Hall of Immortals

[Jennie Bomb]

Well... according to the criteria the game uses, The Undertaker is very, very close to meeting the criteria even if you don't give him iconic status. He's currently on 6 World title reigns, has participated in 2 WrestleMania main event matches and has a PWI Match of the year plus a Meltzer 5* match, which should qualify as 2 Major matches. If you expand the definition of "historic or legendary events" to include all of the "Big Four", then 'Taker easily meets the requirements even without the National Icon status that he arguably deserves anyway, being one of the most recognisable names in wrestling history and all.

[Sartagis]

[QUOTE=The Aussie;427784]Well, the IWGP is considered a main event championship in NJPW and is in a national promotion. The Junior-heavyweights have their own division which is considered the equal to the heavyweight division[/QUOTE] I assume when you said IWGP you meant IWGP Jr. is considered a Main Event championship? Anyways I wouldn't say it's considered main event. The Juniors aren't seen as equals as such, guys like Minoru, Kanemoto, Tiger Mask, Liger and AKIRA are seen as legitimate threats to heavyweights, but still the under dogs. Wataru Inoue and Ryusuke Taguchi the current and last IWGP Jr champs probably would not get close to a victory over any Heavyweight past mid-card, maybe give an upper mid-card guy a run for his money, and Taguchi is probably the most popular of the current NJPW Jr's who aren't one of the five I already mentioned. But thats where things get confusing as then you have this thing called The Best of the Super Juniors (BOSJ). Now the BOSJ is a entire tour headlined by Juniors, i think a few years recently the juniors have been pushed down and they went with Heavyweights still headlining till the Final but most years as I recall the Juniors have been giving the last several matches each show for both round robin matches and final four brackets. To Jaded: I can't comment on all Japan currently but NJPW at least sorta pushes their Juniors along with the heavyweights. Factions are a big thing, so it faction warfare Juniors are envolved, each of the 3 none home army factions in NJPW currently have 2-3 guys who can be called Juniors (RISE: Minoru, Milano and Devit, LEGEND: Liger, AKIRA, Koshinaka if ya want, GBH: Jado, Gedo). They on a regular basis are in matches with Heavyweights, but generally in 4,6,8 and 10 man tags. If one of them gets the victory it's usually over another Junior, but more times then not one of them is taking the fall to one of the heavyweights unless someone lower on the totem pole like a young lion or Tomoaki Honma is in the match.

[paphos]

Wow.I find this feature quite simple and still people are confused. Immortal should be a guy that has made such a big impact on wrestling that he is almost sinonimous with it. So we have just a few at that level like Hogan,Andre,Flair,Bret,Austin maybe Taker in a few years...After that I can't really see who would be in it... Sting for me is not a legend.Neither is Hall that i've seen being sugested for the HoI.

[alden]

I think it is defining what each catagory is. What is a "legendary match". Is it a five star match in a historic or above ppv? what is Natinal icon? Is it A populairty though an entire country or is it A*? Year's of glory is odvious in the cverse but what about real world? There are a few top 100's out there. Which one do you go by?

[mad5226]

I'm stunned that so many people would leave Sting out. He was one of the top 3 names in WCW easy. The main face during their biggest years while they were the number 1 company in the world. And never caused any drama backstage. Surely he's a shoe in for sure.

[Gigas]

So if someone held the belt for like 3 years they would be worse off when compared to someone who won it 3 times in 5 months. Shouldnt the HOI take how long the title reigns lasted into consideration?

[shamelessposer]

I'd argue for the possible inclusion of Lawler and Foley because of what the two men have done to raise public awareness of wrestling. In Lawler's case it was the Kaufman feud and in Foley's it was putting out a New York Times bestseller. Keep in mind that both men spent large chunks of their careers in the territory system, so the metrics put forward by the TEW 2008 editor aren't entirely suited for judging either man's worthiness. Foley in particular has done a lot to change the way both his fans and his coworkers view wrestling.

[bigdaddykraven]

I was thinking the same thing for the time they held the titles. That would be a nice addition to the criteria that if the overall TIME of the reigns, say 3 years? Unno.

[lazorbeak]

[QUOTE=paphos;428164]Sting for me is not a legend.Neither is Hall that i've seen being sugested for the HoI.[/QUOTE] Either you have a short memory or you're just not paying attention. He was the top face for the top promotion in the world, main evented WCW's some of WCW's biggest pay per views ever, and was on top from about 1990 to the aftermath of that disasterous Starrcade match. The numbers say he'd be in. [quote=Gigas]So if someone held the belt for like 3 years they would be worse off when compared to someone who won it 3 times in 5 months. Shouldnt the HOI take how long the title reigns lasted into consideration?[/quote] Is that really any better? Going by length favors promotions that don't run 12 major events or more in a year. WWF back in the day didn't defend their title nearly as often, so it seems arbitrary that a longer time period between defenses should be rewarded. Further, any wrestler will tell you how important it is to get the second title reign: it's a sign of trust from the management that they're trusting a wrestler to carry the company for a second time, instead of going in a different direction or trying someone new. Kurt Angle never had a long title reign, but it was a sign of how much management trusted him despite never being a huge draw or an "icon" that he won the title four times. Conversely, Angle would have less time holding the title than Kevin Nash, who had a one year reign that absolutely sucked, then never touched the title again. I don't see a problem with the current system.

[Bucky Sinister]

My HOI list currently includes Hogan, Flair, Austin, and Rock. But I'm going to add Andre, Gorgeous George and Santo as Deceased workers just so I can have them in there. Because you don't get much more iconic than those guys. I was initially planning to include Bruno Sammartino and Dusty Rhodes, but after the discussion here, I don't think I will. Ditto Taker and Sting. I'm not sure who to add from Japan, though. Antonio Inoki? Giant Baba?

[alden]

I personaly think after we see who is in the c-verse hoi it will be easy for me to judge who the real world people should be *who's not in it is going to say alot also*

[davebiggs]

What I want to know is what about Vince? Ok so he is not a wrestler in the main sense of the world but would wrestling still be what it is today with out him? He would have my vote based purely on what he has done for wrestling as a whole.

[alden]

i'm not sure but i think adam said they hade to be active wrestlers *not sure though so i might be wrong*

[paphos]

[QUOTE=alden;428225]i'm not sure but i think adam said they hade to be active wrestlers *not sure though so i might be wrong*[/QUOTE] Well Vince is a former WWE and ECW champion... "cough" :rolleyes:

[Michael Wayne]

[QUOTE=Jennie Bomb;428139]If you expand the definition of "historic or legendary events" to include all of the "Big Four"[/QUOTE] I do this. I consider the big four, and some of the WCW events as historic/legendary, when deciding on the person.

[Sensai of Mattitude]

Ditto. I'd say the Rumble, Summerslam and Survivor Series could all come under historic (they've all run for over 20 years, right?) with WrestleMania the only WWE one under legendary.

[Von Dozier]

I'm honestly confused how people are forgetting to add these two immortals. [url]http://youtube.com/watch?v=9LUMuX8MIkk[/url]

[gazwefc83]

having been converting my 1989 mod when you add someone to the HOI and you choose the number of headliners and such is that how many events he has headlined or for how many promotions?

[W3LSHY]

It means Historic or Legendary events for a National or above company ;)

[combatmedic]

So, we've established that WM, Summerslam, Survivor Series, and Royal Rumble are legendary event for WWF. What about WCW? I'd say Starcade, War Games, Halloween Havoc, and maybe The Crockett Cup

[Michael Wayne]

[QUOTE=combatmedic;428403]So, we've established that WM, Summerslam, Survivor Series, and Royal Rumble are legendary event for WWF. What about WCW? I'd say Starcade, War Games, Halloween Havoc, and maybe The Crockett Cup[/QUOTE] and possibly Bash At the Beach. I'd say the rest are all historic. With events like Souled Out, SIN, and some of the others normal.

[combatmedic]

[QUOTE=Michael Wayne;428404]and possibly Bash At the Beach. I'd say the rest are all historic. With events like Souled Out, SIN, and some of the others normal.[/QUOTE] Ah, yes, I forgot about Bash At The Beach

[gazwefc83]

so in my 1989 mod do i have to count how many times hulk hogan has mainevented a royal rumble, summerlsam, ss and wrestlemania? or does he get a 1 as in he has headlined for 1 promotion?

[Mr T Jobs To Me]

[QUOTE=gazwefc83;428425]so in my 1989 mod do i have to count how many times hulk hogan has mainevented a royal rumble, summerlsam, ss and wrestlemania? or does he get a 1 as in he has headlined for 1 promotion?[/QUOTE] In 1989, I wouldn't say any events besides Wrestlemania were legendary. So he'd get WM I, II, III, and if it's set after V a total of 4 Headliner points. If before, just the 3.

[gazwefc83]

its set after summerslam 89 so thats after wrestlemania 6! also whats difference with future inductee and current?