First, Sting is the top inductee. He spent the majority of his career outside of the WWE, most notably in WCW and TNA. He finally came to the WWE in 2014. His first feud was against Triple H, which he lost. His second feud was against Seth Rollins for the WWE Championship, which he lost. He also suffered a serious injury in that title match. Next thing you know, he's going into the Hall of Fame and it looks like his career is over.
This has to be viewed as tragedy. There were so many other feuds and storylines fans wanted to see for Sting. The top of that list would have to feature Sting vs. Undertaker. It is not unheard of for someone in the Hall of Fame to still have a match for the WWE, but how likely will the WWE be to do it? They have been very careful with injuries in recent years, especially after allegations from CM Punk after he walked out on them. Besides that, if Taker vs. Sting really was on their agenda, would they rush the induction of Sting so soon after he just wrestled a few months ago? No, it seems this might be the true end of Sting's in-ring career.
What can he do as a non-wrestler? Before Shane McMahon returned I was thinking about how the WWE can bring Sting back as a GM. He has experience doing that kind of thing in TNA. It would be a good way for him to still be useful. Even with Shane McMahon's return and this angle about him possibly taking over Raw, is it out of the question that Sting might still end up an authority figure? It could still happen. The WWE would look bad if they just have Sting's career end with him looking like a legendary jobber.
Second inductee I want to bring up, Jacqueline. Some fans scratched their heads at this one, while others are happy about it. When it comes to the men, the WWE doesn't just induct A-tier wrestlers into the Hall of Fame. It isn't just main-eventers and former World Champions going in. Even midcarders go in, if they had careers that stood out. Jackie was not an A-tier diva. She was never the centerpiece of the diva division. Even though she had some periphery angles, including a brief run with the Cruiserweight Championship, she was not a periphery diva. She was not someone featured as a star on the periphery of the centerpiece. She was a credible jobber. Her first title reign was off of putting over Sable, the first centerpiece of the diva era. Her second title reign was filler. Nevertheless, it wouldn't be out of the question to see a woman pushed as a credible jobber get inducted.
When it comes to Jackie, however, I do not think she really belongs in the Hall of Fame. There are three reasons I think someone should go into the Hall of Fame. First, overness. Popularity isn't everything, but pro wrestling is part of the entertainment business. You go out there to perform to connect with the fans. If you can become extremely popular with the fans that you stand out over time, you deserve to be in the Hall of Fame. Second, a remarkable career. If someone is booked like a god, it is going to be hard to keep them out of the Hall of Fame, regardless of whether or not they got over. Michelle McCool is an example of what I mean. She didn't get the popularity to deserve induction, but she will obviously get in for all the times the WWE booked her to make history and how hard they pushed her. Third, making a major contribution to pro wrestling. Even if the bookers don't give you the fabulous career and you don't get the love from the fans, if you did something to help the business be successful, you might deserve induction. Let me bring up the example of Vince Russo. The WWE is unlikely to ever induct a writer, but this guy is probably the best-known writer in pro wrestling. A lot of fans may scorn him and view him as a joke, but he helped to make the Attitude Era as successful as it was. He wasn't a wrestler that would be booked to look amazing. He didn't get popular. But he stands out and had a hand in one of the most successful eras in the WWE.
What does Jackie have going for her? She never got too popular. Aside from her Cruiserweight title run, yes, she was the first African-American woman to win the Women's Championship. I don't think that's enough to get you into the Hall of Fame. Doug Williams is the first African-American quarterback to start and win the Super Bowl. He was the MVP of the big game. And he is not in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. I don't think being the first person of a certain race to hold a title is enough, especially in a business where title reigns are booked by people backstage. Does The Great Khali deserve to be in the Hall of Fame for being the first Indian to hold a World title in the WWE? He probably will be inducted, but he really does not deserve it. Jackie wasn't even the first woman to hold the Cruiserweight Championship. I have seen some people point out she was a ref for a while. And? She deserves induction for that? Did it really have a positive impact on the business? A positive impact for women? She didn't get as over as Lita or Chyna. She wasn't booked like Trish Stratus or Michelle McCool. She really didn't do anything to have a major impact as a performer. Even outside of the WWE, because the WWE does often acknowledge what a performer does in other big promotions, she didn't become too notable. She never got over too much in TNA and never even won the title there. Doug Williams deserves induction in the Pro Football Hall of Fame before Jackie deserves induction in the WWE Hall of Fame.
As I said, the Attitude Era was one of the hottest periods in wrestling. Jackie was a part of that. But does everyone that was a part of that era deserve induction in the Hall of Fame? Look at that Denver Broncos team that just won the Super Bowl. Those players will get their Super Bowl rings. But are all of them deserving of Hall of Fame rings? No. Peyton Manning will eventually be inducted. DeMarcus Ware will be inducted. There might be a few other guys that have already clinched induction or likely will. But it isn't enough to just be on a winning team. It is not enough to play one great game or even one great season. That is one of the reasons Doug Williams has not been inducted. I see some fans that think The Godfather does not deserve induction. I disagree. He played a unique character that got over with the fans. That is why I say guys like him and Rikishi do deserve induction. They might not have won World titles. They might have only been midcarders. But they stood out in an entertaining way to help the Attitude Era be successful. Jackie never really had a unique gimmick in the same way these men did. Simply winning some title reigns during the Attitude Era is not enough.
There was an uproar from wrestling fans last year that the WWE could not ignore. That has caused the WWE to be a little better with how they treat women with wrestling talent, although I would not say the status quo of the diva division is over. But the WWE and fans have to be realistic. The Attitude Era was not a time when solid women's wrestling shined. You can bring up Chyna vs. Lita and whatever else all you want, but that doesn't mean all female wrestlers got as over as those two and respectable women's wrestling matches made that era great. Eye-candy divas and other things going on in the periphery made that era great. Debra stood out during this era more than Jackie. You might say that is not respectable, but that is the way it was. Sunny isn't the only eye-candy diva that deserves induction into the Hall of Fame. The WWE should not only be inducting female wrestlers for the next few years. They are just not being realistic to what their history is about. I know there is a revolution going on, but that doesn't mean you go back and act like certain women had more of an impact than they really did. That's revisionist history. This is an era where tables have turned and female wrestlers are getting talked about more. I could imagine Paige, Sasha Banks, Becky Lynch, and Charlotte getting careers to get them into the Hall of Fame. It is a lot of the eye-candy divas, like Summer Rae, that are no longer making the same impact they made back in the Attitude Era.
In the end, I would say I see some double standards here. A lot of fans will say a woman deserves induction into the Hall of Fame for just having solid wrestling talent and winning some titles. But these same fans would roll their eyes at certain midcard men with solid wrestling talent and some title reigns under his name getting inducted, even if he stood out more than these women and got more over. A lot of fans drop their standards for the women. I don't think that's right. Do you want to demand better for these women? Or do you want to accept mediocrity as something amazing? As long as the WWE continues to commit to inducting one woman into their Hall of Fame every year, more women that may not really deserve it may get it.
No comments:
Post a Comment