A Little Rant about Top 10 Wrestling Slide Shows

Lately (and probably before that) there has been a rash of top-10 wrestling slide shows on the Bleacher Report.

I don't like to knock other writers but when people put out a top 10 they give it a title as if it is the definitive Top 10 and not just their personnel one.

I feel the need to rant about this because the vast majority of these top 10s only include matches or wrestlers after the Attitude era. 

Basically they are calling themselves an All-Time Top 10, but really only cover a span of 10 years of so.

I decided to write this article because I've just gotten tired of commenting and reading the comments on these poorly researched articles.

For example I just read one about WrestleMania that only had two pre-Attitude era matches included in it and they were "Hogan vs. Andre" and "Hart vs. HBK."

"Savage vs. Steamboat" wasn't mentioned, nor was any match from the first WrestleMania.  Now correct me if I'm wrong but if you're doing any kind of top list of an event shouldn't something from the very first get mentioned?

After all the first WrestleMania (though overshadowed by three) did start not only WrestleMania, but the craze of Wrestling Pay-Per-Views.

I know every list is in a sense a personal one, but when you call something an all-time list and only focus on a fraction of the history the list looses all credibility.

So I'm asking those of you who make the list (and for the record I don't really think any of them are bad) if you have little to no knowledge of wrestling before a certain era or are just going to focus on one era, call it something more specific.

Like, The Best Heels of the '90s or My Top 10 Heels of All-Time.  

That way your comment section isn't filled with people calling you an idiot for not including this wrestler or that match.

Okay loyal reading, rant over.