Legacy: Or How To Step Out Of Your Father's Shadow

[Remix]

Nepotism is a word that's had a long relationship with wrestling. Whether it's a promoter pushing his son as the top guy in his fed or David Sammartino existing at all it's a big part of the past of the buisness and looking at WWE's roster a big part of its future as well. And this thread is to get your thoughts on this phenomenon and what you think it takes for a guy who got into WWE because of their last name to stand on their own two feet and give my own thoughts too.

The Me factor

To me, this is the single most important thing that determines whether a wrestler will be able to step out of their father's shadow. What I mean is when you see or hear their name you think of THEM not their father. When you see Randy Orton, the first thing that comes to mind is a oiled up, tanned and tattoed musclebound guy with an awesome finisher that can come out of nowhere, not the son of a cowboy with a cast on his arm and hepatitis viruses in his liver cells. But when you think of DH Smith, chances are you think of him as not quite as good son of The British Bulldog.

I've seen wrestling be called the "me" buisness, and if the people buying tickets are thinking of someone other than you when they see you in the ring you have failed end of story.

Don't be a tribute act of your Father

This is really just an expansion of the first point and it's about drawing a line between the past (i.e. your father) and the present (i.e. you). By all means reference that you have a legacy in this buisness, but don't let that define you. Let me give a couple of examples. If you are a DiBiase, then by all means do the Million Dollar Dream and be a rich arrogant heel, but don't rehash his act. Or, if you're the son of Ricky Steamboat, then by all means use some of your Dad's signature spots, but don't wrestle like a highlight reel of him (which used to be a real issue with Richie Steamboat, but is now less so).

A very good example of someone who has the ballance right is Cody Rhodes. In a match you'll see him call back to his brother (stop, kneel uppercut) and his first tag team partner in WWE (with Hardcore Holly's Alabama Slam) and with some of his old attire (Uncommon on his old jacket (a reference to Dusty's Common man gimmick), and half gold and half polkadot trunks)

Tallent

Yeah, I probably should have put this first, but this does apply to every wrestler and not just guys with famous surnames so it goes here. If you want to be a success you've got to have some kind of tallent. If you don't, well you're going to fail like every other useless motherfucker. Case and point:

[YOUTUBE]MhnnxCrbqDM[/YOUTUBE]

Talking points:

What do you think are the most important things that determine whether or not a second/third generation guy will be a success?

Do you think it's easier or harder for a second/third generation guy to get over and maintain their popularity?

Who in your opinion are the best and worst second/third gen guys in WWE?

 

[Iversen]

Christ I'd never seen David Flair wrestle before and that was truly awful. Ric can't have stood and watched than and seriously thought his son was good can he?

Anyway to the topic:

What do you think are the most important things that determine whether or not a second/third generation guy will be a success?

Exactly like you said, they have to become their own man. I have no issue if they start out on a similar path as their father or whoever but they have no move away from it, make their own character and move set etc. People don't just want to see a son ripping off his father.

Do you think it's easier or harder for a second/third generation guy to get over and maintain their popularity?

I think it gives you a boost straight away. You've got the name recognition and fans will be interested in what you can do. However in the long run you might be expected of more and they can turn on you.

Who in your opinion are the best and worst second/third gen guys in WWE?

Best: Orton and Rhodes, of the guys who are regularly competing at the moment. They've both become their own characters and have built a niche for themselves that had little to do with their fathers. Goldust falls into that category as well.

Worst: Dibiase, the guys got talent he just isn't using it or being used rightly. His gimmick when he was pushed was near identical to his dads and he's never done anything to distance himself from that.

 

[poppycock]

I think talent will be the overall factor in if a wrestler makes it or not...despite being a second or third generation superstar and nomatter how big the family name is in the wrestling business, if they have no talent or money making potential then I doubt they will make it. I don't think you can make it on name alone unless you have something more to offer.

I think the second question has two answers..firstly yeah, I think it probably would be easier to get a chance to put a foot in the door if you are the son/daughter or relation of a legend in the wrestling business but I think it would be harder to step out from their shadow and make a name for yourself. Like I said before I guess you just have to have "it" to make it..nomatter who you are or who you are related to.

The Rock has to be one of the best examples of a wrestler who made a name for themselves and stepped out from any family shadow.

 

[CMSawall]

By golly that was the worst wrestle match i have seen. He makes Cena look good. Lol

What do you think are the most important things that determine whether or not a second/third generation guy will be a success?

Well usually WWE will try to make them follow in there father's gimmick, until they can get over somewhat, then try them in there own gimmick. I think thats the main problem with Dibiase. He needs to make his own impact and not try to copy his fathers gimmick, Rhodes got own on his own fine, so did everyone else.

Do you think it's easier or harder for a second/third generation guy to get over and maintain their popularity?
Pretty much I think they could get over just as easy as anyone could if you just put 100% into it and your gimmick, alot of 2nd/3rd Gen. superstars have been a success so far, there are a few out there that need to step their game up though (Ted Dibiase, Joe Hennig)
Who in your opinion are the best and worst second/third gen guys in WWE?
Right now the best would be Orton, Rhodes. When Orton came to the ring he quickly moved away from his fathers gimmick's and made out his own character, and quickly evolved into the Legend Killer, then eventually into this.... "Apex Predator". Cody came and astablished himself pretty bad he didnt get over to well while with Holly, He got more over when he alligned with Legacy (greastest faction ever) then he was able to pick up the confidence and start on his own way eventually coming to what he is today.

Worst by far has to be Dibiase. Even though he went with Legacy he still tries to live off his fathers. This guy just refuses to start his own thing. The guys got tallent, he just needs to stop sucking off his fathers legacy. Second would have to go to Micheal McGillicutty but i dont blame it on him, i blame it on WWE for not letting him use the "Henning" name and go on to continue what his father started. The guy is great he's worked with what he got in Nexus, and now he wants to start his own thing.

 

[Shockwave]

Personally, i think it's harder for someone to succeed when they get into the business because of their last name for simply because they have their fathers/grandfathers legacy as a shadow over them. The Rock...Randy Orton...Cody Rhodes and Goldust...These few have all done it, but had to bust their asses to succeed their respective family heritage. People without the background have it a bit easier IN MY OPINION because they have nothing to compare too...they build their own legacy - whether they become stars or not - knowing that people won't be saying "yeah, he aint as good as his dad".

 

[S.J. Maximus]

I don't think the criteria for becoming a successful wrestler is dependent on whether or not they are 2nd/3rd generation. Everything the OP said is true for every person who wants to become a wrestler. I believe that the same tools are used to build all generations of wrestlers, meaning that there is nothing that 1st generations need that 2nd/3rd gens don't and vice versa.

That being said, I do think it's easier to get over when your dad was a famous wrestler because of the booking behind their debuts as well as the direct connection to greatness. Ted Dibiase jr. didn't need to speak but I loved him the minute I saw him with the Million Dollar Man because of how much I love Ted Sr. DH Smith in 2007 cut one of the worst promos in the WWE history but because he was Davey's son he was over and was slated to join the IC title race before getting suspended for steroids. It's just fun to see the kids of your old heroes become new heroes, much like Randy Orton did (and Cody Rhodes might do). Their always booked as guys with "wrestling in their blood" and guys who have that "extra gear" due to their heritage so that always helps too, it's much easier to be and 2nd/3rd guy.

Randy Orton. Orton is the second best 3rd generation star of all time behind the People's Champion The Rock and I wish they put them in a feud that could take advantage of that but I'll save that for a different topic. If we're talking about history, we need Bret Hart, Ted Dibiase Sr., Eddie Guerrero, Jake Roberts, Rey Mysterio, and Owen on the list behind Rock but if we're talking about today then let's put Orton, Cody Rhodes, Goldust, and Natalya (first ever 3rd gen diva) on the list.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Interesting topic. I think when it comes to being a success, a wrestler simply has to be talented. If you want success over the long haul, then you have to have the qualities that can make someone an interesting and entertaining professional wrestler. Just because your father and/or grandfather happened to be a legend doesn't mean that you've just automatically inherited the talent that made them stars in the industry.

There's nothing wrong with using family connections to potentially get your foot in the door, or at least to get someone to notice you. That's all well and good. But, eventually, you have to show what you've got and what merits you bring into the business other than what your old man did in the business before you. If you don't, then you're eventually going to fizzle out. You might be able to get by on your name for a while but, in time, you'll have to stand on your own two feet and make the people wanna see and care about what you bring to the table.

Off the top of my head, guys that stand out as 2nd or 3rd generation stars are the likes of Randy Orton, The Rock, Barry Windham and Cody Rhodes. All of these wrestlers have a legacy in wrestling and all of them either have or could possibly eclipse what their father have done before them. Orton's career has left the ones had by his father & grandfather in the dust, as has The Rock. They've made more money, worked in front of bigger crowds and are infinitely better inside the ring or on the mic than their forebearers ever dreamed of. Barry Windham was one of the best overall pro wrestlers of the 80s. He was a star in the Mid-Atlantic & Florida territories, later a star in WCW, was a star in the WWF and held over 30 major titles in his career including an NWA World Heavyweight Championship run. Cody Rhodes is a fast rising young star and has the potential to go a long way. He's still only in his 20s and has his entire career ahead of him.

All these wrestlers had/have the talent to move past being just the son of a well known star and became or are becoming stars in their own right.

You want proof that talent isn't inherited, look at D.H. Smith & Ted DiBiase. Smith did an interview recently in which he all but says that he believes he should have and could have been a big star in WWE based on the fact that he's a member of the Hart Family. Ted DiBiase looks better and is more athletic than his father ever was, but his father could out-wrestle & out-talk circles around him on his worst day.

 

[SinCityBlitz]

What do you think are the most important things that determine whether or not a second/third generation guy will be a success?

Personality. He/she needs to be a good talker and can get the crowd eating out of his/her hands. The in-ring stuff will come with more practice and time.

Do you think it's easier or harder for a second/third generation guy to get over and maintain their popularity?
Depends on how good of a talker they are. Perfect example is Ted Dibiase Jr. He has the look but he really needs to work on the persona.

But in general I would say it's harder to be a second/third generation guy unless you hit it out of the park like Rock or Orton. It's extremely hard to live up to standards set by your Father. Especially if it's a guy like Curt Hennig and Ted Dibiase. It's a lot harder now that there is no more territories any more.

Who in your opinion are the best and worst second/third gen guys in WWE? Orton Rhodes are the two best. I have been extremly impressed with Rhodes. I thought he was the third wheel in Legacy but damn has he come on. Guy has all the tools to be a main event guy in the near future.

David hart Smith is one of the worst. The guy has the charisma of a snail. No offense to any snails reading this post.

 

[SD619]

What do you think are the most important things that determine whether or not a second/third generation guy will be a success?

I feel that how successful a wrestler does not depend upon his heritage. If a superstar/diva is talented and can make the audience care about them, they will be successful. Being a second/third generation wrestler can only get someone tryouts without working on some local promotion or such small initial pushes. What happens after some company signs them is entirely in their own hands.

Who in your opinion are the best and worst second/third gen guys in WWE?

Best: Rock, Randy Orton and recently Cody Rhodes all have made major strides in the WWE.

Worst: David Flair. He is the prime example of the fact that having a famous father will not help you much in life.

One thing that I find ironic about Legacy is that Ted Dibiase Sr. accomplished the most in his career followed by Dusty Rhodes and Bob Orton, but among their sons, the order is the reverse.

 

[Dagger Dias]

What will make a superstar successful if he just happens to have legendary ancestors is the exact same criteria that it would take for someone who doesn't have legends in their family. Every wrestler needs talent. They should be able to connect with the crowd, know how to do promos, work well with their given gimmick, make fans care about their current storyline, and of course be able to get the job done in the ring. That is what it takes, regardless of if you are related to legends or not.

The multigenerational talent actually have it worse because they are held to a higher standard. They have the advantage of being raised by one of the best in the business, so you'd think they would pick up on a few key things along the way.

The better examples are guys like Orton and Rhodes. Randy is already a bigger star than his dad while Cody has he potential to be and has improved quite a bit. Then you have worse examples in Ted, McGillicutty, and DH Smith. They are nowhere near as successful as their dads. They probably never will be. It is unfortunate that some multigenerational talent never make it out of the shadow of their ancestors but for the guys that do end up having better careers it only increases their level of success to make it past the standard their relative(s) set for them.

 

[Mustang Sally]

A very good example of someone who has the ballance right is Cody Rhodes.

I'll buy that. When he first came around, I thought Cody was going to be Dusty without the flab, but he's managed to become his own man. Of course, it's only fair to acknowledge that he might not have been able to create an identity for himself without WWE management and the Creative team being solidly behind him, creating three separate major programs for him to star in. I'm sure there are plenty of mid-carders on the roster who wish they had that kind of backing.

Aside from that, though, Cody is Cody.....not Dusty Jr. He's done a good job.

Of course, if you're going to talk about the Rhodes family, who in the history of pro wrestling ever departed from the "tough cowboy" legacy of his father more than Dustin Runnels? One can only imagine what Dusty thought when his first-born son adopted the character of a.....well, you tell me. A transvestite? Can you imagine what Dusty must have thought?

The point is that the character of Goldust was as original as anything ever seen, and folks should appreciate the irony that the role was played by a guy whose Dad was the king of tough-guy matches like Bunkhouse Brawls and stuff like that. Good for Dustin; he was his own man. (er, person)

******

An honorable mention to Randy Orton. It's often said that blood runs thin from generation to generation, and when you look at pro wrestling, comparing Bruno Sammartino to his son, or Verne Gagne to his bears out the notion that it's not always a good idea for a son to follow in his Dad's footsteps.

But Randy Orton is better than his father or grandfather. His Dad was a crude brawler who was more comfortable backing up Roddy Piper than forging his own path. And I actually saw a little of the original Bob Orton on an ESPN Classic tape; he was the prototypical big-bellied brawler seen in the 50's and 60's. He was crude and slow, so the TV announcers excused all that be depicting Bob Sr. as "tough as nails." (Yeah, and "tough as nails" is a good thing to call someone who has nothing else to distinguish him).

In this case, the legacy grows stronger: Randy is twice the wrestler and twice the personality of either of his ancestors. I think that's great.

 

[WunNightStan619]

the only way to stand out of your fathers shadow is to be better than him in all aspects. That goes with anything in life tho. If your not bigger than the tree, than the tree is always gonna have a shadow over you.

 

[RicoLen]

Talking points:

What do you think are the most important things that determine whether or not a second/third generation guy will be a success?

Do you think it's easier or harder for a second/third generation guy to get over and maintain their popularity?

Who in your opinion are the best and worst second/third gen guys in WWE?

It's the same as with any wrestler. You have to get over with the fans by yourself. No one cares who you are or aren't.

It's easier for a guy who has family in the business because they can get the training they need earlier, and their foot in the door more easily. The problem they face is if they start talking about their parents and talking about doing their parents proud. You can't think or talk like that or you're always going to be compared to them and nostalgia paints your parents as larger than life and far better than they really were.

The Rock, early on was working with Rocky Johnson & Tony Atlas, that really didn't do much for him. Pretty much no one, not even someone as old as I was knew Rocky Johnson, so seeing him in the ring coming to his son's aid didn't mean a thing to me, and ultimately it just makes the young guy look weak.

I think the whole tribute to your family needs to come later as a part of a future face run, just not your first face run. It's a good angle to play and it can help give background on your favorite superstar, but it can't make a nobody into a superstar.

I marked out when I heard about Mr. Perfect's son being in FCW, and I watched him wrestle, I saw his look and I really thought he was a diamond in the rough and possibly someone that could take the next step like Mr Perfect did in stepping out from HIS dad's legacy. Then I found out Joe was already in his 30's and after that I heard him on the mic. I don't think he's going to be able to step out from his dad's legacy, as much as I would love to see him do it. He needs a lot more experience with the mic, but even then, he doesn't have the quick wit his dad did.

So as far as guys that have really stepped it up and proven themselves as great 2nd/3rd gen wrestlers, I look at Randal Poffo, Curt Hennig & Dwayne Johnson as the be all end all of wrestling in general. They're my top 3 of all time and coincidentally they all had fathers that were wrestlers.

By far the most successful 2nd generation wrestler of all time is Randy Savage. No one even remembers Angelo Poffo, but EVERYONE knows and loves Randy Savage. In much the same way no one remembers Larry The Axe Hennig, but EVERYONE knows and loves Mr. Perfect.

When it comes to 3rd Generation wrestlers, it's Dwayne Johnson by a landslide. Everyone knows and love The Rock, but even moreso than Savage & Perfect, because of The Rock we've frequently been told of the accomplishments of his father & maternal grandfather.

Bret Hart is another good example of a wrestler that not only rose to the highest of heights in the world of pro-wrestling, but because of him we also know about his legendary father, Stu. Stu Hart, Rocky Johnson, & Peter Maivia owe Bret & Dwayne for furthering their legacy to future generations, and I think that makes them the best stars who have fathers who were also stars.

When it comes to the worst, it's the guys that get a shot, but never even get on TV. David Flair, as bad as he was, at least had a few storylines that were mildly entertaining, and he got to live the life for a time, that's more than you can say for Wrestler X's nameless junior who tried and failed to even get that far.

 

[TheAwesomeF'nTruth]

the only way to stand out of your fathers shadow is to be better than him in all aspects. That goes with anything in life tho. If your not bigger than the tree, than the tree is always gonna have a shadow over you.

I agree the only way for a superstar to step out of their father's shadow is to become better than them. When you're the son of a legend or former main event superstar you're already expected to be a star when you enter the wrestling business because of your last name, and if you're not able to live up to those expectations you'll just be considered the son of _______ ..

 

[RicoLen]

I agree the only way for a superstar to step out of their father's shadow is to become better than them. When you're the son of a legend or former main event superstar you're already expected to be a star when you enter the wrestling business because of your last name, and if you're not able to live up to those expectations you'll just be considered the son of _______ ..

I don't agree with that. At lead not in the Rhodes family. Dustin has nothing on Dusty, but Dustin is also his own man, clearly out of his dad's shadow at the same time. Unless Cody steps it up, and has a stellar career (which is entirely possible in time) Dusty is THE man in the Rhodes family. He is the legend, he is the hall of famer. Goldust... I don't know, I could see a few arguments for him but ultimately he's got nothing on Dusty, and for the time being, the same goes for Cody. All 3 are their own men, none living in the shadow of their father.

 

[One to Remember]

The way to step out of your fathers shadow is to be better then him or way different then him. Cody rhodes and Goldust are way different in. Looks and persona from Dusty. And far removed from his years of prominence. The only time Dustin was in. Dustys shadow was perhaps in wcw when we were a lot closer to dustys era.

David flair, david sammartino, greg gagne, and I can't think of another are the only guys that were only known due to their lineage and had to use it as a crutch well past their debuts. It gets your foot in the door and gives you steam but only you can keep that. Momentum going.

The Rock, Cody, B. Windham, Bret Hart, Natalya, and Goldust are good examples.

Shawn Stasiak, Duece, and Ted jr. Are some guys that have not really added to their legacies.

McGilicuddy, D.h. smith, Tamina, Steamboat jr., the other DIBiases, and Shaul Guerrero are some people WWE will probably need to associate with their heritage to keep them afloat.

Its definitely a tie between Shawn Stasiak. And David Sammartino as the worst though. Both are descendents of former WWWF champs..

 

[Monkey_Mania]

One, you have to be talented. Two, don't copy their gimmicks. I mean do you think if The Rock came out like "Soulman" Rocky Maivia or "High Chief" Rocky Maivia that he would have been the most electrifying man in sports entertainment? No, I doubt we would even love The Rock as much as we do. All you really need to be is talented, and then take on a career of your own, not return to the spot where your previous generation left off. You can only piggyback off a name for so long. You have to go out and make something of yourselves. Which is why Ted Dibiase and Joe Hennig are failing and Cody Rhodes is flourishing, take on your own persona and be entertaining.