Should a wrestler’s ability to draw always be measured in the immediate?

[Mr. Nerfect]

This is something I’ve been thinking about every now and then for a little while. The knock on guys like Diesel, Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart as WWF Champions was that they didn’t draw much as champs. But considering that media exists in perpetuity, should we reconsider how successful those runs are based on ways they can be monetized now?

How many people still enjoy the shit out of Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart matches now? Do people revisit Hogan’s amazing runs with the same gusto? Is the “replay value” of a champion important?

[Fignuts]

I doubt the longevity of a great wrestler's matches is as profitable as a guy who draws in the moment.

People may not revisit hogan's matches as much, but I'll bet they buy more of his legends contract merch than bret and hbk's.

[Destor]

You cant pay your bills on tomorrows money. If in 40 years it turns out Orange Cassidy fits the cultural tastes better than Hulk Hogan it doesnt make him the GOAT or even good for that matter.

If you're ahead of your time you still starve and so do your coworkers. And those delayed profits arent exactly going to feed your kids either. If i go back and watch a sick 123 kid match from 30 years ago Waltman doesnt see a penny of my peacock money.

So no. You cant judge a guy on a theoretical, and possibly entirely fictitious, future audience.

[xrodmuc316]

I think the go back and watch older stuff can certainly increase the perception of a talent, but that is really only important is they are still active.

I think of Stone Cold, there are certainly teenagers today who were born after his last match, and when he was announced to main event Wrestlemania this year, I could easily envision those fans watching his highlights and getting invested in him enough to part with money.

If he doesn't have that match against K.O. less people would have watched Mania, and he would have sold less merch this year than he has, and he certainly would not have trended on Social Media.

Austin is also a bad example because his run certainly is not undervalued. In terms of drawing ability, Austin being announced for Raw this year is going to get more buzz than last year, because now there is the added possibility of "what if he is appearing to setup another match?" instead of just a legend's appearance.

[Big Vic]

Drawing ability has no use in professional wrestling. This is sports entertainment, not art school.

[Lock Jaw]

You cant pay your bills on tomorrows money. If in 40 years it turns out Orange Cassidy fits the cultural tastes better than Hulk Hogan it doesnt make him the GOAT or even good for that matter.

If you're ahead of your time you still starve and so do your coworkers. And those delayed profits arent exactly going to feed your kids either. If i go back and watch a sick 123 kid match from 30 years ago Waltman doesnt see a penny of my peacock money.

So no. You cant judge a guy on a theoretical, and possibly entirely fictitious, future audience.

What if that theoretical future audience has invented time travel?

[Fignuts]

Drawing ability has no use in professional wrestling. This is sport entertainment, not art school.

What if a wrestler's gimmick is that he's an artist who draws himself beating on his next opponent?

[Destor]

What if that theoretical future audience has invented time travel?
Then theyd be drawing right now ;)

[Ruien]

No because you failed to get the audience to care when it mattered most.

[Destor]

Thats exactly it. Youve got the audience youve got not the one you wished you had or hope to have. The imaginary audience in the imaginary future doesnt matter.

[Lock Jaw]

Jerry Lawler must have one of, if not THE best ability to draw of any rassler ever.

[Destor]

A draw who could draw

[LibSuperstar]

Wrestlers will always be judging by drawing ability since that's what the business was built on. Although today it's a bit different particularly for the top promotions (at least stateside) since they get their money from TV deals. Not to mention the pandemic halting things for a brief spell. Still, I imagine it would take a couple of months to really judge a wrestler sells tickets.

[Mr. Nerfect]

Ftr I’m not saying that a wrestler performing in front of empty seats is a good thing. I’m not saying forget now.

[Tom Guycott]

What if a wrestler's gimmick is that he's an artist who draws himself beating on his next opponent?

You just described Dexter Lumis' NXT run.

[Ruthervin]

How many people still enjoy the shit out of Shawn Michaels and Bret Hart matches now? Do people revisit Hogan’s amazing runs with the same gusto? Is the “replay value” of a champion important?

I get what you're trying to say but I'm willing to wager that most WWE fans would be far more inclined to revisit matches like Hogan/Rock, Hogan/Warrior, Hogan/Andre than seeing Bret/Davey Boy or Shawn/Razor. Rock/Austin Wrestlemania 17 is probably revisited more than say Flair/Steamboat. “Smart marks” make up less than 0.1% of the population. Most others are fans that prioritize sports entertainment over technical wrestling.

[Ruthervin]

Jerry Lawler must have one of, if not THE best ability to draw of any rassler ever.

Quite possibly the dumbest statement that I've ever read in my life and that's saying something. Your post is living proof as to why contraceptives were invented.

[Seanny One Ball]

Hahaha LJ you bitch I bet this goes unanswered.

[Ruthervin]

Hahaha LJ you bitch I bet this goes unanswered.

“Jerry Lawler can arguably draw as much as Hogan, Rock, and Austin,” - Lock Jaw

[Fignuts]

Actually, he might of drawn more. He was a major draw in the territories for far longer than any of those big names were on top. And he didn't have a huge machine like wwe behind him to do so.

People underestimate how lucrative the really successful territories were.

[Ruthervin]

Actually, he might of drawn more. He was a major draw in the territories for far longer than any of those big names were on top. And he didn't have a huge machine like wwe behind him to do so.

People underestimate how lucrative the really successful territories were.

“Might of.” You mean “might have” there chief?

Lawler was a major draw in his territory but he couldn’t have done what Hogan, Andre, Austin, Rocky, and Cena did. What metric are you using here? Revenue? Crowds? Merchandise? Yes, Lawler didn’t have the machine behind him initially but the counter argument is that if the WWE knew that he’d draw as big as those guys that I mentioned, they would have brought him in much earlier.

[Stu Hart]

I think a draw should be broken down into different categories:
Does he draw viewers to the the show
Does he draw live audiences?
Does he draw merch sales?

The time frame of determining this is a hard one because if he isn’t pushed or in a meaningful feud then he hasn’t been given the opportunity.

[Lock Jaw]

“Jerry Lawler can arguably draw as much as Hogan, Rock, and Austin,” - Lock Jaw

Personally I have never seen anything drawn by Hogan, Rock, or Austin.

[Mr. Nerfect]

I think a draw should be broken down into different categories:
Does he draw viewers to the the show
Does he draw live audiences?
Does he draw merch sales?

The time frame of determining this is a hard one because if he isn’t pushed or in a meaningful feud then he hasn’t been given the opportunity.

Breaking it down across areas makes sense. I think being a sustainable commodity to your business is a point we often forget. I mean, Hogan was on top for years and certainly helped move VHS and DVD. It was off the back of him that Vince really discovered the value in video tape, right? It’s mainly guys who were in top spots that didn’t always cover one of those areas that I wonder if a part of the bigger picture is missing.

[drave]

https://media.tenor.com/vqnFz0OuPbkAAAAC/break-it-down-mc-hammer.gif