Should Bearer be inducted in the HOF of 2013?

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Stopspot, Mar 6, 2013.

  1. I might take some flack here but bare with me and read my reasoning.

    I feel that Paul deserves to be in the HOF, but he shouldn't go in this year.

    To induct him in this years class will seem like a kneejerk reaction. "Oh a beloved entertainer who could have gone in at any earlier time has died, HOF TIME!" I would instead wait a year to induct Paul so that it doesn't seem like such a kneejerk reaction to his death, which could devalue his work and HOF status. I felt the same way about Eddie going in early after his passing and slightly the same about Edge going in so close to retirement. Next year they could also probably get a proper inductor.

    Do you think Paul should go in this year, or next year?
     
  2. Next year, although I wouldn't see a big problem with him going in this year.

    I think most agree that Taker's last match will be Wrestlemania 30 and it would be fitting for Taker to induct him into the HOF the night before he himself wrestles his last match.

    I don't agree about Edge or Eddie. There was four months of difference between Eddie's death and his HOF induction and there was a year of difference with Edge. I don't see the problem with waiting, but I also don't see an issue with doing it right away unless there's some other circumstance (some say Edge should have been inducted when WM was in Canada again, for example.)
     
  3. The way I look at it is he deserves to be inducted, so as long as he get's inducted it shouldn't matter whether it's this year or next. This perspective was kind of brought on by the all the people who I felt should've gone in but haven't for one reason or other namely Bruno (though thankfully that's no longer the case) & Savage.
     
  4. I get the logic behind not wanting to induct Paul Bearer in to the Hall of Fame now, but I think he'd already deserved it compared to people like Edge, who in my opinion could have waited at least another year. As far as the comparison to Eddie goes is that if Eddie hadn't passed he probably wouldn't have been inducted that year, but Paul Bearer could have been inducted this year, so I find an induction this year for Paul Bearer would be more plausible.

    Obviously the ones who have to induct him are Undertaker as well as Kane, who I'm sure has something to say about Bearer as well as Taker.
     
  5. I think it's too close to WM for it to happen this year, considering all of the things that have to happen before he's finally laid to rest. I do see him as the first announced member next year though.
     
  6. He should go into the Hall of Fame the same year as Undertaker & Kane imo. They should honestly all go in at the same time.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. That sound slike a great idea. The family of destruction going in together.
     
  8. Undertaker should really have his own induction, he has one of the most storied careers in WWE history, having been here in every era since the Hogan days. Plus, Kane is so far away from being what he used to be that it isn't even funny. I can barely recognize him as the Big Red Monster that he once was.
     
  9. He's a much more fully fleshed out character now in my opinion. There was in my opinion no way he was going to be able to keep the character relevant without fleshing it out as time passed on. Undertaker already covered the "myeterious monster" role so if Kane had stayed the same he would have always just been "the little brother".
     
  10. The family of destruction should be inducted together as a family, end of the greatest.
     
  11. I don't like managers in the HOF, but the HOF is so terrible anyway idk why the hell you all spend so much time discussing it.
     
  12. An induction this year seems iminent, and deserving imo.
     
  13. Kane was still a much different character than Taker, though. One is an undead supernatural (not quite) zombie, the other just a burnt/mentally scarred/ugly freak. There's room for two big men monster gimmicks without one being in the other's shadow. I thought Kane kinda did add different dimensions to his character, with the way he became friends with X-Pac (he actually screamed in agony a bit when Taker destroyed X-Pac the night after Fully Loaded 1999) or the way he had a love interest in Tori, or the way he was distraught over Lita's miscarriage, etc. All without subjecting himself to terrible storylines like Katie Vick or the Imposter Kane (not even the Imposter Undertaker angle was this bad...) or the comedy nonsense he's doing now with Daniel Bryan.
     
  14. This "comedy nonsense" is just the X-pac and RVD angles in a new form and some of the most entertaining work Kane has put out. In my honest opinion of course.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Yeah, Kane is doing well as far as putting some effort into being comedic, but I don't like Kane doing comedy roles. I'm sure Undertaker could have done comedy pretty decent too, but I'm glad he never really had to. I'm glad that Team Hell No is probably breaking up soon, as there's hints of dissension between the two and Bryan has said in interviews that he's sick of the comedy as well. Edit: {Plus, you never really saw cheesy comedy with X-Pac and RVD. The closet they came to it was when Kane said Suck It in the promo on Raw after he and X-Pac won the tag titles. He and RVD never screamed back and forth at each other in cringe worthy fashion.
     
  16. Stopspot, we know your posts are just your opinion. No need to post "IMO" 1000 times breh


    Edit: in my opinion
     
  17. HELL YES PAUL BEARER SHOULD GET IN THIS YEAR!
     
  18. Ohhhh Stopspot you're in trouble now, Dad's going to hit you now :pity:
     
  19. Dolph's is more like an uncle than a father. Dolph's vs my dad would be something I'd pay to see.
     
  20. Stop would pay me to fight his Dad? Where do I sign up? Will you pay for travel and lodging a well?