Discuss here.

Not a single hope in hell and I'm even actively opposed to others including him on their top 100s. Terrible wrestler, terrible promo, terrible person. Probably in my bottom 5 wrestlers behind Chief Jay Strongbow and Road Warrior Hawk.

 

Hated him as a kid, hate him even more as an adult. His death changed nothing about how I feel about him.

No.

Someone seriously nominated him?

Not a single hope in hell and I'm even actively opposed to others including him on their top 100s. Terrible wrestler, terrible promo, terrible person. Probably in my bottom 5 wrestlers behind Chief Jay Strongbow and Road Warrior Hawk.

 

come now, that's a bit harsh. i'd certainly rank him above early 90s jimmy garvin!

 

but yeah i basically agree

He'd probably make my 500. He could follow direction. He had a lot of energy. He believed in what he was doing which came through in his work (much like Sid). He was insanely fun to watch on the apron in a tag match. Yep, he'd make my 500.

His inability to even execute very basic things like - I don't know - kicking shows me he had no respect for his craft, and I could never rank someone like that.

I would comfortably rank Davey Richards above him.

I feel like Kevin Federline showed a better understanding of wrestling in his one professional match than I can recall seeing from Warrior, other than the times he was smart enough to let the other guy handle the workload.

I don't think this is a conversation worth having, to be honest. Whoever nominated him should probably say something, though.

He has no place on a list like this. Curious to know on what grounds he was nominated.

Really? If I'm not voting DDP I'm certainly not voting Warrior. The retirement match with Savage at Wrestlemania VII was a fantastic spectacle from start to finish, but that was all Savage's doing and is much more a feather in his cap than Warrior's. I'd be interested to see who nominated him and why?

I nominated him and fully realize that I will be his only vote.

 

When guitar players put together top 100 lists, the lists include widely different players. You have the number one contenders like Hendrix. You have the masters like Segovia and Atkins. You have the technical wizards like Malmsteen. You also get Johnny Thunders. The purists will howl, "Johnny can't play. Johnny is sloppy and out of tune. Johnny plays rehashed Chuck Berry licks. Johnny is just a junkie." There is a magic to Johnny's playing though. The energy of his playing and his raw tone make him a memorable guitarist who is beloved by some and hated by others.

 

I enjoy the energy of the Warrior. His character was a barbarian from another dimension and I feel like in his run from 1988 to 1991, he played that character well. His matches feel wild and out of control. They very well may have been falling apart at times, but I think that can be an enjoyable thing to watch at times. I see Warrior as a genre of wrestler that I would call the monster face that would include guys like Goldberg and I think he was the best of that group of wrestlers that destroyed their opponents.

 

I think of the Summerslam '89 match with Rude, his match with Hogan, and the retirement match with Savage as my favorite matches of that period in WWF. I have Savage in my top 5 of the list, so I think he was a wonderful wrestler. I don't think that he could have handed his 30 page script for Wrestlemania to anyone and anybody could have had that great match. Warrior was a part of those matches.

 

I like the theatrics he brought to his squashes, especially the '89 squashes. You never knew who he was going to stuff under a ring, carry to the back on his shoulder, or send off on a stretcher. I like his short form, against the green screen, promos. His and Jake Robert's strange promos always made me pay attention more so than the regular pun type promos others gave.

 

To Jerry's point that he was a bad person, Warrior certainly said some ugly things in his life, but I am not considering things that happened outside the show. The other nominees include murderers and thieves, which I am not holding against them. My working number one Flair is a guy that defrauds people and harasses women, but that doesn't change his greatness as a wrestler.

 

Warrior didn't connect to the "smart" communities of wrestling fans. He did connect to plenty of fans though. If you ever went to a show with Hogan and Warrior, their cheers were deafening. Hogan's were more sustained, but Warrior's were certainly in the same ballpark. The guy knew how to get fans to cheer. He was certainly unorthodox, but I think he was a worthwhile wrestler.

 

I realize nominating him is very controversial, but I am sincere that he is one of the wrestlers that I think needs to be on my list if the list is to be balanced with wrestlers from all sorts of types and genres.

To Jerry's point that he was a bad person, Warrior certainly said some ugly things in his life, but I am not considering things that happened outside the show.

Neither am I, I was thinking specifically about the times he held up Vince.

 

I do hold stuff like that against workers. I don't like Sid being a pain in the ass about doing a job on the way out of WCW, I don't like Brody holding up the NWA title by going into business for himself, and I don't like Warrior holding up Vince at Summerslam 91.

 

Some smart arse will bring up Flair not putting over Luger in 91, but the answer to that is, "but yeah, Flair was also the greatest wrestler of all time who'd been world champ for a decade" whereas Sid, Brody and Warrior were guys who'd been in the business five minutes who thought they were the dog's bollocks.

Are you considering promos into your equation Marvin?

I realize nominating him is very controversial, but I am sincere that he is one of the wrestlers that I think needs to be on my list if the list is to be balanced with wrestlers from all sorts of types and genres.

 

It's good of you to go and back up your nomination. I'm not nearly as harsh on your choice as some people. That said, if, as a community, we haven't put 100 better wrestlers in front of you (Even by some of the criteria that you laud Warrior upon) by the time the voting happens, then I'll be a little surprised.

He actually never held up Vince. That was one of the reasons he was so pissed at the company when that DVD came out, because it was a complete misrepresentation of the sequence of events at the time. He had documents in a court of law that proved that was a lie, which was the basis for his lawsuit.

In that case, I'll take the "terrible person" part back, it was the least important part of it anyway.

You know i considered putting Goldberg on my list so i see where Marvin is coming from.

I would comfortably rank Davey Richards above him.

 

 

Woah folks......let's not say anything we can't take back and will regret later.

 

You know i considered putting Goldberg on my list so i see where Marvin is coming from.

Goldberg is Warrior, if Warrior had figured out the basics of wrestling and was athletic.

Marvin gorilla pressed all the normals in this thread. Warrior for the top 100!

I was quite nervous about posting, but thanks to everybody for treating me fairly. It is great that the posters in this forum can tolerate people like me that have some really heretical opinions.

Yes, great post and I appreciate you sharing it. But I better not see you pimping Mongo McMichael anytime soon.

No Mongo from me.

I'll never vote for the Warrior, as my views are like Parv's to a slightly lesser degree (I can appreciate a good Warrior match and performance--and his destruction of the Honky Tonk Man remains one of the happiest moments of my fandom). That said, guys like him should probably be put out in the open, so to speak, so there can be an attempt at a fair discussion. I don't think every worker on the planet needs a thread, but for certain guys it might be nice to rationally express why we're not ranking them.

 

It's a similar principle to Warrior being put on the WON HOF ballot. I hardly think he's deserving, but it's probably even more unfair to refuse to put him on the ballot and engage in a discussion about him at all, polarizing though he may be.