Should Have Been Champion...I Don't Think So

[The Brain]

He should have been world champion. It’s as common a phrase as anything on the forum. We all like to look back in time, pick one of our old school favorites who was supposedly held back, and sing his praises as a should have been champion. The most common people I see mentioned are Ted Dibiase, Mr. Perfect, Rick Rude, Roddy Piper, Davey Boy Smith, among others. I loved watching every one of those guys and have a lot of respect for their work. With that said, none of them should have ever been world champion.

WWE was very different in the 80s and 90s compared to the 21st century. Guys were perfectly capable of having a long and successful career without every getting the strap. Despite never being world champion we look back at the five names a mentioned above as a success. They were always relevant and always involved in big storylines. Sure their hall of fame resumes would look better with a world title reign but it wasn’t necessary. In their day the IC title was a lot closer in prestige to the world title than it is today. You could argue that an IC title reign twenty years ago is equal to a Smackdown world title reign today. Four of the names mentioned above had an IC reign during the glory years. Just contending for the title was considered a good enough push. Piper had a legendary feud with Hulk Hogan. Dibiase and Perfect got to work with the Hulkster too. Wins and losses didn’t matter for the heels. Just working with Hulk in a sold out arena was enough to be considered a success.

With the brand extension and much shorter title reigns it’s been a common argument that the championships have lost their prestige. We look back to the longer title reigns of a generation ago as the good old days and hope for those kinds of reigns again. If all these guys who “should have been champion” actually were champion the longer reigns we enjoyed back then would have never existed. When should they have been champion? If Dibiase, Perfect, Rude, and Piper were to each have a title reign in the late 80s that would have taken away from Hogan’s or Savage’s reign. I’m sure there are those who wouldn’t care if those four took some time away from Hogan, but then we wouldn’t have the legend of Hulkamania. Hulk Hogan would have been just another guy who had a couple reigns. The true legends needed to stand out and they couldn’t have done that if the title was passed around so frequently.

So if you’re among the many who think several wrestlers who were never champion should have been, lay it out for me. When should they have been champion and at whose expense? How would your scenario effect the legacy of the wrestler you’re stripping of the title and would it be worth it? Think realistically of the timeframe as well. If you say Mr. Perfect should have been champion in 1990 instead of Ultimate Warrior wouldn’t we be sitting here today claiming Warrior should have been champion?

One other thing to keep in mind is the champion is always a target for criticism. My guess is never holding the title has helped each of these wrestler’s legacy within the IWC. They are remembered as true talents who were never given a chance instead of criticized like just about every champion has been.

 

[FunKay the Inevitable]

Ted DiBiase - February 5, 1988-March 27, 1988​

On February 5, 1988, Ted DiBiase unofficially was crowned WWF Heavyweight Champion after being presented with the belt following Andre the Giant's championship win. DiBiase's reign however was declared null & void and he never officially held the title. The title was declared vacant and remained so until March 27th when Randy Savage defeated DiBiase in a tournament final at WrestleMania IV.

Now in my opinion, DiBiase could well have had a brief month and a half championship reign right there in that gap. Heel wrestlers rarely had long title reigns (Iron Sheik will tell you that) and often served as a transitional champion (Again Iron Sheik) so DiBiase would have fit perfectly as Hogan would've gone after Andre for Mania like he did. That's when Ted DiBiase should've been World Champion.

 

[TheAbsolute1.5]

I actually agree with what you have said almost completely.
The only person that I can remember who should have held the strap and didn't was Davey Boy Smith. I don't think that it would have hurt Bret Hart all that much to drop a title match to the guy, because I always remember him being over with the crowd. Also, there was the time in the 90s when Yokozuna had a few reigns and Diesel had his failure of a reign, so I think that maybe instead of Yokuzuna having multiple reigns, you could have fit someone else in there. Also, did Sid need two title reigns? Did he even need one? I think WWF and Vince pushed some of the wrong guys too much back in that era, and they didn't get it right until they put the strap on Michaels. That's just my opinion, though, and I agree a lot with what you said about people from the 80s. I remember guys like Piper and DiBiase more fondly because they never held the belt. If they had held it for like, one month and dropped it right back to Hogan or Savage, then we'd remember them as a joke champion.

I'd actually like to see it go back to that in the WWE. Sure, let Miz hold the belt for a year. I'm not crazy about the guy, but a lot of other people seem to either love him or hate him. I think that it's a joke that someone like Edge is a 10 time "world champion", when, as you put it, the Smackdown championship is the new Intercontinental Championship. I don't really mean to dog on Edge so much, but he's not in the same league as the other guys who've earned that honor. I feel the same way about Orton, too.
Wouldn't it have been better if Edge had just been world champion like, maybe four times in his career? You'd cut down the total by over half, give him longer reigns when he had the belt, and they'd be more memorable. I honestly can't remember exactly who Edge has even fought in his times as champion, so that's why I feel the way I do.

 

[TUFFY54]

Good Thread. Here are a few.

Ted Dibiase - After Andre won the title, he should have laid down for Ted right their. Ted gets a ref to count to three and he is officially a champion. At Wrestlemania 4 we would have had Hogan Vs. Andre and Savage beating Ted for the title. Nothing changes in history.

Roddy Piper - Piper is a little bit tricker because his feud was at the height of the Hulkamania days. Two choices, have Hogan win the title back at Wrestlemania 2. This is the least likely of the two choices. Bundy would injure Hogan before a match with Piper. Piper would get the tainted victory and Hogan would get his belt back to a huge applause at Wrestlemania 2. We never really got to see Hogan Vs. Piper in a singles match, and Piper was wasted boxing Mr. T at Wrestlemania 2. The more likely scenario would see Piper beating Flair for the title at Wrestlemania 8. Piper had a great match with Bret, but that match could have easily been a few months later letting Bret beat Piper for his world title. Piper could have also droped it to Flair or Savage on a Saturday Nights Main Event a month later. Again, this would change nothing in history.

Mr. Perfect - Perfect could have beaten Warrior at Summerslam 90. Warrior could have won it back a few months later and nothing in history would change.

Lex Lugar - Common sense here. Luger wins a Summerslam 93 (its still bizzare that he didn't). Yoko, or some other heal, wins it back at the Rumble and Bret gets it at Mania 10. This absolutly should have happened.

Scott Hall Hall totally should have been the one to beat Nash for the Title at Survivor Series 95. Hall was one of the most over guys in the company at that point. Bret beats Hall at the Rumble and nothing changes.

Those are probably my top guys that should have been world champion. As you can see, nothing in history would have changed. The more I think about it, the 92 scenario makes more sense for Piper. At this time they were playing the angle of him never getting gold, and he was one of the last guys eliminated from the Rumble. Really, with the exception of the mid eighties Hulkamania run, anyone could be world champ and not change history as long as they lost it back in a rematch to the original champion.

P.S. As for your point about the titles today. I don't think their is any question that the Intercontinental Championshiop in the eighties and early ninties was more prestigious than the Smackdown world title is today. The IC/US belts aren't really anymore noteworthy today than the Hardcore title was ten years ago.

 

[The Eighties]

When I have had this conversation before I have came to the same conclusion, so when I talk about the guys you mentioned I use the word's "Could have been" because no doubt they all had the talent to be the champion, but as you point out the circumstances simply didn't allow them a reign, as with many things in life timing is everything.

Now to just take a look at your question for fun, I'd firstly say that in the 80's FunKay J. Crawford points out the only possible reign that any of these guys could have had.

If we push on a little further there is Mr Perfect in 1990, I actually think he may have gotten a reign but he didn't click with Hogan from everything I have read, it was no one's fault just one of those things. Injuries from that point on scuppered any other potential reigns.

Roddy Piper may well argue that when Hogan vs Flair fell through for Wrestlemania 8 he should have gotten that match instead of Savage, and thus that reign.

Rick Rude simply left too soon, if he had hung on another couple of years he'd have most likely been in the mix by 92 and possibly could have had a reign.

Davey Boy was a good performer but never good enough all round to be the WWE champion IMO.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

In Rude's case it was pure politics, Hogan first then Warrior refused to work and drop the belt to him (and smaller guys in general) despite Vince being keen on it... Hence his leaving in disgust as he really felt Warrior owed him it for bringing him up by his bootstraps... Back then Hogan and Warrior did nothing they didn't want to. When he died he was training for a return and I think he might have gotten a brief title run from Vince then... but by then it was too late...

The problem with Perfect was that at the time he feuded with Hogan, it was with the Genius as his manager... and it was more about his working with Beefcake than about he and Hogan having issues... Had Heenan been with him them it would have gotten over a lot more, but again Rude was point man for the Heenan Family, so again would have fallen foul of the Hogan fear of smaller men.

Davey Boy was the best all rounder of the mid 1990's once he dropped a bit of weight... in 92 he could easily have had Brets push hadthe steroid trial not been on the go... Once he came back in 94 he was leaner, meaner and as a heel he was always main event caliber... I think had the power not outed at IYH 8 he would have won that night for a short reign... He was certainly deserving as he had a total package and was certainly promised at least one reign by Vince... in the end they created the Euro belt for him but Vince screwed that up by letting Shawn get his way... and Davey's fire went when his sister died shortly after seeing him drop the belt... Vince always payed his rehab and stuff cos he knew most of Davey's latter life demons were down to him breaking promises...

Piper was too old and washed up by the time WM 8 came... his problem was that he was far too small in WM 1 and 2 and by 3 he was "leaving for Hollywood", just as he had bulked up and looked a credible alternative to Hogan... had he not, I think he rather than Savage would have got the belt... but Piper dug his grave by wanting the big movie career and it bombing... and after his big return he had that bike crash that destroyed his hip... It was never gonna happen... the IC Title was more down to Bret not wanting to do a proper job to Jacques Rougeau due to the Dynamite punch...

 

[The Brain]

Good Thread. Here are a few.

Ted Dibiase - After Andre won the title, he should have laid down for Ted right their. Ted gets a ref to count to three and he is officially a champion. At Wrestlemania 4 we would have had Hogan Vs. Andre and Savage beating Ted for the title. Nothing changes in history.

Roddy Piper - Piper is a little bit tricker because his feud was at the height of the Hulkamania days. Two choices, have Hogan win the title back at Wrestlemania 2. This is the least likely of the two choices. Bundy would injure Hogan before a match with Piper. Piper would get the tainted victory and Hogan would get his belt back to a huge applause at Wrestlemania 2. We never really got to see Hogan Vs. Piper in a singles match, and Piper was wasted boxing Mr. T at Wrestlemania 2. The more likely scenario would see Piper beating Flair for the title at Wrestlemania 8. Piper had a great match with Bret, but that match could have easily been a few months later letting Bret beat Piper for his world title. Piper could have also droped it to Flair or Savage on a Saturday Nights Main Event a month later. Again, this would change nothing in history.

Mr. Perfect - Perfect could have beaten Warrior at Summerslam 90. Warrior could have won it back a few months later and nothing in history would change.

Lex Lugar - Common sense here. Luger wins a Summerslam 93 (its still bizzare that he didn't). Yoko, or some other heal, wins it back at the Rumble and Bret gets it at Mania 10. This absolutly should have happened.

Scott Hall Hall totally should have been the one to beat Nash for the Title at Survivor Series 95. Hall was one of the most over guys in the company at that point. Bret beats Hall at the Rumble and nothing changes.

Those are probably my top guys that should have been world champion. As you can see, nothing in history would have changed. The more I think about it, the 92 scenario makes more sense for Piper. At this time they were playing the angle of him never getting gold, and he was one of the last guys eliminated from the Rumble. Really, with the exception of the mid eighties Hulkamania run, anyone could be world champ and not change history as long as they lost it back in a rematch to the original champion.

P.S. As for your point about the titles today. I don't think their is any question that the Intercontinental Championshiop in the eighties and early ninties was more prestigious than the Smackdown world title is today. The IC/US belts aren't really anymore noteworthy today than the Hardcore title was ten years ago.

You keep mentioning how nothing in history would change but that’s not really true. We would have a bunch a very short title reigns and a lot of angles that wouldn’t have happened I’ll take a closer look at your examples.

Ted Dibiase: It seems logical to just have Dibiase keep the title until WM4 but that would drastically change things. WM4 was built around the tournament to fill the vacated title. It was impossible to follow the main event of WM3 so Vince created a unique tournament guaranteeing us a new champion. Simply having Savage vs. Dibiase as the announced main event wouldn’t have had the same impact.

Roddy Piper: Piper could have taken the title from Hogan sometime in 1986 but part of Hulkamania was four uninterrupted years as champion. Piper was a great challenger and we did see some one on one matches between him and Hogan. There was the War to Settle the Score just before WM1 and the Wrestling Classic in November. If they went to WM2 the feud would have been over a year long. As for 1992 I don’t see that working either. Piper was IC champ. A lot of rewriting would have to go on. Also both Piper vs. Hart and Flair vs. Savage were mania classics. I wouldn’t want to give up either of those matches. Plus Piper left the WWF right after WM8. It was his last event as a full time wrestler.

Mr. Perfect: He was IC champ at SummerSlam 90. He dropped the title to The Texas Tornado but regained it a couple months later and held it until SummerSlam 91. Maybe you meant Rick Rude. He was gone from the WWF two months after SummerSlam.

Lex Luger: This is a whole different scenario. I’m sure at SummerSlam 93 Vince knew he wanted Luger to win the title at WM10. That’s why Luger got the win by countout. That’s why the stipulation stated SummerSlam would be Luger’s only shot. That’s why Luger had to find a loophole to get in the Rumble in 1994 bringing Tenryu and Kabuki in as a compromise. Vince wanted mania to be the time where Luger overcame all the obstacles and finally win the title. The problem was by the time we hit 1994 Luger had lost his momentum with the fans and Vince decided to go with Bret instead. You could definitely argue that Luger should have gotten the title at SummerSlam but that would have given Yoko a short reign and we wouldn’t have gotten the payoff at mania.

Scott Hall: I have to disagree about your opinion here. Razor was IC champ at Survivor Series 95. He was about to enter a program where he dropped the title to Goldust at Royal Rumble 96. You have the solution of Razor dropping the title to Bret at the rumble, but what about Goldust and the IC title? Beating Razor was the key to getting Goldust over. Also Bret’s reign would have shrunk from four months to two. Maybe that’s not a big deal but I like Bret holding the title from Survivor Series to mania a lot more than Razor from Survivor Series to Royal Rumble and Bret from Royal Rumble to mania.

On the surface it doesn’t look like much would have changed but when you take a closer look there are a lot more consequences than you realize. There not bad ideas. I just don’t think it was in the cards for those guys.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Rude felt he was being dissed by not being given the title at Summerslam 90 as he knew by then there were plans for Warrior to drop the belt within a month or two, when he realised he wasn't going to get that spot he left...

Luger blew it by blabbing the night before while drunk at a bar he was slated to win... Vince was furious and he gave Bret the win instead and Lex lost in the shitty way he did.

On paper things wouldn't have changed massively if someone like Razor had had a title reign rather than a month or two out of someone's like Diesels as during that era the Kliq ran everything anyway... where it would have gotten murky was if someone like Bam Bam or Tatanka had been given the final stages of the pushes they were being given... then things could have gotten a lot worse...

DiBiase is a conundrum, he'd have been a great champ, but he had to have beaten Hogan for it to work... they sabotaged it with the angle really as Andre clearly deserved to be champ once... DiBiase was also brand new to WWE fans around that time so it was a safer bet for someone like Savage with a bit more time served and Elizabeth to get it... Personally I'd have given it to Rude then and had Savage and Steamboat both chasing...

 

[the king of viper 3:16]

it should have been jake roberts sure he won GCW titlebut when he was over with the fans why not give him the strap. That would have made for epic rivalries eg. hogan. (I would have completely marked out for that.) Another person that i believe should have been champion was double A he had the fans behind him and it would have made people say finally hes out from Flair's shadow.

 

[cbreezy]

rude was wcw champ though. shouldnt that count? but anyway, magnum TA is a main player in this section. he basically just missed his chance because of a motorcycle wreck. i also believe buff bagwell could have been the miz of the 90s and scott hall should have been champ as well

 

[TUFFY54]

You keep mentioning how nothing in history would change but that’s not really true. We would have a bunch a very short title reigns and a lot of angles that wouldn’t have happened I’ll take a closer look at your examples.

Ted Dibiase: It seems logical to just have Dibiase keep the title until WM4 but that would drastically change things. WM4 was built around the tournament to fill the vacated title. It was impossible to follow the main event of WM3 so Vince created a unique tournament guaranteeing us a new champion. Simply having Savage vs. Dibiase as the announced main event wouldn’t have had the same impact.

Roddy Piper: Piper could have taken the title from Hogan sometime in 1986 but part of Hulkamania was four uninterrupted years as champion. Piper was a great challenger and we did see some one on one matches between him and Hogan. There was the War to Settle the Score just before WM1 and the Wrestling Classic in November. If they went to WM2 the feud would have been over a year long. As for 1992 I don’t see that working either. Piper was IC champ. A lot of rewriting would have to go on. Also both Piper vs. Hart and Flair vs. Savage were mania classics. I wouldn’t want to give up either of those matches. Plus Piper left the WWF right after WM8. It was his last event as a full time wrestler.

Mr. Perfect: He was IC champ at SummerSlam 90. He dropped the title to The Texas Tornado but regained it a couple months later and held it until SummerSlam 91. Maybe you meant Rick Rude. He was gone from the WWF two months after SummerSlam.

Lex Luger: This is a whole different scenario. I’m sure at SummerSlam 93 Vince knew he wanted Luger to win the title at WM10. That’s why Luger got the win by countout. That’s why the stipulation stated SummerSlam would be Luger’s only shot. That’s why Luger had to find a loophole to get in the Rumble in 1994 bringing Tenryu and Kabuki in as a compromise. Vince wanted mania to be the time where Luger overcame all the obstacles and finally win the title. The problem was by the time we hit 1994 Luger had lost his momentum with the fans and Vince decided to go with Bret instead. You could definitely argue that Luger should have gotten the title at SummerSlam but that would have given Yoko a short reign and we wouldn’t have gotten the payoff at mania.

Scott Hall: I have to disagree about your opinion here. Razor was IC champ at Survivor Series 95. He was about to enter a program where he dropped the title to Goldust at Royal Rumble 96. You have the solution of Razor dropping the title to Bret at the rumble, but what about Goldust and the IC title? Beating Razor was the key to getting Goldust over. Also Bret’s reign would have shrunk from four months to two. Maybe that’s not a big deal but I like Bret holding the title from Survivor Series to mania a lot more than Razor from Survivor Series to Royal Rumble and Bret from Royal Rumble to mania.

On the surface it doesn’t look like much would have changed but when you take a closer look there are a lot more consequences than you realize. There not bad ideas. I just don’t think it was in the cards for those guys.

When I said that nothing in history would change, I was saying that no champion would have not gotten his reign. It was in reference to you saying that if Henning got the title at Wrestlemania 6, we would be saying the Warrior deserved the belt. My examples didn't take titles away from anyone. I did mean Mr. Perfect in 90. He was orginaly going to face Hogan and win the belt at Mania 6. Thats why he and Hogan were the last guys in the Rumble. Hogan said he didn't want to lose to Perfect because he wasn't believable. Thats why Perfect should have wrestled Warrior at Summerslam instead of Rude. With Perfect, Piper, and Hall you point out inconsistencies with them being IC champ at the time. Well, the world title is far and away the bigger belt, so I gave that top concern with thinking these out. It would have been very easy for a guy to drop an IC title to go after the World Title. Remember, Warrior became the first guy to give up the IC title after beating Hogan. Personally, I think all my ideas work. However, it's just fantisy so it doesnt really matter.

 

[mlp4200]

I never understood the "Brand extensions hurt the title prestige" argument. Do people not remember that before the brand extension there were two major promotions anyway? During this time you had 2 world champs: WWE champ and WCW champ. Also an IC Champ and US Champ, European champ/TV Champ, and so on. I always figured the brand extension was meant to fill the void for people looking to have two different wrestling rosters to follow after WCW folded.

 

[Jackal960]

The word "should" actually covers interesting aspects. In late 80's everything turned out exactly as what "should" have happened, so that we are all wrestling fans today. If those wrestlers were champions back in the day, wrestling might not be what it is today. Hulkamania wouldn't run wild, we wouldn't be watching wrestling on national television, there wouldn't be a forum for wrestling (well, a forum not this big at least).

I am glad that they didn't change the champion and the face of the company so often because when you find the right guy to turn the direction of the company, there is no need to risk it by giving the title to someone else. Like him or not, Hogan was the right guy who "should" have been the champion, the sole champion. Getting a title shot against the Hulkster was big enough for you to become main event material. Dibiase, Andre, Piper, Orndorff, Bundy didn't become big because they had the title, it was because they were feuding with Hogan.

As for all the wrestlers the op mentioned, if they were wrestling in 2000's i would definitely say they should have won the title. Considering all the title holders in the past decade, it would be an assault not giving the title even once to them. But for late 80's and early 90's they did their job fine and eveything went as what should have happened.

 

[The Idiot]

Ted DiBiase - February 5, 1988-March 27, 1988​

On February 5, 1988, Ted DiBiase unofficially was crowned WWF Heavyweight Champion after being presented with the belt following Andre the Giant's championship win. DiBiase's reign however was declared null & void and he never officially held the title. The title was declared vacant and remained so until March 27th when Randy Savage defeated DiBiase in a tournament final at WrestleMania IV.

Now in my opinion, DiBiase could well have had a brief month and a half championship reign right there in that gap. Heel wrestlers rarely had long title reigns (Iron Sheik will tell you that) and often served as a transitional champion (Again Iron Sheik) so DiBiase would have fit perfectly as Hogan would've gone after Andre for Mania like he did. That's when Ted DiBiase should've been World Champion.

If DiBiase was the champ for that time period...we would never of had the great tournament at WM 4. The reason for the tournament, of course, was because the title was declared vacant, as you said.

DiBiase would have made a great champion...but I'm not going to say he SHOULD have been champion. I'm one of the few who believes in long title reigns to build up prestige....and I wouldn't change a thing back in the old days.

If I would have to change something then this is what I would change: Savage is one of my all time favorites...and his one year title reign from WM 4 to WM 5 was perfect. HOWEVER...I think it would have been better suited if Flair dropped the title to Hogan in the main event of WM 8, instead of to Savage. The storyline with Elizabeth was good enough to carry on it's own...the main event with Hogan needed something more. Plus a Flair-Hogan Wrestlemania main event SHOULD have happened. A Savage-Sid Justice/Mr. Perfect co-main event would have been great.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

it should have been jake roberts sure he won GCW titlebut when he was over with the fans why not give him the strap. That would have made for epic rivalries eg. hogan. (I would have completely marked out for that.) Another person that i believe should have been champion was double A he had the fans behind him and it would have made people say finally hes out from Flair's shadow.

As good as Jake Roberts was, and he is right up there with the best talkers of all time, he would never have been given the strap ahead of some of the bigger names who were around at that time. If guys like Piper never had a run with the world title, no way was The Snake going to get a run.

However, I do think he should have had a long-term IC title reign, I think that belt would have suited him perfectly. If Honky Tonk Man can hold it for a year, why not Jake? He was excellent in his prime.

But as we are looking for reasons why these guys were not given title runs, in Jake's case it surely must have been his personal problems? We all know he has his issues with booze and drugs, and while many other wrestlers dabbled in pills/coke etc around this time, Jake was in another league. He would still be of use in the company today as a GM or a manager if he hadnt spent the last 10 years in a crack induced haze. Yet another wrestling fuck up

 

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

I agree with you, Brain. If you have only one world championship in the company, it should ideally be held by the biggest face or the biggest heel of the company. It would be fair to say that neither Dibiase, Perfect or Jake Roberts were ever the top face or heel of the company.

Among the three I have mentioned Dibiase one who had the best chance of winning the championship when he was managing Andre in 1988. But even though he was managing Andre, I still feel that Andre was the bigger heel and the biggest heel in the company at that point. Also at that point WWF had probaably planned the Mega Powers storyline that was about to happen for the rest of the year. That is possibly one of the greatest storylines that the WWF has ever had and if Dibiase had been booked to be champion we might have never gotten to see such an awesome storyline.

Jake Roberts and Mr Perfect were even further down the card. Perfect also had his back injury which might have prevented Vince from ever booking him as champion though I cannot remember if Perfect ever had a main event level feud. About Jake, I did think that his character as a heel was a bit too evil for the era in which he wrestled. Most heels that got pushed in that era were either heels as a result of jealousy or cowards. Jake was pure evil for the sake of being evil. It could be that WWF thought that he might be a bit too extreme as a main event level heel.

The other name worth noting is Roddy Piper. Unlike the other three he was actually the top heel for a significant period of time. But then that was the era where champions were booked to have long title reigns. Maybe that is why WWF kept Hogan as champion throughout his feud with Piper thinking that if he lost the title too soon, it would make him look too weak.

 

[Dyno Kid]

Ted Dibiase should have been world champion in my opinion but it should have been in the NWA and not the WWF !

In 1985 he would have made a GREAT heel champ ! Inside the ring he was at the top of his game and was one of the top 10 workers in all of the business ! He played the role of the kick-ass heel perfectly, and his promo's were top of the line ! He had all of the tools to make a great touring heel champion !

There had been talk for years of Ted getting a run going back to 1981 with guys like the Funks, Harley Race, and Bill Watts all pushing for Ted to get the gold. But guys like Eddie Graham, Jim Crockett, and Fritz Von Erich all had a little more pull and it never happened. Wrestling politics at work !

 

[IrishCanadian25]

I think it's harder today to get over and be respectable without winning a major championship, and it's unfortunate. Several all-time greats never won the WWF or WCW World Title, and made amazing careers as main eventers even still. The booking was different back then, longer term, and there was less the need for each week on TV to be a massive event-mover. When guys could week-in, week-out squash jobbers on Superstars and Wrestling Challenge, feuds moved slower and guys without titles had build up.

Let's even take this away from the usual Perfect / Rude / DiBiase / Owen Hart chit chat. Don Muraco was never WWF Champion, nor was Bob Orton. Both were fantastic workers and main-event level guys. Both feuded with the likes of Hogan for years. Junkyard Dog is considered one of the greatest draws in WWF history, and was often regarded as the #2 babyface behind only Hogan in the 80's and early 90's, but he never had a title.

I'd have LOVED to have seen JYD with the World Title just to put the "WWE is racist / first black World Champion" crap to rest early on. But that would've cost Hogan, and it may have changed the course of Wrestlemania when you think about it.

 

[Dyno Kid]

Junkyard Dog is considered one of the greatest draws in WWF history, and was often regarded as the #2 babyface behind only Hogan in the 80's and early 90's, but he never had a title.

At no point was Dog the number 2 face in the WWF and between his drug problems and the fact that he was a HORRIBLE worker he would have made a terrible champ ! There's a reason that Bill Watts kept Dog's matches under 5 minutes and that was because he was horrible in the ring !

He was a draw in Mid-South but he didn't mean much in the WWF.