LaBar: 'The Icon' Sting "Isn't an Icon in Pro Wrestling; Needs WWE to Be Considered"

[Uncle Sam]

Like a drunk on the train, Justin LaBar is speaking up again whether you want him to or not. Oh no - you just made eye contact. He's swaying and stumbling toward you. The smell of urine hangs heavy in the air as he starts a new rant.

Spoiler

Longevity doesn't equal iconic.

Road Warrior Animal made a comment on his radio show 100.3 KFAN in Minneapolis, Minnesota, that Sting isn't an “icon” until he works in WWE. Animal said:

"Sting is not in the same league as guys like Triple H, Stone Cold, The Rock. Sting will never be considered a legend or icon until he lets his pride go and joins WWE. He needs to bury his personal issues and just get into the WWE. Sting has to come over to the WWE to be that guy, it's a bigger stage. Impact is one thing, the WWE is a way bigger thing."

For years it has been a major point of contention with me that Sting is given icon status in professional wrestling. I respect Sting, Steve Borden and all that I'm aware they have done in real life along with the wrestling world. Great talent, memorable matches, kind human being and around a long time—but not an icon.

The dictionary defines icon as a symbol that represents its function and meaning. For the purposes of professional wrestling, an icon is someone who, at the sound of their name and sight of their image, is synonymous with wrestling. This isn't Sting.

Hulk Hogan, despite the things said about him as a political backstage force or in-ring work, is someone who, at the mention of his name or view of his trademark look, immediately says wrestling. Just as someone who knows nothing about basketball knows Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods to golf and Babe Ruth to baseball.

Google or ask someone about Sting, you get the musician more times than not. I'm not relying on Google to determine icons in wrestling for me—I rely on my love of the history, extensive viewing of the genre and watching tape of before I was born in the '80s.

The fact is there are very few in professional wrestling who are icons, but Sting is frequently labeled as that. It might make a good gimmick for a company that wants to cash in on a guy with an extensive legacy, but don't confuse marketing for reality.

Why is he listed as an icon? He has worked a lot of years, against some big names and hasn't made headlines with negative publicity. He never went to WWE because he wanted to stay loyal to his morals. I'm sure it means something to him and to hardcore fans of his, which is terrific.

Honestly, I think there are less people who care about his personal morals and more who think it's the cool thing to hate on WWE because it's not underground and is too corporate. Sting held out, which makes his an icon. Valid points can be made for WWE's harm on the evolution of the sport, but they are still the top company until someone can remove them. Don't confuse positive morality for reality.

So there is the other side of the argument that says Sting needs to work for WWE to be an icon. WWE is the top company. He does need to work for the top company and draw money for WrestleMania. He has to do that first before any considerations can be worthy of taking place. This wouldn't be hard. If he is promoted one time, for one WrestleMania feud, he will draw no matter who is working with because he is the guy who never came to work for McMahon until then.

You might say Dan Marino never won a Super Bowl, but he is still a legendary quarterback. Apples and oranges. Dan Marino played on one of the 30 teams in the NFL. The WWE is the league, they are the NFL. The NFL is the top league in American Football over NFL Europe, CFL, Arena and everything else.

WWE is the top league in pro wrestling. I don't care about the hardcore arguments claiming ROH has better workers or anything like that. WWE is the wrestling company that makes the most money courtesy of the most fans. You don't find an athlete who plays the American style of football who strives to only make it to the Arena Football League. They might only talk about that because they know they can't cut it in the NFL, but they still would take the NFL if it came calling.

Every promoter, wrestler, referee and ring crew member has dreamed of WWE. They might disagree with WWE's content over the years, but would still answer the WWE phone call. Period.

WWE hasn't always been the top company. We all know WWE was number two to WCW in the middle of the 1990s. Take a look back to when WCW started to get hot in 1996 with the New World Order angle: Sting takes a break from the ring. He takes a year and a half from working matches.

He remains on camera by appearing on television in the rafters with a character take off of “The Crow.” The angle did contain mystery and curiosity of who Sting was going to align himself with, but Sting wasn't being the top draw for attendance or pay-per-views. He wasn't the symbol that everyone associated with wrestling. That symbol was the black-and-white shirt with three letters. Add that to the list—that New World Order y-shirt is iconic to wrestling.

Road Warrior Animal said Sting wouldn't be an icon until he works WWE. Even if and when he works WWE, I don't know if you can ever convince me he is a wrestling icon. If he does work for WWE drawing money for WrestleMania, he at least potentially puts himself on the platform to increase his visibility.

If he works for WWE, he has at least worked the big show. Even when working WWE for a major feud/payday, I probably still won't view him as an icon. He will finalize what is an accomplished career and fluently move right into the WWE Hall of Fame.

But not as an icon.

He works WWE, then I'll tolerate the radical argument that he is an icon in professional wrestling. For a few more seconds than I currently do, at least.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1100714-sting-isnt-an-icon-in-pro-wrestling

Sting being a wrestling icon isn't a radical argument, is it? Telephone lines should be replaced by dental floss - that's a radical argument. Gail Kim should be thankful for the envelopes of pubic hair I send to her - that's a radical argument. Sting - a name, a face, a person that's more synonymous with professional wrestling than anyone this side of Hulk Hogan or Steve Austin - is a wrestling icon. Seems about as sensible as butter on toast.

The football analogy, as an Englishman, is lost completely on me. Mind you, the point of the article as a whole is lost completely on me. I'm all for denigrating Sting - grab some torches, pitchforks and some nWo shirts and I'm there. However, to argue that Sting isn't synonymous enough with wrestling to be considered an icon seems ludicrous to me, and the idea that, "Hey, Sting's never really been in the big leagues, has he?" seems even more ridiculous. LaBar paints himself as this guy that's putting hipsters in their place. "Hey kids, you like your Ring of Honor and your New Japan Pro Wrestling, and I dig it, so let me ruffle your hair and send you on your way. Aww, bless! Hey, I remember when Sting was hugely popular in WCW, but that doesn't matter. If only I could make you understand that the WWE is popular. It's, like, very popular in comparison to other organisations. Ah, a man can dream."

Either LaBar's being completely irrational - and let's not rule it out - or he's set the bar for being a wrestling icon very, very high indeed. Except, wait, no, because he decides that his definition of icon should be the dictionary definition: "a symbol that represents its function and meaning." About Hogan, he says: "at the mention of his name or view of his trademark look, immediately says wrestling." Sting doesn't meet this criteria apparently. Come. The fuck. On.

I think that's the bloke from The Police.

You chumps know more about Sting than me. This is your outrage to have.

 

[Davi323]

The only thing I can say is that Sting was the man in WCW when WCW was beating the WWF in ratings. Had WCW never exploded in popularity, I might have partially agreed with the idea that Sting possibly wouldn't automatically be an icon...but WCW did explode in popularity, Sting was the man in the most popular wrestling company in the world while he was there, he is a multiple time world champion...of course he is an icon.

And using the Google search argument is ridiculous. Maybe if there was. Musician calling himself Hulk Hogan like Gordon Sumner calls himself Sting, Google would show him first too. It's not really Steve Borden's fault that the "other" Sting was the lead singer of a popular 80s rock group and then went on to have an enormously successful solo career, it is what it is.

 

[Uncle Sam]

And using the Google search argument is ridiculous. Maybe if there was. Musician calling himself Hulk Hogan like Gordon Sumner calls himself Sting, Google would show him first too. It's not really Steve Borden's fault that the "other" Sting was the lead singer of a popular 80s rock group and then went on to have an enormously successful solo career, it is what it is.

You'll notice LaBar - who, in this metaphor, has just vomited on his shoes and is now curled up in a fetal position, sobbing quietly about past relationships - cuts the legs off that argument himself almost immediately:

Google or ask someone about Sting, you get the musician more times than not. I'm not relying on Google to determine icons in wrestling for me—I rely on my love of the history, extensive viewing of the genre and watching tape of before I was born in the '80s.

Don't worry, I'll translate that for you. Fittingly, I used Google Translate, and translated from "Justin LaBar" into "English":

"Google 'Sting' and the musician will come up before the wrestler. Only wait, no, that's silly, isn't it? Google doesn't decide who's an Icon - I do! I am, after all, the foremost wrestling authority. Do you know how much YouTube I watch? Because it's a lot. Shit, I shouldn't have done all those shots. Shouldn't have broken up with Tiffany. Sure, she was forty pounds overweight, but she suffered through all the rants I made about Ring of Honor. Maybe I'll post on her Facebook wall, reignite the old flame."

 

[klunderbunker]

This is a sidebar but one thing I've understood less and less about Sting critics as time goes by: what is going to WWE now going to do for him? He's been on the national stage for 24 years and hasn't been in his physical prime for arguably over 15 years. What in the world is going to WWE where you hear his name dropped from time to time going to prove? He'd be able to have a few brawls here and there but he wouldn't be a world champion or the Sting that could outjump RVD. Everyone knows him and he's arguably more famous because he's not in WWE. He's the one that got away from Vince and he'd probably lose some of his fame if he went there. Him going there doesn't make him a bigger star.

Anyway as for LaBar's and Animal's comments, they're missing on this one. Sting certainly is a huge icon in wrestling. Going to WWE doesn't make you more famous. Look at Flair. He went to WWF in 1991 and while he had a good run there with two world titles, did it make him a bigger star? No, it didn't. It proved he wasn't as big of a draw in WWF as he was in WCW. Think of Flair's top moments. How many of them are in the WWF? How many of them are before 1991? The answer would be most of them. The same is true of Luger. His time in WWF is little short of a failure as he never won the world title, never became the next big thing, and is most famous for getting a huge push and never getting the world title. He was huge in WCW though, both before and after he left. The same is true of Goldberg. He never reached the level in WWE that he had in WCW.

The idea that just because you don't go to WWE means nothing. Sting was the most popular guy in the most popular company in the world for about a year. He was easily the second most popular guy in the world from about 1991 to 1992 and was always the top homegrown guy in WCW. As for the Google search argument, Google Steve Austin. Odds are you'll see something about the Six Million Dollar Man. Try The Rock. You'll probably see San Francisco or a Nicolas Cage movie. Are they not icons? LaBar and Animal are wrong.

 

[Davi323]

The only thing I can say is that Sting was the man in WCW when WCW was beating the WWF in ratings. Had WCW never exploded in popularity, I might have partially agreed with the idea that Sting possibly wouldn't automatically be an icon...but WCW did explode in popularity, Sting was the man in the most popular wrestling company in the world while he was there, he is a multiple time world champion...of course he is an icon.

And using the Google search argument is ridiculous. Maybe if there was. Musician calling himself Hulk Hogan like Gordon Sumner calls himself Sting, Google would show him first too. It's not really Steve Borden's fault that the "other" Sting was the lead singer of a popular 80s rock group and then went on to have an enormously successful solo career, it is what it is.

It's kinda funny, isn't it? If he wasn't trying to use it as an argument that Sting wasn't an icon, why even include it at all? It's almost as if he is a lawyer who deliberately states something, knowing full well that not only will there be an objection, but that it would be sustained. Officially the statement is not part of the record, but it still exists in the minds of the jury members. It's like he recognizes just how stupid the Google argument is, but he still felt compelled to use it anyway...

 

[shattered dreams]

This has always been about one thing. People want to see Sting in WWE. I get that. What I don't get is why they think that he is going to go there if they call him out on the internet? Why don't you write what you mean instead of taking a shit on your keyboard and trying to pass it off as a well-reasoned argument? Write about why you want to see Sting in WWE. Write about how iconic Sting has been and how you want to see him at a Wrestlemania because it is only fitting in your mind. Don't try and tear him down with obviously stupid statements just because he won't give you what you want.

 

[ABMorales787]

So let me get this straight.

The Man They Call Sting has defeated the likes of Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, Vader, Kevin Nash, Rob Van Dam, Bret Hart, Mick Foley, Goldberg and beyond, was a mainstream star in the late 90's parallel to WWE's then rising Attitude Era,has re-invented himself at the least 3 times, has held that shiny strap Daniel Bryan carries quite a few number of times and has worked for many a major organization sans WWE (and ECW) and has held numerous World titles. He however is not to be called an "Icon" because he never worked for WWE. That's as stupid as saying John Cena can never be considered a star that's on par with guys like Hogan and Austin in their prime because he wasn't around back then.

Legends of this business are chosen for their accomplishments, not where they work. That's why Antonio Inoki and Mil Mascaras are/will be in the WWE's Hall Of Fame.

If we were to spin the stupidity of LaBar's words badly enough, he's pretty much saying Bubba Ray Dudley is better than Bully Ray because he's a WWE character. If it's him trying to troll, he should call Mark Madden for help because this was bad. if it was his genuine view on it, it's still bad.

 

[BiGEViL]

Sting will never be an icon. Sting was an legend in WCW/NWA/TNA, but that is as far as it will ever go. When people think icon, they think large, big, lots of money, fame, fortune, success, big matches...but most of all, they think WWE.

For instance, the Rock is an icon, but the Rock never wrestled for WCW/NWA. Why is he still an icon? Because he DID wrestle in WWE. Sting is a legend. He will always be a legend, but Sting's legacy will be left in TNA, as a failed attempt to save save the sinking ship that is TNA.

He could have worked so many programs in WWE. So many storylines and angles and characters. He didn't, he chose his morale highroad, and you know what? That's okay, because he did what was in his heart, and he never "sold out". I'm sure he's fine with that. Sting is one of the legit good guys, and stood up for what he believed in.

I hate TNA with a passion, so the fact Sting is there, irritates me to death. I mean, I grew up on watching Sting in NWA/WCW and he had tons of great programs: vs Flair, taking on The Horsemen 1 by 1, teaming with The Road Warriors vs The Russians, Teaming with The Bulldog, becoming a Horseman, vs The Great Muta (my favorite), vs Cactus Jack, Lord Steven Regal, Vader, etc. I went to so many Starrcades and Clash of the Champions JUST to see Sting.

I've always cheered for and admired Sting. I don't watch TNA, even Sting can't change that. I gave it a chance, I watched, purchased ppv's went to a few shows, but nope. Didn't work. I hate their product (not their wrestlers). I hated it when they tried to force that stupid 6-sided ring down our throat, or those stupid ropes above the ring. I hate the fact they repeated the SAME mistakes that ruined WCW by bringing in Hogan, Bischoff, Russo and gave them the power.

As much as I hate TNA and the fact Sting works for them, I respect his decision to not make the jump. Why? Because he did something very important by honoring his word, he did what he needed to do to be Sting: He remained true to himself, his morals and his word. If he had jumped ship, I would have been ELATED to see him in WWE and watch his stuff, follow his angles, etc...but I wouldn't have respected him 1/2 as much as I do now. So no, he's not an icon. At least not to me...a 30 year wrestling viewer, he's something more important than just being an "Icon", he's a Real Man that honors his word because it's what he feels is right. Kudos Stinger!!! I'm proud of ya!

Anyway...that's my two cents.

 

[dwith]

If LaBar honestly believes the bs that spews from his mouth then he is a douche bag. It all started with the road warrior i believe a few weeks ago saying that exact same thing.

Why should the WWE be the ones to decide who can be a icon or a legend?
WWE does not have the exclusives on talent just because they are the biggest wrestling organization.

That's the same as saying Owen Hart or The Rock will never be legends or even an icon because they were never in WCW and only served one major wrestling company in their career's. its friggin bullshit.

WWE shouldn't have any say what so ever with talent's being nicknamed icon's or legends or whatever they may be just because they have never sucked VINCE MCMAHON'S dick in WWE.

LaBar needs to stay off the crack pipe he's smoking, and get a friggin clue, and realize that WWE doesn't get to decide a wrestler's future status, and LaBar sure as hell doesn't either.

 

[Foshinzo]

Sting is an icon.

Do you not immediately recognize his name?
Do you not immediately know him by appearance?
I dare you to say that you don't.

I don't know if the younger crowd can't remember the day, but WCW was once at least as big as the WWF, if not bigger, and Sting was the biggest face of that company.

If you're an icon in the only company to ever truly rival the WWF/E, then why is the WWE so important? This isn't like the CFL to the NFL...this is the AFL to the NFL.

Why is LaBar spitting on WCW like it didn't count? Does anyone honestly think that Ron Simmons is going into the WWE Hall of Fame because he played Faarooq? He's going in because he won the WCW Championship over Vader, who was arguably the biggest heel in the business, at that time. Even if Simmons is getting recognized because of his WWE tenure, what of the Four Horsemen? Arn and Tully aren't getting in because they were the Brainbusters, they're getting in for their time in NWA and WCW.

When you say Sting isn't an icon, you're seriously spitting on WCW IMO, and I it's foolish. Sure, WCW past 97 sucked, but from 95-Starrcade 97, it was the real deal. WWE hasn't always been the end all be all. Sting still wrestled the likes of Hogan, Flair (when, "the Man," really was, "the Man,"), Savage, etc., but it doesn't count because it wasn't in WWE? What, wrestling HHH or Undertaker what it takes before you're an icon? I understand what LaBar's side of the argument is, but it's wrong.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

I listen to these kinds of ridiculous arguments on a daily basis when I have to hear about how hockey players—predominantly Russians who play in the KHL—aren't "stars" because they never played in the NHL. While I agree that the NHL is the biggest stage in hockey, to argue that point-per-game or better players in the KHL aren't "stars" when they make millions of dollars, sell jerseys and get pegged as superstars that every NHL team would line up to sign by scouts working for NHL clubs is ludicrous... nearly as ludicrous as trying to argue the semantics of adjectives like "icon" or "legend" in this argument from Laurinaitis/LaBar.

Fact is, Sting is both legendary as well as iconic in this industry. His face is well known. His history is well know. He's had bouts with and has beaten many of the largest names in the world, repeatedly, and he's twice now helped to carry a wrestling company to new heights. I get that WWE fans want to see Sting and don't want to have to watch TNA to do so, but why is it so fucking difficult to remain objective about it? Why is it so difficult for me to find arguments from anyone pining for Sting to the WWE that don't predominantly hinge on hammering TNA and/or Sting for failing to give WWE fans what they want?

 

[LittleJimmy]

If that is the best reason that Animal and LaBar can come up with on why Sting isnt an icon then they need to go back to the drawing board. I am a huge Sting fan and have been for 20+ years. Would like for him to someday show up on RAW, HELL YEAH who wouldn't? But am I going to think any less of him because he never wrestled in WWE? Absolutly not, nor should anyone else. He carried WCW on his back, and IMO more so than Hogan, for many years. He was hugely over back then and still is today. HE IS AN ICON! No matter what some dirt sheet hack says.

BTW, what credentials does LaBar have to determine who is an icon and who isnt? NONE! He is the "commissioner" of a tiny indy promotion and had a 5 minutes "match" w/ a guy who is 110lbs soaking wet. His mouth and ego have over run him, probably why I dont listen to his weekly radio show like I used to.

 

[dwith]

Sting will never be an icon. Sting was an legend in WCW/NWA/TNA, but that is as far as it will ever go. When people think icon, they think large, big, lots of money, fame, fortune, success, big matches...but most of all, they think WWE.

For instance, the Rock is an icon, but the Rock never wrestled for WCW/NWA. Why is he still an icon? Because he DID wrestle in WWE. Sting is a legend. He will always be a legend, but Sting's legacy will be left in TNA, as a failed attempt to save save the sinking ship that is TNA.

He could have worked so many programs in WWE. So many storylines and angles and characters. He didn't, he chose his morale highroad, and you know what? That's okay, because he did what was in his heart, and he never "sold out". I'm sure he's fine with that. Sting is one of the legit good guys, and stood up for what he believed in.

I hate TNA with a passion, so the fact Sting is there, irritates me to death. I mean, I grew up on watching Sting in NWA/WCW and he had tons of great programs: vs Flair, taking on The Horsemen 1 by 1, teaming with The Road Warriors vs The Russians, Teaming with The Bulldog, becoming a Horseman, vs The Great Muta (my favorite), vs Cactus Jack, Lord Steven Regal, Vader, etc. I went to so many Starrcades and Clash of the Champions JUST to see Sting.

I've always cheered for and admired Sting. I don't watch TNA, even Sting can't change that. I gave it a chance, I watched, purchased ppv's went to a few shows, but nope. Didn't work. I hate their product (not their wrestlers). I hated it when they tried to force that stupid 6-sided ring down our throat, or those stupid ropes above the ring. I hate the fact they repeated the SAME mistakes that ruined WCW by bringing in Hogan, Bischoff, Russo and gave them the power.

As much as I hate TNA and the fact Sting works for them, I respect his decision to not make the jump. Why? Because he did something very important by honoring his word, he did what he needed to do to be Sting: He remained true to himself, his morals and his word. If he had jumped ship, I would have been ELATED to see him in WWE and watch his stuff, follow his angles, etc...but I wouldn't have respected him 1/2 as much as I do now. So no, he's not an icon. At least not to me...a 30 year wrestling viewer, he's something more important than just being an "Icon", he's a Real Man that honors his word because it's what he feels is right. Kudos Stinger!!! I'm proud of ya!

Anyway...that's my two cents.

Who in the hell ever said a pro wrestler had to serve any particular wrestling organization to be an icon?

It's the hard work, and effort through out their career that would make them an Icon. The ROCK was fun to watch, but i would hardly say he is an ICON. No one company should ever decide how someone becomes an Icon in wrestling except for their history. Sting has been wrestling for 25 plus years, The ROCK was what 7-8 year career. Come on, use some common sense.

icon- An icon is a graphic representation of something, a person or thing that is symbolic or is a noted figure.

 

[Schwing]

Icon and Legend are both very flattering yet very different terms. I truly believe there are only a handful of Icons in wrestling and Sting isn't one of them.

Hulk Hogan is. Ric Flair is. The Undertaker is. Shawn Michaels is. Stone Cold Steve Austin is. The Rock is. Give it ten years and you can add Cena to that list and that's the problem.

Being an Icon isn't that great. It means you are very well known by everyone. The dictionary describes it as "a person or thing widely regarded as a representative symbol of something." In wrestling, I'd rather be considered 'Just' a legend.

In normal sports, those people considered Icons are always the best at the sport. That's what makes them so entertaining after all. Jordan. Ali. Pele. They were masters of their craft and we all recognise that and that is why they are seen as Icons and Legends. But there were other people around, people just as talented and entertaining but the shimmer is gone when we think of them.

Think Fast food mascots... Ronald McDonald spring to mind? How about the Colonal? Or The King? Thought so...
Did Wendy even come to you before you read her name? How about The Arby's hat? Carl Jr's star? Didn't think so. But hey, if you love them, that's great... the rest of us don't really care so much. The fact remains that McDonalds is the star of the show They are considered the best in their market. Any Child or Grandparent can think up the Golden Arches or Ronald McDonald's face. Everything else is just an also ran in comparison. Even Burger King and KFC. I'm not even mentioning Subway...

When it comes to wrestling, forget all of that about being the best.

I'm telling you things I hope you already know here but Wrestling isn't about being good at wrestling. It's about having the look, the charisma and popularity.

Hulk Hogan was not the best wrestler to ever live. Neither is The Undertaker. Or Stone Cold. Or John Cena but they are they symbols of Wrestling that live on and will continue to live on after they retire and die. It's justifiable... they entertain us en masse. That is their job and I don't ask for any more from them. I love all those guys. But if I want to watch a true clinic in the ring then I'm not searching YouTube for the John Cena Vs Randy Orton. Nor for Undertaker Vs Mankind in HIAC. I'm looking at Kurt Angle. Chris Jericho. Chris Benoit... Those guys for me were my personal icons. But that's not the arguement.

Some other guys like Ric Flair or Shawn Michaels... they break the rules and have the full package. That's why they're regularly referenced as the best of all time. Shawn gets that accolade on a weekly basis these days. These guys are the rarest of the rare and I don't see many more coming anytime soon.

I did the Google search check. This is apparantly completely immaterial but I still felt I should do my homework as another poster above suggested that The Nicolas Cage film and Lee Majors would get the nod ahead of their wrestling namesakes. He was wrong. The Rock's Wikipedia is the first result. For Steve Austin, Stone Cold is first ahead of The Six Million Dollar Man.

Sting, however, brings up the musician first. Steve Borden is second. Maybe it isn't that immaterial after all. It seems to be backing up the argument.

It genuinely doesn't matter what Sting has done in wrestling. Who he has beat. Which story lines he's had. That's all Kayfabe and that truly is immaterial. The only thing that matters is if anyone outside of wrestling actually knows who he is and, on that point, I have to agree with what Road Warrior Animal and Justin LaBar have said. I'm guessing that 9/10 people would say the Musician first and another 9/10 from those people probably wouldn't even realise there is a wrestler with the same name.

My only real concern is why everyone seem so worked up about one mans opinion? What does it matter if Sting is considered an Icon or not to the rest of the world? You are the wrestling fan, not them. So who gives a shit what they think. I'm a football fan (Soccer) and I'm told time and time again by non-football fans how boring it is. I really couldn't care less about what they think. I love it and always will so if you love Sting and think he's a Legend in your eyes then look around! You're in great company on this website because every single Wrestling fan that has ever seen him wrestle will agree with you. He just won't be pinned up there in the public eye along with Ronald McDonald and Mickey Mouse. That is certainly something I can live with.

 

[CasualWatcher]

I gotta ask something...

Google or ask someone about Sting, you get the musician more times than not. I'm not relying on Google to determine icons in wrestling for me—I rely on my love of the history, extensive viewing of the genre and watching tape of before I was born in the '80s.

From that, should we assume that we have to ask anyone out of wrestling? Cause, you know, I'm guessing pretty much any wrestling fan over the age of 16 will probably know Sting (and I'm gonna dare to say that anyone above 20something knows him for sure).

So, since when do people out of wrestling fandom affects if a wrestler is considered an "icon"? I mean, out of Hogan, Rock and perhaps Cena (in the US, cause out of it, I doubt so many people know him if they don't follow wrestling at a certain degree), who would be considered an icon? Who is known enough out of wrestling for that?

 

[hatehabsforever]

I think it would be borderline silly to suggest that Sting is not an icon. He has earned that moniker over an extended career in multiple organizations. He is a household name in wrestling, with tons of accolades and the recognizability that has earned him the description of an icon. However, there's no doubt that the lack of WWE experience on his otherwise glowing resume is a huge omission, one that will always keep him further down the list of all time greats than he would otherwise be had he spent a portion of his career in the WWE. As much as some would insist on disputing it, the WWE is the pinnacle of the professional wrestling business, and not spending any of his time in there, proving himself on the grandest stage of them all, will always cause some to question his significance in the grand scheme of things. Is Sting an icon? Of course he is. But one cannot help but wonder where he would fit amongst the greatest of the great, had he had the courage to take the leap and quiet the skeptics once and for all.

 

[Champ1432]

Sting not an icon? Wow.

I too find that argument ridiculous, mostly for reasons already mentioned.

LaBar says WWE is the biggest wrestling company in the world. True........ today. Back in the 90's, WCW was beating the pants off WWF. Sting was in WCW. So Sting was in the biggest wrestling company in the world, and at the time when they were doing their best. Why is the nWo shirt iconic and Sting not? Because of the one extremely disappointing run the nWo had in WWE? Or is it because of what they did in WCW, which no one had ever seen before, and will probably never be duplicated? If Vince hadn't brought the nWo in, would they not be iconic any longer? Please.

Also, because Sting doesn't have the name recognition of someone like Hogan with non-fans or extremely casual fans of wrestling, this makes him not an icon? Because more people would know the singer Sting? This is an irrelevant argument. First of all, I would argue that no wrestler is as well known "outside of the business" than Hogan. Not Austin, not Rock, not anyone. If Hogan is the measure of an icon, than he is the only icon ever. I don't think anyone will ever match him. Also, as was already pointed out, if there were a mainstream musician named Hulk Hogan, more people would know that person than the wrestler as well. Pop music is always going to be more popular than pro wrestling in the mainstream.

I'm sure if Sting did ever decide to go to WWE, LaBar would say he's not an icon because he sold out. LaBar likens a wrestler's desire to reach WWE to a football players desire to reach the NFL, stating every single football player wants to do that and would jump at the chance. But this is an invalid comparison, since LaBar himself acknowledges that it was Sting's choice to never go to WWE. Does anyone really think that if Sting had wanted to move over to the E at any point in his career, Vince would have said no? Of course not. So obviously, the only reason Sting was never there is because he didn't want to be. So that is what is keeping him from being considered an icon? Because he stuck to his guns, didn't compromise his principles? Nice.

I know I rehashed a lot of other arguments, but what more can be said that hasn't been said on this issue by now? Sting not being an icon is ludicrous, in my opinion.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

I think it would be borderline silly to suggest that Sting is not an icon. He has earned that moniker over an extended career in multiple organizations. He is a household name in wrestling, with tons of accolades and the recognizability that has earned him the description of an icon. However, there's no doubt that the lack of WWE experience on his otherwise glowing resume is a huge omission, one that will always keep him further down the list of all time greats than he would otherwise be had he spent a portion of his career in the WWE. As much as some would insist on disputing it, the WWE is the pinnacle of the professional wrestling business, and not spending any of his time in there, proving himself on the grandest stage of them all, will always cause some to question his significance in the grand scheme of things. Is Sting an icon? Of course he is. But one cannot help but wonder where he would fit amongst the greatest of the great, had he had the courage to take the leap and quiet the skeptics once and for all.

What skeptics? Again, this is the type of argument I hear from fans pining for Sting to WWE (which I know you are not one of), but it's shallow and completely transparent. Do the people touting these types of arguments think it actually holds ground?

Not having WWE on his résumé is not an indictment on his ability. It does not hinder his career in any way. It does not hurt Sting. The only thing it "hurts" is the desires/fantasies of WWE fans who want to see him any cost that does not require they watch TNA to do so. The only "quieting" that Sting going to WWE would have accomplished is silencing angry [internet] fans who are upset with the personal decisions of an iconic performer who snubbed the company they love most. Period. Nothing more.

Anyone who questions the legacy of Sting I would firmly invite to seek out their local radiologist office for a CAT Scan.

 

[LittleJimmy]

I did the Google search check. This is apparantly completely immaterial but I still felt I should do my homework as another poster above suggested that The Nicolas Cage film and Lee Majors would get the nod ahead of their wrestling namesakes. He was wrong. The Rock's Wikipedia is the first result. For Steve Austin, Stone Cold is first ahead of The Six Million Dollar Man.

Sting, however, brings up the musician first. Steve Borden is second. Maybe it isn't that immaterial after all. It seems to be backing up the argument.

A Google search on the name Sting is an even more pathetic argument than whether he has wrestled in WWE or not. I mean come on, come up with a better point then post.

Sting has gone through is career on his own terms and not going by what other people say or think about him. It is not a requirment of every big name wrestler ot go to the WWE.

 

[dencar84]

using the logic of the people that say he isn't an icon simply because he has never been in wwe, all he would have to do is show up on raw one night and maybe cut a promo then leave and never return and that would make him an icon becuase he appeared in a wwe ring.
sting is a wrestling icon period, lebar said that during wcw's prime the nwo was the main draw and sting set out for a year, wrong, every time sting descended from the rafters and attacked hogan and co. the crowd went nuts.
the payoff at starrcade 97 may have been a disappointment the year-long build up was incredible.
when he was asked about his "Mt. Rushmore of Wrestling" he named all wwe guys, and even said ric flair wasn't a big enough name to make the cut, wow.

 

[King of the Words]

I see Sting as one of the few Icons of Pro Wrestling to not have worked in WWE. For him to have reached the level of popularity he has without being in WWE is a huge accomplishment in itself. WWE has been for the most part the biggest stage to perform on, and most known and most mainstreamed. This is of course going to help you be a bigger star because more people are watching. Sting made himself a big name without help from WWE. Not many people can say that. The only reason for Sting to pass through WWE now is to possibly have that much antisipated match with Undertaker at next Mania and get in the WWE Hall Of Fame. He still may get into the WWE HOF even if he doesn`t ever work for them. Vince would want him in for the Name alone, trying to have every ICON or LEGEND that has been in the pro wrestling businsess, in his HOF to add to it`s greatness. Personally, I would love to see Sting and Undertaker fight at Mania 29, but if Sting chooses to stay away from WWE I wouldn`t blame him.

 

[ilapierre]

Justin LaBarr is a moron. The little show he does is the most annoying and smarky thing I've ever seen. He can say whatever he feels like based on his WWE obsession. Wrestling was not just WWE. There is way more to wrestling. There is ROH and TNA now. There was WCW and ECW 15 years ago. There was NWA and the territories before that. Ric Flair would have been an icon without WWE. In fact, I don't believe Flair's time in WWE did anything to improve his legacy. Flair's time in WWE kind of makes him appear less than the greatest wrestling entertainer of all time. Hulk Hogan's best overall work was in WCW as part of the NWO. Hogan's legacy is Hulkamania but the heel character he played in NWO is what makes Hulk Hogan the best of all time. The Four Horseman and the NWO are the two best stables of all time and the Horseman had nothing to do with WWE. NWO invaded for about a month before they were made to look extremely weak. These legacies wouldn't have been any better attached to the WWE. Sting never needed WWE to be one of the best. In 1991, Sting was considered one of the best ever. Fast forward 20 years later, Sting still has not wrestled for WWE but is still one of the best ever. Better than most of anything ever produced by WWE.

You can be obsessed with your allegiance to a particular company all you want. You can be like LaBarr and go around believing WWE is the major leagues and everything else is the minors. If that was correct, then WWE would have an off-season which they do not. WWE is the company headed by the guy with the most desire. Any Ted Turner could set up a wrestling organization and put Vince and WWE out of business. WWE is the top company but it wasn't always like that. NWA was the wrestling-based company years ago, WCW was the better overall entertainment in the mid to late 90s. And WWE has been relatively weak ever since the recession put WCW and ECW out of business. Sting has competed with everyone from Ric Flair to Randy Savage to Hulk Hogan to Ultimate Warrior to Kurt Angle to Steve Austin to Ricky Steamboat. The guys today who are wannabe icons like John Cena and Randy Orton haven't even faced one tenth the star calibre competition that Sting has. Sting is an icon because he was the main part of the best storyline in the history of wrestling. Sting has done it all. He is one of the 10 best. Lou Thez had very little to do with WWE and he is an icon and one of the best. I'd argue that without WWE, guys like The Undertaker and Shawn Michaels may never have been icons. I don't know if a lot of guys who benefited from being a WWE superstar could have become as iconic as Sting has without the machine backing it.

Justin LaBarr is an idiot. No one should take any stock in what the guy says. Any one of us could put on a suit and a tie and get our friends to videotape us giving our dumbass opinions. Sometimes I wonder if LaBarr just says things for the sake of saying things because it's all been said. It sounds like something someone would say and change their mind about a minute after saying it. I don't even know I believe LaBarr could even truly believe his own statement.

 

[Cats Pajamas]

When I was a kid I can remember walking through a toy store and seeing an action doll set that was something along the lines of "The Evolution of Sting". That was years ago and at that point, Sting was easily an icon. Today, Sting is definitively legendary.

So what's in a name? Type "Sting" into Google and you may learn about "Fields of Gold". Big deal. What if someone painted Steve Bordens wrestling facepaint over Mona Lisa? "Hey... she's a WCW fan, and how!"

He is iconic, about as much as Andre the Giant is. I don't know as if J-Bar should be excoriated for this, though... it almost sounds like he's just trying to piss us off a la Mark Madden. Animal should know better then this, too; He's iconic to tag team wrestling, if there ever was an icon to that division. Alright folks, until next time watch for falling rocks, never trust a politician, don't eat the poisoned apple and best regards, wrestling fans.

You found the secret message! "I shall call it Sting!" - Bilbo Baggins, naming his Elven sword

 

[znick921]

Just because Sting didnt wrestle in WWE doesant mean he isnt a icon he didn't want to wrestle for them so what you forget that they still came knocking on his door asking him.

 

[czar76]

The fact that Sting has never worked for WWE makes a better case for his Icon status then anything else. He is the only BIG name that never worked there. He has managed to stay relevant in the business for over 20 years without ever stepping foot in a WWE ring. Say what u want about TNA but the dude has saved their ass many times. They got the 2 hour block on spike because of Sting.
Vince has tried to get him on several occasions, that in and of itself says a lot. To say that Sting doesn't deserve the status he has achieved is moronic. Sting will be remembered if for nothing else, and there is a lot he will be remembered for, as the only big time player who never worked for Vince. Why? Because he didn't need to.