In a recent podcast episode that sent shockwaves through the wrestling community, iconic commentator Jim Ross delved into the intriguing question of why Kane, one of the most imposing figures in WWE history, didn’t hold the championship more times. As the Instagram wrestling historian community buzzes with speculation, Ross’s insights have sparked a fiery debate about whether Kane was better off as a special attraction or if he deserved more title runs.
Ross, known for his no-nonsense approach, wasted no time in asserting his perspective. According to him, Kane unquestionably fell under the category of an attraction and didn’t need the championship to solidify his status as a wrestling star. Drawing parallels with other legendary figures like Andre the Giant and the Million Dollar Man, Ross emphasized that some performers transcend the need for a title to be recognized and celebrated.
In a moment of candid analysis, Ross stated, “He didn’t need it to be noteworthy, to be recognized, and all those things. He just didn’t need it, but he was a star. He had become a star, without any doubt. So anyway, he did well. It just shows you; you don’t have to have a title to get over. If that’s what you need, then you never were going to probably be over to any degree.”
Ross went on to commend the creative minds behind Kane’s character development, giving credit to individuals like Bruce and the entire creative team. He praised the portrayal of Kane as a larger-than-life persona, a human prop standing at 7 feet tall and weighing 300 pounds. According to Ross, the character of Kane didn’t need the championship as a prop; he was the prop, a testament to the success of the creative vision that brought him to life.
- Advertisement -
Now, as fans and wrestling enthusiasts digest Ross’s perspective, the controversy takes center stage. The Instagram wrestling community is abuzz with discussions and arguments, with opinions split on whether Kane’s lack of title runs was a missed opportunity or a strategic choice that enhanced his mystique.
As the wrestling world grapples with these divisive opinions, one thing is certain – Jim Ross’s insights have reignited the debate on whether championships are essential for a wrestler’s legacy or if, in certain cases, the absence of gold can elevate a performer to even greater heights.