Make the argument!

While I love receiving comments that exhibit some level of intelligent thought, the average comment that I receive goes something like this:

“UR dUMB. (Fill in the blank with an athlete) is a bum. (Fill in the blank with a different athlete) is a living, breathing god. HAHA. UR stoopid.”

Internet comment sections and message boards are often heavy on opinions and insults and light on facts and nuance. As compelling as it might be to let your inner Patrick Star loose, none of those things do anything to move the conversation forward and are better suited for the wall of a gas station bathroom stall. Every spot on this list was earned by making the best possible argument for each player at each slot using statistics and degree-of-difficulty. The reason why Messi is ranked 1st is because I can make a better argument for him using statistics and degree-of-difficulty than I can for any other player on the list. That includes Pele. Nobody–including Pele–gets a spot by reputation. The argument has to justify the placement. 

Pele was a great player. Many people still consider him the GOAT. He is most famous for being the only player in history to win three World Cups. The problem is that in 1966–one of the years that he “won” the World Cup–he suffered an injury in the 2nd game and missed the rest of the tournament. Brazil not only won its group without him, it won the World Cup without him. This is where nuance matters. It’s easy to recite the “Pele is the only player to win 3 World Cups” line as if that’s the end-all, be-all to the argument. Instead, we see that Pele won 2 World Cups while playing for a country that was so stacked with talent that it won the World Cup even though he was too injured to play. Additionally, while Pele was the world’s top career goal scorer for a half century (some still consider him the unofficial king), his goals were scored against competition that Gerd Muller and Alfredo Di Stefano would’ve salivated over. 

Pele played for Santos FC in the Campeonato Paulista which is a state football league in Brazil. Brazil is home to 26 states. That means that while the best players in Europe were playing in the top-flight national leagues in Germany, England, Spain, Italy, and France, Pele was playing in a state league against comparatively weak competition. To exemplify how beneficial weak competition can be to inflating statistics, let’s consider the creation of the Bundesliga in 1963 from a collection of five sub-regional Oberligen (premier leagues) to an elite German national league. We’ll use legendary German striker Uwe Seeler to highlight this point. Seeler began playing for Hamburger SV in the Oberliga Nord in 1954. The Oberliga Nord was a German sub-regional league similar to what Pele’s Santos FC encountered in Brazil. Seeler feasted on the regional competition. In the 237 games that he suited up for Hamburger in the Oberliga Nord, Seeler scored 267 goals for a superhuman rate of 1.12 goals per game. In 1963, the five German sub-regional leagues (Oberliga Nord, Oberliga West, Oberliga Sudwest, Oberliga Sud, and Oberliga Berlin) combined to form a new national football system in Germany called the Bundesliga. Only the best clubs of the Oberligen were invited to participate in the new German national super league. Seeler’s Hamburger SV was one of the clubs invited to join the Bundesliga. In the 239 games that Seeler suited up for Hamburger SV after its move to the Bundesliga, he scored 137 goals for a relatively meager ratio of .57 goals per game. Seeler’s career was spent almost equally between a sub-regional league (237 games) and a national league (239 games) with vastly different performance outcomes. 

Similarly, German great Gerd Muller scored 33 goals in the Regionalliga Sud (formerly the Oberliga Sud) in just 26 appearances for Bayern Munich as a 19 year old. That amounts to a sizzling 1.27 goals per game. After one season with Bayern in a regional league, Muller saw his club promoted to the Bundesliga where his goals per game dropped precipitously to just .45 over 33 games. Seeler and Muller saw an immediate and significant reduction in their production as soon as their competition level spiked. The idea here isn’t to show that Pele’s Santos FC wasn’t a good club. It was. It’s also not to argue that Pele wasn’t a good player. He was world class. The point is that the level of Pele’s state league competition was well below that of the national leagues that existed in Europe or what a national league would’ve looked like in Brazil had one existed. 

Pele’s Santos FC had success in barnstorming tours of Europe, and Pele shined on the biggest stage over four World Cups. What Pele didn’t have to do was play against elite competition every night. This cannot be discounted and absolutely must be considered when determining Pele’s place in history. There is no question that the level of physicality at the highest levels of the sport is something that elite players must contend with. There is also no question that the talent and athleticism at the national level would have had better answers to Pele’s skill than what would be found in a state league. The most talent-filled competition that Pele ever played in was the World Cup. Despite his success, he was routinely injured–missing ⅓ of Brazil’s World Cup games–and saw his goals/game drop to .86 which was significantly below the 1.14 rate that he racked up in the Campeonato Paulista in Brazil. 

Pele was a world class footballer. He was the GOAT for a half century. He did all that he could do given what the landscape of soccer in Brazil looked like at that time. However, degree of difficulty matters and it is precisely why Messi and Ronaldo are the runaway choices for the top 2 spots on the all-time list. Pele is a worthy choice for the #3 position. Although, there is a compelling argument that Robert Lewandowski is just as worthy. Whichever side you fall, just make sure you make the argument using facts and logic. Nothing else moves the conversation forward.     

Goals über alles

Herm Edwards famously said, “You play to win the game!” While the sentiment is seemingly obvious, it’s important to remember the point of competition. If Edwards were a soccer coach instead of a football coach, he might have said, “You play to score goals.” Soccer is a beautiful game that calls for 11 players to work in unison to protect and advance one ball. Some of the greatest players the sport has ever seen like Pele, Johan Cruyff, and Andres Iniesta have been described as graceful and magical. Pundits and fans like to use words like “artistry” and “brilliance” to describe how a player looks aesthetically on the pitch. There is no question that certain players and teams are more graceful than others. However, it’s important not to lose sight that you play to score goals. A soccer goal is the rarest commodity in team sports. It’s never guaranteed, and oftentimes doesn’t come. The odds of winning a soccer game increase significantly with just a single goal. As much as it takes 11 footballers playing in harmony to protect, advance, and defend to win a football game, even more important is having someone to put the ball in the net at an elite rate. From the earliest stages of youth soccer all the way to the Premier League, goal scorers are in scarce supply. Within this context, it is important that unordinary goal scorers get precedent on this list. 

It is not uncommon to read or hear comments that disregard goal-scorers like Gerd Muller and Robert Lewandowksi in the all-time great conversations as “poachers” as if goal scoring is merely an afterthought to the beautiful game itself. The weird implication here is that putting the ball in the net is somehow the easiest skill instead of the most difficult. Of course, this idea is bananas. It doesn’t matter how ugly or displeasing it looks. It doesn’t matter if you think Iniesta has better foot skills or is more artistic on the pitch than Lewandowski. What matters is who impacts winning more and that answer is almost unequivocally the player who puts the ball in the net at an extraordinary rate, of which there are few.  Not every team has one of those, but those that do likely have the trophies to show for it. There is a reason that these players are paid the most and, in almost every scenario, are the hardest to replace. It is for these reasons that you will see players like Lewandwoski and Muller rated higher on this list than what the soccer zeitgeist seems to be willing to allow. It’s one thing to appreciate the artistry of soccer, but it’s just as important to remember why the game is played. You play to win the game, and you often win the game by scoring a single goal.

It’s complicated.

Putting together a list of the top 100 soccer players in history is not for the faint at heart. The factors that need to be considered dwarf that of other sports because of the murky competitive history of soccer as well as the sheer number of competitions that exist. Let’s tackle these separately, starting with the disparate experiences players and teams have had and continue to have across the sport. A good place to start is a good place to start any soccer conversation and that’s with Pele. Pele spent the majority of his soccer career playing in a state league in Brazil. For the record, there are 26 states in Brazil. Pele is the embodiment of a big fish in a small pond. Although, it might more accurately be portrayed as the biggest fish in the smallest pond. On the other side of the globe,  Pele’s international rival, Gerd Muller, played in the Bundesliga, Germany’s national league. Comparing these two very different experiences is virtually impossible. This was the case for much of the 20th century where the best players in the world were spread out all across the world. 

Towards the latter half of the 20th century, the best players in the world began to gravitate exclusively to the Big 5 domestic leagues in Europe. Just like the best basketball players in the world want to make it to the NBA in America, the best soccer players in the world want to make it to a Big 5 domestic league in Europe. However, instead of a single destination like there is for basketball, there are five destinations for soccer players. Serie A (Italian domestic league), The Premier League (English domestic league), La Liga (Spanish domestic league), The Bundesliga (German domestic league), and Ligue 1 (French domestic league) are essentially equivalent to having five NBAs (or 4.5 if you don’t think Ligue 1 quite fits the bill). This makes things rather dicey when comparing player accomplishments. In the NBA, Nikola Jokic and Giannis Antetokounmpo play against the exact same competition. Their performance levels can be compared directly to each other. Similarly, there is just one championship that they compete for and that’s the NBA Championship. This makes direct comparisons somewhat cut and dry. 

In soccer, Harry Kane, Kyllian Mbappe, Erling Haaland, Robert Lewandowski, and Lautaro Martinez could all win the equivalent of an NBA Championship in the same season by winning their respective domestic league trophies. They could also all be a domestic league scoring champion at the same time. Who’s to say how difficult it is to lead the Bundesliga in scoring versus, say, leading the Premier League in scoring? How should we weigh the competitive experience of a 34-game schedule against the unique collection of teams in the Bundesliga compared to a 38-game schedule against an entirely different slate of teams in Serie A? Whereas comparing players who played in the same era in the NBA is relatively easy, doing so in soccer is vastly more difficult, and that’s just comparing domestic league performance.

Comparing soccer players from the same era is fraught with a Rubik’s Cube of intricacies, and comparing players from different eras is downright chaotic, and that’s just if we stay in the realm of the regular season. Factoring in domestic cups (totally different from the domestic league schedule), continental cups, and international cups is like opening a 4th dimension. Let’s use Messi and Lewandowski’s 2014-2015 seasons to show how indirect these comparisons end up being.

Messi’s 2014-2015 season (July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2015)

38 La Liga games (Spanish domestic league)

4 World Cup games (World Cup with Argentina)

13 Champions League (Championship of the European domestic league winners)

3 Friendlies (Exhibition with Argentina)

6 Copa Del Rey (Spanish domestic cup)

5 Copa America (South American Championship with Argentina)

Lewandowski’s 2014-2015 season (July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2015)

31 Bundesliga games (German domestic league)

1 DFL – Supercup (German domestic cup)

5 DFB – Pokal (different German domestic cup)

6 UEFA Euro Qualifying (European Championship Qualifying with Poland) 

12 Champions League (Championship of the European domestic league winners)

 1 Friendly (Exhibition game with Poland)

Note that Messi and Lewandowski played 69 and 56 matches, respectively, in the 2014-2015 season and, given all of those matches, they played each other just twice (Barcelona and Bayern Munich split two matches in the Champions League) and had only two common opponents (Messi’s Argentina and Lewandwoski’s Poland each played Germany and Switzerland). That’s it! That’s what we have in terms of a direct comparison. That’s what we have to compare their respective brilliances. Keep in mind that it’s not just that Messi and Lewandowski don’t play each other, it’s that they don’t even remotely play equivalent competition.  Remember that in the NBA, all of Jokic and Antetokounmpo’s opponents are common opponents. If we’re comparing this to taking a test in school, Jokic and Antetokounmpo are taking the exact same test while Messi and Lewandowski are taking tests that feature none of the same questions in different course levels. 

A comparison like Messi to Cristiano Ronaldo is quite a bit easier since they faced each other in La Liga for nine seasons, but that sort of comparison is the exception rather than the rule with elite players scattered across 5 domestic leagues. With so much information and so little common points of comparison, the way forward is to simply create the best possible argument using statistics (relative to the league average) and degree of difficulty. Once you start doing this, the spine of a top-100 list starts to take shape. There is no doubt that if I restarted this list 100 times without the benefit of seeing the previous list, I’d end up with 100 different lists. There’s just too much minutiae to sift through. However, what’s important is that the relative achievements of players given their eras and their strength of competition makes sense as we descend down the list. I’m not concerned that some people view Xavi’s career as superior to Iniesta’s while others don’t. There is just as much room for subjectivity as there is objectivity in this exercise. The goal here is to give as accurate a snapshot as possible of the greatest resumes that exist in the sport. 

The Playoffs

Domestic league performance serves as a great base for building a strong soccer resume. Just like there’s major clout that comes from winning an NBA MVP or leading the NBA in scoring, leading a Big 5 domestic league in goals, goal contributions (goals + assists), or assists carries a lot of clout. However, much like the NBA, legends are built in the playoffs. This is where the highest level of soccer is played. Iconic performances against elite competition is the hallmark of a killer resume. Defining what the “playoffs” are in soccer is a bit tricky. While the domestic leagues don’t have a playoff like the NBA, each nation has a domestic playoff like the Copa Del Rey (Spain) or the DFB-Pokal (Germany). While these tournaments provide an opportunity to extract additional data points, elite resumes are not built in these competitions. The marquee playoff that mimics what happens in the NBA Playoffs/Finals is the UEFA Champions League (and to a lesser extent the UEFA Europa League) at the club level.

Although the World Cup and continental cups are great opportunities to leave a legacy, they only come around every four years, leaving the UEFA Champions League (UCL) as the de facto equivalent to the NBA Playoffs. The UCL is where the biggest stars play and it’s where legacies are forged. When looking through the top-100, you will see 100 uniquely created resumes. Some will include players who only had domestic league success like Hugo Sanchez. Sanchez led La Liga in scoring four consecutive years and five times overall. On the other hand, he had very little success internationally with Mexico. Some resumes will feature tremendous international success like Paolo Rossi or Mario Kempes. Rossi and Kempes led Italy and Argentina to World Cups, respectively. Both took home the Golden Boot (leading scorer at the World Cup) and the Golden Ball (best player at the World Cup) for their stellar play. However, Rossi and Kempes didn’t leave quite the same mark domestically. Sanchez, Rossi, and Kempes are examples of players who managed to put together top-100 resumes without achieving massive success in the UCL. They prove that it is quite possible to be one of the top-100 footballers without a complete resume. 

By and large, the players who show very well in the top-100 are players who had tremendous success in the UCL, in their domestic leagues, and on the international stage. Of the top-10 goal scorers in UCL history, all are rated in the top-70. The top three goal scorers in UCL history (Messi, Ronaldo, and Lewandowski) hold three of the top-4 positions on the top-100 list. Strong resumes can be put together through a combination of domestic league and/or international success (like Sanchez, Rossi, and Kempes), but the further you make your way up the list, the more likely you will find massive UCL success.     

Lewy “The Wonder Kid”

There is little question that Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo are the two greatest footballers of all-time. Their accomplishments are in a different stratosphere than anyone who has ever played the game considering their competition level. Pele, of course, was a word-class player who was the long serving GOAT following his legendary exploits on the pitch in–and for–Brazil, but it’s difficult to compare Pele and the other great players of his era like Eusebio, Garrincha, and Alfredo Di Stefano to the juggernauts that are Messi and Ronaldo. Domestic league competition in the mid-20th century was considerably more diluted than what we see today. Pele did his cooking in a Brazilian state league, which is similar to LeBron James playing all of his games in the Mid-American Conference (MAC). 

While Pele’s star has been surpassed by the two mega-stars of this era, the player who joins Pele as Messi and Ronaldo’s closest galactic neighbor is Robert Lewandowski. There’s no question that Lewy is a known commodity in the soccer world, but his resume is much, much more historically significant than most probably realize. In fact, when it comes to doing things that had previously never been done before in a Big 5 domestic league, he’s the closest to Messi and Ronaldo that we have ever seen. 

The argument for Lewandowski is as easy as they come. He has led a Big 5 domestic league in goals a record eight times. Not even the great Cristiano Ronaldo can say the same. He scored at least 10 goals in three different UEFA Champions League seasons (UCL). Only Messi and Ronaldo have duplicated that feat. He scored 41 goals for Bayern in 2020-2021. Only Messi and Ronaldo scored more in a single Big 5 domestic league season. He scored 15 goals in the 2019-2020 UCL season. Only Ronaldo scored more in a UCL season. He scored at least 13 goals on two different occasions in the UCL. Only Ronaldo did it more often. Lewandowski has 94 career UCL goals. Only Messi and Ronaldo scored more. Lewandowski’s UCL goals per game ratio stands at .78. Among players with at least 50 UCL goals, only Messi has a better ratio. Lewandowski has 386 (and counting) Big 5 domestic league goals. Only Ronaldo and Messi have more. Lewandowski has 12 Big 5 domestic league seasons with at least 27 goal contributions (goals + assists) and 11 Big 5 domestic league seasons with at least 29 goal contributions. Only Messi and Ronaldo have more. He has five Big 5 domestic league seasons with at least 30 goals. Only Messi and Ronaldo have more. Lewandowski scored a hat trick in the UCL for three different clubs. Nobody has ever equaled that feat and it’s possible nobody ever will. Lewy has six UCL hat tricks. Only Messi and Ronaldo have more. 

Keep in mind that while Lewy’s Bayern Munich club never hurt for talent, he didn’t have the luxury of playing with Xavi, Iniesta, Luis Suarez, Neymar, and Mbappe like Messi did, or Benzema, Toni Kroos, Luka Modric, and a prime Gareth Bale like Ronaldo did. It’s not hard to imagine Lewandowski’s goal contributions inflating in a lineup featuring some of the greatest players the sport has ever seen. It’s also not hard to imagine his raw statistics inching even closer to the land of the absurd had he the benefit of a 38-game schedule like Messi and Ronaldo had in La Liga. The Bundesliga–where Lewandowski played for 12 seasons–is the only Big 5 domestic league that plays a 34-game schedule.     

It’s pretty clear that Lewandowski’s domestic league and Champions League production is more impressive than any non-Messi, non-Ronaldo footballer who has ever taken the pitch. Where he would appear to fall short are his contributions on the international stage, but looks can be deceiving. Lewandowski’s home country of Poland has not been an international force since the late 70s/early 80s. Poland’s typical roster looks nothing like the loaded rosters that Messi and Ronaldo have had the luxury of playing with for Argentina and Portugal, respectively. Messi has achieved massive acclaim for his country. He led Argentina to one of the great international runs as La Abiceleste (Argentina’s nickname) emerged victorious at both the 2021 and 2024 Copa Americas as well as the 2022 World Cup. Add in a 2nd place finish at the 2014 World Cup and Messi is clearly one of the great international performers of all-time. Ronaldo doesn’t have the trophy case to match Messi’s, but his international run with Portugal has been impressive in its own right. Ronaldo won the 2016 UEFA Euros, finished 2nd in 2004, and reached the semi-finals at both the 2006 World Cup and 2012 Euros. Ronaldo (130) and Messi (109) are, far and away, the top international goal scorers of all-time. 

However, given the talent advantages that Ronaldo and Messi have had with Portugal and Argentina, Lewandowski’s contributions with Poland should not be overlooked. Prior to Lewy joining the Polish National Team, Poland had qualified for the Euros just once in its history. Since 2012, Poland has qualified for four consecutive Euros including its best ever finish (5th) in 2016. Lewandowski also helped Poland qualify for back-to-back World Cups in ‘18 and ‘22 for only the second time since 1986. His 83 international goals are the 9th most in history.

It’s doubtful that Lewandowski will be universally recognized as a top-3 or top-5 player of all-time due to factors outside of his control. He doesn’t have the same marketability or name recognition as many of the great players of his era.  Poland is not a soccer powerhouse which means his status as a national icon is somewhat muted in a way that players like Messi, Ronaldo, and Mbappe will never be. The Bundesliga does not get the kind of attention that the Premier League or La Liga get (nor does it have a 38-game schedule). However, the numbers, accolades, and the degree of difficulty are there to justify his standing as the greatest non-Messi, non-Ronaldo footballer of the last 50 years.  

Professional wrestling might eschew sophistication with a bloody, toothless grin on its face, but it is hard to argue that it’s not the most unforgiving performance art we have. Fickle audiences wait at the ready to show disapproval with jeers, chants of “boring!” or, worst of all, silence. Approval rarely comes immediately, even for the characters that do end up resonating. No amount of preparation guarantees success. Getting over with the crowd requires constant refinement through trial-and-error, night after night. It is the cruelest game of survival of the fittest with the audience, like nature to Darwin’s theory of evolution, capriciously deciding what works and what doesn’t. The only thing that’s true about the recipe for success in professional wrestling is that there is no recipe. The crowd only knows what it likes when it sees it. 

While there have been a few “can’t miss” concepts over the years—The Undertaker, for one—most are initially met with skepticism. This is true even for wrestling’s biggest stars. “Stone Cold” Steve Austin and the Rock were unceremoniously rejected when they debuted as the Ringmaster and Rocky Maivia, respectively. Neither abandoned their character completely, instead opting to cater to the audience’s growing preference for characters with an edge. The results speak for themselves as their respective evolutions gave way to the Attitude Era—the most successful in the history of the business. 

Although some gimmicks are better than others—clucking and strutting like a rooster are not the hallmarks of creative gold—the pathway to stardom starts and ends with giving the audience what it wants. Those who succeed reap the rewards of a cult-like following that explodes to the sound of broken glass and blissfully recites favorite catchphrases in unison. Like the most revered ballet dancers, professional wrestlers who tame this treacherous landscape deserve to be celebrated and recognized as accomplished performance artists. 

While putting together a comprehensive list of the greatest performers in any sport has its challenges, pro wrestling presents a unique one: how do we measure success in a scripted environment? Hulk Hogan is arguably the most popular and accomplished pro wrestler in history. Yet, “the Babe Ruth of professional wrestling” wasn’t particularly skilled at the actual wrestling part. Bret Hart, on the other hand, is arguably the most technically-gifted pro wrestler in history. Yet, the “Excellence of Execution” spent most of his career delivering underwhelming promos. Both achieved massive audience acceptance, but they did it in two very different ways, underscoring that beauty in pro wrestling is in the eye of the beholder. Although who we gravitate towards comes down to personal preference, the most accomplished performers share defining characteristics. We can lean on these characteristics to color a representative picture of the 100 greatest performers/characters in wrestling history. They include:

• Merchandise sales/ratings impact
• Promos/Catchphrases
• Versatility (ability to make multiple characters work or evolve an existing character)
• Industry impact
• Win/loss record, championships
• Memorable angles/matches
• Technical/in-ring work
• Peak longevity
• Body composition/presentation
• Psychology (in-ring and out)
• Cultural significance
• Signature move
• Degree-of-difficulty (risking taking, Mick Foley, etc.)
• Wardrobe/Ring attire
• Ring entrance/music
• Crowd Reaction

Rushmore

Professional wrestling’s Mt. Rushmore features a quartet of icons who can all stake a claim as the greatest of all-time. Hulk Hogan, Ric Flair, “Stone Cold” Steve Austin, and the Undertaker have resumes that stand out even among the all-time greats. Hogan is the linchpin who forever changed the wrestling industry by making it a pop culture phenomenon while fueling Vince McMahon’s takeover of the territories. Flair is the greatest heel in history, driven by his boastful, industry-changing promos. Austin saved the WWF in its darkest hour when he led the company to victory over WCW in the Monday Night Wars. The Undertaker persona is the greatest gimmick sports entertainment has ever seen, and nobody was more relevant for longer. These four industry giants separate themselves from the rest of the pack by having very few weaknesses. While there is a worthy list of contenders who also made their marks, each has just enough of a flaw to sink their candidacy.  

The most notable omission is, without question, the Rock. If only we had decided on Fab Five as our preferred grouping of greatness instead of Mt. Rushmore, we could have serenity, and we could have it now! The Rock is much closer to our Rushmore quartet than he is the rest of the contenders. His combination of Flair’s flamboyance and Austin’s abrasiveness mesmerized WWE audiences as he blurred the lines of what it means to be a heel or a face. The only missing ingredient is longevity. He blasted off to superstardom in the summer of 1997, and by 2001 he was already looking to parachute into Hollywood. While he never abandoned his wrestling roots, making sporadic appearances over the years and headlining WrestleMania 28 and 29, his brief run as a full-time wrestler is what inevitably gives The Undertaker claim to the 4th spot. 

Speaking of WrestleMania 28 and 29, it’s not a coincidence that John Cena was handpicked as the Rock’s opponent for a two-year program that produced the only immediate main event rematch in WrestleMania history. Cena was the only performer at the time capable of matching the Rock’s star power. Given the love/hate relationship we have with Cena (“Let’s go Cena!/Cena sucks!”), he will likely never get the full recognition he deserves. Some of that ambivalence can be attributed to the sterile environment he was forced to perform in as McMahon transitioned to a PG product. Cena might not rate the highest in any one category, but he rates consistently high in all of them. He was the face of the WWE for 13 years, which is longer than Austin and the Rock’s reigns at the top combined. Time will likely be kind to his legacy. 

Shawn Michaels might very well be in the 4th spot on Rushmore if not for the back injury he suffered in his casket match with The Undertaker at the Royal Rumble in 1998. The Heartbreak Kid was forced to retire after dropping the belt to Austin at WrestleMania 14. Two weeks later, Monday Night Raw beat Monday Nitro in the ratings for the first time in 84 weeks. In one of the cruelest examples of misfortune the industry has ever seen, Austin’s reign ushered in the most lucrative era in history, producing some of the greatest angles and matches of all-time. Michaels would miss all of it. After a four-year hiatus, Michaels would return for a successful second act that would last another eight years. It says a lot about Shawn’s career that despite missing four pivotal years in the middle of his prime, he’s still universally considered one of the all-time greats. 

Nobody delivered a better promo than “Macho Man” Randy Savage. He is quite possibly the most imitated pro wrestler of all-time. Everyone has a “Macho Man” impersonation (some even have a matching shirt and socks they like to wear while doing it 😎). In an era when Hulk Hogan’s larger-than-life persona overshadowed every other performer in the industry, Savage became a pop culture icon in his own right, carving out one of the most unique characters sports entertainment has ever seen. He falls just short of Rushmore status for two reasons: he was never the face of a major company—the closest he ever got was when Hogan left for a few months to film No Holds Barred in 1988—and the twilight of his career was interrupted both by inactivity and misuse by WWF and WCW.

Like Shawn, Bret Hart’s candidacy for Rushmore is plagued by misfortune. His departure from the WWF to the WCW was the epitome of sell low, buy high. It immediately preceded the WWF’s stratospheric rise under Austin and coincided with WCW’s death spiral. Even worse, the WCW creative team (storyline writers) proved to be too incompetent to incorporate Bret into its dysfunctional organization, instead opting to waste him as a bit player. To add insult to injury, any chance he had of adding to his Hall-of-Fame legacy was lost after receiving a career-ending kick to the head from Goldberg. Whereas Shawn was able to add a second chapter to his career, Bret had no such luxury.  

Lou Thesz and Bruno Sammartino are old-school legends who were no doubt etched on wrestling’s Rushmore at one time. They were kings of a bygone era when the pace was slower than molasses, promo skills were optional, and the territorial set-up regularly produced fresh sets of eyeballs. Most importantly, spectators thought what they were seeing was a legitimate competition. While both hold a lofty place in wrestling history, it would be a disservice to those who have had to perform in a much less forgiving arena to place either on wrestling’s Rushmore.

The Total Package > The Partial Package

We could create a separate top-100 list for each of the 16 factors listed above, which would be a pretty fun exercise. Some performers rate inordinately high in one or two categories, but not necessarily overall. “The Total Package” Lex Luger had the body of Adonis and would rank very highly on a list that only factored physique. In hindsight, it would have been more appropriate for Luger to be named “The Partial Package” as he was weak on the mic, didn’t move merchandise, had little-to-no character versatility, and was far from a technician in the ring. His physical stature, peak longevity, and participation in memorable angles are enough to get him on the list, but nowhere near the top-25.

The Dynamite Kid was an exceptional in-ring performer—maybe-top five in the history of wrestling. However, his cultural significance (in North America), promo work, longevity, and merchandise sales rate much lower than his in-ring work, leaving him outside of the top-50 overall. While Luger and Dynamite’s resumes are strong enough to overcome their limitations, others come up short.

The Honky Tonk Man was white-hot as a heel in 1987 and 1988. His 454-day reign as the Intercontinental Champion is still the longest in history (Note: RIP to this distinction as Gunther broke the record in 2023). His feud with Macho Man sparked some of the highest-rated wrestling shows to ever air on network television. If we’re talking peak crowd reaction, Honky rates near the top-5 heels of all-time. In terms of his historical significance, there are just too many great performers for his two-year run at the top to be enough to crack the top-100.   

U.S. and Canada

When it comes to pro wrestling, comparing success in Japan to the U.S. and Canada is a losing proposition not because one is better than the other but because we have little overlap to form a basis for comparison. The audiences and cultures are very different from each other. In Japan, in-ring technical work has historically been the most emphasized element, which is supported by the fact that 125 of the 160 5-star matches awarded by Dave Meltzer of the Wrestling Observer Newsletter have taken place within Japanese promotions. In the U.S. and Canada, physique, the ability to deliver memorable promos, moving merchandise, and driving ratings have all played more important roles in defining legacies. 

These two distinct wrestling cultures have had very few lasting collaborations and crossover stars, although Japan has been much kinder to its visitors. The list of U.S. wrestlers who have been embraced by Japanese audiences is long and varied. It includes Big Van Vader, Stan Hansen, Scott Norton, “Dr. Death” Steve Williams, and Prince Albert, all of whom were more popular in Japan than in the U.S. The list of Japanese stars who have been embraced by American audiences stands at Shinsuke Nakamura. In all seriousness, while the Great Muta, the Great Kabuki, Ultimo Dragon, and Jushin “Thunder” Liger did achieve modest success in the States, they weren’t exactly featured in their respective promotions.

To fairly compare North American wrestlers to Japanese wrestlers, we would need to see them in the same universe with the same opportunities, and that just hasn’t happened. Instead of randomly splicing Japanese legends throughout the list, we’re better off settling on a U.S. and Canada-centric list and deferring the Japanese list to those immersed in the Japanese culture. Although Rikidozan, Antonio Inoki, and Giant Baba might be household names even among American wrestling fans, there’s a difference between being aware they existed and understanding their impact. 

We certainly wouldn’t expect a Japanese wrestling fan to accurately rank, say, The Ultimate Warrior without a deep understanding of American wrestling culture. The Ultimate Warrior was a pop culture icon. At WrestleMania 7, he became the first person to cleanly pin Hulk Hogan in nine years. He would send Macho Man into retirement the following year in the first and only career vs. career match in Wrestlemania history. He starred in Slim Jim commercials, appeared on Regis & Kathy Lee and the Arsenio Hall Show, and was adorned to Wrestling Buddies and Hasbro figures alike. His popularity would eclipse even that of the Immortal Hulk Hogan. So, it would make sense if his legacy was mistaken for more than what it was.

The reality is that Warrior had a reputation for working stiff (unintentionally hurting his opponent). His skill-set was limited to a few basic moves. He gassed himself out sprinting to the ring, leading to short matches. He delivered rambling promos that did nothing to further storylines. Worse yet, he was notoriously unreliable. Without this additional context, it would be easy to overrate his legacy. Without having intimate knowledge of Japanese wrestling culture to avoid making similar miscalculations, we’re better off outsourcing to experts. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be a top-100 Japanese list. Hopefully, that changes at some point. In the meantime, here is an informative rundown of 50 of the greatest Japanese wrestlers of all-time. 

Latino wrestlers have had more success in the U.S. than their Japanese counterparts, although even that door has only been open for 25 years. Lucha libre in the states didn’t take off in earnest until WCW began to promote its cruiserweight division in 1996. Wrestling fans would immediately marvel at the pace and athleticism of Rey Mysterio Jr., Eddie Guerrero, Juventud Guerrera, Chavo Guerrero Jr., Psicosis, La Parka, and Super Calo. Since Latino stars who predated this lucha explosion rarely got the opportunity to apply their craft in the U.S., it also makes sense to recognize them separately rather than force them onto a list without having proper cultural context. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be a top-100 Latino list, either. Hopefully, that changes, too. In the meantime, here is an informative rundown of 15 of the greatest luchadores of all-time. 

Full Body of Work

Despite Japan and Mexico’s rich history of professional wrestling, their stars have historically not found success in U.S. wrestling promotions. For this reason, we lack the proper cultural context to make comparative evaluations. Although we should leave these evaluations to those immersed in each respective culture, pro wrestlers who have thrived in multiple cultures have shown a unique ability to assimilate their skills and will have their entire body-of-work considered. 

Dynamite Kid achieved success in North America, first in Stu Hart’s Stampede Wrestling, and then later in the WWF as a member of the British Bulldogs. He also achieved massive acclaim in Japan, most notably in his matches against Japanese legend Tiger Mask, proving his ability to excel in any environment. Other wrestlers whose legacies are enhanced by overseas work include Terry Funk, Stan Hansen, Terry Gordy, Road Warrior Hawk, Road Warrior Animal, Vader, Owen Hart, Sabu, Eddie Guerrero, Brock Lesnar, AJ Styles, and Kenny Omega.

Additionally, because character development has no expiration date, we should acknowledge all in-ring contributions made by performers, including influential roles after full-time in-ring careers have slowed or stopped entirely. Jesse “the Body” Ventura, Gorilla Monsoon, and Mr. Fuji are examples of accomplished pro wrestlers who evolved their characters to stay relevant on-camera even after their in-ring careers ended. It’s important to note that this is very different than factoring in Charles Barkley’s work as an NBA analyst for TNT when evaluating his professional basketball career. Professional wrestling is performance art; every character on the screen—regardless of whether an in-ring career has ended—is part of the performance.  

Moving Merch Matters

No serious person would factor in Tom Brady’s jersey sales when contemplating his place in football history. His legacy is tied solely to on-field performance. He could have zero dollars in career jersey sales, and his seven Super Bowls and five Super Bowl MVPs would still leave him as the greatest professional football player of all-time. In football, “winning the game” means scoring more points than the other team. In professional wrestling, it means winning the audience’s approval, no more, no less. For proof, consider that “Mr. WrestleMania” himself Shawn Michaels has a career record of 6-11 at… WrestleMania. Shawn’s job was not to win but to entertain, and he did it as well as any performer in wrestling history. 

We can measure a performer’s ability to entertain intangibly by listening to live-crowd reactions. We can measure it tangibly by merchandise sales and individual segment ratings. Although WWE doesn’t publish historical merchandise sales, it’s not a stretch to suggest that “Stone Cold” Steve Austin, Hulk Hogan, and John Cena are the three greatest merchandise-movers of all-time. It’s also not a stretch to suggest the Rock and The Undertaker round out the top-five. It’s not a coincidence that all five are well within the top-10 on our list. While there are many other factors we can use to evaluate a pro wrestler’s legacy, we can’t forget that selling merchandise and driving ratings is tantamount to winning.

It’s also important to note that merchandising as we know it today didn’t exist until Hulkamania started putting an end to the territories in 1984. Performers who debuted well before this boon—like Ric Flair, Harley Race, and Dusty Rhodes—didn’t have the benefit of WWF’s national promotional machine driving merchandise sales. We need to evaluate these performers based on the conditions that existed at the time, and not what the landscape looks like today.

The Last Superstar 

The wrestler known as Ryback stated on his eponymous podcast that HHH had once told him that John Cena would be the last marquee superstar the WWE ever has. HHH’s comments weren’t as much a slam on the current crop of talent as they were an acknowledgment that the WWE might be looking to do business differently moving forward. 

Without WWE strapping a rocket to its next chosen star, even the top performers will find it challenging to make their mark in the industry. Hulk Hogan, “Stone Cold” Steve Austin, The Rock, and John Cena were all given plenty of airtime and the creative liberties necessary to make their characters work because the WWE had already decided they wanted them to work. We’ve already seen the WWE repeatedly pump the brakes on elevating Bray Wyatt and Braun Strowman, which could simply be poor creative or another indication that they are being mindful of not letting talent get too over (popular).

Looking at the WWE today, it’s not hard to find truth in HHH’s reported comments. Cena has transitioned to part-time status, and there does not seem to be an implied heir apparent. In the absence of WWE’s penchant for creating a “face of the company,” previously useful metrics for ranking a wrestler’s place in history like merchandise sales, ratings impact, and cultural impact might dry up even for top-level performers. If that ends up being the case, then technical ability will likely become more important than ever, which would be a welcome development for wrestling purists.

 

It would be easy to look at the offensive explosion in the NBA over the last five years and call into question player attitudes towards defense. Since defending is equal parts technique and effort, it stands to reason that a significant increase in scoring would be a reflection of defensive effort. Interestingly, this is one of the few times where logic lets us down. While it is technically true that defenses are performing worse (i.e., allowing more points), it turns out that defensive effort is either an insignificant factor or not a factor at all. A fancy tool we have at our disposal to help illuminate this is shot distribution by distance. The offensive uptick in the NBA has paradoxically coincided with NBA players attempting more difficult shots instead of fewer. We can hardly blame NBA defenses for this unexpected development. To get a better idea of the root cause(s) of the NBA’s pinball point totals, let’s take a look at some surprising trends.

Up first on our to-do list is to separate the signal from the noise. Scoring is up in the NBA, and it’s up big-time. In the 2011-2012 NBA season, teams averaged 96.3 points per game. That number has skyrocketed to over 112 points per game today. It’s important to note that pace—or the number of possessions per game—has also increased significantly, which would naturally lead to an increase in scoring even if the league-average field goal percentage remained steady. More possessions = more points.

NBA teams are averaging 8.2 more possessions per game in 2021 than in 2012. Assuming a conservative 1.08 points per possession, that gives us 8.64 more points per game from the increase in pace alone. The 8.64-point increase only represents 55% of the 15.7-point overall points per game increase since 2012. Where is the rest coming from?

Those of us who have spent hours (or thousands of hours) playing 3-on-3 at the local gym know that layups and 3s keep you on the court. The mid-range game is your ticket to a 45-minute wait in the crowded queue of gym rats and weekend warriors. That has been a way of life in pick-up basketball long before Allen Iverson made it cool to clank the iron. The layups or 3s approach is pretty easy to explain using some nifty 6th-grade math. The league average shooting percentage in the NBA for a long-two (beyond 16 feet) is around 40%, or .8 points per possession (40% x 2 possible points). The league average shooting percentage in the NBA for 3-pointers and layups is 38% and 67%, respectively, resulting in 1.14 (38% x 3 possible points) and 1.34 (67% x 2 possible points) points per possession. The math confirms that three-pointers and layups are the way to go.

Curiously, the NBA seemed oblivious to this remedial math lesson for more than 60 years, instead opting to canonize the mid-range jumper. Many seasons and many inefficient players later, the layups or 3s philosophy finally hit the NBA within the last decade, spreading like wildfire. In just 10-seasons, three-point attempts have gone up an unbelievable 74%. Over the same period, long-twos have gone down 64%, currently representing only 7% of total shot attempts as the league has started to view them as the reckless gambles they are.

While the increase in 3-point shot attempts alone would be enough to increase points per possession, something unexpected happened along the way that has accelerated the increase even more. NBA players didn’t just start taking more 3-point shots, they started making them more often. In 2011-12, when 22.6% of total shot attempts were 3-pointers, the leaguewide 3-point shooting percentage was 34.9%. In 2020-21, 3-pointers are accounting for 39.4% of shot attempts, while the league average 3-point shooting percentage has increased to an astounding 36.8%. The upticks in both three-point attempts and three-point shooting percentage have combined to produce the five highest league average Points Per Possession seasons of all-time in just the last five years, culminating in 2021’s bonkers mark of 1.12.

With all due respect to the Showtime 80s, this quicker-paced, more efficient style of play has arguably produced the most exciting brand of basketball the NBA has ever seen. The byproduct of that development is that playing defense in the NBA—and accumulating defensive stats—has never been more challenging. The layups or 3s offensive approach has had a massive trickle-down effect on several counting statistics that we’ve historically leaned on to measure defensive impact. Here are some examples:

1. With more attempts coming from behind the arc, fewer shots are closely-contested, causing block shots to plummet. The five fewest Block Shots Per 100 possessions seasons in NBA history have come in the last five years.
2. With more attempts coming from behind the arc and coming sooner in the shot clock, the number of overall passes and the number of “risky” passes (passes made in traffic inside the arc) are down, causing steals to drop significantly. The three fewest Steals Per 100 Possessions seasons in NBA history have come in the last three years.
3. With more attempts coming from behind the arc and three-point shooting percentage rising, defensive eFG% allowed has skyrocketed. The seven highest eFG% seasons have all come in the last seven years.
4. The increase in pace and opponent eFG% has caused teams to emphasize getting back on defense as quickly as possible to avoid giving up transition opportunities, abandoning the pursuit of offensive rebounds in the process. The four lowest Offensive Rebounding % seasons have all come in the last four years.
5. NBA defenders have historically benefited from having the option to foul an opponent before allowing a high-percentage attempt close to the basket, artificially limiting points per possession. That option simply doesn’t exist when defending a 3-point shooter. With more shot attempts coming from behind the arc, fewer attempts are coming near the basket where most fouls occur, causing fouls to drop. The five fewest Fouls Per 100 Possessions seasons in NBA history have all come in the last five years.

As increases in offensive efficiency and pace have put more pressure on defenses, we’ve seen steals, blocks, offensive rebounding, and fouls per 100 possessions plunge. Since raw inter-era per-game and per-possession comparisons of these statistics offer little value, we need to find a better way to compare present-day defenders to their predecessors. Any inter-era player comparison needs to consider two factors: 1) degree of difficulty (or strength of the league) and 2) performance relative to peers. Since modern defenders face the highest degree of difficulty in NBA history, we can use performance relative to peers without limitation. Let’s look at how an elite modern defender compares to elite defenders from different eras using performance relative to the league average.

Rudy Gobert is the premier defensive center in the NBA today. He is a two-time Defensive Player of the Year winner, a four-time 1st Team All-Defensive selection, the active leader in Block % and is on pace to become the active leader in Defensive Rating. Unsurprisingly, Gobert’s per game marks are underwhelming compared to centers from eras with more action inside the three-point line. Fortunately, we can lean on performance relative to peers to provide a more fair comparison.

The only player in NBA history who has performed better relative to the league average than Gobert is David Robinson. Skyrocketing field goal percentages, an increased pace, and globalization that has produced superstars like Giannis, Nikola Jokic, and Luka Doncic, make Gobert’s NBA competition significantly more challenging than what Robinson faced. Gobert is only 28 and currently having his best defensive season yet relative to the league average, so it’s not hyperbole to suggest that Gobert is on his way to becoming one of the greatest—if not the greatest—defensive centers of all-time. Longevity matters, of course, but after eight seasons, Gobert couldn’t be off to a better start. If we merely focused on raw Defensive Rating in our comparison, then Robinson would win in a landslide. Robinson’s ten best seasons according to Defensive Rating are better than any season Gobert has ever had. It’s only when we remove pace from the equation and make the comparison using performance relative to the league average that we get a true measure of Gobert’s contributions.

While the NBA may have been slow to adapt, the focus on points per possession is not a recent phenomenon. Dean Smith incorporated it into his offensive philosophy as early as the 1960s, while another Dean—Dean Oliver—brought the terminology into our everyday vernacular with his focus on points per 100 possessions or, as he calls it, Offensive Rating (ORtg). As players, coaches, and front offices have adopted points per possession as a crucial metric, the efficiency—or inefficiency—of shot selection has never been more scrutinized. In turn, we need to make sure we’re understanding the defensive ramifications of this philosophical shift, or we are destined to underrate modern defenders and potentially miss out on historical greatness right in front of our eyes.