User Tag List

Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Wilfred's Debate Round 2 Tie 1 - Rusty Shackleford vs Spudz Mackenzie

  1. #1
    Furry, Filthy and Fun Badger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    A Sett
    Posts
    72,020
    Mentioned
    329 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2950453

    Wilfred's Debate Round 2 Tie 1 - Rusty Shackleford vs Spudz Mackenzie

    @Rusty Shackleford vs @Spudz Mackenzie

    Well done for making it past a gruelling first round. We kick off Round 2 with the first of two questions that are based on:



    Topic - Your task is to choose a talent or group (tag teams and stables are allowed) that has either been employed by the WWE or been employed or involved with WCW (since WWE has now bought them) in a wrestling or non-wrestling capacity that is currently not in the WWE Hall of Fame that you feel deserves to go in. You must also argue why your choice is superior and more deserving than your opponent's.

    As this is Round 2, we are going to make this is a little more challenging and say you are NOT allowed to choose Owen Hart. This is not because he is undeserving but because this may be the obvious choice that one of you may go for.

    To help you out in researching your choice, I have included a wiki link below to the complete Hall of Fame along with the current inductees for the 2020 class so you do not accidentally choose someone already in there or about to go in:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWE_Hall_of_Fame

    RULES:

    - You have 5 days/120 hours and 3 posts each in this debate. A maximum word count of 500 words per post will be allowed. Please do not go over this limit.

    - All posts must be done within the 120 hour time limit so any posts made after the time limit will not count even if there is in an uneven number of posts at the end.

    - All posts must be staggered. You can't make your next post until the other debater has had their turn.

    - If there is a no-show from anyone after 120 hours, then their opponent who does turn up will automatically advance.

    - No editing of posts allowed unless it is for something spelling, grammatical mistakes or accidentally going over your word count. However you must come and inform myself or Mazer first where we will approve them.

    - Pictures, gifs and videos can be used in literally unlimited amounts to support your point. Information should be self-contained within your post. For example, you can't post a link to an article and expect people to go read it. Quote it in your post.

    - Quoting words from your articles does count towards your word count but quoting your opponent does not.

    The order of posting will be determined by a coin toss. The coin toss has revealed that Rusty Shackleford will be going first!

    Bring on the Hall of Pain!
    Last edited by Badger; February 19th, 2020 at 6:31 PM. Reason: Okay I decided to include WCW as well as WWE bought them

  2. #2
    Midcarder Rusty Shackleford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173138
    Really interesting question, this.

    For me, membership of the WWE Hall of Fame, or indeed any HOF, can serve more than one purpose:

    1. A recognition that you’re one of the absolute best in history in your field. Someone for which the legacy of an organisation couldn’t be written without your name being mentioned.
    2. An acknowledgement that you’ve made a significant contribution to your field behind the scenes. This gives the means to retroactively give honour, thanks and acknowledgement of your contribution to history.
    3. Your contribution has fundamentally changed the trajectory of the organisation


    Now, if one were to construct a HOF from scratch, the natural thing to do would be to take a top down approach. Start with your Mount Rushmore, your absolute elite, and then work downwards.

    However, the idiosyncrasies of the WWE approach, offering up headline acts each year along with more modest entries, means the net has been cast wider. This works well in terms of having an annual ‘product’, but it can also leave some glaring omissions.
    My process for choosing my candidate follows my initial potential definitions. I’ve gone through the existing HOF inductee list and asked myself:

    • Is there anyone from the Mount Rushmore of WWE performers who isn’t in yet?
    • Is there anyone from WWE past who has made a significant contribution to the company behind the scenes who should be in?
    • Have they changed the course of history?


    For me, there are three individuals (and I expect my opponent to name one of the other two) who stand head and shoulders above the rest as potential candidates for this, but only one ticks all three boxes. In fact. He doesn’t tick the boxes, he made the damn boxes.

    He revolutionised WWE more than once, he had one of the most iconic on-screen personas of all-time, he is – quite simply - synonymous with the organisation. And into his 8th decade, he’d still pop the crowd in any WWE event in any WWE venue across the world.

    He is Vincent Kennedy McMahon.

    Love him or hate him (remember, this is a question about relative contributions to the company, not about booking) his contribution to the organisation is unmatched. No-one has put in more hours. His work-ethic is the stuff of legend.

    I’ll close by saying that accepted wisdom (mind you, let’s not believe everything you read on the internet) suggests the man himself may not want to be inducted. However, this is Rusty Shackleford’s 2020 Hall of Fame class and the question asks – who does Rusty feel deserves to go in?

    There is no-one more deserving than Vince McMahon. His contribution to WWE history is unmatched and he will go into the HOF at some stage, but I beg of you Vince, don’t let it be posthumously. The man deserves a period of reflection among his peers. He deserves, for all his flaws, that standing ovation.

    And think of the speech…

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    4,720
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    I'll come right out and say it. Modern day wrestling, AEW, and the WWE as we know it wouldn't exist in the capacity they do today without this man.

    Robert Edward Turner III - Better known to the wrestling public as Ted Turner or more derisively as "Billionaire Ted" is the absolute unsung hero of wrestling. In a world of Vince McMahons and Tony Khans...



    ... sorry...

    Ted Turner is the last true silent backer of wrestling. He was never one to be down in the trenches of WCW booking Nitro or Thunder episodes or deciding on house show lineups. But Ted was, among anything and everything else, an unabashed wrestling fan and supporter. Even after making billions with his baseball team, his TV networks, launching CNN, making massive royalties off of showing classic movies and sitcom reruns - Ted never forgot that wrestling had helped his networks stay solvent for years.



    And obviously, the biggest turning point in wrestling since the WWF's national expansion in the 80's happened, at the behest of Ted Turner and his willingness to give the wrestling show to the "wrestling guys".

    WCW Nitro was an innovator in the world of wrestling. Live every week with a slick, cool, and modern look (by 1995 standards). You can look back at it now and think its obvious or take it for granted, but Ted Turner provided the platform. If it hadn't been for Ted writing checks, WCW would've been a Chinese interest. And the whole course of wrestling history could have changed.

    Can you imagine a wrestling climate in 1995, where Nitro was never greenlit as a primetime, two-hour live show? WWF's ratings were in the tank by 1995. By 1995, WWF had scaled back their operations to the North and Northeast, largely. WCW Nitro was the cool new show that gave American wrestling the kick in the ass it needed to generate fan interest again.

    And again, Ted Turner let the wrestling guys run it. There's plenty of stories of TV executives and programming heads trying to tell Turner how WCW should have been run. But Turner realized that wrestling is such a bespoke entity that it can't be produced and written like a normal TV show. Modern day WWE with their "writer's room" and fully scripted promos could learn a thing or two from that approach.

    And by letting the wrestling guys run the wrestling company, Ted Turner was able to step back and focus on staying in his lane. Making billions of dollars in Atlanta Braves money, among other business dealings. And with that money, WCW was able to bring in every major former WWF star. Recognizable names sell tickets. And with Turner's backing, WCW could finally afford them.

    By the end of 1995, all because Ted Turner took a chance, pledged his allegiance to wrestling, and gave Eric Bischoff a degree of carte blanche control, American wrestling had a new alternative, a new weekly Monday show, and a new place to see all their favorite stars.

  4. #4
    Midcarder Rusty Shackleford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173138
    If you believe in the multiverse theory, then there's a version of us arguing over the relative merits of The Undertaker and The Rock like normal people. But we are where we are.

    Ted Turner eh? That came from leftfield. A stunning, almost avant-garde response to my safe choice of Vinnie Mac! Turning this debate into an almost philosophical discussion. I love it. Well done.

    I've read your post a few times and think I can boil your argument into two main threads:

    1. Ted Turner has made a significant contribution to modern wrestling...but perhaps more importantly
    2. His investment in WCW forced the hand of Vince McMahon into taking drastic action thus changing WWE for the greater good. I invite the reader to remember that bit in bold. We'll come back to it later.


    It may surprise you to hear that I absolutely agree with both points. Ted Turner made a massive contribution to mainstream wrestling canon. We tend to romanticise the attitude era but for many, the Monday Night wars and associated excitement will never be matched. You're absolutely right in that it ushered in a new form of entertainment, merging traditional episodic TV with wrestling and tearing up the traditional face/heel dynamic. And, of course, who can forget the exhilaration of the NWO, as Scott Hall (made famous by Vince McMahon), Kevin Nash (ditto) and Hulk Hogan (awkward) made Nitro unmissable. Throw in other superstars like Bret Hart (hi Vince) and Randy Savage (you get it by now) and you had an absolutely stacked card.

    Meanwhile in Stamford we all know what happened next. The WWE got busy making new stars as Vince McMahon and co worked round the clock making WWE programming better than ever.

    Could we do with another Ted Turner now? Oh dear God yes. Most of us would agree that WWE is caught in a creative slumber. But for all thecriticisms that can rightly be levelled at Vince McMahon and co, let's focus right in on what this question is about. It asks who deserves to be recognised for their contribution towards the WWE.

    Without Vince there is no Hogan. No Stone Cold. No Rock. No Bret Hart. No Undertaker. No streak. No Wrestlemania. Hell, for all it's faults in 2020, think how much we all love NXT. Vince McMahon (to varying degrees) is behind all of this. And for a short period of time, yes, Ted Turner made him better.

    Quite simply, it comes down to this:

    • Does Vince McMahon deserve to go into the hall of fame? Absolutely. This is beyond any form of reasonable dispute.
    • Does Ted Turner deserve to go into the hall of fame? I'm not so sure. Perhaps. It depends. It's complicated. I think we'd all struggle a bit with the logic of it all.



    And that right there ladies and gentlemen goes right to the heart of this debate. Who is most deserving?

    I look forward to your response.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    4,720
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    "Iron sharpens iron."

    - Proverb 27:17.

    Okay, so I must admit, I really quite enjoyed my opponent's response to argument. There's definitely a through-line there, in Rusty's post of the typical "WCW only became popular and powerful on the back of using former WWF stars". That's been the narrative for years. "Billionaire Ted" and good 'ol "ATM Eric" team up to splash out millions of dollars for WWF's leftovers.

    And yeah, that's true. WCW did spend a ton of money to bring in

    Scott Hall (made famous by Vince McMahon), Kevin Nash (ditto) and Hulk Hogan (awkward) Bret Hart (hi Vince) and Randy Savage (you get it by now)
    But that sure does sound similar to a certain something that Vince did in his own time. What a strange coincidence that WCW does something that garners criticism while Vince does the same thing and Rusty seems to ignore it.

    Vince's "National Expansion" in the 80's is as lost to time and WWF revisionism as anything else, but Vince made the WWF a super powerhouse off the backs of every major territory star in history, by offering them more money and better TV exposure.

    WCW and Ted Turner doing it to Vince was just turnabout and fair play.

    And let's not forget the superstars that WCW had, when Ted Turner bought the company and gave them exposure on his "Superstation" even before Nitro existed; Pre-Hogan, we had Sting, Ric Flair, The Road Warriors, Vader, The Four Horseman, Sid Vicious, Dustin Rhodes, The Steiner Brothers, The Rock 'n' Roll Express, The Midnight Express, Jim Cornette, Paul E. Dangerously, Madusa, Ricky Steamboat, and many, many others.

    WCW had a stellar roster before Ted Turner even opened his checkbook.

    Meanwhile in Stamford we all know what happened next. The WWE got busy making new stars as Vince McMahon and co worked round the clock making WWE programming better than ever.
    The WWF made their programming "better than ever" by drawing their record low ratings (at the time) against WCW Nitro.

    Without Vince there is no Hogan. No Stone Cold. No Rock. No Bret Hart. No Undertaker. No streak. No Wrestlemania. Hell, for all it's faults in 2020, think how much we all love NXT. Vince McMahon (to varying degrees) is behind all of this. And for a short period of time, yes, Ted Turner made him better.
    Without Verne Gagne, there's no Hogan.

    And without Ted Turner and Nitro there to act as an impetus to force the WWF out of its creative slump, there never would have been a Steve Austin, Rock, or an Attitude Era-fueled Monday Night War to speak of.

    Hell, for all it's faults in 2020, think how much we all love NXT.
    As much as I'd hesitate to call NXT a Vince project anyway, its a Triple H labor of love, the wrestling program that helped solidify the "NXT style" wasn't the WWF/E. It was WCW Nitro.



    "Flyin" Brian Pillman vs. Jushin "Thunder" Liger was the opening match on the first episode of WCW Nitro ever. This match, with two guys who weren't lumbering beasts or musclebound behemoths set the example for what modern wrestling would become.

    All because Ted Turner gave WCW a prime time wrestling platform.

    Your precious NXT wouldn't exist without Ted Turner and this match.

    Ted Turner helped create modern wrestling, and that makes him Hall Of Fame worthy, if nothing else.

    Iron sharpens iron. And Ted Turner was sharper than Vince McMahon.

  6. #6
    Midcarder Rusty Shackleford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173138
    Thanks for your response Spudz.

    There’s a few things in there that I agree with, but I’m going to highlight a couple of items that fundamentally undermine your case here.

    And let's not forget the superstars that WCW had, when Ted Turner bought the company and gave them exposure on his "Superstation" even before Nitro existed; Pre-Hogan, we had Sting, Ric Flair, The Road Warriors, Vader, The Four Horseman, Sid Vicious, Dustin Rhodes, The Steiner Brothers, The Rock 'n' Roll Express, The Midnight Express, Jim Cornette, Paul E. Dangerously, Madusa, Ricky Steamboat, and many, many others. WCW had a stellar roster before Ted Turner even opened his checkbook.
    So, what you’re saying here is that WCW had lots of pre-existing talent that had nothing to do with Ted Turner? I agree. It’s a good job for me though that this question centers around who deserves to be in the WWE hall of fame and not “who is the best venture capitalist, able to spot an investment opportunity?”

    Flyin" Brian Pillman vs. Jushin "Thunder" Liger was the opening match on the first episode of WCW Nitro ever. This match, with two guys who weren't lumbering beasts or musclebound behemoths set the example for what modern wrestling would become.
    There are two things that spring to mind here Spudz.

    1. You stated in a previous post that Ted Turner let the wrestling people get on with the wrestling side of the business. So, it’s a significant reach here to suggest he deserves the lions share of the credit for this
    2. But your premise itself doesn’t make sense to me. A single match on the premiere of Nitro is the butterfly effect that would lead to modern ‘NXT style’ as you put it? Really? When I was growing up one of my fondest early memories of wrestling was Wrestlemania 10. In particular, Bret v Owen and Razor v Michaels. One a 20 minute technical masterclass, the second the (public) birth of the ladder match, still a staple 25 years on. Not a ‘lumbering beast’ or ‘musclebound behemoth’ in sight in either of these two matches. Now, I’ve just checked the dates and Wrestlemania 10 was in March 94 and the first episode of Nitro aired in September 1995. But how did Vince know to book two non-meathead classic matches without seeing Pillman/Liger first? Did Ted Turner invent the time machine too? Screw the hall of fame, get the man a Nobel while we’re at it!


    WCW and Ted Turner doing it to Vince was just turnabout and fair play.
    This I absolutely agree with and is the reason I hadn’t brought it up because there’s nothing to dispute. Both are businessman. The difference being that this acquisition activity is Ted Turner’s sole contribution to wrestling canon, whereas Vince McMahon is so much more than that over an overwhelmingly longer period of time.

    My closing statement

    I commend Spudz for an innovative choice, immediately positioning himself as the underdog. And who doesn’t love the underdog? But I implore the judges to hone in on the purpose of this question – who is more deserving to enter the WWE Hall of Fame?

    Spudz has proved that Ted Turner is first and foremost a businessman. Let the wrestling people take care of the wrestling.

    Vince McMahon is also a businessman, of that there is no doubt. But he also bleeds wrestling. It’s in his DNA. For all his flaws he has worked round the clock to try and entertain people both on and off the screen.

    So then, who gets in the hall of fame first? The man who built the empire or the man who tried to knock it down? And failed to do so. You come at the king you best not miss.

    It’s a simple choice.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    4,720
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Well said, Rusty. Well said.

    To start with, I'd like to begin with your closing statement.

    So then, who gets in the hall of fame first? The man who built the empire or the man who tried to knock it down? And failed to do so. You come at the king you best not miss.
    Let it not be forgotten in the annals of history that Ted Turner, in his time providing a platform for WCW and its wrestlers to ply their trade, a platform that gave 3 first-run wrestling programs a weekly dissemination to millions of viewers, and a pay-per-view business that often rivaled the WWF's - that Ted Turner never missed. Ted Turner made a run at the King and he could have succeeded at taking the King's head off, if it hadn't been for the AOL-Time Warner corporate takeover that ended Ted's reign as head of his own company and the distaste many of the new chairmen felt toward "lowbrow" pro-wrestling.



    "The takeover, merger, whatever the Hell you want to call it- Ted Turner woke up one day in a corner office and realized he had no influence."

    So, what you’re saying here is that WCW had lots of pre-existing talent that had nothing to do with Ted Turner?
    And Vince McMahon had an entire territory's worth of talent that had nothing to do with him, upon acquiring the WWWF from Vince Senior. Bruno Sammartino had been established as a massive territory star for a good 10 years before Vince Jr ever put pen to paper to run the WWF. Vince Jr is just as much a venture capitalist as Ted Turner ever was.

    But your premise itself doesn’t make sense to me. A single match on the premiere of Nitro is the butterfly effect that would lead to modern ‘NXT style’ as you put it? Really? When I was growing up one of my fondest early memories of wrestling was Wrestlemania 10. In particular, Bret v Owen and Razor v Michaels. One a 20 minute technical masterclass, the second the (public) birth of the ladder match, still a staple 25 years on. Not a ‘lumbering beast’ or ‘musclebound behemoth’ in sight in either of these two matches. Now, I’ve just checked the dates and Wrestlemania 10 was in March 94 and the first episode of Nitro aired in September 1995. But how did Vince know to book two non-meathead classic matches without seeing Pillman/Liger first?
    By 1994, Vince's hand was forced by the strength of the U.S. Government and the FBI to switch from muscled-up steroid freaks like Hulk Hogan or The Ultimate Warrior, into giving smaller and more "natural" athletes a shot at the big time. Vince was staring down potential jail time due to steroid charges.

    Ted Turner and Nitro had no such issues, giving Liger and Pillman the nod to go on first and show wrestling fans a different style of wrestling.

    WCW - under the platform given to them by Ted Turner also brought in cruiserweights, opened up working relationships with Japan, and gave a platform to foreign wrestlers from all around the world.

    All those things WWF tried to emulate and failed at.

    If you've ever enjoyed a modern day wrestling match, or an AEW match, you have WCW under Ted Turner to thank for it. Because he gave a platform to allow smaller and more dynamic wrestler to ply their trade.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jibrD6TRAZk

    Vince McMahon is also a businessman, of that there is no doubt. But he also bleeds wrestling. It’s in his DNA. For all his flaws he has worked round the clock to try and entertain people both on and off the screen.
    And this is the biggest downfall of Vince McMahon.

    Ted Turner has never hurt the wrestling industry.

    Vince McMahon has.

    In that effort to be a ruthless and aggressive businessman, Vince has denied unionization, forced many of his wrestlers into unenviable situations (including one that killed Owen Hart), and continually broken the law by flouting what it means to be an "independent contractor". Don't get it twisted, Vince is successful. And that's commendable, but he's done it off the backs of the bruised.

    Ted Turner provided legitimate competition, gave guys their start in the industry who never would have had an "in", and gave the WWF a kick in the ass in the late-90's and therein helped create a wrestling boom period that Vince and Co. are still trying to recreate.

    I'll reiterate; there wouldn't be a modern wrestling world without Ted Turner and WCW Nitro.

    Because competition makes everybody better. Even Vince.

  8. #8
    Furry, Filthy and Fun Badger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    A Sett
    Posts
    72,020
    Mentioned
    329 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2950453
    ROUND OVER!

    Voting commences now, here's how it works:

    - The winner of each tie will be chosen equally from 4 sources. 3 selected judges and a public vote.

    - The 3 selected judges who will PM their votes to Mazer and myself. The judges are @Jarrod1983, @Psycho666Soldier and @virmicious so please send us your votes. Each judge's vote will be worth one point each to the total overall score.

    - The 4th source is a public vote where readers can post in this thread who they felt had the better argument. The combined public vote will count as one point towards the overall score.

    - If there is a 2-2 score in the total score of a tie after all the judging and public voting, then special guest judge Mazer shall break the tie.

    - All votes must be backed up with solid reasoning. Anyone who just says stuff in their votes like "I voted for Mikey just because his argument was better or I agree with him" will be asked to elaborate on their vote further before it can be counted.

    Voting will be open for 120 hours, same length as the tie.

    VOTE NOW!

  9. #9
    What the fucks up Dennys! Nash Diesel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Dead Moines, IA
    Posts
    47,722
    Mentioned
    147 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2397920
    Wow, tough decision here. Valid points made for both men. How do you argue against putting someone in their own hall of fame AFTER someone attempted to put them out of business so to speak? As as well 2 people who were not really apples to apples. Rusty did a great job explaining the genius of Vince and ability to keep his company relevant and thriving all these years while also handling Spudz counters to that ability. Spudz did well in providing the argument that makes perfect sense of how it wasn't just Vince-made talent that helped WCW and I give props to the notion that the in-ring product WCW provided under Ted had a serious influence on the business to this day.

    Ted Turner absolutely should be in the WWE Hall of Fame if we're inducting people that were never part of the WWE's history (as an actual talent) but had serious influence on the business. Whether you're a promoter, a wrestler, doesn't matter. If you had a positive influence that helped the business you belong. But do you belong over the guy who has proven to do it better? And that's still here, in the business regardless if their opposition lost power through mergers or bankruptcy? No.

    Rusty

  10. #10
    Turning back time Kdestiny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    We haven’t become anything — we simply are as we are
    Posts
    21,134
    Mentioned
    330 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1167179
    usa
    Solid argument by both, but I gotta go with Rusty.

    He was able to solidify Vinces accomplishments while pointing out that Turner didn't really have as much of an impact as one would think, especially compared to Vince.

    Spudz had some interesting counters, but none had the impact that Rusty's argument of actual wrestling achievement did. Turner was really only involved in acquisition, and Spudz didn't really counter that at all.

  11. #11
    Main Eventer
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    Nutmeg State
    Posts
    6,239
    Mentioned
    190 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    1890040
    I found this an intriguiong discussion on both sides, but I think Rusty had a stronger argument, so he has my vote. I think both deserve to be in the hall, but Rusty did a better job. Spudz comments about Turner never missing didn't really feel legit - perhaps had he expanded on this idea more it could have stuck. It is hard to argue against Vince, but I think Spudz did an admiral job, resisting the temptation to point out so many examples where Vince shit the bed, as I think Rusty might have been hoping for, because it would have given an opptunity to talk about Vince accomplishments, which are truly staggering.

  12. #12
    Yikes
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Super, Super Mik Arteta!
    Posts
    16,285
    Mentioned
    69 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Rusty.

    He made very strong rebuttals as to why Vince should be in the HOF and Turner shouldn't. He pointed out Vince's achievements, and once he did that it was nigh on impossible to argue against it.

    Good job both guys.

  13. #13
    Furry, Filthy and Fun Badger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    A Sett
    Posts
    72,020
    Mentioned
    329 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2950453
    Okay we have enough votes for a winner here so will get this over with now.

    PUBLIC VOTE Rusty beats Spudz 4-0 so he gets 1 point.

    JUDGE JARROD1983



    Quote Originally Posted by Jarrod1983
    This was a awesome back and forth read.

    When Rusty picked Vince I will admit to thinking it was going to be tough to argue against Vinnie Mac because, bottom line, Vince transformed wrestling into what it is and has been. Vince bleeds wrestling like Rusty pointed out and has had his hands firmly grasped around the wrestling world.

    Spudz, to his excellent credit, came right out of the gate with a wonderful picture (Spudz use of pictures and videos was great) of Ted Turner that set the tone for his solid argument. His points on Ted and his "Iron sharpens Iron" arguments were well articulated.

    In the end Rusty Shackleford really earned my vote with the who deserves it more statement. Spudz picked apart Rusty's closing statement but felt Rusty's points were too strong to be denied.
    1 point to Rusty.

    JUDGE PSYCHO666SOLDIER



    Quote Originally Posted by Psycho666Soldier
    Due to time constraints, this vote will be a bit shorter and less-detailed than normal. But in no way is that a reflection of the quality of this debate. This was easily one of the stronger competitions of the tournament this year, and such a fantastic take on the question that found a life of its own. Kudos to both men for their tremendous effort.

    I think this argument sort of became a "Chicken or the Egg" debate in the sense that they were basically trying to debate over who had more influence on Vince's success: Ted Turner or Vince himself. I think both Spuds and Rusty came out full force here, showing even stronger showings than the first round. Spudz did an excellent job of seemingly having a counter for everything Rusty threw at him. ANd it was a compelling angle: Ted Turner gave WCW the platform that allowed the Monday Night Wars to transform wrestling forever, regardess of who wound up on top.

    But Rusty was relentless in his choice, and doubled down a few key points of his side that won this for him. Most importantly, the idea that he said part of going to the Hall of Fame is the contributions you've provided for WWE. And while Ted's presence and decisions certainly had an impact that sent ripples through the industry, the actual day-to-day work was handled by someone else. Rusty made sure to point out that Vince was the one who put in the blood sweat and tears, bringing wrestling to brand new heights before and after the heavy influence of Ted Turner. It also helped that Rusty took Spudz' best points against him and showed that they were circular arguments that are both positive and negative for both candidates.

    It was a very tactile angle Spudz went for with his choice, and I'm not sure there was any genuine better counter. But Rusty Shackleford played a tight game and kept his ship on course, ultimately convincing me that Vince was still the optimal choice.
    1 point to Rusty.

    JUDGE VIRMICIOUS



    Quote Originally Posted by virmicious
    Judge Sweet Virmiciousness owner of all lands, truth teller to the billions and all around humanitarian once again adorned his robes of magic and splendor

    Before us we have an interesting topic with some very interesting answers. When I saw Rusty's selection I thought to myself this is going to be tough to topple but along came spudz. Brilliant choice by this man and I must say each argument had me swaying back and forth like Badger with a 24 pack on a friday night.

    After rereading the debate and firing up my helixicron 2020.2 gavel of might I have come to my decision.

    Rusty squeaks thisnout but just barely. Both made excellent points and both had me convinced of their picks at various times. Rusty countered just enough to put the fire in his column for the win. Very well done to both.
    Final point to Rusty.

    @Rusty Shackleford takes this one in a clean sweep 4-0 in another debate that was much closer than the scoreline suggests. Great efgort though @Spudz Mackenzie

  14. #14
    Midcarder Rusty Shackleford's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    302
    Mentioned
    51 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    173138
    After Super Showdown I'm uninserting Vince. Ted Turner all the way!

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    4,720
    Mentioned
    21 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Shackleford View Post
    After Super Showdown I'm uninserting Vince. Ted Turner all the way!
    Does that mean I win? ; )

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •