Hi Scott,
Big fan of your rants, read 'em after every show, and read old rants to pass the time at work. I got into wwe wrestling in 2001, so I missed most of the Attitude Era. I read a lot about Austin, my favourite wrestler, but I was hoping I could get your opinion on how popular he really was. You say a lot of times in the rants that Cena carried the company on his back, and Batista turned it around, but how does their popularity compare to Austin? And was he a bigger star than The Rock? Or was he bigger in 98-99, but The Rock took over in 2000?
Thanks,
Roel from Holland.
Cena and Batista compare to Austin like a bug compares to the person about to squash them under his boot as far as popularity goes. Steve Austin transcended wrestling, taking an entire company from the verge of bankruptcy and making it into a billion dollar publicly owned juggernaut. In 1998, you could walk down the street and see regular people wearing Austin 3:16 t-shirts, and these are people who would never have watched wrestling in their life before that. Rock is a bigger star overall now, but Austin destroyed him in box office and merchandise. The WWE's own quote on the number of shirts sold by Austin, according to Dave Meltzer, is "a shitload". Basically so many that he still essentially lives off the residuals.
So yes, Austin was a bigger star than ANYONE. The only other person, and I mean the ONLY one, who is even in the conversation is Hulk Hogan.
I don't think the match would have been as good, but some part of me remains disappointed that the 'Mania match featured Rock facing Hogan, when the more logical match would have been Hogan versus Austin.
ReplyDeleteThe biggest superstar of the 80s vs. the biggest superstar of the 90s, the 2 biggest superstars of all time...yea, even if the match wouldn't have been as good, it IS pretty lame it never happened. Would Hogan have laid down clean for Austin as he did for Rock, though?
ReplyDeleteAustin was on top from '97-2001.. Hogan was on top from '82-2000.. I may be in the minority, but that's how I look at it.. Of course, I was one of those people who thought the Attitude/Crash TV era was straight garbo.. Can't lie, I don't think it holds up well.. Certainly not as awesome as the mid to late eighties.. WWE Classics On Demand proves this week after week..
ReplyDeleteThat said, Austin shits on Cena, but there is something to be said about The John lasting longer than The Steve, and showing NO signs of slowing down.. It'll be an interesting convo in 15 years when Cena is finally ready to take on a reduced schedule..
"So yes, Hogan was a bigger star than ANYONE. The only other person,
ReplyDeleteand I mean the ONLY one, who is even in the conversation is Steve Austin."
FIFY. Hogan infiltrated every facet of pop culture, not just t-shirts.
Looking at the crap Austin pulled for his match on that Mania, I'm glad it never went down. Austin would have never been able to make his distaste for working the match look as interesting as Shawn Michaels did.
ReplyDeleteHe wasn't on top from 82-2000. He was only legitimately the top star from 82-1990ish. Every year after that was just Hogan doing whatever he could to cling to his former star power.
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty sure Austin/Hogan was planned for WM18, but Austin refused to work with Hogan. Somehow, Rock/Hogan just seem like they would have better chemistry with each other anyway.
ReplyDeleteI certainly hope you fully recovered from that coma that took the mid 90's away from you..
ReplyDeleteI would say Hogan is the biggest star ever in wrestling. The name Hulk Hogan still rings out as relating to wrestling, even if a non-wrestling fan hears it. Austin got a lot of publicity outside of wrestling while he was on top, but if the average person (who didn't watch wrestling) heard the name Steve Austin now, they would struggle to think of who he is. Plus, Hogan was on top longer and had a huge impact in two companies.
ReplyDeleteI'd reckon that the first thing anyone over 50 thinks when you mention "Steve Austin" is The Six Million Dollar Man.
ReplyDeleteI was put in that coma from the boredom watching Hulk Hogan main event Starrcade against Brutus Beefcake wearing white face paint in 1994. Then in 1996, I woke up to see Hulk turn heel and that was interesting for about 2 months until I realized that he was just as boring and bland as a bad guy.
ReplyDeleteThankfully Austin and the Outsiders prevented me from falling into another Hulkamania induced coma.
I feel like the only method of comparison is to say that Austin burned brighter but Hogan burned longer. The name "Hulk Hogan" still endures to this day in a way that "Stone Cold Steve Austin" simply doesn't. And yet, I feel Steve Austin made professional wrestling a viable and legitimate entertainment in a way that Hogan never did. Wrestling was popular with Hogan on top, and sold out arenas all over the world. Merchandise too, in addition to being a PPV draw. However, Austin not only made professional wrestling popular, he actually made it cool, in a way that, again, Hogan never did. Randoms on the street would wear Austin 3:16 shirts. I don't know that you could say the same about Hulkamania t-shirts.
ReplyDeleteUltimately, I'm not really making an argument in one direction or the other. I feel as though they both have legitimate claims to being the biggest star in the history of professional wrestling, for different reasons. I just don't know what the criteria would be: name relevance? PPV buyrates? Ratings? Merchandise? Attendance? Mainstream penetration?
I feel both men have combinations of these traits, some larger than others. For instance, Hogan probably drew higher live gates than Austin while Austin likely sold more merchandise than Hogan. I feel like it's really hard to conclude, one way or the other, who the biggest star is, conclusively.
Ultimately, Hogan wins because he became a megastar on two separate occasions. He made the WWF into the juggernaut it is today, and the only time it was ever threatened was by the nWo juggernaut that he lead in WCW.
ReplyDeleteThere's no chance in hell that Austin could have left the WWF and gone somewhere else, completely reinvented himself, and made that promotion the number one sports entertainment entity on the planet.
Here's a question...who do you guys think are the best known of all time to people who do not watch wrestling at all and have no interest in it? Austin is probably unquestionably top 2 in wrestling itself, but I'm not sure how big he is to those who are totally unfamiliar with wrestling. Hogan and Rock have got to be top 2, no?
ReplyDeleteI like to use the "my mother" test, as she has no interest in wrestling and I'm not sure she's ever watched a minute of it. As far as I'm aware, there are only five total wrestlers (and I'm reluctant to include one of them) that she'd even recognize their name...Hulk Hogan, The Rock, Chris Jericho (Dancing with the Stars and that game show he did for like one or two episodes, she liked it and is a big Jericho fan), Randy Savage (the Slim Jim commercials I guess? I just know she knew who he was when he died), and then I'm reluctant to include her but Stacy Keibler, no issue if you want to discount her since she wasn't exactly a big name in wrestling like the other 4. And I guess Vince McMahon but I wasn't really counting him. Maybe she'd recognize one or two other names if she heard me mention them, or maybe Shawn Michaels because my cousin was a huge fan of his and talked about him all the time, but as far as people she was aware of, it's pretty much those named above. What do you guys think?
That's your opinion, though. I can definitely see where you're coming from pre nWo, where it seemed like he was just holding on to past glory and wasn't necessarily what people wanted to see, but it's hard to argue he wasn't on top of at least WCW and at times the business during the nWo angle, even beyond 2 months. 2000 is too far though, he was pretty much back to "holding onto past glory" by the end of 1998 if not earlier.
ReplyDeleteI actually agree on the Attitude Era for the most part, even though clearly my opinion is the minority and I accept that. I wasn't a big fan. It certainly had its moments, and some of my favorite wrestlers of all time came out of that era, but I just didn't like it.
ReplyDeleteAndre the Giant of course, I forgot him. My mother knows who Andre the Giant is.
ReplyDeleteYou can dislike Hogan as a performer, but you can't deny that he was the centerpiece of the nWo.
ReplyDeleteSo all those teenagers were tuning into Nitro to see a 40 year old man with a spray paint beard ramble on for 20 minutes every week making less sense than their senile grandmothers?
ReplyDeleteAfter the abomination of Starrcade 96, the main reason people were watching Nitro in 97 was to see Sting destroy him. And when they fucked that up it was all downhill from there, and it was all over after WM 98.
Yeah because he put himself there. The reason why the nWo was cool was because of Hall and Nash. Everyone watching at the time just tolerated him because we had to, while waiting for them to finally have Sting destroy him.
ReplyDeleteJesse Ventura?
ReplyDeleteThey could feud over who had the harsher failed marriage...
ReplyDeleteToo soon?
Yes, he put himself there. So what? He first had to make Vince enough money to get the power that allowed him to do that. And the nWo doesn't get over nearly as much in mainstream America without Hogan's star power.
ReplyDeleteHall and Nash helped make the NWO cool, but Hogan's heel turn was what helped put the whole angle and group over the top big time. Hogan-Sting and Hogan-Goldberg were big matches because of Hogan in large part, not because Hogan happened to lead a group that two other guys made cool.
ReplyDeleteThe nWo really wasn't that much of a mainstream crossover, at least not in the same league as Austin was in 98. Hogan turning was absolutely the jump off and I'll give credit for that but Nash and Hall were the reason people KEPT tuning in.
ReplyDeleteIf Hogan turns heel with anyone else as his nWo backup, it dies on the vine before the end of 1997.
It'll take at least a decade for Cena to catch up to Austin's wife count. And he'll probably never catch Flair.
ReplyDelete:) I laughed out loud at this comment (Brother Bruti The Butcher Zodiac!!) but I agree for a lot of it.
ReplyDeleteNothing bored me like Hogan from 94 to 96 summer and theres a reason both companies were doing badly in this era. They should have gotten some attitude and episodic must-see storylines about two or three years before they did.
Im a bigger fan of egomaniacal-cheat-to-win champion Hogan leading the nWo (in hindsight only) but at the time I thought he sucked and was tuning in for Hall and Nash and the nWo storyline. I can feel you on the Hogan hate. But he was a good heel from 96 to 98, I would say really really good.
http://challonge.com/wrestlingtournament2012 (R1)
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying Hogan wasn't an effective chicken shit heel. My point is that nobody wanted to see that in 1998.
ReplyDeletehowever Post-'98, I would say he had the match with the most heat in 2 straight Manias, '02 &'03..
ReplyDeletewhenever im watching wrestling my mum cant resist sitting down and watching as well, even at the cost of making dinner and doing teacher stuff.
ReplyDeleteWhat people think now-a-days is what I thought then, which is "What happened to tough guys trying to kill each other?"
ReplyDelete99.9% of the reason those were big matches was because of Sting and Goldberg. It wasn't "Oh I hope the dastardly heel finally gets his comeuppance" heat. It was "God I hope Goldberg beats him and Hogan takes off and goes and shoots a movie." heat.
ReplyDeleteThat's a more than fair assessment, though I don't really have a dog in the fight either way (insofar as I don't even know who I'd pick, not that I don't give a damn about either guy).
ReplyDeleteI'd also add that Hogan is probably among the only guy who, and Ric Flair is the only person I could think of who could reasonably match/challenge him on this, could be considered BOTH the greatest babyface and the greatest heel of all-time.
It's inconceivable, in a lot of ways, to think that ONE person could play both sides of the fence so excellently, when so many men dedicate their careers to PERFECTING one or the other, the craft of being a babyface or the craft of being a heel.
I truly feel like Hogan has the market cornered on laying claim to being both the greatest babyface AND the greatest heel in history, with only Flair posing a significant challenge in terms of money drawn on both sides of the fence, and just how much heat they could get, getting people to either love them with every fiber of their being and hate them with just as much voracity. Maybe Rock is up there too? But I think that'd be a bit of a stretch. Really, the only mark against either man's claim is that Hogan eventually got stale as a babyface, and was too cool of a heel to hate. That latter issue has always been true of Flair, though he was always able to turn the crowd against him, at least in his prime.
Good point. Thinking back I kind of had a 'Oh brother not again' reaction when Hogan won the belt back on Nitro spring 1998, only a night after Savage toppled Sting and only 3-4 months after Hogan's long ass title reign.
ReplyDeleteThough I do think chicken shit heels can be in the main event and make it work but there was definite staleness and kind of paled to the badassery of Austin at this time, even if WCW was winning the ratings war still.
Your comment about the Attitude vs Rock 'N Wrestling is interesting to me.
ReplyDeleteI'm 25, most of my friends/co-workers are slightly older than me. They were little kids during the Hogan years and were the perfect age for Attitude. I assume most of them at some point wacthed Attitude (since it was such a big part of pop culture for a little while there). But they *never* talk about it, not even in an ironic way. We listen to the radio at work and every once in a blue moon they'll talk about something wrestling related, like Stone Cold or Vince's birthday (they do a 'Celebrity B-Days' segment every day). When it's Attitude era stuff, nothing. But mention *anyone* from the 80's, from Hogan to Ted Dibiase and you'll at least get a comment. For some reason it feels "cool" to discuss stuff like the Savage vs Steamboat feud (which we did last year) or Hogan/Andre vs anything that happened during the Austin years. Even guys like Koko B Ware get some love, but I can't imagine someone ever bringing up Too Cool and Rikishi in the same way.
The only guy from the Austin years who gets a reaction is Rock, and it's always related to his movies. I realize this is a pretty small sample size, but it's shaped my opinion that Rock N Wrestling had a bigger cultural impact than Attitude.
I think it's probably because people tend to be more nostalgic about their years as a kid as opposed to the teen years. Me and my friends hardly ever talk about the stuff we were into as teens but there is always a conversation about the cartoons, movies, and toys we were into as kids.
ReplyDeleteI'd add Ric Flair to the list - my Mom always used to tell me that she hated him, not for any of his heelish antics but because when her father watched wrestling (no idea what company) she'd get pissed off that Flair never touched up his roots.
ReplyDeleteThis is one of those arguments that comes down to which factors you count as an objective measures and what you don't, or even how much subjective or anecdotal evidence you want to include in your argument. How much weight you give to each one could tip the scales in either direction as well.
ReplyDeleteMaking a truly objective comparison is impossible given that the data we have to go on is either incomplete (we don't have all of the necessary inflation adjusted gates, merchandise sales, financial records, and Q scores for each guy) or impossible to untangle (there is no reliable way to assess how much a million dollar gate is attributable to a guy).
"X is a bigger star than Y" is sort of an ambiguous argument anyways -- is that who made the most money? who had the most recognizably at their peak? the most recognizably over the long haul? Based on those kinds of measures, I think that a compelling argument can be made either way and I'm fine with that.
My gut tells me it is Hogan given the sheer amount of time he was around and on top of his respective companies in prosperous times -- heck, even Meltzer himself wrote an article in early 2000 that Hogan was 'The biggest PPV draw of the 1980s and the 1990s'. I could definitely buy the idea that if you compare peak year to peak year that Austin outpaced Hogan, perhaps by a substantial margin, especially given some of the factors in Austin's favor (more merchandise, more PPVs, bigger contracts, etc). I just don't know though that if adjusted for inflation (or maybe even if you didn't) and compared their overall careers that Austin would have been more responsible for more $$$ than Hogan, since Austin's time on top was so short in comparison.
Pretty much the exact opposite for me. Everyone I know loves to talk about the glory days of Austin and Rock and Triple H and DX and stuff.
ReplyDeleteAs early 90's announcer Vince McMahon would say "I would tend to agree with that statement."
ReplyDeleteAustin's star shined brighter than anyone at his peak, but Hulk Hogan permeated pop culture like nobody else in the history of the business. If you surveyed 100 random people, I would guess 99 at least know who he is.
Hogan turning heel gave it the WTF?! moment that catapulted the angle to stardom, but it wasn't like Hulk Hogan did anything particularly special except be the opposite of who he was for many years. People say he completely re-invented himself, but he didn't. He just wasn't the good guy anymore, and he acted pretty much the same as he did when he was a face, but without the pandering to the kiddies.
ReplyDeletePeople forget that the character of Hulk Hogan was a hypocrite and a jerk. That's what made Ventura so awesome is he pointed out that Hogan was not the virtuous soul he pretended to be.
So he changed his manner of dress, grew a beard, and acted more like Superstar Billy Graham. It was great, but it wasn't the genius booking that a lot of people think it was.
One of the things about Savage's death that amazed me was how many people who knew jack shit about wrestling and even thought it "beneath them" knew Savage's name. There is an entire generation that grew up in the 80s that knows names like Jake the Snake, Honkytonk Man, The Million Dollar Man Big Bossman, etc. even though they didn't watch the product. You simply can't say the same about the Attitude era. I would guess that Hogan has name recognition with 90% or more of the American populace over the age of 18. Other's with huge name recognition would be The Rock (obviously for a mix of reasons), Andre the Giant, Roddy Piper, Savage, and yes Ric Flair. I think Austin comes in around the same area as Piper and Flair, but I think there are plenty of adults who know Hogan and Andre, who don't know Austin. And for a guy who had such a short run, Goldberg has a surprising amount of name recognition still. it's hard for me to quantify Cena. I will say that unlike Austin, the NWO, and other attitude era stars, you won't see anyone over the age of 12 wearing a Cena shirt normally.
ReplyDeleteAgree with those who say Austin burned bright, Hogan longer. for about a 18 month period, Austin was a pop culture phenomenon. Hogan was as well in the mid 80s (he hosted SNL for one thing) but Austin definitely had a "cool" factor that Hogan didn't have. However it is important to remember that it's hard to compare eras. Hogan had zero ppvs when he first hit the big time with Rocky 3 and then came to WWF to win the world title. Even as he started to fall, he only did 4 ppvs a year. Hard to compare buyrates under those circumstances, although I can tell you that WM3 was a bigger phenomenon than any attitude era ppv could ever hope to be. WWF also wasn't the merchandising machine they became by the time of Austin (and even more so now) so it's hard to compare merchandise sales.
ReplyDeleteHogan certainly has permeated pop culture more than Austin. As one poster noted, ask many people about Steve Austin and they think he's the 6 million dollar man. Austin's doing junky reality shows on CMT while Hogan is doing shows on VH1 and Rent-A-Center commercials. Hogan simply is seen as a bigger star than Austin in the world of pop culture. If you ask 100 non-wrestling fans to name a wrestler, I bet Hogan gets 75 mentions or more.
And as some posters noted, Hogan did spearhead two different eras. While one can argue about how successful pre-NWO WCW Hogan was, he was undoubtedly the face of the company, got them countless marketing deals and prestige with those who didn't know who WCW was and got them a timeslot on TNT to launch the monday night wars. His name value sold the product to those who weren't paying attention. And of course post NWO he was the face of WCW as well. yeah Hall and Nash were "cool" but it was Hogan on Leno. It was Hogan headlining ppvs. It was Hogan teaming with Rodman. It was Hogan facing off against Karl Malone. From summer 96 until summer 98 when he lost to Goldberg, he was definitely the face of WCW during their peak. Now one could argue he wasn't the reason for the ratings or the success other than the intitial shock value and I certainly see some merit in those arguments, but the bottom line (no pun intended in this thread) is that he WAS the face of WCW regardless of whether some think it was the cruisers bringing the ratings (sorry Jericho, your wrong), Sting, Nash and Hall, etc.
This is a complete smark answer. Congratulations.
ReplyDeleteWhen you talk about "biggest star," I tend to lean toward cultural impact. The name Hulk Hogan resonates across all ages. Hogan was in Rocky III, he was on SNL (with Billy Crystal), he was on the cover of Sports Illustrated, he had his own cartoon. Heck, he had a terrible reality show that people actually decided to watch!
ReplyDeleteAs far Hogan goes without Hall and Nash's swagger the whole nWo idea would not have been as successful. Hall, Nash, Syxx/Xpac all added a thug life attitude to the group. If Bret Hart and The British Bulldog were The Outsiders I don't see Hogan's heel turn being as marketable. I remember just as many nWo shirts as Austin shirts.
ReplyDeleteMy mom would actually say Sputnik Monroe. He was my great-grandmother and grandmother's favorite wrestler b/c he was big into civil rights and wouldn't wrestle if the black fans in the crowd weren't allowed to sit where they wanted. He also teamed up with black wrestlers too. Even though my family isn't from Memphis which is where he was based, they all knew him b/c of his exploits. So definitely not a top 5 or probably even 50 recognizeable name or anything just thought it was a cool "mom test" story to share.
ReplyDeleteHogan > Austin.
ReplyDeleteI know you have to quantify by saying different eras and all that, but 33 million people watched Andre vs. Hogan on NBC.
For a single run, then Austin's 98-99 blows everything away and I believe Vince McMahon has said as much on the record.
cultstatus nWo wasn't mainstream crossover? So all the people wearing New World Order t-shirts (and their knockoffs) in 1997 were either hardcore wrestling fans or neo Nazis?
ReplyDeletehow old are you though. cuz im in the grp that talks more abt rock n wrestling than attitude.
ReplyDeleteFlair sucked as a face.
ReplyDeleteYEAH FUCK THAT GUY, I'M TAKING PLEASURE IN JOKING ABOUT HIS MISERABLE MARRIAGE.
ReplyDeleteI said it in the last thread about Austin, but I think he might be the most beloved legend in wrestling. He's the guy that people just never turned on, until he turned heel, and even then they were begging to cheer for him again. Nobody wanted to hate him. Even when his character was getting stale he didn't get the backlash that The Rock, Hogan, Cena or Batista ever got. What would have been interesting is if Hogan had faced Austin at WMX8 instead of The Rock. I was there, I know the Hogan nostalgia was in full force and I got caught up in it myself. We booed The Rock out of the building and were rabid for Hogan - but I can't see the same thing happening with Steve Austin. I think it's either a legit 50/50 reaction or 90% pro-Austin.
ReplyDeletePiper over Jesse.
ReplyDeleteYes, Jesse too, I did forget a few. ;) Not sure about Piper, possibly because of his movies but I've never really had any indication she knows who Piper is. But yeah, Jesse of course.
ReplyDeleteMost Mormons won't catch Flair's wife count.
ReplyDeleteRoddy Piper would like to have a word with you.
ReplyDeleteLargely agree, but the thing with Rock is that we like to boo him. I'm definitely a bigger Rock than Hogan fan, but I cheered Hogan and booed Rock because the iconic Hogan is 80s face Hogan and the iconic Rock is 1999 heel Rock. Those are them at their best. That was the most fun way to do the match. So you boo Rock like you boo Flair--because that's the point of the show.
ReplyDeleteIconic Austin is 1998 beer swillin' Austin, a face. So it's not quite the same thing.
I'd have to say Jesse over Piper, at least once Jesse became Governor of Minnesota.
ReplyDeleteYeah, exactly. We have shame for what we liked/did during our adolescence, but none for the innocence of childhood. This might be somehow connected to the mainstream belief that we all should have "grown out of this" (enjoying wrestling) by a certain, fixed age.
ReplyDeleteExcept for this one quietly intense guy I work with, who has to be in his early 40's. Always wears a purple Cena shirt. Sometimes mixes in an Orton T.
ReplyDeleteSo would Bruno Sammartino
ReplyDeleteI always thought Flair pulled the face role well in small doses. He was great as the guy wanting to get revenge on Funk in '89.
ReplyDeleteAll caps, really?
ReplyDeleteLOL, no.
ReplyDeleteI'm honestly not so sure about the beloved part. Bruno's attitude post expansion and endless tirades against Vince and the state of wrestling in general has really soured a lot of people on him.
ReplyDeleteYes, in response to his all caps bit. Pretty obvious satire.
ReplyDeleteduh, you're right, my bad. My eyes skipped over his post...damn hang overs.
ReplyDeleteAs a guy about to go out to drink, I completely understand and will endeavour to post a reply to you in the morning to return the favour!
ReplyDeleteYou're right, it's more of a generational Northeast U.S. thing with Bruno.
ReplyDeleteMacho Man is a much better answer.
I have a joke!
ReplyDeleteQ: What do you call it when WWE sends out emails during June, July and August?
A: SummerSpam!
8 )
I dunno if Piper beats Austin in this debate but I do love seeing Hot Rod on TV even now. That Piper's Pit on Smackdown with Daniel Bryan and AJ a few weeks back was great.
ReplyDeleteYeah, it seems like a total styles clash. Austin cut a pretty fast pace in his matches that I don't think Hogan could have kept up with and Steve's brawling style lends itself to realism. Can't see him selling for the finger/big boot/legdrop routine.
ReplyDeleteI can. It was "I can't wait too see who Hall & Nash beat the shit out of tonight", not "I can't wait for Hulk to cut a bullshit promo instead of defending the World Title." The whole fun of the nWo was to see who would get punked out, or who would be the new guy joining. People weren't booing Hogan because he was a heel, they were booing him because they were sick of him. At least that's the way I remember it.
ReplyDeleteCouldn't disagree more. I was in my mid-20s watching this whole thing unfold and have very vivid memories about the entire angle as I watched WCW religiously vs. WWF. Hogan, when he turned heel, absolutely propelled the angle over the top and people booed him because he was the most over heel in the world, not for some revisionist history that you're implying. He did not have X-Pac heat or whatever you want to call it.
ReplyDeleteThose original vignettes with Hall, Nash and Hogan were the shit and each guy was important. The angle doesn't work at this level if you take any of the 3 out imo.
cultstatus
ReplyDelete99.9% of the reason those were big matches was because of Sting and Goldberg. It wasn't "Oh I hope the dastardly heel finally gets his comeuppance" heat. It was "God I hope Goldberg beats him and Hogan takes off and goes and shoots a movie." heat.
100% opinion.
Yeah, I don't think people give Hogan enough credit for his time on top of WCW as a heel, it was clearly one of the hottest periods of his career. The idea that people were bored of him and didn't care about him at all doesn't hold out statistically either -- many of Nitro's biggest ratings segments involved Hogan and the Hogan headlined PPVs did better business on average than the ones without him.
ReplyDeleteI do think it is likely true that the prosperity was due to people wanting to see him beat down for whatever motive, but that's ideally what a heel does on his part in the show -- he helps drub up business by making you want to see the opposition destroy them. In either case, he was never an instant channel changer -- people hated him, but did so passionately and they still watched, which to me is an indication of an excellent heel. When your segment loses a point every time you are on TV, then I think the argument holds up.
Yeah, I think this varies a lot from person to person. In my group, I am the one who wants to talk about the early 1990s, but everyone else has almost no interest in it and is all about reliving the later 1990s.
ReplyDeleteDoes everyone remember when bishoff joined wwe in 02 that he said on raw that if HHH joined wcw during the Monday night wars that wcw would have won the war? I still get upset that the writing team and HHH had to script that line in. SO RIDICULIOUS.
ReplyDelete....
ReplyDeleteTriple H is the greatest, most popular of all time. He's popularity and success is matched only by his generosity. He's made as many people into superstars as he's held world championships, and he's held A LOT of championships.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was SummerPest?
ReplyDeletebut the nWo might have worked without Hall or Nash. but it would have never worked without Hogan.
ReplyDeleteThey wren't booing at the top of their lungs and throwing garbage in the ring _before_ Hogan turned on WCW.
ReplyDeleteI still don't get why HHH is made out to be this way. What purpose does it serve except to stroke his own ego? It's not like him winning a lot of championships means he'll be mentioned with the likes of Michael Jordan, Kobe Bryant, Muhammed Ali, Derek Jeter, etc. It's a fake sport!
ReplyDeleteSo why do this?
It only worked when it was basically a set up to turn heel again. He did this with Sting in 90 and 96. Triple H did this is 2000 as well. WWE writters should take note.
ReplyDeleteA lot of times, it just comes down to wrestlers usually being big marks for themselves.
ReplyDeleteSure, he didn't win any "legit" titles via winning competitions, but it does generally mean that the boss thinks you're doing a good job; ergo, the more titles you win, the better job you're doing. Kinda.
I've said this a number of times, but I think Rock is basically too cool for his own good: he's a rich, good-looking, over-achieving playboy, which makes it very easy to boo him. Sure, we can laugh at his jokes and respect his talent, but we also like the idea of a big bad ass-kicker rearranging his face.
ReplyDeleteI mean, that may just be my opinion, but I really believe that that's why Rock got booed against guys like Austin, Brock, and (to some degree) Trips; he'd have the entire audience in the palm of his hand during a promo, but less support during matches against certain opponents.
I really think the success can really be divided evenly amongst the three - Hogan was the perfect leading man, and Hall and Nash were the perfect supporting actors.
ReplyDeleteYeah, Piper over Jesse before then probably, but once Jesse became Governor he probably jumped past. Also in my specific area, Bob Backlund since he ran for Congress in CT back in 2000.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that with these rumours of an Austin comeback, it's always Austin vs. Punk simply because their characters mesh. While it's a logical matchup, wouldn't Austin vs. Cena be much bigger for business?
ReplyDeleteI think we're married to the Punk idea just because most of us internet fanz want to see Punk fully elevated into legend status and because Austin was 'our guy,' i.e. a good worker that everyone followed from WCW into becoming one of the very biggest stars ever. But really, since Cena is clearly the biggest guy, you could have him run the Wrestlemania legend gauntlet and pit him against Austin next year and then against Undertaker at WM30. (Or, I guess, do both and have Austin/Punk and Cena/Taker at WM29, and then Austin/Cena at MSG at WM30.)
You basically have three streams of "superstardom" in wrestling...
a) the 'WWE superstar.' I use this terminology for guys like Hogan, Rock and to a lesser extent Cena since they exemplify everything Vince McMahon wants in a top guy. A big musclebound superface who can do the talk shows, do movies, be a hero to kids, and go over with corporate America as well as they can with an arena of fans.
b) the 'pro wrestling superstar.' As in, a guy who is huge in the realm of wrestling specifically, but has limited pop culture breakthrough. This is a much larger group that would include Flair, Michaels, Hart, Sammartino, Undertaker, Triple H, etc.
c) the hybrid of these two, meaning guys who were somewhat limited within the mainstream since they were so distinctly 'pro wrestling,' but nevertheless still made a pop culture impact since they were just so unique. For this, I'm thinking just Austin, Piper, Andre and Savage qualify.
and that was a completely worthless reply. Congrats right back atcha bright eyes
ReplyDeleteNah, survey says 86.4% pro-Austin...
ReplyDeleteMore people would identify Andre The Giant than any other wrestler, ever; thank you, Princess Bride...
ReplyDeleteX-Pac = Thug Life about as much as 50 Cent = Tea Party...
ReplyDeleteBut they'll try -- They got heart, gotta' give them crazy sumbitches that...
ReplyDeleteEasy. Andre. Princess Bride.
ReplyDelete