WWE Hall of Fame: Class of 2018

[justtxyank]

I've never understood why JJ's legacy is so poor on the internet.

Never did anything of note in WWF or WCW?

WWF
-6x IC champion
-European Champion
-Tag Champion (with Owen Hart, helluva team)

WCW
-4x US champion
-3x World Champion

That's just raw titles.

on WWF:
His attitude era turn produced some of the biggest mid card feuds of 98-99. The hair match with Xpac, guitar shot on his throat were MAJOR heat magnets and helped XPac get over. Then the run with Debra and Owen was great and was even better as solo IC act with Debra as the Randy Savage/Miss Elizabeth story. His mini-feud with DLo was fun there and of course the stuff with Chyna was big time. He would have been in the world title picture as well except for the fact that Austin had a personal grudge against him and refused to work with him.

on WCW:
I'll only talk post return from WWF in 99 because the small blip was worthless as it got aborted before it went anywhere. WCW was obviously struggling here but was still the 2nd biggest national promotion we've seen and he was a multiple time US AND world Champion and a centerpoint of the promotion.

Those accomplishments alone would be more than enough to deserve a HOF spot in WWE, but it ignores his Memphis time where he was FIRE and his TNA run which I admittedly don't have much to say about because I didn't watch it.

A good worker. Not flash, but could work solid matches with anyone. A good heel that could get heat out of crowds with ease. He wasn't a big money draw. That's the only knock. Couldn't work as a big time main eventer in an era with all of the biggest money guys in history working still.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Lawler is the logical pick as Jarrett came from the USWA/Memphis area... if his dad isn't gonna induct him, then Lawler who was his business partner makes more sense than anyone else on the roster other than Roode or AJ.

I didn't think of the rehab thing... would be weak sauce as a reason on its own but not beneath WWE to do it to hype their rehab. I can actually imagine Angle being part of this/getting it done... whatever he thinks of Jarrett and Karen etc. The HOF and return to the company has only been good for Kurt in terms of helping to rebuild his life... he probably would want the same for Jeff as it can only be good for his own kids who Jarrett is stepfather to if he is focused and back "in the fold" with WWE. I still get the feeling Vince might even pony up some money and a spot on the network for GFW... it might be a quick way to get the UK show off the ground for example, as Jarrett did well with TNA here.

Career wise, yeah, I take the points that he held belts but virtually every latter day title he held was down to him being close personal buddies with Russo rather than his actual talent. The early IC titles aren't to be sneezed at... and to be fair he was a legit heat magnet back then with the "Ain't I Great" thing, I loathed him more than any other WWF guy.

In essence though, most of it is gonna be because of the Jarrett name... Jerry perhaps was too "behind the scenes" to go in himself as Lawler and Jeff were in effect the "front men" of CWA and TNA... Take away any alleged heat Jeff "got" and the Jarrett name is one of the last "family names" that could and perhaps should be going in there from the old days.

 

[GhettoV1]

Maybe GFW can be an WWE Developmentmental territory based in Nashville, TN moving into TNA's old offices and take half of the new signees from NXT so developmental talent can benefit (or look into reviving the USWA under both Jeff and Lawler's watch).

 

[LibSuperstar]

on WWF:
His attitude era turn produced some of the biggest mid card feuds of 98-99. The hair match with Xpac, guitar shot on his throat were MAJOR heat magnets and helped XPac get over. Then the run with Debra and Owen was great and was even better as solo IC act with Debra as the Randy Savage/Miss Elizabeth story. His mini-feud with DLo was fun there and of course the stuff with Chyna was big time. He would have been in the world title picture as well except for the fact that Austin had a personal grudge against him and refused to work with him.

Forgot about the D-Lo stuff but yeah his Attitude Era run was pretty solid. I believe he adapted quite well.

Lawler is the logical pick as Jarrett came from the USWA/Memphis area... if his dad isn't gonna induct him, then Lawler who was his business partner makes more sense than anyone else on the roster other than Roode or AJ.

I didn't think of the rehab thing... would be weak sauce as a reason on its own but not beneath WWE to do it to hype their rehab. I can actually imagine Angle being part of this/getting it done... whatever he thinks of Jarrett and Karen etc. The HOF and return to the company has only been good for Kurt in terms of helping to rebuild his life... he probably would want the same for Jeff as it can only be good for his own kids who Jarrett is stepfather to if he is focused and back "in the fold" with WWE. I still get the feeling Vince might even pony up some money and a spot on the network for GFW... it might be a quick way to get the UK show off the ground for example, as Jarrett did well with TNA here.

Career wise, yeah, I take the points that he held belts but virtually every latter day title he held was down to him being close personal buddies with Russo rather than his actual talent. The early IC titles aren't to be sneezed at... and to be fair he was a legit heat magnet back then with the "Ain't I Great" thing, I loathed him more than any other WWF guy.

In essence though, most of it is gonna be because of the Jarrett name... Jerry perhaps was too "behind the scenes" to go in himself as Lawler and Jeff were in effect the "front men" of CWA and TNA... Take away any alleged heat Jeff "got" and the Jarrett name is one of the last "family names" that could and perhaps should be going in there from the old days.

Legit tweeted that earlier and did a Fargo Strut.

 

[rge2010]

As someone else has already pointed out, I don't understand the JJ hate either. JJ had a VERY solid career in WWF, WCW and the territories. He won lots of titles in the big 2 promotions and was a solid mid card cog in the Attitude Era.

There is obviously an agenda to this and it probably involves the network. Although I am no more shocked at Jarrett breaking bread with Vince than I am Warrior, Bruno or Bret.

 

[A11oftheLights]

Wow, it's official... Jeff Jarrett will return to the WWE and enter the Hall of Fame.

This really is a strange one, especially as his father Jerry, who at one time was tapped to take over running the WWF if Vince went to jail and was the major promoter in Memphis for years isn't in there/going in with him.

Jeff of course has had a checkered past with Vince, switching sides more than anyone during the Monday Night Wars and famously holding him up for money to drop the belt to Chyna.

Personally, I never got why Vince was so mad, it was JR or whoever's fault that his contract lapsed while holding a title...and Jeff was being asked to drop a male title to a woman, something not only that had never been done...but that would inherently damage him going into WCW.

Personally, I hope Jarrett is brought on with WWE bring him in backstage somehow.... I have no wish to see JJ the character in the inevitable authority role, but using his GFW contracts could be interesting in setting up a second feeder territory for the company... where people can actually get experience of working.

Lawler will likely be the one to induct him although RoadDog at the outside could.

I guess now ANYONE can go into the HOF except Benoit... Jim Cornette's call must not be too far away.

WWE aint going to touch that with a 10 foot pole. Double J is a snake. Thats why he's been kicked out of TNA more than once and the whole GFW/TNA merger is very shady

 

[Y 2 Jake]

I don't hate Jarrett but he's had a fairly uninspiring career. One of WCW's main guys when they were on the way out and an absolute chore to watch. An overbooked, antique champion who dragged down the exciting performers who had to face him to get title shots in TNA. And the only real highlight of his WWE run is his feud with Chyna, which was simply better than expected but still very much of its time.

 

[Makaveli31]

WWF
-6x IC champion
-European Champion
-Tag Champion (with Owen Hart, helluva team)

WCW
-4x US champion
-3x World Champion

Titles don't mean jack shit in "pro wrestling" and they meant even less during the Russo years which Jarrett where Jarrett had most of his success. If anyone else had been booking Jeff Jarrett would not be a three time World Champion. Furthermore, all those "championships" meant was that he was given the ball and failed to deliver. Either he was out of the company or the company folded soon thereafter. Not saying he was bad but I wouldn't rank him among the top five I-C Champions of all time and maybe not even in the top 10 same goes for tag . So spare me the "championships" argument.

on WWF:
His attitude era turn produced some of the biggest mid card feuds of 98-99. The hair match with Xpac, guitar shot on his throat were MAJOR heat magnets and helped XPac get over. Then the run with Debra and Owen was great and was even better as solo IC act with Debra as the Randy Savage/Miss Elizabeth story. His mini-feud with DLo was fun there and of course the stuff with Chyna was big time. He would have been in the world title picture as well except for the fact that Austin had a personal grudge against him and refused to work with him.

I remember the Attitude Era and EVERYONE was hot at the time. It's like being a roleplayer on a championship team. You're going to get the rub off guys like Austin, Rock, Foley, DX but no one in their right mind would say Jarrett contributed to the success of the Attitude Era. It was the atmosphere back then. It was just crazy hot. Are you going to put everyone was in WWE during '98-'99 in the HOF?

on WCW:
I'll only talk post return from WWF in 99 because the small blip was worthless as it got aborted before it went anywhere. WCW was obviously struggling here but was still the 2nd biggest national promotion we've seen and he was a multiple time US AND world Champion and a centerpoint of the promotion.

Those accomplishments alone would be more than enough to deserve a HOF spot in WWE, but it ignores his Memphis time where he was FIRE and his TNA run which I admittedly don't have much to say about because I didn't watch it.

A good worker. Not flash, but could work solid matches with anyone. A good heel that could get heat out of crowds with ease. He wasn't a big money draw. That's the only knock. Couldn't work as a big time main eventer in an era with all of the biggest money guys in history working still.

No it does not. WCW was a complete dumpster fire by when Jarrett was "on top." His biggest claim to fame in WCW was laying down in the middle of the ring and letting Hogan pin him. As the late Mike Graham said "He broke 10,000 guitars and he didn't draw a dime...not a DIME."

 

[HeenanGorilla]

Titles don't mean jack shit in "pro wrestling" and they meant even less during the Russo years which Jarrett where Jarrett had most of his success. If anyone else had been booking Jeff Jarrett would not be a three time World Champion. Furthermore, all those "championships" meant was that he was given the ball and failed to deliver. Either he was out of the company or the company folded soon thereafter. Not saying he was bad but I wouldn't rank him among the top five I-C Champions of all time and maybe not even in the top 10 same goes for tag . So spare me the "championships" argument.



I remember the Attitude Era and EVERYONE was hot at the time. It's like being a roleplayer on a championship team. You're going to get the rub off guys like Austin, Rock, Foley, DX but no one in their right mind would say Jarrett contributed to the success of the Attitude Era. It was the atmosphere back then. It was just crazy hot. Are you going to put everyone was in WWE during '98-'99 in the HOF?



No it does not. WCW was a complete dumpster fire by when Jarrett was "on top." His biggest claim to fame in WCW was laying down in the middle of the ring and letting Hogan pin him. As the late Mike Graham said "He broke 10,000 guitars and he didn't draw a dime...not a DIME."

Your usage of quotes is cringeworthy. Why is pro wrestling in quotes? The business is called pro wrestling. You could put “titles” in quotes to support your silly point of belts not mattering, but you didn’t.

I guess “you’ll” never learn how to use quotes, but at “least” try to not dismiss titles “as” irrelevant. You sound kind “of” silly.

 

[Makaveli31]

Your usage of quotes is cringeworthy. Why is pro wrestling in quotes? The business is called pro wrestling. You could put “titles” in quotes to support your silly point of belts not mattering, but you didn’t.

I guess “you’ll” never learn how to use quotes, but at “least” try to not dismiss titles “as” irrelevant. You sound kind “of” silly.

For this idiot, I am using pro wrestling in quotations because I am using it in the context of it being a sport where titles matter.

 

[HeenanGorilla]

For this idiot, I am using pro wrestling in quotations because I am using it in the context of it being a sport where titles matter.

Oh I know why you’re using quotes. I was just pointing out that you’re a fool.

Rocky lost to Apollo Creed and then beat Apollo Creed. For anyone to say he “won” because it was written in a script is obvious in such a foolish way, the one making the argument can only be mocked.

The fact that you are still trying to sell this view of no wins and losses in a business based on wins and losses within its storylines is nothing more than proof that you are a mark. We’ve had this argument before and you failed miserably.

I also see you respond to the same post multiple times, proving you still also respond immediately...then wish you had said something—here come well-used quotes—“better”. The worse part is, you don’t get better even with a mulligan. You’re just terrible at arguing, no matter how many responses you make.

NO ONE older than childhood thinks wrestling is real in the way you are pathetically trying to disprove. Get over that awful point—you sound like a fool.

 

[Makaveli31]

Rocky lost to Apollo Creed and then beat Apollo Creed. For anyone to say he “won” because it was written in a script is obvious in such a foolish way, the one making the argument can only be mocked.

That is exactly why I'm mocking you. You are an idiot. You are comparing a boxing movie with a story arc to the career of a professional wrestler. Two different things junior. We are not discussing a particular angle or storyline. We are discussing the career of Jeff Jarrett. I made the argument that just because he "won" a bunch of titles does not automatically make him HOF worthy.

The fact that you are still trying to sell this view of no wins and losses in a business based on wins and losses within its storylines is nothing more than proof that you are a mark. We’ve had this argument before and you failed miserably.

I've never said this. Again, you are confusing two entirely different things. Yes, titles and wins and losses are of particular importance in a storyline or an angle but not in the overall big picture of things. That's like saying Jerry Lawler was a better wrestler than Andre the Giant just because he "won" more titles.

 

[HeenanGorilla]

That is exactly why I'm mocking you. You are an idiot. You are comparing a boxing movie with a story arc to the career of a professional wrestler. Two different things junior. We are not discussing a particular angle or storyline. We are discussing the career of Jeff Jarrett. I made the argument that just because he "won" a bunch of titles does not automatically make him HOF worthy.



I've never said this. Again, you are confusing two entirely different things. Yes, titles and wins and losses are of particular importance in a storyline or an angle but not in the overall big picture of things. That's like saying Jerry Lawler was a better wrestler than Andre the Giant just because he "won" more titles.

The fact that you didn't get the movie metaphor--and felt the need to say that movies and wrestling are different--tells me all I need to know about what I'm dealing with here.

Moving on, title reigns are absolutely relevant in an argument of HOF worthiness. Being given (yes, given--no one thinks these are actually won) a title means you are of a standing appreciated, for one reason or another, by the powers that be. Jarrett never entertained me and I couldn't care less about his induction or him being passed over; but, regarding titles in general, they can absolutely be used as a relevant point in these discussions.

And let me make one more thing clear. People can argue for or against an inductee all they want. If they want to use title reigns as part of their argument, they are allowed to. Just because you have some issue with how titles are given, as opposed to won, doesn't give you the right to insult people for no other reason than them mentioning titles. (Be clear, I am speaking for the other people you insult on this forum. You can insult me all you want because I see that you're a fool and don't have much intelligence, and seemingly no logic skills--and you always result to "boy" and "idiot" because it makes you feel superior, which has to be a rare feeling for you.)

Honestly, I think arguing over the WWE HOF is a waste of time. I get that people take it very seriously, for some reason, much like they do all Halls of Fame. If that is your thing, hey, have fun with it. But, personally, I don't see the big deal if Vince wants to honor past employees and contributors for one reason or another. In fact, with the HOF ceremony being such a big part of Mania weekend, those of you who this bothers better get used to it. You CANNOT induct this many people EVERY YEAR and think the standard that you hold this HOF to can be kept. It is a money-making evening and Vince will induct anyone he needs to in order to fill seats in that arena the night before Mania. Like I said, if someone wants to argue that someone should be in by now, or argue that an inductee doesn't deserve it, it's silly to me, but it's that person's right. But, try to keep in mind that this is simply an evening that makes the WWE money. There is no way that they will not have a HOF class any year soon because they have run out of "worthy" inductees. Vince will induct 6 jobbers if it means selling tickets.

So, to everyone else, enjoy the debates here, but keep that in mind before you get so upset.

 

[Makaveli31]

Moving on, title reigns are absolutely relevant in an argument of HOF worthiness. Being given (yes, given--no one thinks these are actually won) a title means you are of a standing appreciated, for one reason or another, by the powers that be. Jarrett never entertained me and I couldn't care less about his induction or him being passed over; but, regarding titles in general, they can absolutely be used as a relevant point in these discussions.

I disagree. When I think of a wrestler and whether he transcends eras. When I measure the impact he had on the business. I don't think of the number of titles he's won. I don't know how many Hogan has won, how many Austin has won, how many Triple H or John Cena, Rock, 'Taker etc....it could've been one, it could've been 10,000. I don't care. I just know they made a lasting impact on the business. One that will stand the test of time. The same goes for guys who didn't win any titles Jake Roberts, Hacksaw Duggan, Boss Man. I don't hold it against them. I just know they made an impact.

And let me make one more thing clear. People can argue for or against an inductee all they want. If they want to use title reigns as part of their argument, they are allowed to. Just because you have some issue with how titles are given, as opposed to won, doesn't give you the right to insult people for no other reason than them mentioning titles. (Be clear, I am speaking for the other people you insult on this forum. You can insult me all you want because I see that you're a fool and don't have much intelligence, and seemingly no logic skills--and you always result to "boy" and "idiot" because it makes you feel superior, which has to be a rare feeling for you.)

I never said no one is "not allowed" you fucking idiot. It was part of a debate. Someone disagreed with my assessment of Jeff Jarrett's career and I replied back. No one was insulted. It was a difference of opinion. We are allowed to have that. I never said no one was 'not allowed". Furthermore it was debate I was having with someone else, you felt the need to interject your two cents with, not an argument for or against the topic of discussion, but an insult. The only person I insulted was you and you don't deserve my respect.

If you think it's a waste of time then why are you even here? Are you just trying to troll? I'm not upset either way but I like to give my opinion. Again, I never said it's not anyone's right. I don't even know where you get that. In fact, I engage and encourage debate. I know exactly what it is but I enjoy revisiting wrestlers' careers and if that's not your cup of tea so be it but I don't need the grammar police trolling my posts and if you do you will get an insult back.

 

[LibSuperstar]

I put more stock into drawing power and influence on wrestling. Is a new generation of wrestlers copying your style/persona? Did you help make a promotion or wrestling in general become more successful or prominent?

 

[thebarber]

So....back to the topic. The rumour is this years posthumous inductee will be Bam Bam Bigelow and Kid Rick the celebrity. Surely there will be 1 or 2 more inductees. My picks, based on having an old timer inductee and a WWE agent inductee, I'm going Ivan Koloff and William Regal

 

[THTRobtaylor]

No way is Regal going in the same year as Goldberg... not with their history.

There has been talk of fewer inductions in recent years, Bam Bam takes the "dead wrestler" slot and Kid Rock the Celeb one you pretty much have a class, not the best ever for sure, but it does the job.

The "promoter" slot I guess IS Jarrett.

If they snuck one more in then I'd hope it would be an older midcarder like Rick Martel... Regal can wait for a better class/slot... It makes sense he goes in when Jericho does.

 

[d_henderson1810]

Titles don't mean jack shit in "pro wrestling" and they meant even less during the Russo years which Jarrett where Jarrett had most of his success. If anyone else had been booking Jeff Jarrett would not be a three time World Champion. Furthermore, all those "championships" meant was that he was given the ball and failed to deliver. Either he was out of the company or the company folded soon thereafter. Not saying he was bad but I wouldn't rank him among the top five I-C Champions of all time and maybe not even in the top 10 same goes for tag . So spare me the "championships" argument.



I remember the Attitude Era and EVERYONE was hot at the time. It's like being a roleplayer on a championship team. You're going to get the rub off guys like Austin, Rock, Foley, DX but no one in their right mind would say Jarrett contributed to the success of the Attitude Era. It was the atmosphere back then. It was just crazy hot. Are you going to put everyone was in WWE during '98-'99 in the HOF?



No it does not. WCW was a complete dumpster fire by when Jarrett was "on top." His biggest claim to fame in WCW was laying down in the middle of the ring and letting Hogan pin him. As the late Mike Graham said "He broke 10,000 guitars and he didn't draw a dime...not a DIME."

"If anyone else was booking, Jarrett wouldn't have been a three-time champion"

Except that Jarrett booked himself as three time TNA Champion in the early days of the company. But he owned the wrestling company. So what has been YOUR contribution to wrestling?


You say that "titles didn't count" under Russo.

Okay then, by that reasoning, some of "Stone Cold" Steve Austin's reigns don't matter either, since Russo was head writer of RAW in 1998-99 when SCSA won the belts at WM14 and WM15.

Also, Mankind's title reigns wouldn't mean "jack shit" either, in your eyes, since that was on Russo's watch as well.

But don't let facts get in the way of your agenda.


"I don't rank him amongst the five top IC champions of all time".

I believe that Jarrett may be second or third in the most IC Title reigns (the others being the Miz and Chris Jericho). So he had a few runs with the belt.

"Furthermore, all those championships meant that he was given the ball and failed to run with it".

So you are saying that having a lot of title reigns means that you have failed often?

Okay then, you mustn't respect Ric Flair either, then, since he won the World Title 16 times. But to you, that means that he failed 15 times to retain it, does it not?

Not everyone in the "Attitude Era" was crazy hot then? I think Jarrett has done more in wrestling than Kurrgan, or Phil DeFon, or Mr X (who was in the Brawl for all).

In fact, the biggest drawback of the Attitude Era was that, after the top dozen guys, the in-ring work dropped dramatically. Jarrett had better matches than most of the roster back then.


Look, I get it. You hate Jarrett's guts, and if he met you, he might hate yours too (I have a feeling that you get a lot of that). But to dismiss actual measures of HoF worthiness so that you can exclude one guy, means that others who are also measured to the same standards (such as championships) have to be excluded as well.

You say that championships mean nothing, but I bet you are one of these whiny bitches who gets upset when your fave doesn't win the belt.

It is one thing to not like the guy. But to discredit his achievements are stupid.

 

[Makaveli31]

Except that Jarrett booked himself as three time TNA Champion in the early days of the company. But he owned the wrestling company. So what has been YOUR contribution to wrestling?

Last I checked I am not up for consideration for the HOF but thanks for asking.

Okay then, by that reasoning, some of "Stone Cold" Steve Austin's reigns don't matter either, since Russo was head writer of RAW in 1998-99 when SCSA won the belts at WM14 and WM15.

Also, Mankind's title reigns wouldn't mean "jack shit" either, in your eyes, since that was on Russo's watch as well.

But don't let facts get in the way of your agenda.

This might be the dumbest statement of all time. It would comical if you weren't serious. Let me get these "facts" straight. Steve Austin and Mick Foley drew in millions of TV viewers to RAW on a weekly basis. Sold millions of PPV's. They drew thousands more to arenas and stadiums nationwide and around the world. They sold millions of dollars in merchandise. No, Mick Foley's reign did not mean "jack shit" it meant bank and lots of it. But I would not use the number of titles he won as validation for his legendary career. I would point to the above listed reasons.

I believe that Jarrett may be second or third in the most IC Title reigns (the others being the Miz and Chris Jericho). So he had a few runs with the belt.

Again, I don't care how many times he's "won" said belt. I care about the impact of a performer. When I think great I-C Champions I think of Randy Savage, Curt Hennig, Scott Hall, Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, Rock, HHH but that's just my opinion. You could have Jarrett #1 on your list. I could care less. I just think the above mentioned wrestlers' made more impact with the I-C belt than Jeff Jarrett ever did.

Okay then, you mustn't respect Ric Flair either, then, since he won the World Title 16 times. But to you, that means that he failed 15 times to retain it, does it not?

That is another debate. We all know (or maybe you don't) that the NWA World Heavyweight title was a heavily politicized title. It would change hands overseas, it would change hands to appease a certain promoter, it was used to prop up certain territories. I didn't say anything about not respecting Ric Flair but Flair being a "16 time" world champion has nothing to do with how I view him as a performer.

Look, I get it. You hate Jarrett's guts, and if he met you, he might hate yours too (I have a feeling that you get a lot of that). But to dismiss actual measures of HoF worthiness so that you can exclude one guy, means that others who are also measured to the same standards (such as championships) have to be excluded as well.

When did I say I hate his guts? Did I take personal shots at him? I don't even know him. I can have a rational debate without getting emotionally invested (unlike some). What are the actual measures of HOF worthiness? I would like to hear them.

You say that championships mean nothing, but I bet you are one of these whiny bitches who gets upset when your fave doesn't win the belt.

Sounds like you're the whiny bitch.

It is one thing to not like the guy. But to discredit his achievements are stupid.

Again, never said I did not like him. I guess reading comprehension is not your strong point and I did not "discredit" his achievements. He had a long career in pro wrestling for well over two decades. Was upper mid card in the "Big Two". Was a solid hand in the ring. Had entertaining matches. A bit of charisma but could never find that right gimmick that would take him to the next level. That is what I think when I think of Jeff Jarrett.

I was little surprised by his HOF nomination and questioned his merits based on the MY criteria. I'm just a guy posting on a message board and you think I have some personal grudge. That is laughable and shows you take way too seriously.

 

[d_henderson1810]

Last I checked I am not up for consideration for the HOF but thanks for asking.



This might be the dumbest statement of all time. It would comical if you weren't serious. Let me get these "facts" straight. Steve Austin and Mick Foley drew in millions of TV viewers to RAW on a weekly basis. Sold millions of PPV's. They drew thousands more to arenas and stadiums nationwide and around the world. They sold millions of dollars in merchandise. No, Mick Foley's reign did not mean "jack shit" it meant bank and lots of it. But I would not use the number of titles he won as validation for his legendary career. I would point to the above listed reasons.



Again, I don't care how many times he's "won" said belt. I care about the impact of a performer. When I think great I-C Champions I think of Randy Savage, Curt Hennig, Scott Hall, Shawn Michaels, Bret Hart, Rock, HHH but that's just my opinion. You could have Jarrett #1 on your list. I could care less. I just think the above mentioned wrestlers' made more impact with the I-C belt than Jeff Jarrett ever did.



That is another debate. We all know (or maybe you don't) that the NWA World Heavyweight title was a heavily politicized title. It would change hands overseas, it would change hands to appease a certain promoter, it was used to prop up certain territories. I didn't say anything about not respecting Ric Flair but Flair being a "16 time" world champion has nothing to do with how I view him as a performer.



When did I say I hate his guts? Did I take personal shots at him? I don't even know him. I can have a rational debate without getting emotionally invested (unlike some). What are the actual measures of HOF worthiness? I would like to hear them.



Sounds like you're the whiny bitch.



Again, never said I did not like him. I guess reading comprehension is not your strong point and I did not "discredit" his achievements. He had a long career in pro wrestling for well over two decades. Was upper mid card in the "Big Two". Was a solid hand in the ring. Had entertaining matches. A bit of charisma but could never find that right gimmick that would take him to the next level. That is what I think when I think of Jeff Jarrett.

I was little surprised by his HOF nomination and questioned his merits based on the MY criteria. I'm just a guy posting on a message board and you think I have some personal grudge. That is laughable and shows you take way too seriously.

Firstly, I heard that you were a candidate for the "Idiot" Hall-Of-Fame, so you are eligible for that.

Secondly, you said that Jarrett ONLY won titles under Russo. What has that got to do with anything. Firstly, Jarrett doesn't decide to win the belt three times (except in TNA, when he ran it), Russo booked him that way. He also booked SCSA and Mankind to have reigns as well.

Besides, would you have preferred old guys still winning the main belt in WCW, like Hogan, Sid and Kevin Nash, again and again? Even Sting was on the wrong side of 40. At least Jarrett, Booker T and Scott Steiner provided fresh faces in the title picture, something a lot here wanted WWE to do before NXT became a thing. I doubt Booker T sold out arenas as champion either. Does that then discredit him being a HoFer as well?

Also, Jarrett started a wrestling company, which is still going today. The company he started provides an alternative for wrestlers who have been dumped by WWE, or see it as an alternative to WWE. Also, TNA only went to the pack once Dixie Carter took over, since she was clueless about running a wrestling company.

Jarrett only has a bad reputation in wrestling because two powerful voices, "Stone Cold" Steve Austin and Hulk Hogan, bad mouth him. Austin refused to have a program with him (but then, Jarrett isn't the first guy Austin refused to put over, remember how he walked out rather than putting Brock Lesnar over), and Hogan has badmouthed Jarrett for participating in that stunt where Jarrett lay down for Hogan, and Russo then badmouthed him.

Also, Vince McMahon was annoyed that he had to pay Jarrett upfront to end his contract, because Jarrett thought that Vince would do a "Bret Hart" on him. Both parties have obviously moved on now, and Jarrett is going into the HoF.

I think both Jeff and his father Jerry should be inducted, as Jerry was Vince's right hand man at one stage, and would have taken over running WWE if Vince went to jail for the drug charges. They have contributed far more to the sport than some moaner like you have sitting on the internet trolling them. You say who cares about Jarrett's contribution? Who cares about your contribution to anything in life?

If I were a wrestler, do you know how I would comfort myself against all the hateful trolls? By remembering that, in 100 years time, someone will open a wrestling book, and see that I am in the Hall Of Fame, whereas who will remember any of you hateful trolls in 100 years' time? Just shows whose life is more important.

 

[Makaveli31]

Firstly, I heard that you were a candidate for the "Idiot" Hall-Of-Fame, so you are eligible for that.

LOL, well that's quite an honor coming from a from a first ballot inductee and ranking member. I would try to rebut your answers but they made absolutely no fucking sense and have nothing to do with what I'm talking about.

you said that Jarrett ONLY won titles under Russo. What has that got to do with anything. Firstly, Jarrett doesn't decide to win the belt three times (except in TNA, when he ran it), Russo booked him that way. He also booked SCSA and Mankind to have reigns as well.

Do me a favor and go back and read what I wrote about Austin and Foley. It has nothing to do with their "reigns" and who booked who. It has everything to do with asses in seats. I can't make that any more clear.

Besides, would you have preferred old guys still winning the main belt in WCW, like Hogan, Sid and Kevin Nash, again and again? Even Sting was on the wrong side of 40. At least Jarrett, Booker T and Scott Steiner provided fresh faces in the title picture, something a lot here wanted WWE to do before NXT became a thing. I doubt Booker T sold out arenas as champion either. Does that then discredit him being a HoFer as well?

Another phantom argument. I deal in facts. It dosn't matter what I "preferred". I just deal with what happened.

I doubt Booker T sold out arenas as champion either. Does that then discredit him being a HoFer as well?

We can have that argument.

Jarrett only has a bad reputation in wrestling because two powerful voices, "Stone Cold" Steve Austin and Hulk Hogan, bad mouth him. Austin refused to have a program with him (but then, Jarrett isn't the first guy Austin refused to put over, remember how he walked out rather than putting Brock Lesnar over), and Hogan has badmouthed Jarrett for participating in that stunt where Jarrett lay down for Hogan, and Russo then badmouthed him.

Again, more hearsay and rumor. I never spoke about Jarrett's reputation. Good or bad.

They have contributed far more to the sport than some moaner like you have sitting on the internet trolling them. You say who cares about Jarrett's contribution? Who cares about your contribution to anything in life?

Obviously you care and so does your mom.

If I were a wrestler, do you know how I would comfort myself against all the hateful trolls? By remembering that, in 100 years time, someone will open a wrestling book, and see that I am in the Hall Of Fame, whereas who will remember any of you hateful trolls in 100 years' time? Just shows whose life is more important.

Too bad you are not a wrestler. Keep dreaming son,

 

[thebarber]

Shame the concussion class action is ongoing, guys like Bundy and Demolition are long overdue.
Martel, Honkytonk Man, Muta...so many deserving that are not in

 

[Psykohurricane55]

Shame the concussion class action is ongoing, guys like Bundy and Demolition are long overdue.
Martel, Honkytonk Man, Muta...so many deserving that are not in

Honky tonk man will probably get in when they offered him the amount of money he's asking to show up and if he doesn't ha a convention to go to during the weekend.

That's why he refused it the last time so I wouldn't be surprise that it's still the reason why they don't even bother asking him for a while.

 

[AndrewC316]

I got a feeling the Kid Rock being inducted is gonna lead to American Badass Taker

 

[HORRORHOLIC]

Probably, but I sure hope not!!