Who's the best never to hold the WWE title?
- Thread starter Crayo
- Start date
-
Welcome to "The New" Wrestling Smarks Forum!
I see that you are not currently registered on our forum. It only takes a second, and you can even login with your Facebook! If you would like to register now, pease click here: Register
Once registered please introduce yourself in our introduction thread which can be found here: Introduction Board
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 47,754
- Reaction score
- 14,050
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 34
Leo C said:
Rick Rude, The Million dollar Man, Steamboat... so many greats for the 80s/90s were left out.
Dolph'sZiggler said:
For sure, all of those guys should've won the title. They all deserved it. But title reigns were normally a lot bigger than today when they were in their prime, Hogan was running around with the title all year long, etc.
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 47,754
- Reaction score
- 14,050
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 34
Yea, like I said it's cool on one hand because getting the title actually meant something whereas today it seems so watered down. Last summer we had it go from Cena to Punk to Mysterio to Cena to ADR to Cena to Punk in like a month span.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2012
- Messages
- 6,691
- Reaction score
- 1,927
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 37
- Location
- Union City, Tennessee
Piper with Ted Dibiese as a close second. If I could re-book things, I'd rebook Wrestlemania 4 and do away with the big, boring tournament (even Hogan says in his book he thought it was boring.) Just have Dibiese win the belt via a screwjob (instead of Andre) and have him lose it one on one to Savage at WM4 instead of in the finals of a tournament.
As far as there being many guys who could of or should have been world champion but never were, that's what makes the world title special, to know that only the very best (back when the title actually meant something, that is) would ever get it. The guys who never won is because there always just happened to be a better option available. When it wasn't Hogan, it was Savage. When it wasn't Savage, it was Warrior. Etc., etc
As far as there being many guys who could of or should have been world champion but never were, that's what makes the world title special, to know that only the very best (back when the title actually meant something, that is) would ever get it. The guys who never won is because there always just happened to be a better option available. When it wasn't Hogan, it was Savage. When it wasn't Savage, it was Warrior. Etc., etc
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 47,754
- Reaction score
- 14,050
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 34
I'd take any of these guys over Warrior any day of the week.
About DDP, he was criminally misused in WWE.
About DDP, he was criminally misused in WWE.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2011
- Messages
- 39,124
- Reaction score
- 5,642
- Points
- 118
- Age
- 31
- Location
- God's Country, Sheffield UK
Can't believe I forgot about Rude, dude pulled crazy heat in the early 90s and carried Warrior to a decent match.
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk 2
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2012
- Messages
- 47,754
- Reaction score
- 14,050
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 34
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2012
- Messages
- 6,691
- Reaction score
- 1,927
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 37
- Location
- Union City, Tennessee
Dolph'sZiggler said:
Warrior was hugely over during that time. There was every reason to believe he would take Hogan's place permanently, even though it didn't happen. From a business perspective, Warrior was a better choice than anyone else.
Also, I think Rick Rude was considered for a world title run at one point, but Hogan shot it down. At least according to Ric Flair in his book, that's why Rude didn't want to work with Hogan in WCW.
