Hall of Fame questions



Hi Dave & Bryan:

Since the Freebirds are in as a group (and in my opinion they should be in) is there a case to be made for the original Horseman, or the Windham Horseman as a group?

Also why do you feel that there is less emphasis on tag teams in the hall of fame (I know in the modern era they are not as important, but in the earlier years tag teams were very important)

Is it possible for you to maybe do an article on the past history and importance of tag team wrestling? (It could possibly help observer voters understand the significant of The Andersons, The Rock & Roll Express, and Midnight Express)  

I could be wrong but I can’t help but think that the “modern view” of tag-teams as mid-card players has an impact on how voters look at the tag teams of the past.

 

Charles McClellan

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

213-703-4899

DM:  Actually I see the Andersons and Rock & Roll Express doing really well in the ballot, just not crossing the finish line.  It would be harder for the Dudleys or Hardys, who held a ton of titles but didn't main event as many big shows, although the Dudleys did in ECW.  Regarding the Horsemen, the big problem is that if you look at records, how many times did they actually team up together.  The Freebirds teamed for years in different territories. The Midnight Express teamed up.  The Horsemen were a revolving group where, except for rare occasions, they didn't work much as a four-man team.  I could definitely see Tully Blanchard & Arn Anderson as a team, since they were one of the best teams of the last 30 years, but the teams that make it are those who actually teamed up in a lot of matches, not just a few.


Hi Guys,
 
Just like to say how absorbing I found the Hall of Fame show, and it got me thinking - with the evolution of wrestling in North America seemingly edging towards television and rights fees being the greater focus than house shows and PPV numbers, do you see a possibility in the not too distant future of a factor of consideration for the ballot (or even induction) being drawing ratings? If so, do you think there are any wrestlers not in the Hall of Fame who may find their cases strengthened by this?
 
All the best,
 
Adam Dawes


DM:  People should be evaluated based on what is important at the time.  Today it is a lot harder to define, but a long successful run on top is impressive because there are less spots on top with major companies than any time in history.


Good afternoon Dave,

 

You know how people can be added to the ballot if you get enough emails from people saying they will vote for them? Would you consider doing that to remove someone from the Hall?

 

For example, if you got an influx of emails next year saying Benoit should be removed, would you consider doing another recall vote?

 

Many thanks.

 

John Liddell

 DM:  I voted against Benoit staying, but we used the same standard that would have been used in baseball had such a situation taken place.  The majority voted him out, but the baseball rule is you need the same percentage to get in to be taken out.  It was a one-time deal.  It was an issue people felt strongly about on both sides but bringing it back again because me or others didn't get the result we wanted doesn't seem to make sense.

I didn't get to call into the Observer Hall of Fame show you guys did on Monday, but I wanted to ask Dave about the surprising lack of support for Edge.  He's stated that he thinks Edge should be in the Hall of Fame, and I strongly agree with him.  The fact that he hasn't been elected yet is baffling to me when you look at his credentials. 
In my opinion, his career speaks for itself.  He was a great worker and had a ton of high profile matches with a variety of opponents, not just in gimmick matches as some detractors have stated, but tremendous wrestling matches as well, with everyone from Shawn Michaels and Kurt Angle, to Undertaker and John Cena. 
He headlined and carried the Smackdown brand for a number of years, and his brief title reign in Jan 2006 when he cashed in the Money in the Bank on John Cena spiked the Raw ratings during the period when he was champion to levels that the show hadn't done in a few years.  That proved what kind of draw he was when given the opportunity to headline.
If there's one area where he lacks its longevity, but I don't think he should have it held against him because his got a neck injury that prematurely ended his career.  He has HOF credentials in every other area that WON HOF voters are asked to look at when they vote.
I'm wondering if Dave has any idea, or if he's heard from any voters that don't vote for him, and the reasons why they don't.
Dan Wahlers

DM:  Lots of good candidates on the ballot.  I feel Edge has done enough for the reasons you mentioned, but it's very hard to get voted in.


 

Who is the strongest Hall of Fame candidate from this list?

 

Who is the strongest Hall of Fame candidate from this list?

 

Who should get the next featherweight title shot?