Stephanie McMahon was revealed as the first inductee into the 2026 WWE Hall of Fame during WrestlePalooza, a moment that was celebrated by many fans and praised by WWE itself. However, not everyone agrees that the honor is deserved. Stevie Richards is one of the most outspoken critics, going as far as to say Stephanie should never have been considered for induction.

Speaking on the Stevie Richards Show, Richards argued that her legacy as both a performer and behind the scenes is not Hall of Fame worthy. He was blunt in his assessment, stating that her creative contributions should be recognized in a Hall of Shame rather than celebrated in the Hall of Fame.

“Does Stephanie McMahon deserve to be inducted into the WWE Hall of Fame? No. As a writer, she deserves to never be in the Hall of Fame. I’m serious. That should be in the Hall of Shame. Shane by a mile deserves it more than Stephanie for just the performance and the memorable moments in his matches and how he still could cut a promo. He still did what he did even way back in the Corporate Ministry days. Shane would deserve it. It’s still enough body of work where Shane deserves to be in the Hall of Fame long before Stephanie. Way before Stephanie.”

Richards emphasized that Shane McMahon’s career stands out far more due to his willingness to take risks, deliver memorable promos, and create iconic moments, particularly during the Attitude Era. By contrast, he felt Stephanie’s work was inconsistent and often dragged WWE programming down.

He recalled that Stephanie was entertaining for about a year during her initial run, but quickly became repetitive once she returned as part of The Authority storyline with Triple H. Richards said fans were initially excited to see her return but soon grew tired of the constant opening promos that dominated episodes of Raw.

“Stephanie was really good on screen for about a year and then she disappeared. Then she was the GM and then she was just there and then she sort of went back to mousy Stephanie and then she disappeared for years. Then she came back and then she was the B+ player version of Stephanie McMahon with Triple H that went, oh, those Authority promos that opened the show. And people the first week were like, ‘Oh my god, Stephanie’s back. This is so great.’ It’s like, boy, are you going to be disappointed when this is every single week. It was pulling teeth. They made the show worse.”

Richards also pointed out a major flaw in how Stephanie’s character was presented. In her early days, Vince McMahon often directed her segments and allowed her to face consequences, which made her storylines more entertaining. Over time, however, he became too protective, and Stephanie’s character became untouchable. Richards criticized how she would routinely slap wrestlers on television without ever facing retaliation, creating a sense of imbalance in the storytelling.

“Stephanie McMahon was great in the early days when Vince McMahon was basically directing, and at some point he got so overprotective of Stephanie that it went from she would get a comeuppance every single week to she would never get a comeuppance. Then all she is is this oppressive, looming figure with every wrestler under her thumb every single week. She slapped them, she slapped multiple wrestlers every single week, and they never got any heat back on her.

I remember someone once, years ago, when I said that, they were like, ‘Oh, didn’t you watch that WrestleMania?’ I was like, ‘You mean where she tripped and fell over on her own steam, and it happens once every two years?’ Vince McMahon, you couldn’t get enough heat on that guy or make him look stupid enough, and he got better every week because of it. Stephanie McMahon, just, I don’t know.

Someone started taking her character too seriously, whether it was her, whether it was Vince, or whether it was Triple H, saying, ‘No, you shouldn’t be doing all these things and you should be stronger and more important and more indestructible than everybody else,’ as far as a character point of view.”