|
|
Post by Justin Case on Mar 17, 2012 8:17:32 GMT -5
"he's well known by just about every wrestling fan' well, so is the Junkyard Dog. Or Tito Santana or Koko B. Ware. It's like saying Maroon 5 are Icon's like the Beatle's because people know about them. Or Justin Bieber is well known and has some hit's (i guess?) so he's an Icon like Elvis Presley. Or the Giants have won 2 Super Bowls, so they're like the Steeler's were in the 70s. I see what your saying, but I guess a person can say just by definition that JYD and Tito are icons. But not an icon at the highest level one could achieve. As for the other examples of Maroon 5, Bieber, etc...apples and oranges. It's too early to say if they're icons per say as they haven't been around as long as Presley. overall, I think words like icon get tossed around too freely with no one really understanding what the word truly means. As you say Phoenix, just about anyone could be an icon for not doing something to achieve the highest level that there is to achieve!  |
|
|
|
Post by Vidtek on Mar 17, 2012 9:54:33 GMT -5
When I hear ICON and Wrestling I think of (at least in modern times) Hogan, Andre, DiBiase, Savage, Flair, Michaels, Steamboat, Snuka, Road Warriors...not Sting. Sting doesn't even enter the list. And what do all the people I think of have in common? They all worked for the WWF/E. There is no question that in the mid-to-late nineties WCW came up with a great concept in the nWo, but before that it was a regional promotion at best. The WWF was always the bigger pond. And if you want to be the best, you have to compete against the best.
Yes, there have been LEGENDS in wrestling that washed out in the WWF (Vader and Dr. Death come to mind) and there are LEGENDS in wrestling who never set foot in a WWF/E ring, but there is a difference between being a LEGEND and being an ICON. Sting may be a LEGEND, but he is no ICON.
Sure he faced Hogan and Flair, Savage and Hart, but did he do it while they were in their prime? Yes they were having an upswing in popularity due to various reasons (turning heel, leaving the WWE angrily, being Ric Flair, ect.) but not while at the top of their games. And the sad thing is I don't think he will ever get the chance to make it as an ICON. He says he didn't want to get buried coming to the WWE like they did Booker T...well they didn''t bury Goldberg, and Sting was a bigger star than Goldberg. Does he really think Vince is petty enough to bury Sting? Would he have come in and been hot-shoted to a major title, probably not. Would he be made to do the job to home grown talent, yes. But that makes sense. Stings reasons for not going sound more and more selfish every time I hear them. IF he would have agreed to make the jump and lose to Taker he would have also debuted at the biggest event in wrestling, been recognized instantly and then been moved into a program he could win because NO ONE is going over Taker at Mania EVER. Refusing to go big time just because he would have had to do the job sounds like a whiny chump with an ego to big for the business.
And Koko B. Ware has something Sting probably never will...a WWE Hall of Fame ring.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phoenix on Mar 17, 2012 10:22:46 GMT -5
When i heard that thing about possibly getting buried i couldn't believe it. He cited Booker coming in and The Rock saying "Who in the Hell are you?!" but Rock said that to everybody, and look what Booker did over the years in the WWE.
There's lots of big stars in wrestling, but very few Icon's. Hogan and Flair were Icon's, Savage was one. He became known even outside of wrestling. Austin and Rock are Icon's. I remember in the fall of 97 when Michaels started calling himself "The Showstoppa, the Icon, the Main Event". He's said since then that it was about his character more than really proclaiming himself that, but i thought about it at the time. I immediately compared him to hogan. Not Sting . Hogan was holding the WCW title. Sting was a star, but i didn't think of him in terms of being way up there. Of course i bought what Shawn was saying . He was the best in the ring and the hottest on the mic at that time.
Sting's career, after hogan arrived in WCW was kind of in a holding pattern. He got hot with the Crow gimmick, but what did he do after say 1998? I can't even remember any great matches exactly. In fact his in ring work seemed to go backwards after that. There had been progression, and then it seemed to stop.
Sting should have gone to WWE 4-5 years ago or whenever that old WCW contract expired. He could have worked with Michaels, Cena, UT, Jericho. you can't tell me those guys wouldn't have been happy to have match's with Sting. It would have been good business. Now it's too late. Sting obviously wanted to remain a big fish in a small pond.
Look what Flair did in 91. He ended up in WWE, and he lost at WrestleMania, but not before winning the title, and having an awesome match with Savage.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2012 11:35:28 GMT -5
The phrase "Icon" gets thrown around just as badly as "legend" in the world of wrestling. And even with that said, no, Sting isn't an icon. He was a big star for the promotion he was in (being top homegrown star in WCW means next to nothing after they bring in all of Vince's guys), but he's not an icon.
|
|
|
|
Post by larrywoodbury2 on Mar 17, 2012 14:28:46 GMT -5
I think sting is an icon, just because you stay in one federation don't mean your not an icon. Sting won his fare share of titles in wcw. Look at shawn Michaels, he didn't become anything till he got to the WWE and he's considered an icon. I think it depends on how well your career was and sting had a pretty good carrer.
|
|
|
|
Post by havoc on Mar 17, 2012 16:56:25 GMT -5
I think sting is an icon, just because you stay in one federation don't mean your not an icon. Sting won his fare share of titles in wcw. Look at shawn Michaels, he didn't become anything till he got to the WWE and he's considered an icon. I think it depends on how well your career was and sting had a pretty good carrer. I really had no interest in this argument but with this post, I mean, really, really?? Your point about Shawn Michaels makes no sense. The point IS that you have to be in the WWE to be an icon. There's plenty of guys that were no anything big before the WWE - Undertaker, Bret Hart, Hulk Hogan, well, probably half the people who'd qualify as icons. And then "Sting had a pretty good career"? So that qualifies someone as an icon now?? |
|
|
|
Post by larrywoodbury2 on Mar 17, 2012 20:47:27 GMT -5
Why the heck do you have to be in the WWE to be an icon. is the WWE the only place where you can be an icon, i don't think so. There are plenty of guys who i would consider an icon and never step foot in the WWF/WWE federation. Granted the WWE made alot of wrestlers a star but also made alot of stars into nothing. Thats like saying Giant baba isn't an icon cause he wasn't in the WWF/WWE or Antonio Inoki.
|
|
|
|
Post by Justin Case on Mar 17, 2012 22:05:34 GMT -5
Why the heck do you have to be in the WWE to be an icon. is the WWE the only place where you can be an icon, i don't think so. There are plenty of guys who i would consider an icon and never step foot in the WWF/WWE federation. Granted the WWE made alot of wrestlers a star but also made alot of stars into nothing. Thats like saying Giant baba isn't an icon cause he wasn't in the WWF/WWE or Antonio Inoki. I think most people consider the WWE/F the grandest stage of all wrestling and if a wrestler doesn't make an impact there, they have not reached their highest level of success that can be achieved?! At least, that's the general consensus I'm getting for the majority here? The ol' saying of "The be the best, you have the beat the best." and most see the WWE/F as having the very best to compete against. As I said previously, the word 'icon' gets tossed around too freely by people. There should be a way to set the boundary and how we define it. There is, is there not? With out it, it will always be misused and misunderstood. |
|
|
|
Post by Phoenix on Mar 17, 2012 23:01:55 GMT -5
Michaels was a month shy of 23 when he arrived in WWE.
It really has nothing to do with which Fed someone was in. Not even if they 'wrestled absolutely everyone".
It seems obvious people have different definition's of "Icon".
|
|
|
|
Post by Justin Case on Mar 18, 2012 16:54:43 GMT -5
Michaels was a month shy of 23 when he arrived in WWE. It really has nothing to do with which Fed someone was in. Not even if they 'wrestled absolutely everyone". It seems obvious people have different definition's of "Icon". And it's all those shades of gray with no definition that is clear and accepted by the majority, will be why things of this matter will always be argued. |
|
