[#1-norm-fan]

Originally Posted by CSL why shouldn't drawing power come into it? the majority of guys who make it to the highest spots/are the highest draws can do it all, especially in this day and age. Austin, Rock, Triple H, Taker, Angle, Bret, Shawn, these are all guys who will go down as some of the greatest of all time alongside Hogan, alongside Flair. You're talking like I'm saying that The Great Khali will go down as a better wrestler than Eddie Guerrero.

If Khali is a bigger draw than Eddie, isn't that EXACTLY what you're saying? The whole discussion is that you made it a point to say that the best wrestler IS the one who draws the most. That's it. How would that not be accurate?

Originally Posted by CSL The Eugene equation is is pretty ridiculous. You don't base a wrestlers legacy off a single tiny fraction of his career so it doesn't really make any sense at all. I and many others could have told you at the time Eugene was wrestling Triple H on PPV that his gimmick had a limited shelf life and was the main reason he was over while there was every chance CM Punk could go on to do great things (which he has) I think it's safe to say John Cena isn't going to be running around India wearing a nurse's uniform in 10 years.

I didn't mention anyone's legacy. In fact I specifically said that by your definition, it would mean that Punk BECAME a better wrestler. As in it was based on that time period. The better draw was the better wrestler. If you're gonna base it on who is the better draw, it's gonna fluctuate. There isn't any consistency.

Originally Posted by CSL And show me where I specifically said "better draw=better wrestler", you jumped to that conclusion/assumed that was what I meant. Destor's post pretty much hit the nail on the head.

"The best 'true wrestler' is the guy that pulls in the highest ratings."

Does that not say better draw = better wrestler? You're more than welcome to clarify but that seems pretty clear as day. lol