Ultimate Warrior, Road Warriors, and Sting

[dtroppe]

I am going to start off by stating that I am a big Ultimate Warrior (UW) fan. I have read for years a lot of comments bashing his wrestling ability and his legitimacy as a true wrestling legend.

My post here is asking you guys your opinion on Warriors career and skills versus those of the Road Warriors and Sting. I chose those three men as they all have similar wrestling styles, body types, and of course the face paint gimmick. However, the IWC seems to love the Road Warriors and Sting yet dispises the UW.

One of the most used arguments when discussing UW is that he was not a good worker. I tend to agree that a lot of his early matches are not a great demonstration of wrestling. However, compare is career to the greats of his time. He started wrestling around 85 and by 87 was in WWF doing the Warrior. Two years is zero time to learn to work in a ring. He was green as could be. To add to this, WWE set him up in 2min matches in which he squashed his opponents. Obviously this was no way for the man to learn the art of wrestling technique. Sting started the same time as Warrior but by 1988 he was working 45 min matches with Ric Flair. Obvioulsy he is going to learn a lot more working with the Horseman and Dusty and established wrestlers than Warrior who is squashing his way to fame. The Road Warriors developed in a similar fashion to UW. Their matches were quick squashes in which they only used the same moves.

If you look on youtube at Warriors match with Owen Hart you'll find that its not a horrible match. By then Warrior was more established and had learned to work a little more. Also he had a legitamate wrestling opponent that knew how to work well. He also had some great in-ring promos at that time (1996) and in WCW. I think had he stayed until the attitude era he would have been a great player in the mix.

So I ask you, when you take everything into consideration, what makes Sting and Road Warriors so much more respected as a performers than the Ultimate Warrior?

 

[The Hardcore Kid]

Their dedication to the business. Ultimate Warrior refused to job many times, was VERY shaky with actually showing up to shows, threatened to walk out on Vince at SummerSlam in I think '91 if he wasn't paid for it before the match, and he was (allegedly) hugely into drugs which probably exacerbated those problems.

Sting and the Road Warriors on the other hand did and would still do anything for the business. I guess its more of a respect thing rather than an ability thing.

 

[Tattooed Jesus]

Their dedication to the business. Ultimate Warrior refused to job many times, was VERY shaky with actually showing up to shows, threatened to walk out on Vince at SummerSlam in I think '91 if he wasn't paid for it before the match, and he was (allegedly) hugely into drugs which probably exacerbated those problems.

Sting and the Road Warriors on the other hand did and would still do anything for the business. I guess its more of a respect thing rather than an ability thing.

Warrior probably was heavily into drugs but so was just about everyone else in wrestling at the time. Hell Sting talks about being a heavy drug user and alcoholic during that period in his life, thats why he did the turn around reborn christian thing. I don't know about Animal but everyone knows Hawk was a alcoholic, so the Warrior being on drugs argument doesn't float.

Warrior was a bit and is still a bit crazy in the eyes of your everyday normal person. He was being pushed to the moon super fast and was on deck to be the next Hulk Hogan and I am sure that went to his head, and he probably had a really "I'm better than everyone else" attitude backstage because of it. He played the political games backstage like everyone else did but didn't have the pull or anyone really behind him to give him any really power behind his backstage politicing. Road Warriors were already way over in Japan so anytime they got pissed about whatever promotion they were working for in the US they just jumped over to Japan and made their money and fame greater over there, Warrior couldn't do this at the time, because like you said he was barely established in the US. Sting had guys like Dusty and Flair solidly behind him in all his pushes, because they knew there was money to be made working with him. I think a lot of the guys in WWE at the time did not see that with Warrior and they might have been right.

Who know what would have happened had he actually taken off as the next Hogan. I doubt he would have been able to have hung around for the attitude era without completely overhauling his gimmick. He would have been blown away by guys like Austin, Rock, and HHH on the mic. He would have had to do a Undertaker like transformation for him to have had any kind of longevity, hell Hogan even had to do that.

I think Warrior takes the worst of it because of the way he just walked away from the business on such bad terms with every promotion he worked for. So when that happens you have to ask yourself was it really all the places he worked for or was it him that was the actual problem.

 

[akrassikauda]

There are plenty of reasons but I'll only name 3

1. Warrior would screw up his own promos
" You didn't understand a word he said but it sounded cool so Ya " - Chris Jericho

The Monday Night RAW when showed up with no face paint and a Warrior cap

The Monday Nitro debut when he told those who did not know that he beat Hogan before and that segment dragged on so bad that you could have watched a match on RAW and turn back and he was still talking.

2. His matches were so garbage that Hogan himself had to carry the WM 6 match.

The IC title match with Honky Tonk Man was so botched HTM had to move in order for Warrior to hit the splash. And after you could tell HTM was hurt. WOW in under a minute.

"They guy was so dangerous nobody wanted to work with him" - Bobby Heenan

3. They guy never gave two shits about the fans who made him a star and used his fathers poor health as an excuse.

 

[erichirschi]

Yeah. I agree with everyone who opposed this thread. Just watch the "Bio'' of UW bra. The brain said Andre got so pissed off with him botching all of his moves while they were wrestling together that he punched him square in the face one night just bc of the fact he would get so pissed. Also, on there, it says UW and Sting were tag teams while they were working the independent circuits together.

 

[longlivetheBrood]

Yeah Warrior was pretty bad, though I drank the kool-aid when he was around. The whole ball cap thing was ridiculous (because he was afraid of a breakaway picture that was going to get smashed over his head if I remember right). He spoke nonsense which actually kind of worked until you realized that he was legitimately off kilter in the head. He wasn't totally green in WW(F)E because as erichirschi said, he was in a tag team with Sting as the Blade Runners and in UWF I think as Dingo Warrior.

 

[dtroppe]

I don't think the UW destruction DVD can be the evidence used to judge the UW. It is one side of the story and edited heavily in WWE's favor. Warriors promos got a lot better as he and his character evolved. He had some great ones on Monday night raw and then in WCW. On top of that, a lot of wrestlers have negative things to say about the guy but Warrior himself brushes that off as jealousy from a lot of guys who had worked their whole live and were never given the ball to run with and he was given it after 3 yrs. On the other hand their are quite a few guys that have a lot of positive things to say about the guy. Some examples are Kevin Nash, Ahmed Johnson, and Road Warrior Animal to name a few. You got to give the guy credit for doing in a span of 10 yrs (with a lot of time off) what took guys like Bret Hart and Ted Debiase and Bobby the Brain their whole lives to do and in many cases, Warrior made more money and got more publicity than most of those guys did.

 

[The Prodigal Anti-Lemming]

The Ultimate Warrior was a sheer joke. He only won the title in the first place because Vince McMahon was playing mind games with Hogan. Hogan was becoming bitchy with his demands, so McMahon thought about removing him entirely from the picture, and Warrior was his tool. The fact that Warrior was a dud draw probably saved Hogan’s immortality, but I don’t think there is a single wrestler in history whom made Hulk feel more threatened.

Two years is not really zero time to learn how to work; there are dozens of wrestlers who learned more in less time than did Warrior. Warrior’s style did not change at all over the years, so the “two years not enough to learn” concept is a horrible argument. The fact is he had a grand total of one—just one—great match (versus Savage at WrestleMania VII). It makes me laugh that he ran a training facility. Some guys are natural in the ring and take to the ring like a fish takes to water. When Warrior is the fish in question, the ocean is filled with oil from the latest Valdez crash.

Yeah, Warrior had the greatest promos, if you enjoyed listening to blithering gibberish. He’s talk about other planes and universes and strapping rockets to his back and looking for fuel, and it was never easy to follow. I think the guy had a talent for masking his weak promo skills by spouting whatever random words popped into his mind at a given moment.

I was a big Warrior fan growing up—a fact I will probably never allow myself to live down—until I matured and realized he had the wrestling ability of a dead octopus, the intelligence of a baked radish, and the mannerisms of a raging maniac with schizoaffective disorder. The most entertaining piece of work he was seen in was the mock Warrior confession on youtube made by some random person. Gold!!!

Comparing Warrior to Sting and the Road Warriors is ridiculous. A few years into Sting’s NWA career, he had developed a reputation as a sound, entertaining worker. The 45-minute draw with Flair was a prime example. If Sting had a shitty workrate, he would not have been called up to do a draw with the world champ opposite the WWF’s biggest show of the year. The Warriors meanwhile, changed the mold for tag team wrestling. Their village people look was stupid, but within a year or two they came out with the intimidating paint. They were physical monster heels at a time when other heel tag teams were cowardly rulebreakers. They had success in Japan. No one who has below average ring talent gets a 15-month run with a championship in All Japan.

 

[Slyfox696]

People here bashing the Ultimate Warrior are just making themselves look stupid.

1. He wasn't a good wrestler? How come he's had two of the greatest matches in Wrestlemania history, and did so in back to back years?

2. He wasn't good in the ring? How come fans hung onto EVERY thing he did in the ring?

3.He didn't give good promos? Do you even understand the concept of his character?


The people who bash Warrior do so for one of two reasons. The first reason is because he's a jackass and a bigot. That's an acceptable reason to criticize him. But the other reason they criticize him is because they either don't understand wrestling, or they didn't grow up with him and understand just how insane it was when he came to the ring, how much energy he brought to the table and how much fun he was to watch in the ring.


Whether people like it or not, The Ultimate Warrior is a true legend of the business, and deserves to be recognized as such. I think he's made himself look like a miserable human being, but he is definitely worthy of being called a legend.

 

[dtroppe]

I think several people have made some good statements about Warriors personality. I think theres probably some truth to the fact the Warrior was thrust way too fast into the spot light and it went to his head. But lets also consider that maybe he just wasnt gonna be jerked around by Vince like a lot of other guys were. Almost every wrestler's autobiography that Ive read has some story about Vince screwing them on money or making them do something humiliating. Now maybe Warrior was the kind of guy that just wasnt taking that stuff and was ready to walk out the second Vince started acting out. I don't know for sure Warrior has not really told many stories or commented much on what really happened. Maybe one day he will put out an autobiography and let us know what he was thinking and his side of the story.

And I just want to remind people that in the late 80's, Ric Flair was wrestling 45-60 min draws quite a bit. If I recall, he wrestled Hawk and Animal in singles matches and cheated to go over. I don't think it went to Sting's work rate that he wrestled Flair to a draw but Dusty (I think was the booker) was trying to shake up Flairs opponents and keep in interesting. It was just the booking of the NWA at the time. And thats not a shot at Sting because I am a big fan of his.

 

[The Prodigal Anti-Lemming]

People here bashing the Ultimate Warrior are just making themselves look stupid.

1. He wasn't a good wrestler? How come he's had two of the greatest matches in Wrestlemania history, and did so in back to back years?

2. He wasn't good in the ring? How come fans hung onto EVERY thing he did in the ring?

3.He didn't give good promos? Do you even understand the concept of his character?


The people who bash Warrior do so for one of two reasons. The first reason is because he's a jackass and a bigot. That's an acceptable reason to criticize him. But the other reason they criticize him is because they either don't understand wrestling, or they didn't grow up with him and understand just how insane it was when he came to the ring, how much energy he brought to the table and how much fun he was to watch in the ring.


Whether people like it or not, The Ultimate Warrior is a true legend of the business, and deserves to be recognized as such. I think he's made himself look like a miserable human being, but he is definitely worthy of being called a legend.

1. Other than the Hogan and Savage matches, how many other memorable Warrior outings do you remember?

The Savage match was fantastic, I agree...and of all of Warrior's bouts, it is the only one I can actually watch. But keep in mind that Savage was an excellent worker who was used to carrying matches.

Bill Goldberg was a wrestler who had an amazing match with Dallas Page at Halloween Havoc ‘98. But does that make him a good worker or a great wrestler? No, it doesn’t.

But make no mistake about it, the Hogan-Warrior bout was all about hype. I might take a little flak for airing this, but what the hell. It was not a great match, it was a match that was all atmosphere. Yes, it was anticipated, but the huge crowd completely made that match. Put them in the ring two nights later in front of just a couple thousand people and watch them stink the place up. Hogan and Warrior at WrestleMania VI was like biting into a pie crust and discovering a lack of filling in the pie, just more crust.

This is coming from a guy who witnessed Warrior’s rise to fame and was a huge Warrior mark back in the day. He was my second favorite wrestler at the time, after Savage. But I watched the match, and even then, I didn’t get what all the excitement was about. And I was tremendously easy to satisfy in those days. Don’t think I’m all about high spots and ground wrestling either, because I’m not. I can fully appreciate a match that “tells a story.” I totally got into Hogan vs Rock for instance, and I’m a harsh critic of both of their working styles. Hogan vs Warrior, when you take away the atmosphere, just plain stunk in my humble opinion.

2. Fans enjoyed Warrior because the majority of the WWF’s fan base in 1990 were adolescent males and young teenage boys. To such a demographic, a superhero like Warrior would seem godlike. This was in the days when we thought wrestling was real and that “the gods” really did imbue Warrior with super powers. Then those adolescents grow up, and Warrior’s gimmick is reduced to a comedy novelty act, which is exactly what happened. Warrior’s gimmick was so outlandish that no self respecting adult male wrestling fan—even taking into account the varied novelties indigenous to wrestling—is going to support him.

3. Yes, Warrior was “supposed” to sound like he had entered the fifth plateau of hallucinogenic mania when he talked. And that is exactly how he covered up his inability to talk. Giving Warrior a free pass in this case is like granting Sid Vicious a free pass for his poor speaking ability because the guy has “half the brain of Kevin Nash” (I will never get tired of bringing that up). Warrior spouted nonsense from the moment he was given the opportunity to speak, and if you pay close attention to the inflections of his voice and body language, often appears to be on the verge of stumbling over words before pulling something random directly out of his ass. There were times that he would literally get a blank look on his face, pause (often looking downward to disguise the lapse), and ad-lib. Often, what he ad libbed did not fit. He was a popular star for a few years in spite of this flaw simply because the people he was entertaining were so wound up in his appearance that they rarely cared what he said, just as long as the Warrior grunty and growly mannerisms were on full display.

The pre-WrestleMania VI interviews in which he blathered endlessly about “making the Hulkamaniacs and Warriors one” is a textbook example. To wit:

“You have caused interference in my pathways!”

“You, Hulk Hogan, control a forcefield.....around you, that I, am only beginning, to understand! But each of the challenges before me, I never DID understand, I never TRIED to understand!”

LMAO...........

“I need not THE NORMALS!!!! to protect me, from what I find, most comforting.”

And my absolute favorite Warrior phrase of all time: “I have Huulk Hhogaannn....injected you with the minimum dosage of poison from the power of the UltIMATE WARRIYA!!!!”

(that one conjures up images of Hogan and Warrior sticking steroid needles up one another’s butts for some reason)

Now, like it or not, Warrior had one good year in his climb to the top (1989), one “epic” year where he enjoyed a strong title reign but didn’t draw a damn (1990), one moderately decent year in which he remained in the title hunt (1992), a lot of disappearances, short stints, and nothing else. Hell, even by 1996, the guy was largely irrelevant. He was not as over as he had been, and disappeared quickly before his notorious WCW stint in which he wrestled two or three horrible matches, including the abysmal Hogan rematch.

Even if we subject ourselves to the preposterous notion that Warrior is a “true legend,” then I guess all the other wrestlers that attained “Warrior like” success—specifically guys who had a short term main event run, seemed primed to stay in the main event, then fizzled out abruptly—are “true legends” as well. So I guess that makes Bill Goldberg a legend because his initial run in WCW was phenomenal, even if the rest of his career stunk like a dead body. Add Brock Lesnar, who was there and gone in a couple years but can arguably be considered more successful than Warrior to that list. Oh and Samoa Joe, who I have the utmost respect for but whom has only accomplished one TNA World title to date must be a legend as well. The list goes on and on...

 

[The Prodigal Anti-Lemming]

I think several people have made some good statements about Warriors personality. I think theres probably some truth to the fact the Warrior was thrust way too fast into the spot light and it went to his head. But lets also consider that maybe he just wasnt gonna be jerked around by Vince like a lot of other guys were. Almost every wrestler's autobiography that Ive read has some story about Vince screwing them on money or making them do something humiliating. Now maybe Warrior was the kind of guy that just wasnt taking that stuff and was ready to walk out the second Vince started acting out. I don't know for sure Warrior has not really told many stories or commented much on what really happened. Maybe one day he will put out an autobiography and let us know what he was thinking and his side of the story.

And I just want to remind people that in the late 80's, Ric Flair was wrestling 45-60 min draws quite a bit. If I recall, he wrestled Hawk and Animal in singles matches and cheated to go over. I don't think it went to Sting's work rate that he wrestled Flair to a draw but Dusty (I think was the booker) was trying to shake up Flairs opponents and keep in interesting. It was just the booking of the NWA at the time. And thats not a shot at Sting because I am a big fan of his.

As far as Warrior not taking crap, that sounds like a valid assessment, especially as he has presented that air of himself in numerous shoot interviews. But, as any wrestler, his place in history and legacy will suffer for his absence, and it doesn't help him that Vince was probably intent on demoting him in the card in the years following his title loss.

 

[iwinulose]

sting and the road warriors are on the same level as ultimate warrior, i wouldnt say that they were better. they all did big things in the wcw. they were the reason that that the wcw was as big as it was, well, along with hogan but thats a dif story. the 3 are easily some of the biggest names in wrestling history. to say that either of them were bigger then the other would be outrageous though i do see where your coming from.

 

[Slyfox696]

1. Other than the Hogan and Savage matches, how many other memorable Warrior outings do you remember?

How many do I remember? Many. Is that really the question you meant to ask, or was that rhetorical in nature?

The Savage match was fantastic, I agree

Good enough.

Bill Goldberg was a wrestler who had an amazing match with Dallas Page at Halloween Havoc ‘98. But does that make him a good worker or a great wrestler? No, it doesn’t.

Actually, Bill Goldberg is tremendously underrated as a worker.

But make no mistake about it, the Hogan-Warrior bout was all about hype. I might take a little flak for airing this, but what the hell. It was not a great match, it was a match that was all atmosphere. Yes, it was anticipated, but the huge crowd completely made that match. Put them in the ring two nights later in front of just a couple thousand people and watch them stink the place up. Hogan and Warrior at WrestleMania VI was like biting into a pie crust and discovering a lack of filling in the pie, just more crust.

That's complete and utter bullshit.

This is coming from a guy who witnessed Warrior’s rise to fame and was a huge Warrior mark back in the day. He was my second favorite wrestler at the time, after Savage. But I watched the match, and even then, I didn’t get what all the excitement was about. And I was tremendously easy to satisfy in those days. Don’t think I’m all about high spots and ground wrestling either, because I’m not. I can fully appreciate a match that “tells a story.” I totally got into Hogan vs Rock for instance, and I’m a harsh critic of both of their working styles. Hogan vs Warrior, when you take away the atmosphere, just plain stunk in my humble opinion.

That's absurd. That match is a storytelling classic, and is is almost always the match I bring out when demonstrating the concept of telling a story in the ring. You have the greatest thing in wrestling in Hulk Hogan, and his heir apparent in Ultimate Warrior. That match was about how the two men were equal, going back and forth, with Warrior proving he was every bit the warrior (no pun intended) Hogan was. Every advantage for Hogan was reversed by Warrior, and every advantage by Warrior was reversed by Hogan. The greatest of all time met his match, and not only did Warrior prove he was every bit as ready to take on the forces of evil like Hogan had done for 7 years, Warrior proved he was JUST a little bit better.

That match encompasses EVERYTHING that a wrestling match should be. The workrate was phenomenal, you didn't see a single person not into that match. The storytelling was one of the best ever, and the psychology of the wrestlers was played out perfectly. What more could ANYONE want from a wrestling match?

2. Fans enjoyed Warrior because the majority of the WWF’s fan base in 1990 were adolescent males and young teenage boys. To such a demographic, a superhero like Warrior would seem godlike. This was in the days when we thought wrestling was real and that “the gods” really did imbue Warrior with super powers. Then those adolescents grow up, and Warrior’s gimmick is reduced to a comedy novelty act, which is exactly what happened. Warrior’s gimmick was so outlandish that no self respecting adult male wrestling fan—even taking into account the varied novelties indigenous to wrestling—is going to support him.

Which is an asinine criticism of the Warrior gimmick. You JUST said that the WWE's fanbase bought into the Warrior character, and they bought in big time. How then can you come back and criticize the character 20 years later? Do people come out and say "The Andy Griffith Show" was a waste of time, because it appealed to a nostalgic version of Americana which was cherished at the time, but is no longer desired on TV? Of course not, The Andy Griffith show is still considered one of the greatest TV shows in history.

Your argument is just silly.

3. Yes, Warrior was “supposed” to sound like he had entered the fifth plateau of hallucinogenic mania when he talked. And that is exactly how he covered up his inability to talk.

Again, that's silly. Warrior is a fine speaker. He says stupid things in real life, but he's still a good speaker full of charisma that makes people take notice.

But I don't understand what you're saying here. You're criticizing him for an interview style you agree was PERFECT for his character, and one he pulled off with a level of success we haven't seen before or since? How is it a bad thing, when it worked?

Warrior spouted nonsense from the moment he was given the opportunity to speak, and if you pay close attention to the inflections of his voice and body language, often appears to be on the verge of stumbling over words before pulling something random directly out of his ass. There were times that he would literally get a blank look on his face, pause (often looking downward to disguise the lapse), and ad-lib. Often, what he ad libbed did not fit. He was a popular star for a few years in spite of this flaw simply because the people he was entertaining were so wound up in his appearance that they rarely cared what he said, just as long as the Warrior grunty and growly mannerisms were on full display.

I'm sorry, but I find this silly as well.

Interviews were MUCH different back in those days. It wasn't a live interview, it was pre-taped interview, and something they usually had in the film room weeks in advance. They could shoot as many takes as they needed, and often did. Are you saying everyone got as many chances as they needed to film a good interview, but the Ultimate Warrior, a guy who was a HUGE moneymaker at the time, didn't receive the same treatment?

It was his character. It was so good it even fools you to this day.

Even if we subject ourselves to the preposterous notion that Warrior is a “true legend,” then I guess all the other wrestlers that attained “Warrior like” success—specifically guys who had a short term main event run, seemed primed to stay in the main event, then fizzled out abruptly—are “true legends” as well. So I guess that makes Bill Goldberg a legend because his initial run in WCW was phenomenal, even if the rest of his career stunk like a dead body. Add Brock Lesnar, who was there and gone in a couple years but can arguably be considered more successful than Warrior to that list. Oh and Samoa Joe, who I have the utmost respect for but whom has only accomplished one TNA World title to date must be a legend as well. The list goes on and on...

You can't determine quality in wrestling based upon similar achievements. That argument doesn't work for the Hall of Fame, it doesn't work for drawing ability, and it doesn't work when discussing who the true legends of the business are.

You want to know how I know Warrior is a legend? Because people STILL care about him. People STILL talk about him, people still get excited when he's included in video games, they still buy DVDs which rip him to shreds, they still talk about him regularly on wrestling forums. The guy's active wrestling career ended, for all intents and purposes, 20 years ago, and people still care about him today. THAT makes him a legend. If Samoa Joe were to retire today, people wouldn't give a damn about him 5 years from now. If Lesnar hadn't become such a huge force in MMA, wrestling fans would have moved on. And I would consider Bill Goldberg on the fringe of being considered a legend in the business.

What the Ultimate Warrior brought to the table was really unique and people CARED. Warrior went over clean at Wrestlemania 6 against the greatest pro wrestler in history, and did so to AMAZING support from the crowd, in the same city where a little over 10 years later, Hogan completely stole the crowd away from The Rock. The Warrior did would the Rock couldn't, and that's make people choose him over Hogan.

To say Warrior is not a legend in the business, when you examine the impact he made on the business, when you see how people still care about him, and when you consider all the memorable moments he had in his short amount of national TV time, is just not looking at things in an adult fashion. Just because you're older now doesn't mean you can't still be a fan of the things which drew you into wrestling as a child.

Don't be afraid to admit how you felt about Warrior, you were hardly alone. And while people may not admit it, there are a LOT of people who have fond memories of Warrior, even as they try and convince others how much they don't like the guy. Warrior is a true legend. It is undeniable.

 

[The Prodigal Anti-Lemming]

How many do I remember? Many. Is that really the question you meant to ask, or was that rhetorical in nature?

The question was not rhetorical. If you expect me to believe that Warrior was this “great worker,” you must provide evidence. I know that's a hard undertaking; most Warrior bouts were relatively brief outings in which he displayed his incredible repertoire that included bodyslams, clotheslines, gorilla presses and the big splash.

Actually, Bill Goldberg is tremendously underrated as a worker.

As much as I was a Goldberg fan and really dig his matches with Hogan and Page to this day, he generally had to be led through a match. He had entertaining matches, but that does not translate to “good worker.” Conceivably, any wrestler on earth can have an entertaining match with the right opponent. A good worker is someone who can pull it off consistently. A great worker is someone who can do the deed nearly all the time. Neither Warrior nor Goldberg were good or great workers.

Which is an asinine criticism of the Warrior gimmick. You JUST said that the WWE's fanbase bought into the Warrior character, and they bought in big time. How then can you come back and criticize the character 20 years later? Do people come out and say "The Andy Griffith Show" was a waste of time, because it appealed to a nostalgic version of Americana which was cherished at the time, but is no longer desired on TV? Of course not, The Andy Griffith show is still considered one of the greatest TV shows in history.

And how do you compare one of the greatest television shows in history to a guy who was brought in merely as an alternative to Hogan, won one world title and faded away into obscurity? In Warrior’s case, he was no longer strongly desired within his own era.

But I don't understand what you're saying here. You're criticizing him for an interview style you agree was PERFECT for his character, and one he pulled off with a level of success we haven't seen before or since? How is it a bad thing, when it worked?

What I’m saying is that his gimmick camouflaged his promo ability, or lack thereof. How do you defend the guy’s ability to speak when he’d ramble incoherently at times and make little to no sense whatsoever? To defend that is like saying “Okay, he sucks, but he’s good enough to pull it off convincingly.” In that context, Warrior could say anything at all regardless of whether it had any relevance to his match or the opponent he was wrestling, and it could be excused with “Well, it’s because his character is supposed to be like that.” That’s a lame copout if I ever saw it.

You can't determine quality in wrestling based upon similar achievements. That argument doesn't work for the Hall of Fame, it doesn't work for drawing ability, and it doesn't work when discussing who the true legends of the business are.

It is perfectly logical to use the same measuring stick when comparing wrestlers, particularly when both wrestlers wrestled during a particular individual’s lifespan. You call Warrior this great legend, yet you conveniently overlook that the guy had obvious and irrevokable flaws, those being that

1) He was not a draw;

2) He had all the longevity of a piece of bacon on a hot summer day;

3) He couldn’t wrestle his way out of a wet paper bag and couldn’t work, and anyone who tries to tell me otherwise is either deluded or stuck in a time warp.

That’s just the tip of the iceberg, but those three qualifications are a significant part of determining true individual greatness. Individual criteria doesn’t change when determining eligibility for a particular list. If, for instance, Bill Goldberg isn’t on the list because of what happened after he dropped the WCW title, then how on earth does it make logical sense to include Warrior?

As far as being a draw goes, your dismissing of that strikes me as silly. Wrestling has changed immensely over the years, but what never changes from decade to decade---even going back to the days of Frank Gotch--is that the long term champions are the ones that draw in the gates.

You want to know how I know Warrior is a legend? Because people STILL care about him. People STILL talk about him, people still get excited when he's included in video games, they still buy DVDs which rip him to shreds, they still talk about him regularly on wrestling forums. The guy's active wrestling career ended, for all intents and purposes, 20 years ago, and people still care about him today. THAT makes him a legend. If Samoa Joe were to retire today, people wouldn't give a damn about him 5 years from now. If Lesnar hadn't become such a huge force in MMA, wrestling fans would have moved on. And I would consider Bill Goldberg on the fringe of being considered a legend in the business.

The Warrior’s visibility today is more of a reflection of the ability of the WWF/E’s hype machine than anything else. Of course, it helps that the guy is still alive and making anti-gay remarks and dishonoring dead wrestlers. Because he was immensely popular for a short period of time, and because it was in the WWF, he is remembered. But had he gone to the NWA instead of the WWF and won a world title there before fading away, do you think anyone on these boards would remember there was a Warrior?

What the Ultimate Warrior brought to the table was really unique and people CARED.

People cared about Warrior so much that his title reign fell flat on its ass. 1990 was the beginning of a bonafide wrestling depression, both business wise and creatively, and Warrior was at the forefront. He did not draw particularly well as champion, and became an afterthought in short order. Seems like a number of the fans that had supported the WWF throughout the late-80s tuned out right around the time Warrior got his push. How convenient. You can blame what was going on in the WWF creatively for that if you want or cite whatever justification for this, but the fact remains that Warrior was the guy representing the company at that time, and ideally, the guy out there representing is expected to keep business going.

Warrior went over clean over Hogan so that Vince McMahon could stick it to his craw as much as anything else. Warrior’s achievement was as much a product of McMahon’s personal vendetta —take a big-headed champion like Hogan and remind him who is really in charge—as anything else.

To say Warrior is not a legend in the business, when you examine the impact he made on the business, when you see how people still care about him, and when you consider all the memorable moments he had in his short amount of national TV time, is just not looking at things in an adult fashion. Just because you're older now doesn't mean you can't still be a fan of the things which drew you into wrestling as a child.

Again, the Warrior’s impact was confined to one promotion for a three or four year period in which he won one world title. I am not biased; I am merely facing the facts. And the fact is that no wrestler with that resume deserves to be acknowledged as a true legend.

 

[Slyfox696]

The question was not rhetorical.

Then the answer is many. I remember a house show where Warrior faced Andre the Giant, still one of my favorite house show moments. I remember his match against Honkey Tonk Man, I remember his performance in Royal Rumble 1990, I remember his Summerslam match against Rick Rude, which was a damn fine match. I remember his match against Sgt. Slaughter, another fine heavyweight bout. Of course I remember Hogan vs. Warrior and Warrior vs. Savage.

In an era when you there were only 4 PPVs a year, and two of them were gimmick (Survivor Series and Royal Rumble), I daresay that's quite a good legacy of matches right there. Warrior has two of the best Wrestlemania matches in history, he had two good Summerslam outings (and I have always been entertained by the Summerslam '91 main-event as well), and had fine performances in the Royal Rumble. He gave us many memorable moments.

Now I have a question for you. How many other WWF guys had more memorable quality matches during that time period than Warrior?

As much as I was a Goldberg fan and really dig his matches with Hogan and Page to this day, he generally had to be led through a match.

He did? Says who?

A good worker is someone who can pull it off consistently. A great worker is someone who can do the deed nearly all the time. Neither Warrior nor Goldberg were good or great workers.

Really? Because I just gave your Warrior's resume, and he DID do it consistently.

And how do you compare one of the greatest television shows in history to a guy who was brought in merely as an alternative to Hogan, won one world title and faded away into obscurity? In Warrior’s case, he was no longer strongly desired within his own era.

Because that's a pile of shit, and you know it. Warrior wasn't "brought in" as a Hogan alternative, Warrior made himself a Hogan alternative. Furthermore, he didn't win a World title and fade into obscurity, he won a World title, held McMahon basically for ransom and got fired. When his music hit at Wrestlemania 8, and fans realized what was going on, they went nuts. How can you say that's fading into obscurity? Warrior's real-life personality kept him away from wrestling, not his wrestling ability.

What I’m saying is that his gimmick camouflaged his promo ability, or lack thereof. How do you defend the guy’s ability to speak when he’d ramble incoherently at times and make little to no sense whatsoever? To defend that is like saying “Okay, he sucks, but he’s good enough to pull it off convincingly.” In that context, Warrior could say anything at all regardless of whether it had any relevance to his match or the opponent he was wrestling, and it could be excused with “Well, it’s because his character is supposed to be like that.” That’s a lame copout if I ever saw it.

That doesn't make any sense. You never saw Warrior play any other character, so where do you get the idea he couldn't speak? We have ONE character to base Warrior's promo ability on, and he did those promos perfectly.

Any statement you make about his promo ability not related to the Warrior character is COMPLETELY conjecture on your part.

It is perfectly logical to use the same measuring stick when comparing wrestlers, particularly when both wrestlers wrestled during a particular individual’s lifespan.

No it's not, because no one is the same and no one takes the same path.

You call Warrior this great legend, yet you conveniently overlook that the guy had obvious and irrevokable flaws, those being that

1) He was not a draw;

...Vince McMahon had him go over Hogan clean, and you're telling me he didn't draw? His DVD sold very well (I found a link which said the sales total was near 60,000 copies back in 2005), his merchandise was found everywhere during his peak, and his match against Hogan set the attendance record at the Skydome.

How was he not a draw? Maybe he wasn't the draw Hogan was, but nobody has been.

2) He had all the longevity of a piece of bacon on a hot summer day;

And yet, he is STILL being discussed today. You don't hear people talking about Rick Rude very often, now do you?

3) He couldn’t wrestle his way out of a wet paper bag and couldn’t work, and anyone who tries to tell me otherwise is either deluded or stuck in a time warp.

And anyone who says he couldn't work, either hasn't seen his matches, or doesn't understand pro wrestling very well.

As far as being a draw goes, your dismissing of that strikes me as silly. Wrestling has changed immensely over the years, but what never changes from decade to decade---even going back to the days of Frank Gotch--is that the long term champions are the ones that draw in the gates.

What I meant was you can't say Edge is a bigger draw than Steve Austin because he's won more titles. It was a little confusing, and I almost didn't put it, but that's what I meant. You can't determine quality based upon similar achievements.

The Warrior’s visibility today is more of a reflection of the ability of the WWF/E’s hype machine than anything else.

WHAT? Okay, I have GOT to see how you explain this...

Of course, it helps that the guy is still alive and making anti-gay remarks and dishonoring dead wrestlers. Because he was immensely popular for a short period of time, and because it was in the WWF, he is remembered. But had he gone to the NWA instead of the WWF and won a world title there before fading away, do you think anyone on these boards would remember there was a Warrior?

Again, you are here making conjectures based upon hypotheticals. Do we remember Rick Rude? Do we remember Big Bossman? Do we remember Rick Martel, Tito Santana, or the Earthquake? Sure, we know who those guys are, but we don't remember them the way we remember Ultimate Warrior. Those names aren't on our lips the way Warrior is.

Warrior is a legend, it is indisputable.

People cared about Warrior so much that his title reign fell flat on its ass. 1990 was the beginning of a bonafide wrestling depression, both business wise and creatively, and Warrior was at the forefront. He did not draw particularly well as champion, and became an afterthought in short order. Seems like a number of the fans that had supported the WWF throughout the late-80s tuned out right around the time Warrior got his push. How convenient. You can blame what was going on in the WWF creatively for that if you want or cite whatever justification for this, but the fact remains that Warrior was the guy representing the company at that time, and ideally, the guy out there representing is expected to keep business going.

Wow, I love the false information and the misdirection. The wrestling business had already started to slow down. But the WWF didn't see a decline in business like they did in '96, as you're saying. The business was still strong, Warrior was champion for nearly a year, and putting the belt back on Hogan didn't see any noticeable upward trend in business.

All businesses have up and down cycles, and the wrestling business had already started their down cycle before Warrior got the title. You're basically misrepresenting facts.

Again, the Warrior’s impact was confined to one promotion for a three or four year period in which he won one world title.

And the man is STILL one of the most remembered names in pro wrestling. If that's not a legend, what is? Is Gale Sayers not a football legend? Is Sandy Koufax not a baseball legend? Being a legend has nothing to do with how long you're around or how many titles you win (ask Andre the Giant). It's about the impact you make upon the business when you are there, and how long that impact is remembered. And 20 years later, people still remember and recognize the impact Warrior had on the business, and 10 years from now, I believe they'll still recognize the Ultimate Warrior.

That's a legend.

 

[dtroppe]

I think its ridiculous for anyone to say Warrior wasn't a draw. The man could draw better than most wrestling legends and modern day wrestlers. Guys that are renowned by the IWC as great legends couldnt draw anywhere near what Warrior could. That's why they were not given the ball to run with the same way Warrior was. With all the junk Hogan has talked about Warrior- he knew the man could draw, why else would he bring him into WCW. Some will say just to get over on him and even the score. But lets face it, if Warrior wasnt big time Hogan wouldn't have wasted his time and Bischoff and Nash wouldn't have allowed Warrior to come in. They knew he was a draw. Just like Spain knew he was a massive draw. Just remember Warrior wrestled his last match to a packed house in Spain on his terms. Hopefully guys like Hogan, Flair, Honky Tonk, and Bret Hart remember the guy that set his own terms and went out in a blaze of glory and didnt whiter away as side shows attractions.

 

[oogieboogie]

Yep I also agree that he was a legend and agree with the arguements made by Slyfox.

I wasn't a massive fan, but found the guy entertaining with all the energy he brought to the ring. I know that a lot of people don't like him and bash him, which is cool cos everyone is entitled to their opinions. I wonder if this is because of watching the UW dvd? Yeah he held Vince to ransom (or so the dvd states). But if you're working and you have not been paid how many people wouldn't do the same? I am pretty sure that had Warrior decided to help with the dvd, he would not have been bashed and people wouldn't may not have the hatred towards him they do now.

I don't know if he was a draw in regards to ppv buys but in regards to merchandise, yes he was. I'm sure he must be one of the top 5 wrestlers with biggest merchandise sales and revenue.

 

[dtroppe]

Ooggieboogie, I believe that you are very correct in your assessment of the DVD. Warrior has stated that he was going to work on the DVD with WWE and for some reason that I cannot remember decided something wasn't right. The WWE still wanted to do an UW DVD and created the Self Destruction. UW has said numerous times that he will not work with WWE in a major way until Vince offers an apology. The funny thing is, that if you read Warrior's blogs- he has lately had some positive things to say about Vince so that would lead me to believe that is some ways they have put some of their differences behind him.

People aren't bashing Ric Flair for how he acted in TNA when he was headling their UK tour and basically held the company hostage. The situation is not the same as the Self Destruction dvd claims happened at Summer Slam but its the same idea. Also it seems as though VInce is notorious for not paying fair amounts to all the superstars that main event PPVs as Jericho wrote in his last book and Bret Hart wrote in his book. Jericho was all about to quit when he found out HHH had been paid way more than him for their match. It just so happened Warrior found out before the PPV instead of after.

 

[Psykohurricane55]

You can compare Warrior with anybody that came out of this era and i think it wouldn'T matter to most fans because i'm sure that at less 65% of everybody that hates him weren't even fans of wrestling back when Warrior was in the WWF. The funny is Warrior wasn't the greatest wrestler in the world, but so was Hogan and you don'T see fans bitches about Hogan not being a good wrestler.

The point is Warrior was more over then Hogan back in the day but was paid a lot less money for being a top guy in the company. I somepoint Warrior realise that he was getting screwed by Vince and held him up for more money. If i was in his position i would have done the same thing. You got to remember that at the time, Hogan was doing everything he could to destroy Warrior popularity because he couldn'T stand seeing somebody more popular then him.

Warrior is legends based on only one thing, he drew money, everytime he return, the wwe would make money because he was loved by the fans. Even his WCW runs made WCW alot of money simply because of the rating spike they had during his return segment.

Did his promo made a lot of sense, not really, but don'T forget that i was just delivering what was given to him by the writers. His character was a supernatural character so you had to have those weird promos to go with the characters. If he went out there and cut a normal promo, the character would have work.

Has for memorable Match, outside of the hogan match and the savage match, for me i really loved his feud with Ravishing Rick Rude, especially the steel cage match they had at summerslam 92. I would have love to see his feud with Undertaker last longer and actually get a ppv match. I would have also love to see him do something with Ric Flair on t.v, he would have learn so much from Flair, too bad he got screw over by Vince because of Vince Trial.

In the end, Warrior was your typical WWF wrestlers in the late 80's, a power wrestlers that rely mostly on Charisma to get over and he was able to make a lot of money. The guy got my respect on that alone and for the fact that he stood by his principles and didn'T let Vince McMAhon screw him over.

 

[dtroppe]

Check this video out, of Warriors return promo on Raw- remember this was 1996- and Warrior was still doing his insane character- but in my opinion this is a great early promo on RAW and a fantastic return promo. The back and forth with Goldust is def a foreshadow of the attitude era yet to come. No one in the WWF was cutting promos with that kind of attitude at the time. (here is a youtube link-i hope posting a link to youtube is not against the rules).

 

[The Prodigal Anti-Lemming]

Apologies for my late response, but the weekend's simply been too hectic to allow for much time on the net.

Then the answer is many. I remember a house show where Warrior faced Andre the Giant, still one of my favorite house show moments. I remember his match against Honkey Tonk Man, I remember his performance in Royal Rumble 1990, I remember his Summerslam match against Rick Rude, which was a damn fine match. I remember his match against Sgt. Slaughter, another fine heavyweight bout. Of course I remember Hogan vs. Warrior and Warrior vs. Savage.

If you honestly think Warrior’s body of work holds up against that of actual in-ring workers such as Steamboat, Flair, Hart, Michaels, Savage, Angle, Joe, Styles, Benoit, Misterio, etc you are incredibly biased. Now, I know you don’t compare any of those names directly, but you come off as sounding like they belong in the same category, and as any intelligent person would tell you, in terms of actual workmanship, they just do not. Your definition of a good worker is incredibly general if you believe Warrior vs Andre the Giant is great.

Now I have a question for you. How many other WWF guys had more memorable quality matches during that time period than Warrior?

Speaking strictly of the period stemming from 1987 until 1992, I would say Ric Flair (title bouts with Savage, Hart, 1992 Rumble performance), Randy Savage (bouts with Steamboat, Hogan, Roberts, Flair, and yes, Warrior), Bret Hart (tenure in the Hart Foundation, singles matches with Piper, Flair, Davey Boy Smith), and arguably even Hogan. I could probably come up with more names---particularly if you count outside the WWF, in which case Flair becomes an even greater factor, Sting and Vader step into the picture, as do Misawa, Kobashi and Kawada for their performances in Japan.

He did? Says who?

If memory serves, Goldberg acknowledges the flaw in his autobiography.

Really? Because I just gave your Warrior's resume, and he DID do it consistently.

In your biased view, however, the moment you cite Andre vs Warrior as a quality wrestling match, you start to lose whatever credibility you may have.

You seem to believe that if a match gets a good ovation it is a good match. By that logic, you could say Hulk Hogan vs Andre the Giant at WrestleMania III was one of the finest works of art in wrestling history, since the fans blew the roof off the Silverdome. Forget about the fact that Andre was practically immobile and that the whole encounter was basically twelve minutes of kick and punch.

Because that's a pile of shit, and you know it. Warrior wasn't "brought in" as a Hogan alternative, Warrior made himself a Hogan alternative. Furthermore, he didn't win a World title and fade into obscurity, he won a World title, held McMahon basically for ransom and got fired. When his music hit at Wrestlemania 8, and fans realized what was going on, they went nuts. How can you say that's fading into obscurity? Warrior's real-life personality kept him away from wrestling, not his wrestling ability.

You conveniently ignore the fact that the relationship between McMahon and Hogan was souring in 1990. McMahon resented Hogan's demanding nature and his growing contractual leverage. Warrior is brought in at around the same time, and having many of the same physical gifts as Hogan, is conveniently pushed to the moon while this is taking place. Do the math.

He clearly faded into obscurity, another fact that you refuse to acknowledge. Regardless of whether he was being jacked around by management, had differences with McMahon over usage of the Warrior copyright, or took his ball home because he stubbed his toe after getting out of bed one morning, the reason is entirely irrelevant. These are the facts: He left the WWF in late-1992. He was entirely absent from the game in 1993, 1994 and 1995 (save for an indy match with Honky Tonk in '95 and a stint in Europe). He came back in 1996, won no titles, beat no one other than a pre-main event Triple H and a washed up Jerry Lawler, then left after six months. We can argue why he left, and again the reason has no relevance to the overall scope of the argument. The fact is, he was gone. Then came the laughable WCW stint, which I won't even get into. After his infamous WWF departure, Warrior never had a long term position in a major promotion ever again.

No it's not, because no one is the same and no one takes the same path.

That’s a copout. Regardless of what path a wrestler takes there are specific milestones that govern true wrestling greatness that you are just not seeing. There are certain qualities that people associate with greatness.

Vince McMahon had him go over Hogan clean, and you're telling me he didn't draw? His DVD sold very well (I found a link which said the sales total was near 60,000 copies back in 2005), his merchandise was found everywhere during his peak, and his match against Hogan set the attendance record at the Skydome.

How was he not a draw? Maybe he wasn't the draw Hogan was, but nobody has been.

As I've stated, McMahon had ulterior motives to putting Warrior over Hogan clean.

And you know why that DVD sold so well? It was all in the packaging. A DVD with a name like “The Self Destruction of the Ultimate Warrior” is simply going to sell because the name implies that it’s controversial. Therefore, fans that loved Warrior will say, “Hey cool a Warrior DVD” while fans that hate him will say, “Hey cool a Warrior DVD that trashes his name.” It ties in with my earlier statement about the WWF/E hype machine. They know how to put a spin on a product, simple as that, and I'll give the marketing geniuses credit, because they were probably aware that a simple Warrior DVD would not have sold half as many copies. If he were a true legend, he could sell a DVD without the aforementioned hook.

I felt incredibly tempted at the time to buy it for that very reason, and would have plunked down my change in a heartbeat had I been able to locate a distributor that was selling it. Would I have even given the DVD a second glance had it been called “Ultimate Warrior: His Greatest Matches?” Pfft, no.

And anyone who says he couldn't work, either hasn't seen his matches, or doesn't understand pro wrestling very well.

You accuse me of misrepresenting facts later on, and frankly, that’s all you’ve done as you defend Warrior’s supposed workrate. Say he was a moderate draw, however briefly. Say he was a “legend” (quote-unquote) all you want. But don’t sit there and tell me he’s a great worker while accusing me of not knowing enough about wrestling to know the difference, because it’s pure and total, unadulterated crap.

Ok, you’re a cheerleader for Warrior, I get it, but regardless of whether you’re totally into his gimmick, the gimmick was so elaborate for just that reason: to provide a means of distraction for the marks. Hogan had an over the top gimmick for the same reason, to hide his lack of a great wrestling ability.

What I meant was you can't say Edge is a bigger draw than Steve Austin because he's won more titles. It was a little confusing, and I almost didn't put it, but that's what I meant. You can't determine quality based upon similar achievements.

The flaw in that notion is that is exactly why there should be a wide range of criteria in determining greatness. Certainly, no one with a brain would stick Edge on the same plateau as Austin because he captured more world championships. And that is why the task now becomes comparing other aspects of their careers. Austin was an established draw who contributed to the nationwide appeal of the business. Edge simply never attained that level of mainstream acceptance, never was a stand-alone draw the way Austin was and cannot boast of having affected the industry the way Austin did.

Again, you are here making conjectures based upon hypotheticals. Do we remember Rick Rude? Do we remember Big Bossman? Do we remember Rick Martel, Tito Santana, or the Earthquake? Sure, we know who those guys are, but we don't remember them the way we remember Ultimate Warrior. Those names aren't on our lips the way Warrior is.

None of the guys you mentioned captured the WWF title, and therefore did not have the entire power of the WWF hype machine behind them.

Warrior is a legend, it is indisputable.

Now what’s most interesting about your opinion of Warrior as hall of fame material, is that a quick search of various hall of fames on the internet and elsewhere turns up nada on the Warrior. Wrestling Observer Newsletter Hall of Fame? No Warrior. Professional Wrestling HoF? Again, no Warrior. Online World of Wrestling HoF? Ring Chronicle Hall of Fame? No Warrior. Tell me, how can such a wide range of independent and unaffiliated sources all fail to share your inflated opinion on Warrior?

All businesses have up and down cycles, and the wrestling business had already started their down cycle before Warrior got the title. You're basically misrepresenting facts.

If Warrior was as infallible as you portend, then he should have singlehandedly kept business going strong during his year as champion. That is something that all of the truly great champions have in common. Hogan and Flair were the draws of the 1980s, Gorgeous George was the undisputed top draw of the television boom, Bruno Sammartino remains one of the top drawing wrestlers in Madison Square Garden history, ditto for Bill Longson in the Kiel Auditorium, hell, Jim Londos found a way to consistently draw crowds of 20,000 and even 30,000 throughout the early-1930s when many families could not afford to eat. You cannot tell me that Warrior, if he were truly great, could not keep the WWF booming when Londos drew in one of the United States' harshest economic downturns ever.

 

[Slyfox696]

Apologies for my late response, but the weekend's simply been too hectic to allow for much time on the net.

No apology necessary, I would be far more concerned if you felt you HAD to be here just to reply.

If you honestly think Warrior’s body of work holds up against that of actual in-ring workers such as Steamboat, Flair, Hart, Michaels, Savage, Angle, Joe, Styles, Benoit, Misterio, etc you are incredibly biased.

I love how you throw Samoa Joe in there, when he doesn't have half the ability Warrior had. Joe is just a fat guy who looks good when he has someone to sell for him. Otherwise, he's a mediocre wrestler.

And for the time period he was on top, Warrior's body of work DOES hold up to any of those guys. I'm not saying he was as good of a worker as a Savage or Hart or Benoit or even Styles (HBK, Angle and Flair are all incredibly overrated) but the work he did during his run ranks right up there with just about any match from those guys. Outside of Steamboat vs. Savage at WM 3, I'd take Warriors matches at WM 6 and 7 and call them every bit as good as any match any of those guys ever worked in the WWF/E.

Your definition of a good worker is incredibly general if you believe Warrior vs Andre the Giant is great.

I never said that, but you asked for memorable matches, so I gave you one. You never even SAW the match I'm talking about.

Speaking strictly of the period stemming from 1987 until 1992, I would say Ric Flair (title bouts with Savage, Hart, 1992 Rumble performance)

You named three matches, I gave you 5, and there's never been a truly memorable Hart vs. Flair match.

Randy Savage (bouts with Steamboat, Hogan, Roberts, Flair, and yes, Warrior)

Five matches...like I gave you.

Bret Hart (tenure in the Hart Foundation, singles matches with Piper, Flair, Davey Boy Smith)

Piper and Smith were good matches. The Hart Foundation vs. Demolition 2 out of 3 falls was a good match. As I mentioned, Flair and Hart never had a memorable match. So, there's three matches, when I gave you five.

and arguably even Hogan.

You just compared Warrior with the greatest wrestlers in history, and you're telling me he's not a legend? Why didn't you talk about The Big Bossman, or Tito Santana, or even Rick Martel?

You went straight to some of the greatest wrestling names of all time, and even then you couldn't give me enough matches that were more impressive than what Warrior did. You just put Warrior in the same category as Savage, Flair, Hart and Hogan, considered by many to be 4 of the greatest wrestling superstars in history. How is he not a legend?

I could probably come up with more names---particularly if you count outside the WWF

You can't count outside the WWF, because the styles are completely different, and you seem a guy who bases quality upon style, not what actually happens in the ring.

In your biased view, however, the moment you cite Andre vs Warrior as a quality wrestling match, you start to lose whatever credibility you may have.

First of all, you never saw the match I was talking about. It was a house show, and you don't know where I live, so you obviously are ignorant to the quality of the match. You're assuming quality simply based upon the names involved. You do this "conjecture" thing a lot.

Second of all, I never said it was a quality match (never denied it either, though), however you asked me for Warriors matches that were memorable, and that match was very memorable for me.

You seem to believe that if a match gets a good ovation it is a good match.

Who said that? Certainly wasn't me.

By that logic, you could say Hulk Hogan vs Andre the Giant at WrestleMania III was one of the finest works of art in wrestling history, since the fans blew the roof off the Silverdome. Forget about the fact that Andre was practically immobile and that the whole encounter was basically twelve minutes of kick and punch.

No it wasn't. That match was far better than people give it credit for. It had a good, if simple, story to the match, both guys played their roles perfectly, they had the fans on the edge of their seat the entire time, and the audience erupted when the story hit the climax and the big payoff. What more could you want from a wrestling match?

You conveniently ignore the fact that the relationship between McMahon and Hogan was souring in 1990. McMahon resented Hogan's demanding nature and his growing contractual leverage. Warrior is brought in at around the same time, and having many of the same physical gifts as Hogan, is conveniently pushed to the moon while this is taking place. Do the math.

Ridiculous. At that time there were a lot of guys with big muscles in the WWE. How about the Warlord, why didn't the Warlord get the push? How about Kerry Von Erich, why didn't he get the push? If anyone deserved Hogan's spot, based upon your claim, Kerry Von Erich was the perfect guy, because he was an incredibly handsome man, with a powerful name and reputation. He never made it past the midcard.

Warrior got his spot because the fans adored him and loved what he brought to the ring. History has shown you can push a guy all you want, but if the fans won't pay to see him, you can't make them pay. Guys like Erik Watts, Heidenreich, etc. are certainly proof of that.

He clearly faded into obscurity

How can you "fade" into obscurity, when every time you come back, you get a monster pop? He didn't fade into obscurity, he abruptly left. And any time he came back, the crowd gave him massive pops.

These are the facts: He left the WWF in late-1992. He was entirely absent from the game in 1993, 1994 and 1995 (save for an indy match with Honky Tonk in '95 and a stint in Europe).

Which is not "fading" to obscurity.

He came back in 1996, won no titles, beat no one other than a pre-main event Triple H and a washed up Jerry Lawler, then left after six months.

Which, again, is not "fading".

Aside from the fact you have absolutely zero place to say he "faded" to obscurity, considering his massive pops, you also can't say he's obscure because we're still here talking about him right now. His inclusion in a WWE video game a couple years ago was a big deal. They have WWE action figures of him.

He neither faded nor is obscure, so your sentence is wrong twice.

That’s a copout. Regardless of what path a wrestler takes there are specific milestones that govern true wrestling greatness that you are just not seeing. There are certain qualities that people associate with greatness.

And one of those is impact on the business, and another is being remembered long after your career is over. Warrior qualifies on both of those.

What other milestones make a legend? It's not world titles, because Andre never won one, and David Arquette did. It's not length of career, because Jim Duggan had a near 30 year career. Aside from impact on the business and being remembered long after your gone, what other milestones make a legend? By the way, I think this part of my post also proves my statement was not a copout.

As I've stated, McMahon had ulterior motives to putting Warrior over Hogan clean.

Doesn't change the fact he did.

McMahon could have picked anyone, and he picked Warrior.

And you know why that DVD sold so well? It was all in the packaging. A DVD with a name like “The Self Destruction of the Ultimate Warrior” is simply going to sell because the name implies that it’s controversial.

And if they had "The Self Destruction of Nailz" do you think the DVD would have sold just as well?

It wasn't the controversial title that sold the DVD, it was the wrestler it was discussing.

You accuse me of misrepresenting facts later on, and frankly, that’s all you’ve done as you defend Warrior’s supposed workrate.

Are you kidding me? Are you telling me Warrior's workrate was not fabulous? My God, he was one of the best "workers" in the business at the time.

You have to understand I'm talking about the true definition of work rate, which is the rate at which the wrestler is able to "work" the crowd. You know the difference between a work and a shoot (I would assume), so a good workrate is how well you make fans buy into what you're selling in the ring. Warrior's workrate was phenomenal.

But don’t sit there and tell me he’s a great worker while accusing me of not knowing enough about wrestling to know the difference, because it’s pure and total, unadulterated crap.

But I will, and the facts support me. He had a good match at most of the major PPVs, he had two of the best matches in Wrestlemania history, and fans were hardcore into his matches and his character.

What more can you want from a pro wrestler?

Ok, you’re a cheerleader for Warrior, I get it, but regardless of whether you’re totally into his gimmick, the gimmick was so elaborate for just that reason: to provide a means of distraction for the marks. Hogan had an over the top gimmick for the same reason, to hide his lack of a great wrestling ability.

Your definition of "great wrestling ability" seems incredibly inaccurate. You're calling Hogan and Warrior out for their supposed inability to wrestle well, and doing so in the same post you mention Samoa Joe as a good worker? Just how exactly do you define a good wrestler?

The flaw in that notion is that is exactly why there should be a wide range of criteria in determining greatness. Certainly, no one with a brain would stick Edge on the same plateau as Austin because he captured more world championships. And that is why the task now becomes comparing other aspects of their careers. Austin was an established draw who contributed to the nationwide appeal of the business. Edge simply never attained that level of mainstream acceptance, never was a stand-alone draw the way Austin was and cannot boast of having affected the industry the way Austin did.

Exactly. Everything you said is EXACTLY what I've been getting at, and have been the entire time.

None of the guys you mentioned captured the WWF title, and therefore did not have the entire power of the WWF hype machine behind them.

Fine then, Yokozuna. My point is still valid.

Now what’s most interesting about your opinion of Warrior as hall of fame material, is that a quick search of various hall of fames on the internet and elsewhere turns up nada on the Warrior. Wrestling Observer Newsletter Hall of Fame? No Warrior. Professional Wrestling HoF? Again, no Warrior. Online World of Wrestling HoF? Ring Chronicle Hall of Fame? No Warrior. Tell me, how can such a wide range of independent and unaffiliated sources all fail to share your inflated opinion on Warrior?

Wait...what? How did we go from discussing "legend" to a "Hall of Fame"? Those two things have nothing to do with one another. Pete Rose and Joe Jackson aren't in the baseball Hall of Fame, are we going to say they aren't legends too? We going to say they weren't good at what they did?

If Warrior was as infallible as you portend, then he should have singlehandedly kept business going strong during his year as champion.

And if the Rock was good, WWE ratings wouldn't have dropped when Steve Austin left.

See how silly you sound?

 

[klunderbunker]

The thing about Warrior is people remember his bad years, as in his returns to WWF and his WCW run far more than they remember his good years. Warrior was part of the main three guys (Hogan, Warrior and Savage) in the late 80s/early 90s and would be equal to Rock or Austin if you compared it to the Attitude Era. His world title reign was kind of dull, but that was typical in that time as not a lot happened between Mania and Summerslam and at Summerslam, Hogan returned after an injury in the real main event.

His 92 run wasn't bad and his match against Savage was very solid. Other than that though he had his vomit feud with Shango and then just left.

On to 96 and he's around for three months, feuding with Jerry Lawler and a quick main event six man tag that was on a totally forgettable show. There's nothing to remember here.

And then the big one: WCW. This is probably why people can't stand Warrior. By this time the man was a nut and his match with Hogan is arguably the worst big match of all time. This is what people remember him as, and that's why he's so hated.

All that being said, Warrior in 1989-1990 was AWESOME. He beat Hulk Hogan at Wrestlemania in 1990 and had a classic the next year. His title reign was a bit dull but at the same time, he had it because he beat Hulk Hogan at Wrestlemania in 1990. Let that sink in for a bit. The problem Warrior has is when he's bad, he's REALLY bad and it makes people forget how awesome his time on top was.

As for the Road Warriors, no one really remembers their matches. It was about their aura and personas. Also, they were just a tag team and they managed to feud with the Horsemen for years. That's not bad considering the Horsemen were the biggest heels in the world.

Sting is an interesting case but there's not much of a comparison to be made. He's consistently been over with fans and has had mostly passable matches even in the downside of his career. Also the money he drew with Hogan in 97 is probably going to dwarf anything Warrior ever drew other than Mania 6.

 

[dtroppe]

Now what’s most interesting about your opinion of Warrior as hall of fame material, is that a quick search of various hall of fames on the internet and elsewhere turns up nada on the Warrior. Wrestling Observer Newsletter Hall of Fame? No Warrior. Professional Wrestling HoF? Again, no Warrior. Online World of Wrestling HoF? Ring Chronicle Hall of Fame? No Warrior. Tell me, how can such a wide range of independent and unaffiliated sources all fail to share your inflated opinion on Warrior?

This is an interesting statement until you realize that the HOFs listed above for the most part are done by either marks or real old school guys. If you look at the list of HOF members- its a lot of old school guys. But lets be realistic- there is no reason Abdul the Butcher, Ray Stevens, or Ted Dibiase (these are 3 randoms I selected from several of the HOFs) should be listed and Warrior not. It shows you how unrealistic these HOFs are. Warrior had a bigger impact on wrestling and keeping wrestling mainstream than most of the guys in those HOFs ever could dream of.

And then the big one: WCW. This is probably why people can't stand Warrior. By this time the man was a nut and his match with Hogan is arguably the worst big match of all time

I can't deny the match wasn't good, but I dont think that has much to do with Warriors style. He has said before that he wrestled that match with a torn bicep. He said he worked through it to meet his obligations while other guys at the time were taking 6 months off and milking similar injuries. He also said- and take it for what it is- that Hogan didn't really want to work on the match. Warrior believes and its probably the truth for the most part that Hogan was only interested in getting the win. He wasnt looking to create the magic of 1990. Warrior said in his shoot DVD that they were beginning to set up an angle with OWN (One Warrior Nation) and when they just ended it and let him sit at home and for the rest of his contract.