Shit arguments you will definitely see in WZWT7

[Con T.]

Wasn't Big Daddy also largely responsible for the collapse of British wrestling in the 80's, too?

And for a guy who everyone watched, I'm pretty sure he also drew some really, really shitty houses in his day; houses that would make TNA's Lockdown last year look full by comparison. I've seen numbers of about 1,000, and lower.

Don't get me wrong, I'll vote him over the mid carders of the world. I'll probably toss him a win against the Arn Andersons and the Barry Windhams, even. But I don't think he's an icon along the lines of Santo, Hogan, and even Austin or Rock. His best credential seems to be, "he's Big Daddy".

 

[George Steele's Barber]

All the arguments are shit. Some are just shittier than others. I vote for whoever I believe could drink more.

Andre '13!

 

[Papa Pillman]

This "ultimate legacy" stuff is smark bollocks. Just sayin'. He's like Punk, but ancient and with a worse body. He appeals most strongly to a certain kind of workrate crazy fan and built his legacy on that foundation.

I don't get this at all. This is seriously short-changing Slick Ric.

Punk is a guy who appeals to hardcore wrestling fans and has little mainstream relevance.

Ric Flair is one of only four or five other guys who transcended wrestling and became a household name and bonafied pop culture icon.

On what planet is Flair's legacy merely a product of the "smarks"??

 

[Tastycles]

To Shattered: Those videos of him are largely taken from the end of his career, it's a bit like showing Flair vs. MVP and Mr. Kennedy to show how shit he was. Big Daddy's charisma was largely what drew people in in the first place.

To Occam: Weren't yesterday's stars a factor in WCW's collapse? As for the gates, that's mostly because until arena sized music and comedy events became popular in the 90s,, most British cities didn't have arenas. We don't have any popular indoor sports here to warrant it. Those 1,000 crowds at places like Guilford sound shit, but it would have been a sell out in the biggest venue in the area.

I don't expect him to win against the mega stars, I don't think I even put him on my list this year, as I largely went with favourites rather than people who deserve to be in, I just don't think describing him as the Hulk Hogan of British wrestling is anywhere near as shit an argument as saying Bret Hart is of Canada.

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

Honestly, if people haven't seen any old school Terry Funk, they should skip the tournament and look some up. What little I've seen has been a treat.

This is good advice. I think the same applies well with other 70s stars like Billy Graham, early Dusty Rhodes, Sgt. Slaughter as was, The Freebirds, even early Hogan and more. Some good things existed before 1984 and it's not doing yourself a disservice to look them up.

 

[Con T.]

To Shattered: Those videos of him are largely taken from the end of his career, it's a bit like showing Flair vs. MVP and Mr. Kennedy to show how shit he was. Big Daddy's charisma was largely what drew people in in the first place.

To Occam: Weren't yesterday's stars a factor in WCW's collapse? As for the gates, that's mostly because until arena sized music and comedy events became popular in the 90s,, most British cities didn't have arenas. We don't have any popular indoor sports here to warrant it. Those 1,000 crowds at places like Guilford sound shit, but it would have been a sell out in the biggest venue in the area.

I don't expect him to win against the mega stars, I don't think I even put him on my list this year, as I largely went with favourites rather than people who deserve to be in, I just don't think describing him as the Hulk Hogan of British wrestling is anywhere near as shit an argument as saying Bret Hart is of Canada.

Well that, and some shitty booking and an office that didn't want wrestling on the books.

Understood, that's part of the issue with Big Daddy, but I still don't get why it seems British wrestling fans, for the most part, latched to the WWF vehicle when it came round. Perhaps this has more to do with your point that nothing could touch WWF by that point, so I'll go with that, because it's largely true.

Sadly, knowing you didn't put who deserved to be in, and knowing you know your shit, I can only assume my dreams have been crushed of seeing Ray Stevens and Lonnie Mayne in here.

Grumble grumble

 

[Tastycles]

I'll show my full list after the draw, but Big Daddy isn't on it, I've just checked. He is on two others that I've seen, so he might make it in, but I doubt it.

Gems that did make the Tastycles list include Slam Master J and the aforementioned Essa Rios.

 

[shattered dreams]

Shame Big Daddy may not make it. He makes for more interesting discussions than most because his career was so unique. I know the tag thing was a later career gimmick but I was always under the impression that he was already old and fat before he made any strides towards being as well known as he eventually was.

 

[harrythem]

Big Daddy will never win anything in a straight up wrestling match but, he WAS wrestling over here for as long as I can remember (I still enjoy a trip to a caravan park to experience the stuff I watched as a kid).
I also give a shout out to Kendo Nagasaki (The british original) who clearly had his shtick nicked by El Generico! He hypnotised his opponent in a match! It was mental!

He also inspired this clip:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT4w-WjX7xg

The fact that Soccer AM was still doing old school wrestling skits 20 years or so after it stopped airing says how it has, somehow, remained in the public awareness over here!

 

[Coco]

I don't get this at all. This is seriously short-changing Slick Ric.

Punk is a guy who appeals to hardcore wrestling fans and has little mainstream relevance.

Ric Flair is one of only four or five other guys who transcended wrestling and became a household name and bonafied pop culture icon.

On what planet is Flair's legacy merely a product of the "smarks"??

Flair was second to Hogan in his era as Punk is second to Cena in his. Flair's mainstream relevance is only a result of the heights Hogan and the WWF brought wrestling to.

As for short-changing him, I'd say everyone except me is over-changing him.

And now that I've said what needs saying, I'll save the rest for the tourney. No reason for us to go in circles this early.

 

[Gelgarin]

In terms of one's ability to draw live gates (which I consider the only barometer of success that has remained even remotely consistent between eras), you can make a very real argument that Flair is the second highest drawing performer in the entire global history of the business, second only to Hogan in his ability to pull in fans.

 

[SD619]

1. He can wrestle circles around his opponent.

2. He has more 5-star matches. Hence, he wins.

 

[Coco]

1. He can wrestle circles around his opponent.

Wrestle circles? More like back off like a coward for half the match.

2. He has more 5-star matches. Hence, he wins.

Five star matches? Good lord, if we're going to be arguing taste, I'll show myself out now.

Gelgarin's numbers are worth listening to. Of course what those numbers say about Flair rather than the state of wrestling at the time are something else entirely. But arguing about snowflakes? No thank you. Save that kiddy shit for someone else.

 

[SD619]

Wrestle circles? More like back off like a coward for half the match.

I have never understood how "wrestling circles" around your opponent helps. Is it supposed to make him dizzy?

Five star matches? Good lord, if we're going to be arguing taste, I'll show myself out now.

Unfortunately, this is an argument that will pop up quite a few times during the tournament.

 

[Con T.]

2. He has more 5-star matches. Hence, he wins.

Boy, this is gonna get awkward when Ric faces Misawa

 

[The Crock]

I argued the five star match thing last year (Joe vs Jericho, I think) -- I'm fairly certain I brought up the Misawa example too, but it was just ignored. The ratings system is all about preference, which is its biggest flaw. The fact that any given rating is also the opinion of one individual doesn't help either. If you want to compare matches, it has to be on a more subjective basis; however, I can't see any way you can fairly grade matches against each other. Biases will always exist. If someone wants to use star ratings as a criteria for their personal vote, that's fine -- but I don't see it as a valid argument as to why one wrestler is superior to another.

 

[shattered dreams]

Flair is Cal Ripken Jr. Batista is Mark McGwire.

 

[Coco]

Flair is Cal Ripken Jr. Batista is Mark McGwire.

Is this a real sports thing? I don't watch real sports.

 

[shattered dreams]

Flair is Raw. Batista is Jersey shore.

 

[Con T.]

Flair is Raw. Batista is Jersey shore.

Raw is just as shit as Jersey Shore.


... Yeah, I said it.

 

[Bernkastel]

Raw is just as shit as Jersey Shore.


... Yeah, I said it.

I blame The "Snooki" Rock.

 

[Con T.]

I blame The "Snooki" Rock.

Orange people draw ratings, man. If we were going to have a tournament of the top shows, we at least couldn't be biased, because we can all recognize this truth

Also, I'm just waiting for Kane to pull the robbery on D-Bry one night.

 

[Bernkastel]

Orange people draw ratings, man. If we were going to have a tournament of the top shows, we at least couldn't be biased, because we can all recognize this truth

Also, I'm just waiting for Kane to pull the robbery on D-Bry one night.

Of the spotlight? Hasn't he been doing that already?

 

[Con T.]

Of the spotlight? Hasn't he been doing that already?

First the spotlight.

Then the bitches.


His brother taught him well

 

[Bernkastel]

First the spotlight.

Then the bitches.


His brother taught him well