Never Main Evented WM

[X]

Some of the wrestlers I'm seeing listed are fucking ridiculous, and are coming from people I usually agree with or at the very least respect. You know you're my boy JMT, but Jeff fucking Hardy? Is that a joke? How, in ANY way, does he deserve to main event a WM? What the fuck has he done to deserve that? Fuck over WWE management time after time? Yeah, that sounds like the makings of a WM main eventer. Hardy is a shit champion, and would make an even worse WM main eventer. Seriously, when has this guy EVER been in a quality match that didn't involve a gimmick or tag teams?

Man Wrestlemania truly has turned to shit these last few years. I'm sorry, but a guy like Randy Orton would have zero chance of main eventing a Wrestlemania if this were 1989 and not 2009. Maybe I sound like a bitter old fan, but they just don't make main eventers like they used to.

Anyways, I'd have to go with Flair. Yeah he was part of a "double main-event", but he still didn't get top billing (Jesus I just realized that Sid has main evented TWO fucking Wrestlemanias...how is that possible??!?!?!). Damnit if it were never for that steroids scandal, we all could have gotten the Hogan-Flair main event that could have gone down as the greatest of all time.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

More to the point, had Hogan not balked at jobbing to Flair ...

Hogan knew the match wouldn't end with the Legdrop but with a tainted Flair win and he would end up 4th top face behind Savage, Hart, Taker and feuding with Jake... someone he REALLY held back...

 

[IrishCanadian25]

Dude, thanks for the kind words. I'm not hard to find around here, especially when a good topic like this one comes up. Anyway, you made some nice picks:

Owen Hart- Was already mentioned. I was a huge mark for Owen ever since the debut of The Rocket. Owen was an amazing inring worker that got over huge as a heel in 1994 because the white hot feud with Bret. He wasn't a headline at a wrestle mania because wasn't the top heel in the company at the time with Yoko and Michaels there.

This is very interesting. Owen main evented a SummerSlam with Bret and stole the show at Wrestlemania 10, again with Bret. I wonder if that hindered him as much as it helped him - the Bret Hart connection, that is. But Owen was a consistent enough worker to absolutely be in the conversation. He was just always such a "supporting player."

Scott Hall/ Razor Ramon

I think Razor was over enough to take a run a the world title and the ME at a Wrestle Mania. Surpised He wasn't mentioned yet. Razor was huge and stayed in the IC ranks for years without ever getting a world title shot from what I remember.

Nice choice, first time I've seen this name. Hall co-main evented a Royal Rumble, ironically, with Bret Hart (his name pops up so much as the best match a lot of these guys have had, it reaffirms Bret as one of the greatest ever), co-stole Wrestlemania 10 with Shawn Michaels, and then was a huge deal in WCW. Another case (like with Jannetty, Roberts, etc) of personal demons derailing a terrific career.

Rick Rude/ Henning- Both talked about several times. Two of the most effective heels of all time. I believe Curt is the best to not headline a Wrestle Mania also. Wish it was Perfect v.s Hogan WM 7. I believe Henning is also the best wrestler to not hold the WWE world title.

Mostly agreed. I think Piper and DiBiase Sr. are the best never to hold the WWF Title, but we're on the same page here.

RVD- Yes you can claim his is a spot money also, but an awesome talent that got over right away with the WWE fans and should have been pushed better and sooner then he was. RVD's crowd responce soon after joining in 01 reminded me of how Stone Cold got big out of nowhere. The fans wanted Stone Cold as a face and they wanted RVD in the main event. When he finally got his main event push YEARS LATER it seemed like he had lost a little of his popularity, but IMO he was still good enough to be the main event at a wreslte mania.

He was laid back to the point of being dispassionate. An event the size of Wrestlemania requires a talent who is a little better at building and selling a feud, as opposed to just wrestling an impressive match. I like RVD, but of everybody on your list, he's by far my last choice.

 

[IrishCanadian25]

As to why it has to be guys in their prime... If it isn't then Karl Gotch is the best never to headline WM... or Gorgeous George...

Wow, this is way off. You're talking about guys who were DEAD when Wrestlemania started. Sammartino still wrestled for 5 years after Wrestlemania started, IN the WWF no less! You cannot compare my argument for Bruno Sammartino to an argument for Gotch, George, Hackenschmidt, etc.

It has to be in context...its the only way you can compare guys from different eras... the reality is guys of the older generation did not have the conditioning that current wrestlers have... guys from Sammartino's era did not work with the same kind of fitness that a Shawn or Triple H does...

Then how is my selection of ultra-athletic Bruno Sammartino at Wrestlemania 2 worse than Sgt. Slaughter main eventing five years later?

in 1985 poor diet, drug uses and alchohol meant a 40 year old WWF wrestler would be nearing the end of, if not finished their career unless they were particularly over like a Sammartino...

Sammartino was always in better shape than most guys back then. He hated the steroid part of the business. He's akin to a Nick Bockwinkle - decent sized guy, in great shape. He'd still be able to go. Come on, look at Bob Backlund's match at Survivor Series against Bret Hart. Shit, look at Backlund in TNA! Sammartino is similar to that, he's not One Man Gang.

WWF in 85 was a Multi Million dollar entity, today nearer to a billion... how do you define the yardstick... if you go on attendance (real not inflated) then Davey Boy Smith wins... as he drew 82,000 to Wembley for A SUMMERSLAM!!!

Bruno Sammartino drew tens of thousands of people to places like Shea Stadium and Madison Square Garden before massive syndication, before cable, before pay per view, before the Internet. And the Pontiac Silverdome is bigger than Wembley - Sammartino wrestled there, too.

If it's on dollars drawn, then Harley Race drew more over a longer period nationwide than many... but he never headlined in the New York territory... On adjusted dollars and ratings... Gorgeous George or Buddy Rogers would be the biggest draws...

Can you prove this? Because it doesn't seem accurate. And then you'd have to prove that Sammartino did not, in fact, draw as champion more consistently than anyone up until Hogan.

 

[owenhartfan]

I almost replied to my post right away when I read it and remembered Piper. I have heard similar things said about RVD, but the crowd (not just old ECW crowd) were really behind him at one point and I just waited patiently for him to be the next big thing which never really happened. I agree he is probably the least approptiate pick, but from a biased fan stand point I included him.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Can you prove this? Because it doesn't seem accurate. And then you'd have to prove that Sammartino did not, in fact, draw as champion more consistently than anyone up until Hogan.

No... and NEITHER CAN YOU

This is the point... The bottom line is that to answer the question of this thread you have to have some kind of framework to judge from... call it an average or a median point whatever... There has to be some kind of criteria to base it off... otherwise it's purely subjective... Buddy Rogers wasn't dead when Mania came around..he didn't die till 92... but he was WELL out of his prime... Karl Gotch died in 2007, he would have been 60 when Mania happened.... might be an idea to check your facts...

Sammartino was champion of one territory for many years... so he drew in New York... but did he draw more there than those who travelled the other territories? I doubt it... As Rhodes, Race, Flair et al would have drawn the same high numbers nationwide other than New York... he may have drawn to MSG repeatedly, but they could draw in the other hotbeds nationwide that Bruno couldn't go to once WWWF was out of the NWA...

Sammartino was no different to Hogan and Cena... He was Vince Sr's choice to carry his torch... the NWA had many guys who could swap that torch around and all draw as much...

I rest my case...

 

[SavageTaker]

I have to go with Bruno Sammartino too. The man was the WWWF’s biggest draw before Hulk Hogan came in and of their biggest stars when he wrestled for them. Hell, some people say that Bruno was a bigger draw than Hogan. I don’t know if that’s true or not, but I do know he was a huge draw during his time. I don’t care if Bruno was an old man by the time that Wrestlemania was created, it still doesn’t change the fact that it would have been a huge thing if Bruno would have main-evented Wrestlemania and wrestled Hogan. People still cared and loved Bruno and it would have been like the passing of the torch if Hogan defeated Bruno at a Wrestlemania. Bruno was probably the biggest star in the 60’s and 70’s and when the 80’s came around it was about Hogan. People still cared for Bruno but everything started becoming about Hogan. I honestly think that Bruno should have main-evented Wrestlemania even if he was older than a lot of the other guys because it still would have been a big event especially if he was wrestling Hulk Hogan.

 

[jmt225]

Okay, sweet, jmt and I have a little tussle going here.

Sorry for taking so long to reply; I had to get off right after my post. Hopefully you're not bored of this discussion yet.

Orndorf is better than Hardy. Better matches, better talker, far better heel.

This is extremely false, IC. Please name ONE match that Orndorf has had that can be considered better than pretty much ANY Jeff Hardy match? I fail to see you sticking to that claim.

Better talker? Yes, but Hardy has loads more charisma, so it cancels that out.

And while Orndorf was a good heel, Hardy is a GREAT babyface.

Hardy better than The Ultimate Warrior? Are you kidding me? Warrior as a professional wrestler was significantly above Hardy. Warrior was THE GUY for a portion of the late 80's and early 90's while Hogan was still around! He main evented SummerSlam OVER Hogan one year. And at Wrestlemania 7, he stole the show from the Hulkster. At Wrestlemania 8, Warrior SAVED the main event at the end.

Now, I'm not one of those Warrior haters, but the fact is... he was just a poor man's Sting. The guy had three really good matches his entire career, and only remained truly over for a little while, at a time when the Red Rooster would get pops. If you were a good guy back then, you got pops. Today, it's much harder to get really good pops, and not only does Jeff Hardy get them, but they rival someone like Warrior's pops from back in the day. People love the guy, and he's truly been the most over babyface the company has had in the last 3 years. And another fact is that if The Ultimate Warrior debuted today, he would get absolutely shitted on.

Slaughter is one of the best heels we've seen in the last 20 years of wrestling. Sure, he took advantage of a cultural situation, but he did so effectively. His "Ultimate Puke" promo and his anti-American promos were ULTRA effective. He wasn't athletic, but he was an effective character.

I like and respect Slaughter, but he's only had a couple of good matches in his entire career. Hogan at 'Mania 7, and the Bootcamp match against the Iron Sheik. That's it.

And if Slaughter was that over as a heel, then Wrestlemania 7's buyrates would've been the highest in WWE history, lol.

Sid and Hardy are so different, but overall I'd still give the nod to Sid. Hell, he main evented two Wrestlemanias, and has quite possibly the best pure look in the history of the business.

Sid sucked, pure and simple. He's one of the absolutely worst main eventers of all time, in my opinion. He might have had a great look, but in the ring and on the mic, he was pure shit. When I can say Jeff Hardy is a better promo cutter than someone, then there's a problem.

Yokozuna was significantly better, more effective, and more important that Hardy. Yokozuna was the most imposing heel champion, possibly in wrestling history. He captured people's attention for more than a year as champion, and held fantastic feuds with men named Undertaker, Hart, Luger, Hogan, Steiner, Tatanka, Duggan, etc.

Yokozuna was definitely a great wrestler, but nothing he did rival's what Jeff Hardy has been able to accomplish thus far in his career. It's not like Yoko was a huge draw. The only reason he was even over as a heel was because he was super huge, and played a Japanese character, not because he was talented. In the ring, while very good for a man his size, Jeff is still significantly better. In fact, I dare to say if Jeff Hardy and Yokozuna wrestled each other in a high profile match in Yoko's prime, it very well could've ended up being Yoko's greatest match ever. That's how talented Hardy is in the ring.

Luger was better than Hardy. More relevant, more interesting. Are you making the mistake so many others make, mistaking high spots for wrestling skill? Granted, Luger's not an all time favorite of mine, and he's probably the single biggest waste of wrestling booking team's mega-pushes in history (WWF or WCW). But he was more effective as an overall professional wrestler than Hardy was.

I'm one of Luger's biggest fan on these boards and I will defend him if someone bashes the guy for stupid reasons, but in what way, shape or form was Luger better than Jeff Hardy? Matches? Name one match that Luger had that's better than Hardy's best matches? Hell, the one match you could name, the tag match with Luger & Sting vs. The Steiner Brothers, still doesn't equal most of Jeff Hardy's work as a tag team competitor. The fact is... if Jeff Hardy main events a Wrestlemania against Bret Hart let's say, and Lex Luger main events a Wrestlemania against Bret Hart, not only do the fans care more about the Hardy match, but the Hardy match ends up being TONS better.

Nash and HHH. Wait, wait, wait. Did you just say Jeff Hardy was a better wrestler, or as good a wrestler, as Kevin Nash and Triple H? PLEASE explain why, because this is just too ridiculous for words.

I'm a HUGE Nash fan, and it was hard for me to put his name down, but yes... overall, I would have to put Hardy over him. I was one of the biggest Diesel marks on the planet at one point in time, but Diesel nor Kevin Nash was ever over as Jeff Hardy on his own. And Nash was very inconsistent in the ring as well, whereas as I mentioned earlier, Hardy tears the house down on a regular basis.

As far as HHH, now... this one's debatable. Let it be known, I can't stand HHH, but that's not why I put his name down. HHH in 1999-2001 is better than any Jeff Hardy that ever existed, that I can admit to. But the Triple H that has been headlining Wrestlemania since 'Mania 18 is not. The guy is the most overrated wrestler in history, save Flair. He's inconsistent match wise, and the fans don't care about his stories in the ring and outside of it. Think about this IC and anyone who thinks different... the crowd was DEAD during HHH main events at 'Mania 18, 19, 21, and 25 and all those matches were shit fest. Now, let me ask you this... when was the last time you seen a crowd not into a Jeff Hardy match? The answer is pretty much NEVER. If that's not enough to convince you Jeff is better than that motherfucker, then what about the fact that HHH's best matches these past couple of years were against, guess who, Jeff Hardy?

Big Show, Batista, Mysterio. Equal with Big Show, better than Mysterio, not as good as Batista.

Batista is shit, pure and simple. Unless he's being carried by 'Taker, HHH or Cena, the guy has absolutely nothing to offer. And for the record, Mysterio is better than Batista, too.

I am missing what "facts" you are referring to. The fact that he's only as good as the champion he is chasing?

Please explain this one. I would love to hear this.

The fact that he's a bit of a spot monkey?

Terrible statement. Hardy's no where near being a spot monkey. You could make that argument when he is in a tag team, but as a single's competitor? No way.

The fact that his 3 WWE / WHC reigns have been meaningless, transitional, and virtually non-existant? The fact that, combined, his 3 reigns have lasted less than 2 months?

And that's his fault? No, it's not. He doesn't book the reigns.

And you know, you can shit on Hardy's reigns, but at the end of the day, 3 reigns are more than a lot of wrestlers have had, including plenty of guys people are listing as the best wrestler to never main event Wrestlemania.

Fair enough. I went back and the thread started DID specific WWE guy. So Funk is out. Steamboat was there for a cup of coffee, but he was in WWE as an active wrestler longer than Lesnar was. Plus, he does have his name come up in "best WWF match of all time" discussions.

But it's like I said, while Steamboat could certainly put on a match that's worthy of being the main event at Wrestlemania, I'm not so sure he could have participated in a storyline leading up to 'Mania to make people buy what he was selling. Jeff Hardy definitely could. That's the difference between the two.

What about (despite his short time) Vader? He dominated for a year and was actually supposed to take the WWF title off Michaels, until the cry baby clause was called on the match.

When I first saw you post, I was expecting this and surprised you didn't mention him.

But anyway, before I address this, if I were to ask you what would be your dream scenario for Vader to headline Wrestlemania, meaning that he could face ANYONE in the history of WWE, who would you choose? You know who I would choose? Jeff Hardy. And that's the God's honest truth. Sit there and tell me a match between Hardy and Vader wouldn't have been absolutely tremendous.

Anyway, Vader, Vader, Vader... great wrestler, and definitely could have headlined a Wrestlemania (especially 13, considering how shit that main event was), but I still don't think he's more deserving of it than Hardy. He's certainly not more decorated. Better in-ring worker? That's debatable, I will admit.

Iron Sheik? He won the tag belts at Wrestlemania 1, and he was the last champion before Hogan until Wrestlemania 4.

Iron Sheik was a very good wrestler and definitely over as a heel, but he's never had what it took to be in a long term feud with someone. I mean, why do you think his matches against Backlund and Hogan had ZERO build to it? Of course, McMahon wanted to hand the belt to Hogan as quickly as possible, but he definitely could've milked it at the same time; however, Sheik wasn't good enough to build a big program around, so how could you ever have him headline Wrestlemania?

Bruno Sammartino? Now HERE is a good one. When "Showdown at Shea" occured, many fans went to see Sammartino vs Zbysko, not just Hogan vs Andre. But in 1986 - 1987, Bruno returned to the WWF (at the behest of Vince Jr. and Bruno's son David) to feud with Jimmy Valiant, Brutus Beefcake, Randy Savage, Adrian Adonis, Roddy Piper, and Cowboy Bob Orton. Think, for a moment, how history would look if Vince had placed Sammartino in the main event of Wrestlemania 2 instead of King Kong Flabbytits. Incidentally, Bruno's last WWF match was teaming up with Hogan to wrestle Bundy and One Man Gang.

This scenario is all well and dandy, but who in the World would've been the heel and who would've been the face? Seriously, both of these guys were so loved, that the fans wouldn't have wanted to choose between the two.

But I will say this choice makes me highly question my pick for Hardy. Like I said... it has to be in the realm of possibility, so if you can come up with a more realistic scenario, since neither of these guys would've ever turned heel, then I will listen and consider it.

JMT, you wanna tell me Hardy is better than Sammartino???

Bruno Smmartino is the greatest WWE Champion of all time; I've argued this before, so no... of course I'm not going to claim that you silly Irish Canadian.



Now... on to some other posters.

I have nothing against Jeff Hardy either but JMT is acting like Hardy is the greatest wrestler ever to lace up a pair of boots and put glow in the dark paint on.

How am I claiming that in the least bit? Did I say Hardy was better than EVERY wrestler to ever wrestle in the main event at Wrestlemania? No, I said he was better than SOME, and better than those who never did, that's in the realm of possibility. The fact is, overall, I think Raven and Bryan Danielson are better wrestlers than Jeff Hardy, but neither of those two deserve to headline Wrestlemania like he does, nor is it possible at this moment for those two have been ever given the opportunity to do so.

As for me, I'll take Kane.

Kane has been a workhorse in the WWE for over a decade now. He's been a solid performer his entire career, has always been over, and could have had a great WrestleMania main event. If you built him up as a dominate heel champion, he could have given an amazing rub to an up-and-coming talent.

I wouldn't have mind Austin and Kane headlining Wrestlemania 15 since Rock/Austin would headline two more Wrestlemanias after that, but in no way do I think Kane is anywhere near capable of putting on the type of match Hardy would be able to on in the main event of a Wrestlemania.

Kane is a solid choice, though, even though I'm not a fan of his in the least bit.

You know you're my boy JMT, but Jeff fucking Hardy? Is that a joke?

Nope. And I love you too, X.

How, in ANY way, does he deserve to main event a WM? What the fuck has he done to deserve that?

I've already gone over that plenty of times.

Fuck over WWE management time after time?

How did he fuck over WWE management? WWE management fired him back in 2002. Sure, he's failed a couple of drug tests, but big fucking deal. Let drug tests take place back in the eighties and nineties and let's see how many wrestlers "fuck over" WWE then.

Hardy is a shit champion, and would make an even worse WM main eventer.

I don't think Hardy is that great of a champion either. However, he is an absolutely FANTASTIC challenger, and him challenging someone like Cena in main event at Wrestlemania would be fucking HUGE and they would tear the house down. You know it, X.

Seriously, when has this guy EVER been in a quality match that didn't involve a gimmick or tag teams?

I've seen you post on Hardy before, X, and you just don't like the guy. But if you look at it with an open mind, Hardy really is a great pro wrestler.

And to answer the question, his match against HBK on Raw in 2008 was a lot of people's MOTY for WWE (including my own). So, there's one answer. But he's also had very good, non-gimmicky matches against HHH, Orton, Edge, Jericho, Punk, and others.

Anyways, I'd have to go with Flair. Yeah he was part of a "double main-event", but he still didn't get top billing (Jesus I just realized that Sid has main evented TWO fucking Wrestlemanias...how is that possible??!?!?!). Damnit if it were never for that steroids scandal, we all could have gotten the Hogan-Flair main event that could have gone down as the greatest of all time.

Ric Flair, the most overrated wrestler in history? That Ric Flair? The same Ric Flair who had Wrestlemania 24 built around him, only to fuck up the legacy of it by continuing to return? That Ric Flair? The same Ric Flair who's fucked over WWE himself countless times? That Ric Flair? Come on now, X.

 

[owenhartfan]

Now, I'm not one of those Warrior haters, but the fact is... he was just a poor man's Sting. The guy had three really good matches his entire career, and only remained truly over for a little while, at a time when the Red Rooster would get pops. If you were a good guy back then, you got pops. Today, it's much harder to get really good pops, and not only does Jeff Hardy get them, but they rival someone like Warrior's pops from back in the day. People love the guy, and he's truly been the most over babyface the company has had in the last 3 years. And another fact is that if The Ultimate Warrior debuted today, he would get absolutely shitted on.


I know IC25 is going to respond with some good stuff, but I wanted to throw my 2 cents in first on one. Yes Warrior's matches are horrible and he has little to no talent in the ring (obviously). That in no way makes Hardy a better candidate for a Wrestlemania main event. If this was a thread about who was the most talented inring peformer to not make the main event of Wrestlemania then there was still be a whole lotta guys in front of Hardy. The main event of Wrestlemania is reserved for the most relevant and effective superstar to draw a big buy rate. The biggest names, the most over, the most believable are the ones to main event Wrestlemania. Hulk Hogan v.s Warrior was the battle of the two biggest and most over baby faces at the time in the most anticipated Wrestlemania match (other then hulk v.s andre maybe) up to that point. Warrior went over on Hogan in the main event at Wrestlemania and the place went nuts... Who can Hardy wrestle for the match to be anywhere close to as anticipated as Warrior v.s Hogan? Most would agree when I say Warrior was just as big as Hogan was at the time and this is why they experimented with his clean win over Hogan. Jeff Hardy might have been getting loud crowd reactions for the last 3 years, but the claim that hes the most over baby face in that time isn't true at all. If that was true then we would have seen Hardy in the main event over the likes of cena or HHH in the last 3 Wrestlemanias. Are you claiming you know more then Vince? I know your a big fan, but IMO Hardy would be the least believable Wrestlemania main eventer on the entire list besides Rey Mysterio Jr.

Red Rooster get pops? Maybe small baby golf claps. What shows were you watching then? I remember seeing the Rooster job to the Warrior in five seconds when I was a kid.

 

[X]

How did he fuck over WWE management?

Hello? Failing drug tests and being suspended when he's right in the middle of being pushed to the moon? The company finally puts faith in the guy and starts to push him to the main event, and he immediately fails a drug test. I call that fucking over WWE management when they have to craft entirely new storylines and matches to make up for Hardy's drug use. How could you possibly rationalize that as anything other than Hardy letting down the WWE?

WWE management fired him back in 2002.

Which he damn well deserved. Refusing to quit drugs + no showing events = a shitty employee.

Sure, he's failed a couple of drug tests, but big fucking deal. Let drug tests take place back in the eighties and nineties and let's see how many wrestlers "fuck over" WWE then.

So because wrestlers in the 80s were on drugs, that makes it okay for Jeff Hardy to be? How does that make sense JMT? It doesn't, and you know it. There was no Wellness policy in the 80s and 90s, but there is now. Hardy gets pushed, and than has to be taken off TV in the midst of that push for his drug use. That behavior doesn't scream "Deserves to Headline Biggest Wrestling Event on Earth" to me.

I don't think Hardy is that great of a champion either. However, he is an absolutely FANTASTIC challenger, and him challenging someone like Cena in main event at Wrestlemania would be fucking HUGE and they would tear the house down. You know it, X.

He's really not this fantastic wrestler you claim JMT. Maybe we just have different opinions of a great wrestler, but Jeff Hardy does not fall under my definition in any way.

Just because a wrestler is over with the fans, doesn't mean they deserve to main event a Wrestlemania. If being over with the fans was all that was required, than RVD and Rey Mysterio would have main evented a 'Mania.

I've seen you post on Hardy before, X, and you just don't like the guy. But if you look at it with an open mind, Hardy really is a great pro wrestler.

Not seeing it JMT. The only time the man is enjoyable to watch is in a gimmick match or with his brother Matt, and that's it. As a singles competitor he's lackluster at best, and in no way deserving to main event a Mania.

And to answer the question, his match against HBK on Raw in 2008 was a lot of people's MOTY for WWE (including my own). So, there's one answer. But he's also had very good, non-gimmicky matches against HHH, Orton, Edge, Jericho, Punk, and others.

That match was average at best, and I'm an HBK mark. His feud with HHH? Awful. Orton? Even worse. Edge? What non-gimmick great match did they have? Jericho? If they did have a great match it was because of Jericho carrying that spot monkey. The only one on that list I'll give you is Punk, as he's the only man I've ever seen Hardy wrestle in a non-gimmick match that was above average. Hardly the feuds or makings of a Mania main event.

Ric Flair, the most overrated wrestler in history?

Overrated? Hardly. I know it's the cool new thing to do and hate Flair, but that's a big fat load of shit. Flair has been involved in more classic matches than a Jeff Hardy could dream about. Seriously, you're going to call Flair overrated? Right, I'd love to hear your explanation for that.

The same Ric Flair who had Wrestlemania 24 built around him, only to fuck up the legacy of it by continuing to return? That Ric Flair?

And who exactly said that I'd want Flair to main event a Mania now? You know damn well I was talking about Ric in his prime. Did you think IC wanted Bruno Sammartino to main event Wrestlemania 26 when he brought his name up?

You know damn well that if Hogan had faced Flair at Wrestlemania it would have been the biggest match in the history of the entire business. Everyone and their mother wanted to see that match.

The same Ric Flair who's fucked over WWE himself countless times?

Really? Explain to me how Flair has fucked over the WWE, and than explain to me how it compares at all to Hardy's situation. It doesn't. Flair never had to be removed from TV in the midst of a huge main event push because drug use, did he?

You're seriously going to sit here and argue that Jeff fucking Hardy deserves to have main evented a Wrestlemania more than Ric Flair? Really now?

Love ya JMT, but you're talkin' crazy.

 

[jmt225]

I know IC25 is going to respond with some good stuff, but I wanted to throw my 2 cents in first on one. Yes Warrior's matches are horrible and he has little to no talent in the ring (obviously). That in no way makes Hardy a better candidate for a Wrestlemania main event.

Yes it does. For the most part, Hardy's matches are incredible that crowds are into the entire duration. What makes a better candidate for a Wrestlemania main event than that?

If this was a thread about who was the most talented inring peformer to not make the main event of Wrestlemania then there was still be a whole lotta guys in front of Hardy.

No, that's not the case at all. Where in the first post did it say that?

And believe it or not, but Hardy definitely is a great in-ring performer and currently one of the best WWE has to offer. His matches speak for themselves.

The main event of Wrestlemania is reserved for the most relevant and effective superstar to draw a big buy rate. The biggest names, the most over, the most believable are the ones to main event Wrestlemania.

Name me another babyface in WWE who's as over as Jeff Hardy right now? Maybe Cena, but that's it.

Hulk Hogan v.s Warrior was the battle of the two biggest and most over baby faces at the time in the most anticipated Wrestlemania match (other then hulk v.s andre maybe) up to that point.

Exactly. Don't you think Cena vs. Hardy would have that same kind of impact? The two most over babyfaces in WWE the past ten years, FINALLY going head to head, and its on the biggest stage of them all. That wouldn't generate interest? Fans wouldn't eat that shit up?

Warrior went over on Hogan in the main event at Wrestlemania and the place went nuts... Who can Hardy wrestle for the match to be anywhere close to as anticipated as Warrior v.s Hogan?

John Cena.

Jeff Hardy might have been getting loud crowd reactions for the last 3 years, but the claim that hes the most over baby face in that time isn't true at all.

Yes it is.

If that was true then we would have seen Hardy in the main event over the likes of cena or HHH in the last 3 Wrestlemanias.

Why do you think I brought his name up in this topic in the first place? It's strange to me that he has yet to have a big profile match at Wrestlemania.

Are you claiming you know more then Vince?

No. But we all know that it's not just Vince who runs things. If you truly believe that HHH has gotten all those Wrestlemania main events just because of his talent, then I'm at a loss for words, man.

I know your a big fan, but IMO Hardy would be the least believable Wrestlemania main eventer on the entire list besides Rey Mysterio Jr.

If he's not believable, then how come there are MILLIONS and MILLIONS of Jeff Hardy fans out there who believe in him?

Hello? Failing drug tests and being suspended when he's right in the middle of being pushed to the moon? The company finally puts faith in the guy and starts to push him to the main event, and he immediately fails a drug test. I call that fucking over WWE management when they have to craft entirely new storylines and matches to make up for Hardy's drug use. How could you possibly rationalize that as anything other than Hardy letting down the WWE?

Man... I understand what you're saying, but those drug tests are a fucking joke and Jeff Hardy has been the scape goat since day 1, since it was already known he had a problem with pain pills (if you can really call it a problem, that is). You mean to tell me X that you don't think Batista isn't on something? You mean to tell me it's not possible for WWE to cover up for certain wrestlers, while throwing others under the boss?

And it's like I said, let drug tests happen back in the eighties and nineties. How many wrestlers do you think would've failed, if they were legit?

Which he damn well deserved. Refusing to quit drugs + no showing events = a shitty employee.

When was the last time he no showed an event? Not since TNA, I believe.

Since coming back to WWE, Hardy has worked his ass off for the company. He had a slip up once or twice, but he's more than made up for it. If he hadn't, then they would've never rewarded him with the WWE Championship three times now.

So because wrestlers in the 80s were on drugs, that makes it okay for Jeff Hardy to be? How does that make sense JMT? It doesn't, and you know it. There was no Wellness policy in the 80s and 90s, but there is now. Hardy gets pushed, and than has to be taken off TV in the midst of that push for his drug use. That behavior doesn't scream "Deserves to Headline Biggest Wrestling Event on Earth" to me.

I'm not saying it's okay for Hardy to fail drug tests; I'm just making a point that you can't paint him as this terrible employee just because he's failed a drug test or two, because all our heroes growing up would've been guilty of the same thing if drug tests back existed back then.

And it's been well over a year since Hardy failed he's last drug test, and he's been working non-stop for the company since then. Sounds to me he's not fucking anything up.

He's really not this fantastic wrestler you claim JMT. Maybe we just have different opinions of a great wrestler, but Jeff Hardy does not fall under my definition in any way.

Well, we'll just agree to disagree then.

Just because a wrestler is over with the fans, doesn't mean they deserve to main event a Wrestlemania. If being over with the fans was all that was required, than RVD and Rey Mysterio would have main evented a 'Mania.

First of all, RVD is another person who should've main evented a Wrestlemania (Wrestlemania 19 against HHH instead of Booker T, to be exact), if you ask me.

Anyway, it's not just being over with the fans I'm arguing here, it's the fact that he puts on FANTASTIC matches and the fact that his feuds these past couple of years have for the most part been awesome. Him being over, and those other two qualities is what makes him a great wrestler in my eyes, and one that deserves to main event Wrestlemania.

Not seeing it JMT. The only time the man is enjoyable to watch is in a gimmick match or with his brother Matt, and that's it. As a singles competitor he's lackluster at best, and in no way deserving to main event a Mania.

Again, all we can do is agree to disagree. He's had plenty of great non-gimmick matches as far as I'm concerned. If they're not your cup of tea, than fine, but more would disagree with you than agree.

That match was average at best, and I'm an HBK mark.

Talk about an understatement. That match was great man, and you're honestly the only person I've seen pass it across as just "average". I wish I could find the LD to Raw that night to prove it (looked for it, but no luck).

His feud with HHH? Awful.

The feud itself wasn't very good, but the matches were awesome and the best HHH has had these past couple of years.

Orton? Even worse.

Oh, give me a break, X. People LOVED that feud with Orton. This forum was going nuts during that time, all because of that one feud.

Edge? What non-gimmick great match did they have?

They've had a couple on Smackdown, and they were very good, just like all their work against each other are.

Jericho? If they did have a great match it was because of Jericho carrying that spot monkey.

You shouldn't say shit like this X, because all it does is make you look like a hater. There's nothing objective about your views on Jeff Hardy; it's just hatred, which makes it hard to take seriously since there's so much bias in your post. I'm not even a huge Jeff Hardy fan. I'm a fan, but not a huge one like most Jeff Hardy fans. There are plenty of wrestlers out there I prefer over Hardy; it's just I strongly believe that in the realm of possibility, Hardy is the greatest wrestler to never main event a Wrestlemania.

Overrated? Hardly. I know it's the cool new thing to do and hate Flair, but that's a big fat load of shit. Flair has been involved in more classic matches than a Jeff Hardy could dream about. Seriously, you're going to call Flair overrated? Right, I'd love to hear your explanation for that.

My explanation is very simple to grasp: WWE and a lot of fans out there claim that Flair's the greatest wrestler of all time. In my book, while he's very good, he's no where near being the greatest. And the fact that so many people believe he is makes him extremely overrated. After all, that is the definition of overrated. It doesn't mean that someone is not good to be called that; it means people overrate them.

And who exactly said that I'd want Flair to main event a Mania now? You know damn well I was talking about Ric in his prime. Did you think IC wanted Bruno Sammartino to main event Wrestlemania 26 when he brought his name up?

Like I said, everything being mentioned is supposed to be in the realm of possibility. Flair's prime was in the NWA, so how was it possible for him to ever main event a Wrestlemania? The only Wrestlemania it was possible for him to headline was Wrestlemania 8, and he actually did co-headline that one. Sure, it should have been the last match, but nevertheless... it was still for the WWF Championship and one of the main events that night.

You know damn well that if Hogan had faced Flair at Wrestlemania it would have been the biggest match in the history of the entire business. Everyone and their mother wanted to see that match.

So you think it would've actually passed Hogan vs. Andre? I highly doubt that, X.

Really? Explain to me how Flair has fucked over the WWE, and than explain to me how it compares at all to Hardy's situation. It doesn't. Flair never had to be removed from TV in the midst of a huge main event push because drug use, did he?

No, but Flair still abandoned the company in the early nineties, did he not?

Also, today he fucks over WWE by going to other companies and publicly stating how he still wants to still wrestle. WWE did all they could to give him the perfect send off, and the way he thanks them for it is by ruining its meaning. That's ridiculous.

You're seriously going to sit here and argue that Jeff fucking Hardy deserves to have main evented a Wrestlemania more than Ric Flair? Really now?

Yes. Seriously, what has Flair done in WWE to main event a Wrestlemania? What? Not the entire business, but in WWE only? He hasn't done half the work Jeff Hardy has done and you know it.

Love ya JMT, but you're talkin' crazy.

If there's the smallest ounce of Jeff Hardy fan in you, I'm going to do whatever I can to pull it out and show you the light. If Sly could do it for you with Cena, then I sure as shit can do it for you with Hardy.

 

[X]

Man... I understand what you're saying, but those drug tests are a fucking joke and Jeff Hardy has been the scape goat since day 1, since it was already known he had a problem with pain pills (if you can really call it a problem, that is).

Oh please man that's a bunch of bullshit, what do you think there's a company-wide conspiracy to make sure Hardy fails drug tests? How would taking one of their most popular wrestlers off of TV benefit the company in any way?

Hardy let the WWE down, big time.

You mean to tell me X that you don't think Batista isn't on something?

This thread isn't about Batista JMT, I don't give a shit what Batista is on, because he's never deserved to headline a Mania either in my book.

You mean to tell me it's not possible for WWE to cover up for certain wrestlers, while throwing others under the boss?

Absolutely absurd JMT. What possible reason could the WWE have for wanting to suspend Hardy in the midst of the biggest push of his career? If they were going to be covering up drug tests, they damn well would have covered up Hardy's. Seriously JMT, that's just ridiculous and you know it.

And it's like I said, let drug tests happen back in the eighties and nineties. How many wrestlers do you think would've failed, if they were legit?

You keep bringing this up, and it still has nothing to do with our conversation. It doesn't matter if wrestlers in the 80s or 90s were on drugs, because there wasn't a Wellness policy, and if there wasn't a wellness policy than they couldn't be suspended for drug use now could they? So how exactly is that relevant? Nobody was suspended for drug use back than, so they couldn't have possibly disappointed creative by having to be removed from TV like Jeff was, could they? Completely irrelevant.

When was the last time he no showed an event? Not since TNA, I believe.

That would make sense considering I stated that his no-showing was just cause to fire him, before he ever entered TNA.

Since coming back to WWE, Hardy has worked his ass off for the company. He had a slip up once or twice, but he's more than made up for it. If he hadn't, then they would've never rewarded him with the WWE Championship three times now.

The only reason Hardy has the belt is because there's literally no one else left to put it on. There's a grand total of TWO main eventers on Smackdown right now, Hardy and Punk. Well that and the fact that WWE is trying to convince Jeff to stick around by giving him this title run. He's already been telling people backstage that he plans on taking a break from wrestling very soon (like when his contract runs out). It's sad that the WWE has to give this man you claim has given back so much a god damned World Title in order to try and convince him not to leave so he can go off and smoke weed and ride ATV's in North Carolina. Yeah, what a great company man.

I'm not saying it's okay for Hardy to fail drug tests; I'm just making a point that you can't paint him as this terrible employee just because he's failed a drug test or two, because all our heroes growing up would've been guilty of the same thing if drug tests back existed back then.

WHY do you keep bringing this up JMT? It's IRRELEVANT.

There was no Wellness policy in the 80s and 90s, so there would be absolutely no reason to have to pull someone from TV for their drug use like what had to be done with Hardy. So explain to me how these two situations are alike in any way.

And it's been well over a year since Hardy failed he's last drug test, and he's been working non-stop for the company since then. Sounds to me he's not fucking anything up.

A year isn't very long if you ask me. Not when we're talking about headlining the most important event in wrestling.

First of all, RVD is another person who should've main evented a Wrestlemania (Wrestlemania 19 against HHH instead of Booker T, to be exact), if you ask me.

Huh?

A) Lesnar-Angle was the main event of WM 19, not HHH-Booker T.

B) RVD main eventing a Mania? That's ridiculous. RVD has accomplished even less than Hardy. What's his biggest claim to fame? Being the longest holder of the second best title in the THIRD best promotion, in a company that was bleeding money left and right like it was going out of style?

Anyway, it's not just being over with the fans I'm arguing here, it's the fact that he puts on FANTASTIC matches and the fact that his feuds these past couple of years have for the most part been awesome. Him being over, and those other two qualities is what makes him a great wrestler in my eyes, and one that deserves to main event Wrestlemania.

We'll just have to agree to disagree, because every time Hardy enters a ring it's nap-time for me.

Oh, give me a break, X. People LOVED that feud with Orton. This forum was going nuts during that time, all because of that one feud.

Since when has this forum EVER been a reputable source of booking intelligence? We're talking about the same forum that currently has threads asking questions like "Should Paul Heyman be TNA's booker?" I could care less about what the people on here thought about Orton-Hardy. It was mediocre at best in my eyes.

You shouldn't say shit like this X, because all it does is make you look like a hater. There's nothing objective about your views on Jeff Hardy; it's just hatred, which makes it hard to take seriously since there's so much bias in your post.

How am I biased? Because I enjoy more out of wrestling than fancy little flip moves? I have nothing against Jeff Hardy the person, but as a performer he's average in my opinion. It's not bias, it's an opinion. And he IS a spot monkey JMT, the man built his entire career on performing spots. You can't argue that.

I'm not even a huge Jeff Hardy fan. I'm a fan, but not a huge one like most Jeff Hardy fans. There are plenty of wrestlers out there I prefer over Hardy; it's just I strongly believe that in the realm of possibility, Hardy is the greatest wrestler to never main event a Wrestlemania.

So Hardy is a better wrestler than Mr. Perfect? Bruno Sammartino? Ric Flair? Harley Race? Terry Funk? Bob Backlund? Come on JMT, there are so many better wrestlers to have never main evented a Wrestlemania.

My explanation is very simple to grasp: WWE and a lot of fans out there claim that Flair's the greatest wrestler of all time. In my book, while he's very good, he's no where near being the greatest. And the fact that so many people believe he is makes him extremely overrated. After all, that is the definition of overrated. It doesn't mean that someone is not good to be called that; it means people overrate them.

So let me get this straight; when my opinion clashes with the general majority opinion, I'm biased and incorrect. But when your opinion clashes with the general majority, it's the truth? Right. Come on JMT, I expect more from you man.

Like I said, everything being mentioned is supposed to be in the realm of possibility. Flair's prime was in the NWA, so how was it possible for him to ever main event a Wrestlemania?

His prime definitely included his WWF run JMT, he had several great matches during his stint, and he had a few more great matches as well after he returned to WCW. He didn't start regressing until the mid 90s.

So you think it would've actually passed Hogan vs. Andre? I highly doubt that, X.

Hell yes it would have. The WWF poster boy versus the NWA poster boy, you WOULDN'T want to see that? Andre vs. Hogan was lucky enough to have happened at the absolutely perfect time; Hulkamania was at it's peak, and in Andre they had the perfect monster heel for the kids to jeer. Hogan vs. Flair would have blown that out of the water.

Also, today he fucks over WWE by going to other companies and publicly stating how he still wants to still wrestle. WWE did all they could to give him the perfect send off, and the way he thanks them for it is by ruining its meaning. That's ridiculous.

Like I've already said, we're talking about a Flair in his prime. Long before the retirement match was ever even thought up.

Yes. Seriously, what has Flair done in WWE to main event a Wrestlemania? What? Not the entire business, but in WWE only? He hasn't done half the work Jeff Hardy has done and you know it.

How about the most impressive Royal Rumble victory of all time? How about several title defenses against some of the biggest legends in WWE history? Sounds pretty deserving to me, and that's not even taking into account all of his accomplishments in the NWA/WCW and around the nation.

If there's the smallest ounce of Jeff Hardy fan in you, I'm going to do whatever I can to pull it out and show you the light. If Sly could do it for you with Cena, then I sure as shit can do it for you with Hardy.

It's not gonna happen man. I actually used to be a big Jeff Hardy fan, when I was about 14. Than I started to desire more out of a wrestler than the ability to perform spots and make teenage girls scream.

 

[NSL]

I've skimmed most of this, and I;ll try to name someone new. Please excuse me if he's been listed previously.

Iron Sheik. He was a damn good wrestler, and is the man that put Hogan over for the title. If anything, he;s the catalyst for WrestleMania even existing, because it was made to showcase Hulk Hogan. He was a great heel, and even though Mania started in his later years, a match with Hogan at 1, or even 2, would have been justifiable. They were still before WrestleMania was what it would become today, and it would have been a hell of a lot better than Hogan v Bundy.

 

[jmt225]

Oh please man that's a bunch of bullshit, what do you think there's a company-wide conspiracy to make sure Hardy fails drug tests? How would taking one of their most popular wrestlers off of TV benefit the company in any way?

Hardy let the WWE down, big time.

So you don't think the Wellness Program is a joke? Seriously, X?

And just because Hardy wasn't able to hide his pill taking like apparently others on the roster can still doesn't mean he's fucked over the company. As I mentioned, he's made up for it and done way more good for WWE than harm.

Absolutely absurd JMT. What possible reason could the WWE have for wanting to suspend Hardy in the midst of the biggest push of his career? If they were going to be covering up drug tests, they damn well would have covered up Hardy's. Seriously JMT, that's just ridiculous and you know it.

Hardy's not a cover boy and not a fucking ass kisser like guys like Cena and Batista are. That's a fact. If there's a big name to be made an example of, Hardy was obviously the perfect choice, since he's someone without a great image and someone who has shown plenty of times to leave and come back with the same amount of fan fair as he had when he left.

I know it's a bit of a conspiracy theory, but that doesn't make it any less possible.

You keep bringing this up, and it still has nothing to do with our conversation. It doesn't matter if wrestlers in the 80s or 90s were on drugs, because there wasn't a Wellness policy, and if there wasn't a wellness policy than they couldn't be suspended for drug use now could they? So how exactly is that relevant? Nobody was suspended for drug use back than, so they couldn't have possibly disappointed creative by having to be removed from TV like Jeff was, could they? Completely irrelevant.

It might be irrelevant, but it still makes perfect sense. At the end of the day, you can't fault Jeff for taking a couple of pain pills considering HUNDREDS of wrestlers before his time took much worse shit than that and if the Wellness Policy were around, they still would've taken them and they either would've gotten caught like Hardy did, or get protected like someone like Batista obviously has.

That would make sense considering I stated that his no-showing was just cause to fire him, before he ever entered TNA.

But it stills shows that Hardy has been reliable, as far as showing up to the building is concerned, for the past 4 years.

The only reason Hardy has the belt is because there's literally no one else left to put it on. There's a grand total of TWO main eventers on Smackdown right now, Hardy and Punk. Well that and the fact that WWE is trying to convince Jeff to stick around by giving him this title run. He's already been telling people backstage that he plans on taking a break from wrestling very soon (like when his contract runs out). It's sad that the WWE has to give this man you claim has given back so much a god damned World Title in order to try and convince him not to leave so he can go off and smoke weed and ride ATV's in North Carolina. Yeah, what a great company man.

That's all well and dandy, but the fact is... he's champion and if he was as big of fuck up as you claim he is, then WWE would not trust him the belt, AT ALL. Not even for a day.

A year isn't very long if you ask me. Not when we're talking about headlining the most important event in wrestling.

A year and a half, technically, lol, and it is a long time. Hardy has been back in the company now for almost 4 years, and only has 2 "fuck ups" to his credit. That's not too bad if you ask me.

A) Lesnar-Angle was the main event of WM 19, not HHH-Booker T.

HHH vs. Booker T. was one of the main events. There is such thing as co-main events, X, especially now with the brand splits. Each show has their own 'Mania headliner.

B) RVD main eventing a Mania? That's ridiculous. RVD has accomplished even less than Hardy. What's his biggest claim to fame? Being the longest holder of the second best title in the THIRD best promotion, in a company that was bleeding money left and right like it was going out of style?

In 2002/2003, RVD was by far the most over babyface on Raw. So, yeah... at 'Mania 19 he did deserve to be in Raw's main event against HHH; however, because of politics and politics only, RVD was held down. Hell, one WWE former writer said at one time it was planned for Lesnar and RVD to headline 'Mania 19 and McMahon was all for the idea, but guess who stuck his gigantic nose where it didn't belong?

We'll just have to agree to disagree, because every time Hardy enters a ring it's nap-time for me.

Well, that's unfortunate for you. You're missing some great shit, man.

Since when has this forum EVER been a reputable source of booking intelligence? We're talking about the same forum that currently has threads asking questions like "Should Paul Heyman be TNA's booker?" I could care less about what the people on here thought about Orton-Hardy. It was mediocre at best in my eyes.

I'm not just talking about noobs here, but respected posters. And it just shows that your opinion is in the very minority, so you can't call me insane for believing that Hardy is indeed a very good professional wrestler and finding a lot of his matches, gimmick or not, to be excellent. Look, I don't fault you for your opinion at all X, but there's no reason for you to think this is such an unbelievable idea of me thinking highly of Jeff Hardy.

How am I biased? Because I enjoy more out of wrestling than fancy little flip moves? I have nothing against Jeff Hardy the person, but as a performer he's average in my opinion. It's not bias, it's an opinion. And he IS a spot monkey JMT, the man built his entire career on performing spots. You can't argue that.

As I mentioned earlier, as a tag performer he was a "spot monkey", but as a singles competitor? That's fucking bullshit. So his comeback involves a couple of high spots, that makes him a spot monkey? That makes no sense.

So Hardy is a better wrestler than Mr. Perfect? Bruno Sammartino? Ric Flair? Harley Race? Terry Funk? Bob Backlund? Come on JMT, there are so many better wrestlers to have never main evented a Wrestlemania.

Where did I say that? And do you not understand when I say my choice is "in the realm of possiblity"? And I already said Mr. Perfect is the one guy that could pass Hardy for me, and if IC could come up with a more realistic scenario, than Bruno Sammartino would be a better choice than Hardy as well.

So let me get this straight; when my opinion clashes with the general majority opinion, I'm biased and incorrect. But when your opinion clashes with the general majority, it's the truth? Right. Come on JMT, I expect more from you man.

Dude, you and I both know its fact that nobody spit that "Flair is the greatest of all time" horseshit until Flair started sucking off HHH and WWE started promoting that nonsense. That's just a fact.

And personally, I don't believe the majority opinion is that Flair is the greatest. Do a lot of people ******edly think that with no reasonable explanation to back up their stance other than WWE says so? Yes, but that does not make it correct, nor does it mean the majority think that. I think the majority believes Hogan or Austin is the greatest of all time. And honestly X, you didn't say your opinion was that Flair is the greatest, and I'd be willing to bet that you don't think he's the greatest pro wrestler of all time. Top 5 maybe, but I doubt you'd rank him #1.

His prime definitely included his WWF run JMT, he had several great matches during his stint, and he had a few more great matches as well after he returned to WCW. He didn't start regressing until the mid 90s.

Fair enough. I would still rather see Hardy vs. Cena today over Flair vs. Hogan for 'Mania 8, but still... I can understand that logic.

Hell yes it would have. The WWF poster boy versus the NWA poster boy, you WOULDN'T want to see that? Andre vs. Hogan was lucky enough to have happened at the absolutely perfect time; Hulkamania was at it's peak, and in Andre they had the perfect monster heel for the kids to jeer. Hogan vs. Flair would have blown that out of the water.

Yes, it would've been a big match, but you're underestimating just how big Hogan/Andre was, and you're also forgetting that wrestling was losing their 'boom' at that point of time. That plus the fact that their match at Bash at the Beach 1994 didn't draw shit, I really don't think it would've came anywhere near matching Hogan vs. Andre.

And personally, I'd prefer Savage vs. Flair any day of the fucking week over Hogan vs. Flair, so no... I'm not upset this match never happened.

How about the most impressive Royal Rumble victory of all time?

That I'll give you. And like I already said, Flair vs. Savage should've most definitely been the last match on the card. Most definitely.

How about several title defenses against some of the biggest legends in WWE history?

Lmao... like who? Really, just Savage and Bret and that's basically it. Hell, Jeff Hardy's had more title defenses than Flair had as WWE Champion, lol.

Sounds pretty deserving to me, and that's not even taking into account all of his accomplishments in the NWA/WCW and around the nation.

Yeah its deserving, but I still think Hardy deserves it more, especially when you ignore the failed drug tests. Hardy's worked way longer and harder for WWE than Flair could ever dream of doing.

It's not gonna happen man. I actually used to be a big Jeff Hardy fan, when I was about 14. Than I started to desire more out of a wrestler than the ability to perform spots and make teenage girls scream.

Hardy's one of the best sellers in WWE, and has a ton of charisma. He has much more to offer than just high spots. He's able to get the people emotionally involved in his matches; that's something every wrestler desires to do when they step through those curtains, but most aren't able to accomplish that. Hardy's one of the few in today's industry that can.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Loving this debate... if you can call it that now...

JMT... Hardy WILL never headline Mania... the fact he is jerking them around now will put paid to it... Why should he get a Mania main event over a CM Punk, Chris Jericho, Edge, Cena, Orton, Trips,HBK or Taker when he won't sign a contract?

This thread is quickly becoming "Why Jeff Hardy is the Best Never to Headline Mania"... it's futile cos he just isn't... Who ever we all choose, there will be someone "more deserving"... but some candidates just don't fit... Hardy is there...

As for Sheiky Baby... Similar demons prevented he him I believe... he got pulled over with with Hacksaw and was the highest profile of the early drug failiures... so again, drugs killing a push... I think the rematch would have gone better than Bundy... but...


Flair v Hogan in WCW DID draw... but not as much as a Mania match would have done... those pre NWO Hogan matches got WCW in a financial position to buy Nash and Hall et al...

 

[Milkyway!]

You know who you could make an argument for is Jeff Hardy.

No, no JMT. He said greatest, not worst.

Here's a guy who's now a multiple time World Champion, and one of the most consistently over babyfaces in the company's history

His fans are those that don't know anything about wrestling, honestly. The guy botches about 1/3+ his moves to this day. His mic work is mediocre at best, and the reason hes over is because he can almost do a flippy thing. I'm convienced because of Jeff's sucess, guys like Evan Bourne can make it, just because of some flips.

who's been so since the late nineties;

Did you forget about 2004-2006 where Jeff did nothing inside of TNA? Or about about 2003-2004 when Jeff ran the indies and did nothing? Or how about 2002-2003 when Jeff didn't put on a single good match during his first solo run with the WWE? What about 2006-2008 where Jeff was climbing the ladder, while gaining no improvement whatsoever? I think Jeff Hardy is pity case and a half.

however, he has never competed in a Wrestlemania main event, or anything close to it.

Because he doesn't deserve to.

All his Wrestlemania moments involve mid-card ladder and hardcore matches.

Because thats all Jeff Hardy is, one big botch festing spot monkey.

That's it. It's really hard to believe when you think about it, that someone that over with the fans has NEVER had a big match at Wrestlemania.

Once again, I think the fans just pity Jeff Hardy. Nothing more. He ran off his drug problems, his house burning up, and then he finnally got over.

His biggest was actually last year's against his brother, and even that was slow built and really didn't mean anything at the end of the day

Jeff never does anything at the end of the day. Hes terrible. None of his fueds ever mean anything.

(shit, the match those two had on Smackdown a week later was MUCH better than their 'Mania match).

Agreed.

You can say whatever you want about Jeff Hardy, but the fact of the matter is, the fans love him and he brings that "big match" feel to every match he's in.

He brings nothing to any match hes in. Guys like Jeff Hardy, Undertaker, Triple H, CM Punk, Matt Hardy carry him to hell and back in ever match hes in. I don't know what the appeal to Jeff Hardy is, but he sure does suck.

There's NEVER a dead crowd for a Jeff Hardy match

Philadelphia, PA Night of Champions 2009. Croud hardly cheered when he won the title.

and it shocks me that WWE never took advantage of that fact by given him more important 'Mania matches.

It shocks me that this shocks you.

 

[X]

So you don't think the Wellness Program is a joke? Seriously, X?

It doesn't matter whether or not the Wellness policy is justified or not, because it's still a rule, and Hardy broke that rule. I'm sure spammers on this forum this our spamming policy is a joke, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a rule and when he violated it he let down the WWE management, which was the original point I was trying to make.

Hardy's not a cover boy and not a fucking ass kisser like guys like Cena and Batista are. That's a fact. If there's a big name to be made an example of, Hardy was obviously the perfect choice, since he's someone without a great image and someone who has shown plenty of times to leave and come back with the same amount of fan fair as he had when he left.

I know it's a bit of a conspiracy theory, but that doesn't make it any less possible.

Come on now dude...Hardy may not be an ass kisser but that still doesn't make ANY sense for the WWE to want to suspend him in the middle of a main event push!.

It might be irrelevant, but it still makes perfect sense. At the end of the day, you can't fault Jeff for taking a couple of pain pills considering HUNDREDS of wrestlers before his time took much worse shit than that and if the Wellness Policy were around, they still would've taken them and they either would've gotten caught like Hardy did, or get protected like someone like Batista obviously gets.

I love you JMT but you keep apparently ignoring what I'm saying. It DOESN'T MATTER if wrestlers in the 80s and 90s took drugs because there weren't any rules against it! They weren't violating the company rules, Jeff Hardy breaking the rules of Wellness Policy IS a violation of company rules. They are completely different scenarios that you cannot compare!

That's all well and dandy, but the fact is... he's champion and if he was as big of fuck up as you claim he is, then WWE would not trust him the belt, AT ALL. Not even for a day.

"As big of a fuck up as I claim him to be"? When did I say he was some huge fuck-up? I didn't, I said that he doesn't deserve to headline a Wrestlemania, and that he deserved to be fired when he was. That's it.

HHH vs. Booker T. was one of the main events. There is such thing as co-main events, X, especially now with the brand splits. Each show has their own 'Mania headliner.

The main event is the last show on the card, period. "Double" main events have always been bullshit, everyone knows the last card of the night always gets top billing.

In 2002/2003, RVD was by far the most over babyface on Raw. So, yeah... at 'Mania 19 he did deserve to be in Raw's main event against HHH; however, because of politics and politics only, RVD was held down. Hell, one WWE former writer said at one time it was planned for Lesnar and RVD to headline 'Mania 19 and McMahon was all for the idea, but guess who stuck his gigantic nose where it didn't belong?

I wouldn't have had a problem with RVD facing HHH in place of Booker T at WM 19, but I don't consider that to be a main event considering there were three matches that took place afterwards.

But having RVD in the real main event of a Mania? Ridiculous.

As I mentioned earlier, as a tag performer he was a "spot monkey", but as a singles competitor? That's fucking bullshit. So his comeback involves a couple of high spots, that makes him a spot monkey? That makes no sense.

Let me ask you this: Is it his singles career that has gotten him so over with the fans, or was it his tag career? You know damn well the answer to that question was his tag career. Hardy built his entire career off of gimmick matches and performing spots, that isn't me being biased or something, that's plain hard fact. Nobody gave two shits about Jeff Hardy until he started doing huge spots. His career is based off of that JMT. I'm not calling him a spot monkey now, but that's certainly how he made a name for himself.

Dude, you and I both know its fact that nobody spit that "Flair is the greatest of all time" horseshit until Flair started sucking off HHH and WWE started promoting that nonsense. That's just a fact.

...

What? No JMT, people have been calling Ric Flair the greatest wrestler of all time since the damn 1980s, where are you possibly getting this notion? Flair was constantly touted as the greatest of all time in his NWA and WCW days by not only the organization but by the entire wrestling press (when there still was a wrestling press).

And personally, I don't believe the majority opinion is that Flair is the greatest. Do a lot of people ******edly think that with no reasonable explanation to back up their stance other than WWE says so? Yes, but that does not make it correct, nor does it mean the majority think that. I think the majority believes with Hogan or Austin is the greatest of all time. And honestly X, you didn't say your opinion was that Flair is the greatest, and I'd be willing to bet that you don't think he's the greatest pro wrestler of all time. Top 5 maybe, but I doubt you'd rank him #1.

I don't consider Flair to be the greatest of all time, but he's certainly in the top ten and I feel his legacy is certainly deserving enough to have added a real Wrestlemania main event to his resume. If fucking Lawrence Taylor and King Kong Bundy can main event a Mania, I see no reason why Flair would have been a poor choice.

Fair enough. I would still rather see Hardy vs. Cena today over Flair vs. Hogan for 'Mania 8, but still... I can understand that logic.

...Dude. Really? You'd rather see Cena vs. Hardy today than Flair vs. Hogan at Mania 8? Seriously? How could you possibly prefer a match up that would mean very little in Cena vs. Hardy over what would have been the most important match in the history of modern professional wrestling? I'm not going to knock you for your personal taste, but Hardy vs. Cena could be a damn Smackdown main event, Hogan vs. Flair could have been the dream match of the century (and eventually became just that in WCW, albeit when both were a bit older and a tad worse off inside the ring)

Yes, it would've been a big match, but you're underestimating just how big Hogan/Andre was, and you're also forgetting that wrestling was losing their 'boom' at that point of time. That plus the fact that their match at Bash at the Beach 1994 didn't draw shit, I really don't think it would've came anywhere near matching Hogan vs. Andre.

Maybe Hogan vs. Andre would have been bigger in terms of drawing power, but Hogan vs. Flair would have had twice the importance and legacy.

Lmao... like wbo? Really, just Savage and Bret and that's basically it. Hell, Jeff Hardy's had more title defenses than Flair had as WWE Champion, lol.

Aren't you forgetting the fact that Flair had to overcome TWENTY NINE other men in that Royal Rumble to win the title in the first place? Shit defeating Randy Savage alone is a HELL of a lot bigger of an accomplishment than Hardy's absolutely pathetic World title reigns have been. His biggest accomplishment is a month long reign. Whoopee.

Yeah its deserving, but I still think Hardy deserves it more, especially when you ignore the failed drug tests. Hardy's worked way longer and harder for WWE than Flair could ever dream of doing.

Flair has done more for the wrestling business than Jeff Hardy could dream about in his wildest fantasies JMT. Without Flair, the NWA doesn't take off, WCW doesn't become a powerhouse and the Monday Night Wars never happen in all likelihood. What has Hardy done for the wrestling business? Over-saturate ladder and gimmick matches to the point where nobody even cares about them any more?

 

[owenhartfan]

Yes Flair was the man in his first stint with the WWE and far > and more effective in a main event then Hardy is currently. Entered number 3 of the 92 rumble and won it. Beat out the biggest stars in the compan Hogan, Piper, Savage, Slaughter, Sid, Taker, and Roberts. First heel Rumble winner.

IMO Flair v.s Savage at Wrestlemania 8 had pretty much equal billing as Hogan and Sid. Maybe slightly less out of fear fans needed Hogan to be on last. I think the match should still be considered as a Wrestlemania main event. I remember all the hype going into that match with Flair claiming Elizabeth was his first. As a kid my brother and I were both hooked into the storyline and anticipating that match overy Justice and Hogan.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

The key to all this that everyone is missing is that Hardy has been BOOKED to fail... he has had something like 7 or 8 title matches now and lost the majority... or he has lost the belt the moment he won it...

Other guys who never headlined mania have been booked to win... all through their WWE careers, take Ahmed Johnson, or Tatanka... both had massive undefeated streaks and never headlined mania.... I'd take either over JEFF Hardy.... Matt... thats another story... he has a right to feel real pissed off... but I have a feeling they are gonna go with him after this injury heals... cos he risked and sucked it up so much... Matt Hardy, in shape, new "do", look etc could be a major player... Something Jeff will never be...

 

[NSL]

The key to all this that everyone is missing is that Hardy has been BOOKED to fail... he has had something like 7 or 8 title matches now and lost the majority... or he has lost the belt the moment he won it...

Other guys who never headlined mania have been booked to win... all through their WWE careers, take Ahmed Johnson, or Tatanka... both had massive undefeated streaks and never headlined mania.... I'd take either over JEFF Hardy.... Matt... thats another story... he has a right to feel real pissed off... but I have a feeling they are gonna go with him after this injury heals... cos he risked and sucked it up so much... Matt Hardy, in shape, new "do", look etc could be a major player... Something Jeff will never be...

I was with you until the part I bolded. Ahmed Johnson? Tatanka? Why not just complain Double J never headlined, or maybe 1-2-3 Kid?

Johnson was good for what he was. He was booked as a powerhouse, and was headed for big things, but couldn't stay healthy. Even if plans went through, and he was handed the title, I'm sure they would've booked him to drop it before WrestleMania. No way he was going to headline 'Mania over guys like Bret Hart, Yokozuna, Lex Luger, or any other number of people that did, or could have, headlined 'Mania at that time.

Same thing with Tatanka. No way he would have been given the title to headline. As far as I know, he was never even set to win the belt, and thus, never got close to headlining. His gimmick was extremely over, and he was booked great, but no way anyone thought he'd compete with the guys at the top during that time.

 

[jmt225]

Damn X, I never saw this post until now, so please forgive my lateness to it.

It doesn't matter whether or not the Wellness policy is justified or not, because it's still a rule, and Hardy broke that rule. I'm sure spammers on this forum this our spamming policy is a joke, but it doesn't change the fact that it's a rule and when he violated it he let down the WWE management, which was the original point I was trying to make.

But my point is that while he has broken the rule twice in the last 4 years, he has still more than made up for it. There's no denying that.

Come on now dude...Hardy may not be an ass kisser but that still doesn't make ANY sense for the WWE to want to suspend him in the middle of a main event push!.

I'm not saying they want to; I'm just saying he's not protected like some other main eventers.

I love you JMT but you keep apparently ignoring what I'm saying. It DOESN'T MATTER if wrestlers in the 80s and 90s took drugs because there weren't any rules against it! They weren't violating the company rules, Jeff Hardy breaking the rules of Wellness Policy IS a violation of company rules. They are completely different scenarios that you cannot compare!

I get your point on this one, but I still believe what I said made perfect sense, lol. But whatever... I'll let it go.

"As big of a fuck up as I claim him to be"? When did I say he was some huge fuck-up? I didn't, I said that he doesn't deserve to headline a Wrestlemania, and that he deserved to be fired when he was. That's it.

Well, this is what you said:

"Some of the wrestlers I'm seeing listed are fucking ridiculous, and are coming from people I usually agree with or at the very least respect. You know you're my boy JMT, but Jeff fucking Hardy? Is that a joke? How, in ANY way, does he deserve to main event a WM? What the fuck has he done to deserve that? Fuck over WWE management time after time?"

To me, that's insinuating that he's a huge fuck up.

The main event is the last show on the card, period. "Double" main events have always been bullshit, everyone knows the last card of the night always gets top billing.

I wouldn't have had a problem with RVD facing HHH in place of Booker T at WM 19, but I don't consider that to be a main event considering there were three matches that took place afterwards.

Well, we'll just agree to disagree there.

But having RVD in the real main event of a Mania? Ridiculous.

I guarantee RVD vs. Lesnar at 'Mania 19 would've been better than what Angle vs. Lesnar was.

Let me ask you this: Is it his singles career that has gotten him so over with the fans, or was it his tag career? You know damn well the answer to that question was his tag career. Hardy built his entire career off of gimmick matches and performing spots, that isn't me being biased or something, that's plain hard fact. Nobody gave two shits about Jeff Hardy until he started doing huge spots. His career is based off of that JMT. I'm not calling him a spot monkey now, but that's certainly how he made a name for himself.

But that still doesn't take away from the fact that he's not a spot monkey in his singles matches, and yet he remains the most over babyface in the company. And a lot of new fans haven't been watching since the Hardy Boys were together, so that also hurts your point.

What? No JMT, people have been calling Ric Flair the greatest wrestler of all time since the damn 1980s, where are you possibly getting this notion? Flair was constantly touted as the greatest of all time in his NWA and WCW days by not only the organization but by the entire wrestling press (when there still was a wrestling press).

Find me one quote from the eighties where someone said Flair was the greatest. You won't find it, because it doesn't exist. Besides X, you were too young in the eighties to ever know the ins and outs of the business, so that statement doesn't hold any water.

The fact is... I've been a fan of pro wrestling since the late eighties. So I grew up in the nineties watching. And I learned of the internet, "smark" radio shows in the late nineties, and not once did I hear Flair being touted as the greatest of all time. He was a joke by that point. Like I said earlier... it wasn't until Flair went to WWE and HHH was telling us every week that Flair was the greatest when people actually started believing that bullshit.

I don't consider Flair to be the greatest of all time, but he's certainly in the top ten

I completely agree with you. But the fact that SO many people put him at #1, automatically makes him overrated. As great as say LeBron James is, if people start saying he's the greatest of all time, then that would make him overrated, even though he IS a very good basketball player and one of the most talented of all time.

and I feel his legacy is certainly deserving enough to have added a real Wrestlemania main event to his resume. If fucking Lawrence Taylor and King Kong Bundy can main event a Mania, I see no reason why Flair would have been a poor choice.

I never said Flair would have been a poor choice. And you took the words out of my third post in this thread. If those clowns can headline Wrestlemania, then how come Jeff Hardy can't?

...Dude. Really? You'd rather see Cena vs. Hardy today than Flair vs. Hogan at Mania 8? Seriously? How could you possibly prefer a match up that would mean very little in Cena vs. Hardy over what would have been the most important match in the history of modern professional wrestling? I'm not going to knock you for your personal taste, but Hardy vs. Cena could be a damn Smackdown main event, Hogan vs. Flair could have been the dream match of the century (and eventually became just that in WCW, albeit when both were a bit older and a tad worse off inside the ring)

Why? Well, it's simple. I love the Flair/Savage match from Wrestlemania 8. LOVE it. Have so since I was a kid. I also loved the storyline for the record. So, when I think of Hogan vs. Flair actually replacing that, I don't like it. While the match would have been big, quality wise it wouldn't have been anywhere near as good as Flair vs. Savage was. You watch Flair and Hogan's matches against one another and the fact is... they aren't very good.

And I just think Hardy vs. Cena would have the people going nuts. It's the only option I see WWE has right now to give a real main event feel to their Wrestlemania main event. And that's why I want to see it.

Maybe Hogan vs. Andre would have been bigger in terms of drawing power, but Hogan vs. Flair would have had twice the importance and legacy.

I disagree completely, man. There was nothing those two could have done that would've topped Hogan slamming Andre. Nothing.

Aren't you forgetting the fact that Flair had to overcome TWENTY NINE other men in that Royal Rumble to win the title in the first place? Shit defeating Randy Savage alone is a HELL of a lot bigger of an accomplishment than Hardy's absolutely pathetic World title reigns have been. His biggest accomplishment is a month long reign. Whoopee.

Yeah, and like I said.... Flair deserved to headline Wresltmania 8 because of that performance alone.

But the fact remains that that was the only thing he gave to the company. That was it. Some decent promos? Sure. Some back-body drops, gorilla press slams off the top rope, attempts to his turn buckle spot, dives on his face, and a little blood? Sure. But that still doesn't match what Jeff Hardy has given the company. From millions and millions of dollars because of his fans, to some of the greatest, most dangerous spots in history... Flair cannot match what Jeff Hardy has given to WWE.

Flair has done more for the wrestling business than Jeff Hardy could dream about in his wildest fantasies JMT. Without Flair, the NWA doesn't take off, WCW doesn't become a powerhouse and the Monday Night Wars never happen in all likelihood. What has Hardy done for the wrestling business? Over-saturate ladder and gimmick matches to the point where nobody even cares about them any more?

Flair has done more for pro wrestling than Hardy has, sure, but WWE? Absolutely not, as I explained earlier.

 

[TheBigRedMember]

Ric Flair.

Can't say anyone better.

 

[OWEN-ing It All]

Owen Hart
British Bulldog
Mr. Perfect
Razor Ramon
Rob Van Dam