With awesome movies come awesome quotes like "Earthlings! I HATE Earthlings!"
I've been thinking of the possible Top 5 Wrestling World Champions and where I would put Hogan, because as bad as he was it is impossible to deny he was a great champion for the company. He would have to be 1 or 2, but I can't decide which.
It would depend on your criteria, but I'd have to say that Hogan should be number one. He was champion when being champion really meant something. Since the late nineties, World Champion was a bit of an arbitrary distinction, with storyline meaning more than who was champ (making some champs, like Big Show, Jericho, an Kurt Angle during his first run less important than others). When Hogan was champ, the WWF would run 6 or 7 shows a week, and the champ was the main selling point.
Now, if actual wrestling ability and title reigns mean more in your criteria, then Hogan runs second to Ric Flair.
Yeah, I know you must be talking about WWF history exclusively because there's no way in hell Hogan is a more important World Champion than Lou motherfucking Thesz, who was the first and last holder of the only true undisputed title in history.
But if you are talking 'modern' wrestling, let's say from the 80's on up, I argue still that Harley Race and Ric Flair should be higher than Hulk Hogan on the list.
From my perspective, the WWF was always bigger globally than the NWA. NWA seemed to be a bigger deal amongst wrestling fans, but amongst non-fans in a lot of the world, particularly where I'm from, it was a non-entity. That's why WWF success ranks higher because it was more big-time. I have the Ric Flair Collection, he's not exactly wrestling in front of a packed Silverdome in those matches against Harley Race.
I had no idea your wife was such a big wrestling fan, Saint!
Anyway... then the whole thing comes down to your personal definition of 'important'. It's not really the popularity, or the actual talent that I'm thinking about, it's the history and heritage of said World Title.
Which is what I was saying when I said it depending on one's criteria. I'm thinking from a bottom-line standpoint, Hogan made more money for himself and his employers as champion, and did more to advance the company and idea of professional wrestling to the public.
That said, one could argue that his dumbed-down form of Rock n Wrestling also set back pro wrestling in terms of legitimacy.
I was thinking more about the combination of wrestling ability, popularity, and carrying the company business wise, like the way it is today. I'm not familiar with how wrestling was back when Thesz was champion, never researched that era.
I've been thinking of the possible Top 5 Wrestling World Champions and where I would put Hogan, because as bad as he was it is impossible to deny he was a great champion for the company. He would have to be 1 or 2, but I can't decide which.
Reply
Now, if actual wrestling ability and title reigns mean more in your criteria, then Hogan runs second to Ric Flair.
Reply
But if you are talking 'modern' wrestling, let's say from the 80's on up, I argue still that Harley Race and Ric Flair should be higher than Hulk Hogan on the list.
Reply
Reply
Anyway... then the whole thing comes down to your personal definition of 'important'. It's not really the popularity, or the actual talent that I'm thinking about, it's the history and heritage of said World Title.
Reply
That said, one could argue that his dumbed-down form of Rock n Wrestling also set back pro wrestling in terms of legitimacy.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment