Greatest Champion in WWWF/WWF/WWE History

[Mark0820]

For those saying Hogan never put people over, let me give a list of those he did put over and we'll see if anyone recognizes their names.

Savage(not in the ring as much as in promos during their Mega Powers storyline)
Ultimate Warrior(Pinned Hogan cleanly at WM)
Goldberg
Roddy Piper(who up until the Mr. America crap had never lost to Hogan 1 on 1)
The Rock
Has said he'd put Austin over at WM
Brock Lesnar
The Undertaker
Yokozuna
Kurt Angle
Paul Orndorf
Big Show
Lex Luger
Sting
Ric Flair

 

[ChrisIrvine]

Actually, Austin fans, Austin was a BAD champion!!! We fans rooted for him to win the belt because he was constantly chasing it and getting screwed out of it. Unfortunately, very few people realize just how little Austin actually WAS the Champion. Austin did draw a new crowd to pro wrestling...but he didn't do it as champion. He did it as challenger.

IMO, The Rock is the best CHAMPION the WWE/F ever had. He was great with the strap as a heel and great with it as a face. As a heel, he tormented Austin. As a face, he whipped anyone's ass every week who wanted a shot. And there are VERY few who can say they've even won the strap as both a face and a heel, let alone have runs on each side of the fence that were as successful and entertaining as the Rock's.

 

[ChrisIrvine]

For those saying Hogan never put people over, let me give a list of those he did put over and we'll see if anyone recognizes their names.

Savage(not in the ring as much as in promos during their Mega Powers storyline)
Ultimate Warrior(Pinned Hogan cleanly at WM)
Goldberg
Roddy Piper(who up until the Mr. America crap had never lost to Hogan 1 on 1)
The Rock
Has said he'd put Austin over at WM
Brock Lesnar
The Undertaker
Yokozuna
Kurt Angle
Paul Orndorf
Big Show
Lex Luger
Sting
Ric Flair

However, of all the people Hogan put over, they all put him over, too! I do believe that there are only two people who have defeated Hogan one-on-one who he hasn't in return defeated one-on-one. Those two people are Goldberg and The Rock.

 

[DC24]

We obviously dont have too many wrestling fans in this forum. On the other hand, we have some die hard, which is great.

The idiot who said Samartino is the greatest much have just pick up "The History of the WWE Championship" DVDs at the half off bin at Walmart because his friends watch wrestling and he wanted to keep up. The guy held the belt for years because back then they only defended the belt 2 times a year, and there was no such thing as a TV taping or PPV, so people never got exposed to a champion. Why do you think no one holds the belt that long anymore? Because people get tired of seeing the same old shit, and that is what Samartino was, a big boring wrestler who was built and could bodyslam and hip toss.

Hogan made wrestling main stream and thats about it. This topic is about WWF/E runs, and frankly, if Hogan didnt slam Andre, it would be almost forgettable what he did in the WWF/E. He was a character, one who was larger than life, and no where near real. He slayed a giant, defended America from a turncoat (Slaughter), took down a King (Savage), beat King Kong (Bundy), proved that money doesnt buy everything (Dibiase), and beat an uncontrollable beast (Warrior). He took down characters, gimmicks if you will. Yes, they were all played well, and he took them down and told everyone to take your vitamins and say your prayers. He was a role model character, not a wrestler. His title reigns werent anything in the WWE. He made WCW, not the WWE. When you job out wrestlers to a damn leg drop, you are not a wrestler.

As far as this topic goes, the best champion has to be Stone Cold Steve Austin. He goes from being a prick in WCW, to being what seemed to be a jobber (Ringmaster), to being the face of the Attitude Era. The guy took control of the company that Hogan and Hart left, and turned it around into what was the Attitude Era. He has had memorable feuds with just about every big name star in the business besides Hogan. He wasnt afraid to lose to people, and he finished a match with a broken neck. Austin brought back a sense of reality to wrestling, something Hogan could never do. If you saw Austin on the street, I am almost positive he would look and seem like he did on Raw every week. Hogan, probably not. He would be the regular guy who would go into Hulk Mode when asked. Austin represented everyone who hated their boss, everyone who drank beer and wanted to kick ass, and he did it like it was cool. Something everyone wishes they could do. He held the belt more times than Hogan did, he had more ratings jumps than anyone else not named Dwayne Johnson, and as mentioned earlier, had the highest rated match on television.

Anyone that wants to say Hogan was the best champion in the WWE should check youtube and watch his over the top shit, and then look up someone like Stone Cold, HBK, Bret Hart, and even John Cena. All played a real person, exaggerated, instead of some comic book hero. Hogan on the other hand may have been the best WCW champion of all time, but thats for a different post. Plus....YELLOW SUCKS

Did you really type that; because they all are characters; lets say this together wrestling is fake. Bret Hart is the only to ever whip his bosses ass. But back on topic its Hulk Hogan he the guy Wrestlemania was formed after he made it what it is. Hogan is 50 plus and people still want another Mania match from him; only Austin and The Tock have that type of interest he's the only one to carry two companies to there highest peaks.

 

[andy zones]

There is only one greatest wrestler cum champion of all time. He is the Best there is, Best there was, Best there ever will be ---> Bret Hit Man Hart.
No one has ever made wwe title more prestigious and respectful as Bret Did. He never threw the title in the ring while making his way to the wrestle in the ring. Bret always held wwe title with pride and dignity like no other and a poll in 2004 by wwe has already been done where millions of fans participated and the clear winner was Bret hart. The matches given by him as wwe champion are considered as all time classics.List of matches is just legendary
Vs Owen ( Steel Cage)
Vs British Bulldog (INH 96)
VS Undertaker (RR 95)
VS HBK (WM12,Survivor series 92,)
I Can name atleast 30 more matches with 5 star or 4 star written all over it, But every true wrestling fan know Bret Was indeed the greatest champion of all time

 

[BlitzSage]

Hogan is the definite greatest champ in my opinion. You might say Bruno for the Transition Era, but Hogan not only had a long title reign (4 yrs), but he also had 11 others! Some guys have a few long title reigns, some have numerous small ones, but Hogan had both.

Hogan also was the top guy in both WWF and WCW. So many people try to forget about him, because of all the reality tv stuff you know, but no one can argue that he's the best ever. I can admit that, and I like Austin, Rock, and Taker more!

 

[DEFINITEONE]

It absolutely has to be Hogan! Even though Austin was the face for a couple of years he in no way was the same icon that Hogan was for the amount of time. To this day people are still clamoring for Hogan to appear at Wrestlemania events. Austin, HHH, and the Rock are and were great champions but for this conversation they are not comparable. When Hogan jumped to the WCW and the NWO was formed, WCW drew bigger crowds and made more money. Hogan is definitely the answer!

 

[Milkyway!]

Their ability to draw was so great together that them headlining WrestleMania together was the lowest buyrate the event had recieved up until that point, and still remains the second lowest in the history of the event.

Neither man did great at selling pay-per-views or increasing TV viewership.

When your facing such a force as the NWO. Its hard for two men to defeat that. While Hart/Austin did 15x better and was the NWO beater. Well their fued was, they never fought for the title like they should have. But it still started the uprise for the WWE, and the downfall for WCW. At the time, WWE has HBK, and WWE had Hart. They made due. But do to the NWO being so fresh, Hogans overrated heel turn, in his 2nd overrated run. While that wasnt the best example, you can't ignore the fact they were facing WCW at the time, which was amazing at the time as well. Shawn Micheals, and Hart did a wonderful job vs the NWO/WCW in that it was new, and hardly stoppable. Im willing to say if it was Austin, would have been the same.

And without Hogan, the WWE would have had to shut down long before anybody even cared about Shawn Michaels or Bret Hart.

Not true. They just wouldnt have went National. Hogan is without a doupt the greatest star WWE has ever had. But it dosent mean hes the greatest champion by any means. It just means he was overrated. If Hogan would put Savage over, or Andre it would be them in his shoes today.

So what. Mick Foley and The Rock's "this is your life" segment was the highest rated RAW segment in history, which had nothing to do with Austin.

Which was on the same RAW. Austin kept the viewers tuned in.

Are you implying that Hogan never put people over? Because if so, that's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

Show me when he put someone over. Honestly. At the end of the day, Scoopslam into legdrop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you. No matter the oponet. Only one person TO MY KNOWLEDGE has kicked out of the legdrop. And it was a botch. Hogan wouldn't even put HBK over at Sumerslam a few years back due to his massivly over ego.

Entertainer and professional wrestler mean the exact same thing.

Todays time, yes. Hogans time, no. Harts and HBK's time was tweener on that.

 

[ChrisIrvine]

Show me when he put someone over. Honestly. At the end of the day, Scoopslam into legdrop >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you. No matter the oponet. Only one person TO MY KNOWLEDGE has kicked out of the legdrop. And it was a botch. Hogan wouldn't even put HBK over at Sumerslam a few years back due to his massivly over ego.


Todays time, yes. Hogans time, no. Harts and HBK's time was tweener on that.

Rock kicked out twice. Both matches vs. Hogan. Goldberg did as well in Atlanta. Goldberg and Rock still only two men to defeat Hogan 1 on 1 without ever being defeated by Hogan.

 

[PBA_Sensation]

Ok, first of all to the guy who listed who Hogan put over.

The Rock - Did he really need to put The Rock over? No, so it didnt do anything but sell a PPV

Angle - Angle was already over

Yokozuna - HOGAN LEFT THE COMPANY, HE HAD TO JOB TO SOMEONE AS CHAMPION. So he didnt put over Yoko. He was just the top heel at the time

Orndorf - What the hell has he ever done?

Luger - Was already over for about 10 years before Luger got a win over Hogan

Sting - WAY over before Hogan came around. Hogan put over Stings character change, that was it

Flair - ARE YOU KIDDING ME? Flair put Hogan over

Surprised you didnt put Kidman in here, pshhh, thought you were a Hogan fan

To the guy listing the buy rates and television ratings:

Cannot compare a title match at WM with Hogan to a segment on Raw, "brother". Not even close to the same level. Its like saying Zach Gowan is a master at Kickball.

Whoever criticized my "characters" rant, should step back a little. Sure, wrestling is "fake", but what was being said was that he was a Super Hero Character compared to someone like Austin and the Rock, who were realistic characters played by guys who took themselves and amped it up. Do you honestly think Terry Bolea is Hulk Hogan when he's not in front of the camera? Probably not. Steve Williams is just like Stone Cold, just toned down. The Rock is Duane Johnson toned down. Its a little easier to relate to someone who seems like a real person than a guy who seems to always "save the world" like Hogan.

This debate will forever be going on. You got the Hogan fans who think that wrestling wouldnt be around if it wasnt for him, yadda yadda yadda. You got the purists, like Historian over there who is all about technical wrestling, who prefer someone more like Bret Hart or Shawn Michaels. Then you got the guys who are just big fans and thats it. Everyone will have their opinions.

And as far as Hogan being a champion? Did he EVER do anything great when he wasnt a champion? NOPE. He made some shitty movies, he chased the belt in lacadasical feuds that were only good when he might have been champ. Sure, that makes him a better champion, but he wasnt shit without the belt. He never once held the IC belt, the US title, TV, European, Hardcore titles, only the Tag Titles with other main eventers that could carry a match.

 

[PlayTheGame]

Definitely? Really? You make it sound like there's no arguement, when there's plenty to argue. My bets on Bret Hart/Shawn Micheals one or the other. Their ability to draw was great together. While numbers show otherwise these two men pulled WWE alone during the "slump" years. Honestly, without them WWE would have had to shut down.

How about Austin. I mean he's only the biggest draw the WWE has ever had known to my knowledge. Was in the match that pulled one the highest RAW rating ever. (an 8.1) Everytime they even mention his name, I have a nostalgia for the attitude era.



John Cena can wrestle better than Hogan. He's not afraid to put people over either. He gets the job done, while Hogan is a better entertainer, Cena is a better wrestler, and quite frankly Champion. Without him and a suprise WWE championship to pull ratings, RAW gets 2.7's on the rathings chart.



I think of the Attitude era, Monday night wars, John Cena, Randy Orton and The undertaker personally. Quit putting words in everyone elses mouth.



Hogan had charisma,that is all. While that fueled him into the biggest star wwe has ever had. This still does not make him the best WWE/WCW/WWWF campion. It simply makes him shoved down our throat for 2-3 decades in which we all honestly thought wrestling was real. Most of us did anyways.

To say that HBK or Bret were better champs for the WWE, at least better than Hogan, is just flat-out wrong. I mean, you're glorifying them solely because they kept the WWE afloat, and, although they did this, do you think if Hogan was WWE Champ during that time, the WWE wouldnt have made it through as well (In fact, they probably would have thrived, not just survived)?

Now, about your plea with Austin, I agree that he would probably be the closest second. He was one of the most over/popular champs of all time, and definitely of the modern era. However, when it comes down to it, in an overall sense (and when you factor in longevity) Hogan bests Austin as the better WWE Champ. I mean, the first few Wrestlemanias were practically centered around Hogan as the champ/becoming the champ.

Now, when you say Cena is a better wrestler... first off, neither are that well. They just have loads of charisma, and can tell a story in the ring- they are their respective generations unbeatable uber-faces. They both wrestle the same types of matches anyway. Even if Cena is the better wrestler, that doesnt make him the better champion. Lets stay on topic here bud. Also, in regard to your statement about Cena carrying Raw, if anything he is also pushed down our throats just as you say Hogan was, so of course he's seen as carrying Raw, something Hogan did for the WWF for YEARS as the champ.

And, for the record, I wasnt putting words in anyone's mouths, I'm just saying that there is no question in my mind that Hogan is the best WWE Champion of all time.

 

[Smark Henry]

For me its the Rock and here is why. I'd partially agree about Bruno because he held the title for so many years. But at the same time do we really know how well he performed on the mic? He wasn't as good as an overall entertainer as far as a man who contributed the most to WWE. Hogan contributed alot as well. But half of his career was spent in WCW. Rock was in WWE his whole career. He is a nine time WWE champion. So based on the criteria i'd choose the Rock.

 

[Agent-67]

Its Hulk Hogan! No question.

 

[JohnCenaSucks316]

It isn't Hogan for one reason well two, he's a jackass and he never drew anywhere as near what Austin did. Hogan may have "mainstreamed" the WWF at the time but I believe if Andre was the man he would have or if Savage was the man he would. Vince knew what he was doing.

Remember when Vince squabbled with Hogan who created Hulkamania and he said he did well he wasn't lying he did and if it was Hogan, Andre, Savage or the Brooklyn Brawler Vince knew what he was doing everybody forgets Vince went and done a Buisness degree he knows buisness inside out and he knows what he has to do to get noticed.

Austin was by far the greatest Champion he out drew Hogan on Merchandise and viewing figures. Austin rejuvenated wrestling when everyone thought in was crap. Everyone in my school. EVERYONE at that time was watching it. That's why Austin was the greatest ever Champ. All you Hogan lovers obviously don't remember his last two title reigns at Wrestlemania 9 and at Judgement Day. That "amazing" match with Undertaker at Judgement Day.

Next thing we know you'll all be telling us Hulk Hogan's foster son John Cena was the greatest champ. LMAO

 

[andy zones]

I think most of the fans here are confusing themselves by combining great attractive superstars with great champion. A great champion is one who as a champion gave classic battles with others. A great champion is one who could make challengers look like gold while wrestling with them. A great champion is one who could wrestle whenever and whoever he is asked for. A great champion can win and loose to benefit company any time. A great champion should be able to wrestle multiple times in a night to prove that he is a great wrestler. A great champion has the respect of almost every bunch of wrestlers and workers in a wrestling organisation. A great champion is one who can stand up for other wrestlers and defend their interests like a family member. There is no one .... no one.... who describes the defination of great champion like Bret Hit Man Hart did.
From 1992-1997 he as a champion or challenger for title wrestled classics wrestling matches to make his opponent look like gold. Have a look at these matches
1. Vs Owen Hart ( Steel Cage)
2. Vs Undertaker ( Royal Rumble)
3. VS Diesel ( Survivor Series 95)
4. Vs HBK ( Wrestlemania 12)
5. VS HBK ( Survivor Series 92)
6. VS Undertaker ( Summerslam 97)
7. VS 123 Kid ( Monday Night Raw)
8. VS Bam Bam Bigleow ( RAW)
9. VS Vader,Taker,Austin (Final Four)
10.VS Ric FLair(92, Saskatoon)
11. VS British Bulldog ( INH 95)
12. VS Rajor Ramon ( RR 93)
13. VS Bob Backlund (SS 94)
14. VS Diesel (RR94)
15. VS Fatu (1993)
16. VS Rick Martel(1993)
17. VS Chris Benoit (WCW Title 99)
18. VS Papa Shango (1995)
19. VS Patriot (INY 97)
20. VS Owen Hart (Lumberjack match)
This list can go on and on with 4 and 5 star matches in it.
Bret is one of the most respected champ of all time.If Anywhere you can find reveiws of Guys like austin, rock, taker, benoit, angle, diesel about Bret you would certainly know what was bret s reputation like. I can only think of Undertaker having the same amout of respect as Bret did till 1997 in wwe.
Bret s first title defence consist of some of the most memorable bouts. He used to defend wwe title every week some times twice and thrice a week which earned him the title of greatest champion in 2004. He never refused to put any one over except survivor series 97. He never injured a single wrestler as champion or challenger.His storytelling ability was unparllel. Believe it or not Bret was indeed the greatest champion of all time.

 

[MattMoses]

When your facing such a force as the NWO. Its hard for two men to defeat that. While Hart/Austin did 15x better and was the NWO beater.

How was Austin/Hart the "NWO beater"? RAW hadn't won in the ratings since the 10th June 1996, and didn't surpass Nitro until the 6th of April 1998, which by that time Bret was working for WCW.

Well their fued was, they never fought for the title like they should have. But it still started the uprise for the WWE, and the downfall for WCW.

Neither Bret Hart or Shawn Michaels worked for the WWE when they finally took over in the ratings.

At the time, WWE has HBK, and WWE had Hart. They made due.

Which proves that, with both of these men on top, they couldn't draw. It wasn't until BOTH men had left the company that the WWE started to win in the ratings.

But do to the NWO being so fresh, Hogans overrated heel turn, in his 2nd overrated run.

Yeah, I'd call leading the second biggest boom period in the history of professional wrestling "overrated"

Im willing to say if it was Austin, would have been the same.

When Austin finally became the number one guy, the WWE started winning the ratings war. Neither Shawn Michaels or Bret Hart could do that.

Not true. They just wouldnt have went National.

It has been said that Vince bankrolled his entire savings, as well as the company itself on the success of WrestleMania. If it failed, the WWF would have failed.

Show me when he put someone over. Honestly.

Warrior, Goldberg, Savage, Lesnar, Sting, Luger, Angle and Orndorff to name just a few.

Hogan wouldn't even put HBK over at Sumerslam a few years back due to his massivly over ego.

Why would Michaels need putting over by Hogan?

Todays time, yes. Hogans time, no. Harts and HBK's time was tweener on that.

I don't quite understand what you mean here. Care to expand?

 

[[email protected]]

Its got to be a tie between Hogan and Austin. Hogan MADE wrestling mainstream, Austin brought it back. thats all there is too it.

 

[DD84]

At first I said Bruno Sammartino, because he has the longest WWE Championship reign in WWE history. And I won't back down from that. But I will defend another man, for the
sake of agurement.

The wrestler I chose to defend is Edge. This isn't about who drew the best, it is about the greatest champion. Edge; as far as know; is the Greatest Champion in terms of total championship reigns with 26. All in the WWE. Here's the list

* World Heavyweight Championship (4 times, current)
* WWE Championship (4 times)
* WWF/E Intercontinental Championship (5 times)
* WCW United States Championship (1 time)
* WWF/E World Tag Team Championship (11 times)
* WWE Tag Team Championship (1 time)

It is more than anyone I can think of. He may of not have had the best reigns, but no one has had more.

 

[MattMoses]

At first I said Bruno Sammartino, because he has the longest WWE Championship reign in WWE history. And I won't back down from that.

Back down from what? Where's your argument for Bruno being the greatest champion in history. Did you actually see any of his title reign or are you riding on the fact that it was so long in length you're automatically assuming it was good?

The wrestler I chose to defend is Edge. This isn't about who drew the best, it is about the greatest champion. Edge; as far as know; is the Greatest Champion in terms of total championship reigns with 26. All in the WWE.

Does it really need to be proven how pathetic this argument is? I guess it does.

WWF/E Intercontinental Championship (5 times)

Fantastic. He won a mid-card title five times. At a time when the average title reign was what, a couple of weeks? Well, lets work it out.

#1 - July 24, 1999 - July 25, 1999. Okay, so a title reign which didn't last 24 hours and wasn't shown on TV, and was only to be seen years later on his DVD. Worthless title reign which nobody cares about.

#2 - August 19, 2001 - September 23, 2001. So he holds the title for a month. He feuds with the likes of Christian and Lance Storm. Boring and forgettable.

#3 - October 21, 2001 - November 5, 2001. So he holds the title for two weeks. Remember anything at all about this reign? No, me neither.

#4 - November 18, 2001 - Janary 20, 2002. A two month reign. Feuded with William Regal. Overly boring and forgettable.

#5 - July 11, 2004 - September 6, 2004. Vacated due to injury. Not his fault, but it always hurts the prestige of a title when it's vacated.

So you're using this to defend your stance on Edge being the greatest champion in the history of the WWE? The only argument that presents is one about how weak yours is. Should I continue on about those one week worthless tag-team title reigns he had?

He's also an eight time world champion. Care to tell me what's impressive about that when half of those reigns were a month or less in length? Especially when some of those reigns never consisted of one title defense before actually losing it again.

It is more than anyone I can think of. He may of not have had the best reigns, but no one has had more.

A challenger arises. His name is John "Bradshaw" Layfield. Check out this wicked list of accomplishments.

# WWE Championship (1 time)
# WWE Hardcore Championship (17 times)
# WWE Intercontinental Championship (1 time, current)
# WWE United States Championship (1 time)
# WWF European Championship (1 time)
# WWF Tag Team Championship (3 times)

So I guess this makes JBL the greatest champion of all-time along with Edge, right? After all, he has won 24 championships, most of which just as worthless as Edge's.

Oh wait, what's that I hear? A Raven?!?

# WWF/E Hardcore Championship (27 times)

So by your criteria, Raven is the greatest champion in WWE history?

 

[DD84]

Back down from what? Where's your argument for Bruno being the greatest champion in history. Did you actually see any of his title reign or are you riding on the fact that it was so long in length you're automatically assuming it was good?

I know that back in the day, it was a lot different than today. But if he wasn't any good he wouldn't have held it for as long as he did. You can't tell me he didn't deserve it can you. There wasn't anyone good enough to take the strap from him.

Does it really need to be proven how pathetic this argument is? I guess it does.

Fantastic. He won a mid-card title five times. At a time when the average title reign was what, a couple of weeks? Well, lets work it out.

#1 - July 24, 1999 - July 25, 1999. Okay, so a title reign which didn't last 24 hours and wasn't shown on TV, and was only to be seen years later on his DVD. Worthless title reign which nobody cares about.

#2 - August 19, 2001 - September 23, 2001. So he holds the title for a month. He feuds with the likes of Christian and Lance Storm. Boring and forgettable.

#3 - October 21, 2001 - November 5, 2001. So he holds the title for two weeks. Remember anything at all about this reign? No, me neither.

#4 - November 18, 2001 - Janary 20, 2002. A two month reign. Feuded with William Regal. Overly boring and forgettable.

#5 - July 11, 2004 - September 6, 2004. Vacated due to injury. Not his fault, but it always hurts the prestige of a title when it's vacated.

So you're using this to defend your stance on Edge being the greatest champion in the history of the WWE? The only argument that presents is one about how weak yours is. Should I continue on about those one week worthless tag-team title reigns he had?

He's also an eight time world champion. Care to tell me what's impressive about that when half of those reigns were a month or less in length? Especially when some of those reigns never consisted of one title defense before actually losing it again.

A challenger arises. His name is John "Bradshaw" Layfield. Check out this wicked list of accomplishments.

# WWE Championship (1 time)
# WWE Hardcore Championship (17 times)
# WWE Intercontinental Championship (1 time, current)
# WWE United States Championship (1 time)
# WWF European Championship (1 time)
# WWF Tag Team Championship (3 times)

So I guess this makes JBL the greatest champion of all-time along with Edge, right? After all, he has won 24 championships, most of which just as worthless as Edge's.

Oh wait, what's that I hear? A Raven?!?

# WWF/E Hardcore Championship (27 times)

So by your criteria, Raven is the greatest champion in WWE history?

Of course Raven doesn't count. He won the Hardcore title in the 24/7 period. Its not hard to tell that it doesn't count. He also never won a World Title so I wouldn't even count him.

As far as JBL, Most of his reigns are from the Hardcore Title. The Hardcore Title doesn't count for this.

Second off, when Edge is Champ, he carries it well, even though it may only be for a week. Edge is a great Champ when he does hold it. He is always a part of great storylines. When he holds a strap, you know the reign will be entertaining. Edge is a great Champ.

 

[Mustang Sally]

The idiot who said Samartino is the greatest....

Well, you can count me as one of the "idiots" who think that Bruno was the greatest champion of all time. It all depends on how one defines "the greatest." To me, it means the wrestler who held the title the longest, and Bruno's two reigns exceeded 11 years. He didn't defend the title twice a year, either; it was once a month because that was the way it was done in that era. Pay-per-view had yet to be created and selling merchandise was a concept yet to be thought of. Instead, the champion wrestled the top contenders each month. He didn't regularly engage in any of those 7-minute title matches that we often see today. Bruno earned everything he got.

Sammartino sold out arenas on the east coast whenever he wrestled; including full houses at Madison Square Garden for many years.

Don't get me wrong; I think Bruno has become an embittered old man who is spiting only himself in his exile from the company, but that doesn't change my belief that his title reigns were the greatest in WWWF/WWF/WWE history.

 

[MattMoses]

I know that back in the day, it was a lot different than today. But if he wasn't any good he wouldn't have held it for as long as he did. You can't tell me he didn't deserve it can you. There wasn't anyone good enough to take the strap from him.

I don't judge things I haven't seen. It would be like me saying Citizen Kane is the greatest movie of all-time, despite the fact I've never seen it. It's ridiculous.

Of course Raven doesn't count. He won the Hardcore title in the 24/7 period.

And? The hardcore championship was a championship, end of. If you're using an argument for amount of title wins, which you clearly are, then Raven is the greatest champion of all-time in WWE history.

Its not hard to tell that it doesn't count. He also never won a World Title so I wouldn't even count him.

So now you're only considering people who've won world championships, yet using the worthless undercard titles as your argument as to why they're a great champion?

As far as JBL, Most of his reigns are from the Hardcore Title. The Hardcore Title doesn't count for this.

The hardcore championship was a championship in the WWE, so why shouldn't it count? If you're counting all the awful one week tag-team title reigns Edge had, at a time when those belts were passed around just as much as the hardcore title, then it's only fair the hardcore title be used to amass a wrestlers total number of championships.

Second off, when Edge is Champ, he carries it well, even though it may only be for a week.

Yeah, those several week reigns sure are entertaining, especially when you can't remember half of them.

 

[DD84]

I don't judge things I haven't seen. It would be like me saying Citizen Kane is the greatest movie of all-time, despite the fact I've never seen it. It's ridiculous.

Who said I never seen that. Good job, getting your facts. I know the past, I respect it. He has the longest title reign ever he is the greatest champ in WWE history.

And? The hardcore championship was a championship, end of. If you're using an argument for amount of title wins, which you clearly are, then Raven is the greatest champion of all-time in WWE history.

Ahh, yes the most prestigous championship in WWE history the Hardcore Title.
Let's get serious. We all know why the IC, European, and other belts count but why this one doesn't. It was a belt to spark interest, make things exciting, really nothing more,

So now you're only considering people who've won world championships, yet using the worthless undercard titles as your argument as to why they're a great champion?

The hardcore championship was a championship in the WWE, so why shouldn't it count? If you're counting all the awful one week tag-team title reigns Edge had, at a time when those belts were passed around just as much as the hardcore title, then it's only fair the hardcore title be used to amass a wrestlers total number of championships.

Yeah, those several week reigns sure are entertaining, especially when you can't remember half of them.

Raven really counts. Really. We all know that this arguement is about the best overall champ, not dominating just the mid-card, like Raven. At least when Edge's "awful" tag titles reign lasted more than 20 minutes, which the Hardcore Belt rarely did. It is a crappy belt, stop trying to make an agruement for it. The Hardcore Belt was the most entertaining belt in WWE history, but it was also the most meaningless.

Also, just because you can't remember those reign's doesn't mean everyone else doesn't, you dick. Stop trying to come with a consensus decision for everyone on what they do or do not remember. You know that Raven doesn't count,, why would you keep bringing him out, genius. Edge is a great Champ.

 

[MattMoses]

Who said I never seen that.

I didn't. I said I don't judge things I haven't seen.

Nowhere did I state you hadn't seen any of his title reign. But if you had, I doubt you've seen much of it, considering how little amount of footage exists from back then.

I know the past, I respect it.

So do I. But I'm not going to praise something I have never seen.

Ahh, yes the most prestigous championship in WWE history the Hardcore Title.

It was just as prestigous, albeit worthless as the european and tag-team titles were back then.

Let's get serious. We all know why the IC, European, and other belts count but why this one doesn't. It was a belt to spark interest, make things exciting, really nothing more

Despite whoever held the championship, it was still consented by the WWE and reigns were official. Just saying "oh it doesn't count" makes your arguments even worse.

If you're including undercard championships to determine the total number of a wrestlers title reigns, then the hardcore championship counts.

Raven really counts. Really.

For the 50th time. You're saying all championships count, using that as your "argument" for Edge being the greatest. If a belt as worthless as the tag-team titles are included, then the hardcore should be as well. Otherwise you're just making lame excuses to try and defend an already ridiculous reason for defending someone.

We all know that this arguement is about the best overall champ, not dominating just the mid-card

The wrestler I chose to defend is Edge. This isn't about who drew the best, it is about the greatest champion. Edge; as far as know; is the Greatest Champion in terms of total championship reigns with 26. All in the WWE.

You choose to defend Edge because of the number of championships he won. Most of those were mid-card championships. If you're counting total number of mid-card championships won, then Raven is the winner.

It is a crappy belt, stop trying to make an agruement for it.

I'm just trying to show you how ridiculous your original argument for Edge is.

Also, just because you can't remember those reign's doesn't mean everyone else doesn't, you dick.

Yawn. Why bother with personal attacks?

 

[DD84]

It was just as prestigous, albeit worthless as the european and tag-team titles were back then.

Despite whoever held the championship, it was still consented by the WWE and reigns were official. Just saying "oh it doesn't count" makes your arguments even worse.

If you're including undercard championships to determine the total number of a wrestlers title reigns, then the hardcore championship counts.

For the 50th time. You're saying all championships count, using that as your "argument" for Edge being the greatest. If a belt as worthless as the tag-team titles are included, then the hardcore should be as well. Otherwise you're just making lame excuses to try and defend an already ridiculous reason for defending someone.

You choose to defend Edge because of the number of championships he won. Most of those were mid-card championships. If you're counting total number of mid-card championships won, then Raven is the winner.

I'm just trying to show you how ridiculous your original argument for Edge is.

The tag titles weren't worthless. They were defend way more, good tag teams held the belts and they were in the best matches of the year. If the European is meaningless why is it apart of the Grand Slam, unlike the Hardcore Championship.

Yes all the championships count, but you see the Hardcore Championship shouldn't count b/c it is meaningless. Can you really say a title held by one of Godfathers "hos" really is a prestigious title. The Hardcore title produce 8 World Champs, with more title switches, while the European produce 7 with less championships switching.

You didn't even point out that I said this is about World Champs, not mid carders like Raven. Raven is a Main Event wrestler, but not in WWE. Those 27 Hardcore Title reigns are meaningless.

My argument for Edge isn't meaningless. I'm saying he is the Greatest Champ b/c of all his title accomplishments. Not the greatest of all time, but the greatest champion. It was just an argument to put up. Why you took it so seriously is beyond me. Raven can't count b/c all he basically won in WWE was Hardcore Gold, in the 24-7 period. Say what you want to say about the Tag and European and IC, they didn't have a stupid 24-7 rule, making those reigns meaningless.

Yet again, as I said from the beginning, all title reign's do count, but the Hardcore Championship shouldn't. I should have put that in the intro, knowing someone would make that argument. This is about WWE wrestlers male or female who is the greatest champion in WWE history. Who won the best title in their respective division (being World/WWE or Women's/Divas). Also including mid card titles. I should have including something about why the Hardcore title shouldn't have count, my mistake.

For those reason's, thats why Edge could be the Greatest Champion of all time. He won a lot of mid carder titles, but also is a multi time World Champ. If he didn't have a World Title reign, I wouldn't have had included him.