win the title a day after (along with other issues mentioned by others) Disqualify him? Again no of course not.

On the subject of Sting,I agree this is not the year to induct him as he would be over shadowed by HBK. But IMO it will happen.There is no beef with Sting and Vince and with the WCW back catalogue Vince owns,there is money to be made from a Stng DVD,so it will happen.
The fact he has never worked for WWE does not disqualify him from being in the HOF. Verne Gange is in there and he only ever worked for his own company(The AWA).

 

[Optimist Prime]

This could be the most ridiculous question I've ever seen on this forum.

Shawn Michaels is arguably the greatest all around performer in wrestling history.

If Shawn Michaels isn't able to headline the Hall of Fame in your eyes - who is??

 

[JGlass]

Without a doubt, YES!

The jury's out on what type of guy Shawn Michaels is behind the scenes, but he was one great performer. The man put on more great matches than anyone in known American wrestling history, and he's taken part in some great angles. His ability to work a crowd is second to none, and he has made us love him or hate him with ease. Like many posters have said, he is arguably one of the best wrestlers of all time.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

In response to THTRobTaylor:

Before I respond to this thread,I just want to say that everyone is entitled to their own opinion and I am not trying to completely bash the OP’s opinion.People can believe whatever they want to and I am not trying to say that they are wrong or do not know what they are talking about.However,I strongly disagree with almost all of the points and statements that the OP has made.

After reading the thread,I was pretty outraged because I strongly disagreed with the statements that were made.I really wanted to go on a rant and state my opinion but I decided that I didn’t feel like taking the time to do so.I then read the OP’s second post that he made and decided that I needed to respond.

First and foremost,does Shawn deserve to headline the HOF class by himself?.... Absolutely!!! His first run through 98 alone,merits a HOF spot.Lets look at what he accomplished in his first run: 3 time Champion,3 time IC Champion,2 time back-to-back Royal Rumble winner in 95 and 96 (one of which he entered at number 1,the only person to do so to date.) For 4 years straight,from 93-94,PWI voted him as match of the year.These are quite the accomplishments that some already in the HOF have neveraccomplished. There are many in the HOF that have never even been a 1 time champion!

You can say what you want about his personal behavior behind the scenes, but that means nothing to what he accomplished in the ring,on television,and in front of the fans.Shawn then left the WWE in 1998 to what many believed would be the last time he would be the last time that we would ever see him step foot in a ring to compete again.He made an amazing return in 2002 and although many thought it was just a one-time/short-term return,He was a mainstay until 2010.He would go on to have some of the most memorable matches and feuds in his career and run the title 2 more times.He has won match of the year for the last 7 years straight,bringing his total to a record setting 11 match of the year award victories.If you had to say which of his 2 runs was more deserving or meaningful,I would agree that his 2nd run was more meaningful and deserving than his 1st run,but you can’t ignore his accomplishments during his first run just because of personal issues and behavior behind the scenes.

Now to some of the points that you made in your threads.You state, and I quote,“That the WWF won the wars in Shawn’s absence is telling really.” As the Miz would say,Really?,Really?,Really!?You seem to be implying that Shawn was so bad for business that he was hurting the WWF and is the reason that they were getting beat every week by WCW the reason the WWF starting winning the war was because he was gone.If Shawn was not as good as he was during that time period,there would probably not be a WWE today.He is the one thing at that time that held the company together through the rough times and kept the company afloat.There is not one superstar on the WWE roster that could have beaten/competed with Ted Turner,his money,and the WCW.The WCW had Hulk freakin Hogan,Macho Man,Sting,Nash,Hall,and Luger. They created one of the most successful and entertaining concepts to this day by turning Hogan heel and creating the NWO.Nobody was going to beat/compete with that at that time.You claim that if HBK could have went to WCW with Hall and Nash that he would have in a heartbeat.How do you know that he didn’t have any offers or chances to go to WCW?I’m sure the WCW at one point took a chance or made an offer to try and get Shawn,and if he really wanted to go to WCW I’m sure he would have.Instead, he stayed loyal to Vince and the WWF.Instead of selling out, he was one of the few that stayed and to say that he was the reason they were losing the war is both ridiculous and an insult to what he was doing in the ring night after night at that time.Shawn was the top guy and they main reason the WWF started to go into a different direction and enter the attitude era.He turned the WWF into a new direction and set up what lead to the WWF finally taking over WCW in ratings.He was a creative mind behind DX which was insanely popular at that time and one of the main reasons people would tune into RAW every week.He talked Vince into during more edgy storylines and angles and was a revolutionist and essential part for the WWF heading into the attitude direction.He was also involved in what I believe is the single most important moment in wrestling history….The Montreal Screwjob.He and Vince came up with the plan to do what they did to Bret because Bret was leaving for the WCW like so many others. In my opinion, this really started the attitude era.It made Vince Mcmahon the heel that we know him as today and really got people interested and watching the WWF product.This is what turned the corner for the WWF and without that taking place,Vince would not have been the heel that he was which would have meant that the attitude era probably wouldn’t have grown into something as big and controversial as it was because without Vince being a heel,there would be no Austin Mcmahon feud that really made the WWF what it is today.And Shawn was a very essential part in all of that.

You also claim that Brian Pillman is the reason for the successes of such stars as Shawn,the Rock,Austin,Vince,and Edge. You claim that Pillman is the sole reason for the success of DX and the attitude era and that without him, none of those would have existed. You also claim that if he had been around longer, he would have surpassed Shawn in the ring. Again, Really? ,Really? ,Really?!Don’t get me wrong, I think Pillman was extremely talented and had loads of potential.He was also ahead of his time and if he had came around a bit later he might have been a big star.Unfortunately, Pillman died at the age of 35 in 1997 and now the two words that are synonymous with Brian Pillman’s career are “what if?” While Pillman was entertaining and very controversial and edgy,he was nowhere near the same level as Shawn or anyone else in the attitude era.Those moments you talk about when Pillman said “I respect you bookerman” to Kevin Sullivan and trying to piss on the ECW ring where not that big of moments in wrestling history and were not the reasoning for the WWF to enter the attitude era.The attitude era was more of a combination of a response to WCW and the NWO angle that they were doing and what ECW was doing at that time.The business needed to change and that’s what they did.They still would have done the all the things they did if Brian Pillman never existed.No matter what in the wrestling business,the talent is not going to get over or become successful without execution.You can have the greatest gimmick/character or storyline in the world and if the talent/superstar does not execute it properly,it will fall short from what it was supposed to be or fail.They could have given the Stone Cold or Undertaker gimmick to other superstars and it would have failed because the execution of those 2 superstars were phenomenal.The talent has to get their character and storyline over and to credit someone else for their creation and success is a joke.

And Pillman would have surpassed HBK in the ring??? Pillman was no slouch in the ring,but even in his prime before injuries, he was no Shawn Michaels. That’s no insult because there is no one,IMO, that can’t match Shawn in the ring.You think Pillman would have surpassed HBK, a guy who had some of the most memorable and fantastic matches during the first half of his career through 98 (ladder matches,iron man match,HITC,matches with Diesel and Austin) then took a 5 year hiatus and came back only to have even more memorable matches.He has a record of 11 PWI match of the year awards,an award that he has won for the last 7 years straight.One of those matches was his Wrestlemania match with Vince Mcmahon.Who else could win match of the year in a match with Vince Mcmahon.Sorry but Pillman wouldn’t have came close to Hbk.

Finally,you also say that you would like to see Pillman as the number 2 headliner if they do not induct Sting this year.However your reasoning against HBK headlining the HOF this year is because of personal issues and backstage problems.It was no secret that Pillman also had personal issues and problems behind the scenes.He had a very bad drug problem and had a reputation of doing things that were unplanned and disrespectful.Again, I don’t think that it matters what someone does behind the scenes or on their own time to be inducted into the WWE HOF (unless it is something extremely serious such as in Benoits case) so all of that means nothing to me, but I just didn’t understand your logic when Pillman was not much different. After all, guys like Babe Ruth, Mickey Mantle, Ty Cobb, and Reggie Jackson are in the baseball HOF and all of those guys had character and personal issues with things such as alcohol, affairs, and attitude problems. Those issues did not change what they did on the baseball diamond and it’s no different in wrestling. You claim that you do not hate Shawn Michaels….. Tell us how you really feel?

I know some people might take offense to this, but I’m not even sure that Pillman deserves to be in the HOF. Again, he was extremely talented and entertaining, but he failed to accomplish much and his career was cut short due to injuries and his death. I do not believe you should induct someone just because they passed away and their career was cut short. You should not induct them based on the “what-if?” or the potential or achievements that someone might have had if their career was not cut short. You claim that you do not hate Shawn Michaels….. Tell us how you really feel?

Your "outrage" is misplaced as I never disputed Shawn deserves a HOF spot... this whole thread is about the other side of the coin.. the uglier side of the business and of the man that they are inducting. That it provokes such reaction from so many can either mean it's a valid debate.

Shawn likely did have offers to leave in the 90's but he would also have been signed to a long term deal as part of his push. I argued that had the opportunity arisen for him to leave with the other 2 he likely would have done. He'd have been nuts not to...

Reality is he likely never got that opportunity as he was locked in tight to a deal and Vince would never have let him go. Anyone who would have turned down the money WCW was offering willingly would have been at best misguided as Bret later found out to his cost.

Whichever way you paint the start of the Attitude Era, it could never have happened without Pillman's contribution... no one went off script EVER before him... no one swore on TV or portrayed a character as edgy or radical as the one Pillman did late in his WCW reign. Characters were cartoonish in both feds... there was no one who "broke the mould" in any way... Pre Pillman, Austin 3:16 would not have been allowed... DX would not have been allowed before that... That WCW bungled the opportunity they had with Pillman at the time is more down to Bischoff than anything, but it was a seminal moment. Cos Pillman caused F-bombs on live TV and walked out of PPV matches and the sky didn't fall, people realised the envelope was ready to be pushed. Even at KOTR 96, Pillman cut an edgy debut promo eartlier on that show... Austin 3:16 was only the soundbite ending....

Dismissing his potential had he stayed healthy is wrong, after all, who would have thought in 1995 that we would see guys like Chris Jericho be where they are today? or in 1996 that The Rock would have become what he did.... Pillman easily could have, over time benefitted from working with the same talents Shawn, Eddy, Benoit et al did to build his match of the year credentials.

 

[schaeffershawn]

Your "outrage" is misplaced as I never disputed Shawn deserves a HOF spot... this whole thread is about the other side of the coin.. the uglier side of the business and of the man that they are inducting. That it provokes such reaction from so many can either mean it's a valid debate.

Shawn likely did have offers to leave in the 90's but he would also have been signed to a long term deal as part of his push. I argued that had the opportunity arisen for him to leave with the other 2 he likely would have done. He'd have been nuts not to...

Reality is he likely never got that opportunity as he was locked in tight to a deal and Vince would never have let him go. Anyone who would have turned down the money WCW was offering willingly would have been at best misguided as Bret later found out to his cost.

Whichever way you paint the start of the Attitude Era, it could never have happened without Pillman's contribution... no one went off script EVER before him... no one swore on TV or portrayed a character as edgy or radical as the one Pillman did late in his WCW reign. Characters were cartoonish in both feds... there was no one who "broke the mould" in any way... Pre Pillman, Austin 3:16 would not have been allowed... DX would not have been allowed before that... That WCW bungled the opportunity they had with Pillman at the time is more down to Bischoff than anything, but it was a seminal moment. Cos Pillman caused F-bombs on live TV and walked out of PPV matches and the sky didn't fall, people realised the envelope was ready to be pushed. Even at KOTR 96, Pillman cut an edgy debut promo eartlier on that show... Austin 3:16 was only the soundbite ending....

Dismissing his potential had he stayed healthy is wrong, after all, who would have thought in 1995 that we would see guys like Chris Jericho be where they are today? or in 1996 that The Rock would have become what he did.... Pillman easily could have, over time benefitted from working with the same talents Shawn, Eddy, Benoit et al did to build his match of the year credentials.

Wrong before Pillman the Franchise of ECW Shane Douglas cursed and swore in almost every promo. Shane Douglas went off scrip when he threw down the NWA title and proclaimed the ECW title the world title. Jake Roberts consistently went off script. To contend as you do that Pillman invented the shoot is just asinine. Secondly Pilman was shit in the grand scheme of things. The only thing he ever did that drew a dime was be Steve Austins tag partner. His time in ECW was nothing and guys like Raven, Sandman, Taz and Shaen Douglas were the real fore bearers of the attitude era. Finally HBK was attitude before their was attitude and I'm not talking about 1997. i am talking his heel run from the time he threw Marty through the mirror till the time he turned face he was attitude.

Finally to your point about Bigelow, Candido, and Bulldog. Yes your right maybe they may not have given into their demons if not for the kliq. On the other hand Davey boy was doing roids and other drugs even in the early 90's. Candido's wife still would have been a two dollar ****e who screwed every guy she could to keep her spot. Finally to good old Scotty Bigelow. I personally knew the man. I grew up with his nephew. I can guarantee he would have still died because he was a big fat alcoholic even before he was in the WWF and the guy popped pills all the way back in the 80's and I know cause i was their.

But less ask Hulk Hogan, if he ever thinks about the Renegade, Chris Benoit, Eddie Guerrero, Louie Spicoli or any of other talent he held down and how he might have contributed to their deaths. Lets ask him if he ever felt for a moment for Billy Kidman, Rey Mysterio, or any of the guys who were not on TV because his fat useless nephew Horace needed a gig,

Lets ask Austin why he refused to work with Jeff Jarret, or job to Lesner or HHH.

Lets ask Bret Hart if keeping his useless brother in laws employed was worth the more talented and deserving guys not getting spots.

 

[ted sheckler]

That it provokes such reaction from so many can either mean it's a valid debate.

I don't think it really sparked a great debate.. You haven't had one person that has actually been on your side this whole thread.. Its not a debate as much as a post followed by everyone telling you that you are wrong.

Shawn likely did have offers to leave in the 90's but he would also have been signed to a long term deal as part of his push. I argued that had the opportunity arisen for him to leave with the other 2 he likely would have done. He'd have been nuts not to...

Reality is he likely never got that opportunity as he was locked in tight to a deal and Vince would never have let him go. Anyone who would have turned down the money WCW was offering willingly would have been at best misguided as Bret later found out to his cost.

Why do you seem to be locked in this make believe world of.. "What If..." What if Shawn had gone to WCW..?? What if HBK was nicer to Bulldog..Bam Bam and Skip..?? What if Pillman had lived..?? Well.. I don't know!! I only know what did happen..
Shawn DIDN'T go to WCW and is regarded by many of his peers to be the greatest in ring performer of all time..
Bulldog Bam Bam and Chris all passed away well before their time..
and Pillman DID get hurt...DID pass away young.. and IS today remembered as a small blimp on the pro wrestling radar in the grand scheme of things.

Now if you want to continue to talk alternate timelines and alternate universes and such be my guest.. but that is happened in the real world.

Cos Pillman caused F-bombs on live TV

Wait?? your giving Brian Pillman props because he accidentally grabbed a guy on the "Do not touch list" and then THE OTHER GUY dropped the F-Bomb... and THIS make Brian revolutionary?? What are you talking ABOUT??!!

Even at KOTR 96, Pillman cut an edgy debut promo eartlier on that show... Austin 3:16 was only the soundbite ending....

No one remembers that... And the thing is that I like Brian Pillman but holy hell stop trying to build him into something he wasn't..

Dismissing his potential had he stayed healthy is wrong, after all, who would have thought in 1995 that we would see guys like Chris Jericho be where they are today? or in 1996 that The Rock would have become what he did.... Pillman easily could have, over time benefitted from working with the same talents Shawn, Eddy, Benoit et al did to build his match of the year credentials.

He probably could have gone on to great things.. BUT to think that he would have surpassed Shawn Friggin Michaels in the Ring is ridiculous.. You mention Jericho's success.. and even with all his success he's still not considered in the same class as Shawn Michaels as an in ring performer.. Also Pillman was 35 when he died.. At 35 Shawn already had a legacy and career that most pro wrestlers can only dream of.. 4 Match of the Years.. countless classics.. 2 royal rumble wins.. titles ect ect...

 

[Ferbian]

Yes, Shawn has a lot of demons from his past, and a lot of moments that wasn't exactly something to nod and smile about.

However, Shawn Michaels still back then was considered one hell of a star. Shawn when he "retired" back in 98 was still more than enough of a star power and accomplished wrestler to warrant himself a Hall of Fame induction. Shawn put on numerous great matches, and had numerous great title reigns. At that point Shawn had been in the business for about 14 years. Those amount of years, mixed with how much he gave to the business should be more than enough to consider him a Hall of Fame worthy inductee back then, hell even a headliner.

We can't deny the fact that Vince McMahon has always had a sore spot for Shawn Michaels, and I'm sure there was no difference to it back in the days when he began all his numerous antics that you mention. Because, let's face it, if Vince had reached the point where he had enough of Shawn, he wouldn't have been around anymore, and most likely wouldn't have been around to ever make a return. So, yes I believe that despite all of his "bad" moments, he was still more than worthy of entering the Hall of Fame, as well as headlining.

 

[Jsaturn14]

Yes, i am biased when it comes to this thread

I have to say that I have read through this entire thread and two things have stuck out to me. First, this thread is not a debate at all, and it is pretty much the OP asking a ridiculous question and everyone else laughing at it and saying how ridiculous it is. I find this amusing Secondly, the OP kind of makes me sick to my stomach. It is one thing to say that HBK politicked backstage, and another to say that those actions helped lead to the death of someone. Nobody died because of HBK. Besides a few notable exceptions, everyone who has died young because of professional wrestling has died because they CHOSE to make bad decisions in their life. To say that part of the reason they chose to do these bad things was because of HBK is fugging ridiculous. Were you in their head during the time? Do you know their exact thought process that they went through to reach their decision? Nope, none of us were, and it is sick to assume that anyone besides themselves had anything to do with their deaths. That is just my opinion, and I hope it made sense

Now, as to the question at hand, Of Fugging Course HBK deserves to headline the HOF ceremony. The man should have a Wing built for him right beside Ric Flair's. Nobody has given wrestling fans more memories in between the ropes than HBK. I could list off his accolades as well, but everyone else has already done that. I will put one up that nobody has mentioned yet though. In the recent DVD "The Fifty Greatest Superstars of All Time", in which the WWE Superstars, not Vince, not anyone else, but the current superstars were asked to vote for and rank who they think the best of all time is, HBK came out on top. That just speaks to the level of respect, and the indelible POSITIVE impact that HBK has had on the wrestling world. Some people might think this DVD is a joke because Hogan and Flair are not in the top five, and so that obviously points to Vince being pissed at them. I would say to those people though that based on how the list was created their ranking on the list has less to do with Vince and more with the fact that they have never known when to hang up the boots and leave in a positive way, and both of them have turned into jokes over the last few years. That is not to say that what they did in the past wasn't great because it was, but their careers are still going on today, and because they just couldn't retire and hang up their boots their new found joke status must be taken into account as well. I digress though. The point is, HBK never made himself out to be a joke. He left at the right time, and because of that his magnificent career inside the ropes will never ever be tarnished. He was a hall of famer before he left, and he only helped solidify that status when he came back. Sure he politicked, but, as other people have pointed out, who didn't pull strings in the back? What HBK did inside the ring is what truly counts, and my humble opinion, there was nobody better. If the greatest professional wrestler of all time doesn't deserve to headline the HOF, who does?

(I realize I ramble in certain parts, but I just woke up, so cut me some slack, please? )

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

First of all, if you don't think Shawn deserves to headline a HOF class, you're insane.

The bad almost cancels out the good? What? What "bad" are we talking about? Nearly every "bad" thing Shawn has done backstage comes from nothing more than hearsay and speculation. I'm not saying I don't believe Shawn was an asshole, because I think he was. But we have absolutely no solid evidence to be 100% sure.

Also, backstage troubles have nothing to do with what you accomplish in the ring. Shawn may have held people down, he might have started his fair share of trouble. But in the end, it's about what you do in the ring that earns you a HOF spot.

Shawn has main-evented six Wrestlemania's, won the WWE/WHC multiple times, and had some of the best matches any of us have seen. Also, he's arguably one of the five or ten biggest names in the history of pro wrestling. If he doesn't deserve to headline a class of Hall-of-Famer's, I don't know who does.