For reasons complete unknown to me, I have been pushed into yet another debate of wills between those on the WWE side and those on the TNA side of the fences. While my position is clear in over 300 columns' worth of material to bring in the momentum, some feel compelled to push WWE. I can understand and I can appreciate the zeal. I will ask that you at least try to remember who it is you're rooting for in the battle.
To those who say that men like Sting will never be in the WWE Hall of Fame because they never worked for Vince or the establishment that is WWE or was WWF or was WWWF before that, I bring attention the following men:
"Bullet" Bob Armstrong
The Four Horsemen
I would like to point out that NONE of these men OR stables appeared in WWE or ANY of the incarnations owned by Vince McMahon. A side note: WCW should NOT be included as a part of the WWE Universe as NONE of the inductees here ever appeared in ANY way on a television program produced by Vince McMahon as performers. That having been said, there are only 79 inductees in the entirety of the WWE Hall of Fame, some of which have been snubbed, for reasons only Vince and those close to him are aware.
Next on tap, the argument that had Kevin Nash and Booker T not returned from TNA they would have no place in the WWE Hall of Fame.....really?! Booker T's partnership in Harlem Heat alone would qualify him for such honors. His 5 Times (no, I won't do the whole schtick) holding the WCW Championship wouldn't hurt either, nor his WWE World Heavyweight Championship reigns. Vince would be an IDIOT not to induct Nash, Booker, Goldberg, Hall, Sean Waltman, Savage and the entire list from my previous Hall of Fame column.....but what do I know?
Some of the greatest performers to ever live are missing from the Hall even though they were LOYAL to the WWF name. Jake Roberts was quite possibly one of the best experts in ring psychology ever to compete....yet his name is missing. For Vince to ignore Goldberg, even if he never showed his face in WWE, would be foolish. There are plenty of very vocal fans to attest to that.
As for more Undertaker vs. Sting at Wrestlemania chants.....look....the ship has set sail and ISN'T coming back for another pass. Would it make money? Absolutely. But would it be best? Not a chance. There is simply no way to end a match of that magnitude that would satisfy a true wrestling fan. If Sting wins, he breaks the streak and guys like HBK, Triple H, and Kane, who were far more capable performers when they faced him, would look as if they were inferior. To say Sting, even at his prime, was a better performer than Shawn Michaels is laughable. And now, even moreso. If Undertaker wins, he buries a storied career of a WCW icon. Not cool. Why not have Goldberg vs. The Undertaker and watch Taker get his fan-rude, non selling, underworked, overpaid self get his rear end handed to him....or better yet, why not Brock Lesnar?
The reasons for why not are far more plentiful than those in favor. Simple as that. Should Sting be inducted? If Vince has it in his heart to swallow his pride and induct someone who won't be buried or recreated by him.....sure.
I have so much more to say, but I will save my venom for another column to discuss the status quo in the here and now. But suffice it to say, my opinion is just that, an opinion. If you believe WWE to be the lead dog in the pack, I will not try to stop you from believing it, but in my mind, the young and hungry of the roster in TNA is the superior one. We'll get into that next time.....