606v2 Greatest WWE Champion

Hi all, Basically there have been 40 different WWE champions and I thought it would be good to list them in order from best to worst champion. This will be based solely on the championship reign rather than the individual. I.e. Kane's WWE Championship reign was one of the worst of all time whereas his career has been better than some of the people who will finish above him.

The list of champions is as follows:
1) "Nature Boy" Buddy Rogers
2) Bruno Sammartino (2x Champion)
3) Ivan Koloff
4) Pedro Morales
5) Stan Stasiak
6) "Superstar" Billy Graham
7) Bob Backlund (2x Champion)
8.) The Iron Sheik
9) "The Immortal" Hulk Hogan (6x Champion)
10) Andre The Giant
11) "Macho Man" Randy Savage (2x Champion)
12) The Ultimate Warrior
13) Sgt. Slaughter
14) The Undertaker (4x Champion)
15) "Nature Boy" Ric Flair (2x Champion)
16) Bret "Hitman" Hart (5x Champion)
17) Yokozuna (2x Champion)
18.) Diesel
19) "The Heartbreak Kid" Shawn Michaels (3x Champion)
20) Sid (2x Champion)
21) "Stone Cold" Steve Austin (6x Champion)
22) Kane
23) The Rock (7x Champion)
24) Mankind (3x Champion)
25) Triple H (8x Champion)
26) Vince McMahon
27) Big Show (2x Champion)
28.) Kurt Angle (4x Champion)
29) Chris Jericho
30) Brock Lesnar (3x Champion)
31) Eddie Guerrero
32) John "Bradshaw" Layfield
33) John Cena (8x Champion)
34) "The Rated R Superstar" Edge (4x Champion)
35) Rob Van Dam
36) Randy Orton (6x Champion)
37) Jeff Hardy
38.) Batista (2x Champion)
39) Sheamus (2x Champion)
40) The Miz


We can either go through them and sort them from positions 40-1 or possibly do the worst 5 and the best 10 which would obviously be quicker. Equally, if this proves to be a success we could do the same sort of thing for the WHC (20 champions). What are peoples thoughts on this?

I did a similar thing on a different board, but only the top ten, and top worst ten. I basically gave different amount of points for how they ranked in the ten for each person, and they'd PM me their lists. Then obviously all the points would be added up and then the final list would be published, one by one, once a day.

I think it's a good idea if you can do it all. So I would be in for it, but think it'd be better to keep it in the ten best and ten worst rather than all 40.

So when people have had more than one reign, how would that be taken into account?

Bob Backlund had 4 years as champion, and then 3 days in the mid-90's. There'd certainly be an argument for him on both lists...?

I think if people want to put him on both lists they can.

If people have more than one reign then we can easily put them on both lists. So shall we do 10 worst and 10 best?

Great idea, when we doing this

Yeah I think you should Gregers, it's pretty hard to do though, as I found out!

Shall we start this today then? First of all the WORST WWE Champion in history. Please explain why you've voted for them.

Position 40 =

Gregers, you may find it easier to use polls to make it easier for you to count the results?

Up to you though.

Problem is if we're doing the bottom 5 and the top 10 then thats 15 polls...

I think it's also better with PMs. So we PM you our top ten and then the results won't be clear until you release them.

Okay if I could get people to PM me there worst 5 wwe champions and why

Set up a new thread mate, otherwise people might not realise. :P