---------- Forwarded message ----------
Hi Scott,
Daily blog reader and long time fan.
When you look back on Austin's run on top (April 1998-November 2000) are you surprised how FEW wrestlers he worked feuds with? For about 2.5 years he basically worked PPV matches with:
Foley, Kane, Taker, McMahon, Rock, HHH and one PPV match against Rikishi.
Two Questions:
1-Had Pillman been alive (and not had the ankle issue) do you think Austin would have convinced management to let them work an attitude era Hollywood Blondes fued for the title?
2-Are you surprised he worked with essentially 6 guys for 2 years? If Cena only worked with the same 6 guys for the past 2 years he would be killed on the Internet. Can you think of any guys who deserved and could have used a quick feud with Austin in that 1998-2000 golden days of the attitude era.
Thanks as always
1. Austin was the reason why crippled Pillman was featured as much as he was, so yeah it's safe to say that Austin would have pushed for him to get a program on top.
2. Yeah, Austin was notoriously picky about who he would work with, due to safety concerns with his neck and not wanting to dilute his drawing power. See Jarrett, Jeff. I think maybe Austin could have had a fun brawling feud with Bradshaw or a motivated Windham, but really he worked with the top guys who deserved to be there and made millions doing it.
I think the reason Austin could have only worked with those guys and the crowd didn't get completely sick of him is because of the way the WWF booked his feuds. If you go back and watch it, it was incredibly entertaining. Plus, Austin put people over. He sold angles well. Cena on the other hand, he keeps his joking smiling ways, and that helps nobody, which is why Cena gets hated as much as he does
ReplyDeleteThrow Kurt Angle onto that list.
ReplyDeleteI can't blame Austin for not working with Jarrett or Owen Hart (post SummerSlam).
Don't forget, Austin didn't wrestle from Survivor Series 1999 until October 2000, so that's a year right there.
ReplyDeleteKey with Austin was that he always looked vulnerable but still stayed strong. A lot of that was because of creative booking and putting Austin in situations where you weren't sure if he'd be able to overcome the odds. That was the beauty of Austin's run and why it was so different compared to Hogan and Cena... even though Austin almost always wound up winning the match or the feud, there was always enough doubt surrounding his matches that you had to watch to see what would happen. By 89, that stopped being the case with Hogan and you just knew he wasn't going to lose. Same thing with Cena today. It just feels like he's always going to wind up winning the match or at least get the feud ending win.
Tons of credit goes to Austin, obviously, for being ridiculously talented and using his talents to the max. But the booking certainly helped. Even when he was wrestling Undertaker in 99 for what seemed like every PPV, there were always new little wrinkles that kept the matches fresh. That was kind of a trademark of the era though, because both HHH's and Rock's runs in 2000 were pretty similar in that they were both protected and kept strong but new wrinkles in their title defenses always made them seem vulnerable.
With Kurt, Austin didn't work with him until after his heel turn (not counting Armageddon 2000) which was after the November 2000 date that the emailer mentioned.
ReplyDeleteI understand not wanting to work with Jarrett but I think there could have been money in a program with Owen. I always enjoyed their feud in '97 and even though Owen made a stupid mistake at SummerSlam 97, I imagine that Owen was always otherwise considered a safe worker. I mean after Montreal they kinda just brushed Owen aside when a mini-feud with HBK would have been a fun way to pass the time until WrestleMania.
This question is just wrong. Austin DID work with other guys, but the Main Event Program was actually written out, structured and made sense. Unlike today, where things are written down on a napkin, and nobody remembers last week's storylines.
ReplyDeleteWasn't Austin on top in 2001? Does main eventing wm17 and ss01 not count?
ReplyDelete4 months is not a mini-feud.
ReplyDeleteI think I phrased that part wrong. What I meant was, they should have done a mini-feud between Owen and Shawn Michaels. I remember the night Owen came back and attacked DX, it got a huge reaction. But they never pulled the trigger on Owen vs. HBK at a PPV.
ReplyDeleteI didn't mean that Owen's feud with HHH was a mini-feud. Sorry.
I think he meant the 6 guys thing within 2 years. It was probably just written wrong
ReplyDeletei mean if you started the owen/hbk feud after montreal and lasted till wrestlemania.
ReplyDeleteit seems like i've heard an answer why they didn't feud them then but i forget.
The key was that all of these matches were generally saved for the PPVs themselves, so we didn't get quite as burned out on the big Austin matchups. Due to the overarching feud with Vince and the Corporation/Ministry, you could have Austin fill time on RAW every week facing Shamrock, Big Boss Man, Test, or some of the lower-level lackey guys, or just have Austin cut promos.
ReplyDeleteCompare that to this era, when you have Cena facing a guy at three straight PPVs plus at least a few more times on RAW within that same time frame.
According to both Austin and Bret, Owen never apologized or even called to see if Austin was okay. Therefore, I totally side with Austin on not wanting to work with Owen, even though at the time, the IWC was up in arms about it.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny how time changes people's perspectives. Back in 1999, Austin was viewed as a selfish jerk that never put anybody over and kept people down (Owen and Jeff).
Whoever sent the email forgot to add the Big Boss Man, Austin's first round opponent at the 1998 Survivor Series.
ReplyDeleteAustin protected his spot just like anyone would -- workers who he could draw best with. Jarrett's proven not to have been a draw. Austin had no problems working with Stevie Richards and Jericho.
ReplyDeleteThat's why it was pretty cool when Cena was involved with the Primetime Players that one Raw. Clean win, but it was a nice 10 min match and I'd watch Cena wrestle guys who we normally don't see a lot of. Cena vs.Kofi, Cena vs. Sandow, etc -- if they're never going to be main eventers, why not have them do 10 minute matches on Raw?
ReplyDeleteWhat's all the pity for Jarrett? He never drew money outside of Memphis and only got pushed to the top when he *owned the company.* And he wasn't a great wrestler to boot. He shouldn't have been in a program with the hottest star ever.
ReplyDeleteMore poor phrasing on my part. I meant Owen/HBK from Montreal until the Austin/HBK WrestleMania feud could begin post-Austin winning the Rumble.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good point. I'd be ticked too if I were Austin.
ReplyDeleteI wasn't a real member of the IWC in '99 so I didn't realize that Austin was viewed as someone who held people down. Really is crazy to hear.
If they're losing to Cena, what wrestlers are left to beat the IC and US champs?
ReplyDeleteI'm mad he didn't bury Jarrett deeper
ReplyDeleteI was and I don't remember any backlash against Austin. In 1999 the iwc was obessed with hogan, Nash and what was going on in wcw. The iwc was always (at least since late 95) pro wwe and anti wcw
ReplyDeleteI think that's what works about this Cena vs. Henry feud.
ReplyDeleteThey've interacted in the PPV build, but there's been no obligatory tag match, or any of their usual overdone build. Henry has not wrestled at all on TV during the build, and Cena only has once (the match with Del Rio).
It makes the matchup this Sunday feel a bit more special and fresh.
Jeff Jarrett leader of the nWo was such a joke, shit like that destroyed WCW a lot more than the fingerpoke of doom ever did. Guy was a solid midcarder that's it, and at most deserved to get beat by Austin on Raw or Smackdown.
ReplyDeleteAustin's injuries & sabbaticals definitely helped him keep from getting stale, but the best of 120348971209 vs the Undertaker sure got old by 2002. Kevin Nash as the Wizard ragging on it was a hilarious Monday Nitro moment and that was only 1999.
ReplyDeleteYeah in general WWF didn't get a lot of heat in those days. Part of it was that there was relatively little dirt coming out of there, whereas everyone in WCW and ECW had Meltzer and Keller on speed dial. Part of why so much attention was given to WCW holding people down and ECW stiffing guys on payoffs was because those locker rooms leaked like sieves and that's what they were complaining about.
ReplyDeleteHe was Russo's butt buddy from way back. The verbal blowjobs Jarrett used to get in the Vic Venom columns were so vigorous you'd think he was Dirk Diggler and Russo was Scotty.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of Stone Cold Steve Austin:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.podcastone.com/Steve-Austin-Show
His podcast is awesome.
THIS!
ReplyDeleteOh man, Austin's storylines were terrible during 2002, it was nothing but retreads.
ReplyDeleteWho else you going to push if you're WCW? Mark fucking Jindrak?
ReplyDeleteMost of the heat on Austin came out right around SummerSlam '99. Shawn Michaels was on an internet show and ranted about Steve "refusing" to put Triple H over at SummerSlam.
ReplyDeleteRight around King of the Ring '99, the big story was Rock and Austin HATED each other FOR REAL!
Repush Goldberg, but do it right.
ReplyDeleteAssuming we're talking after the Radicals jumped around the time of the new blood storyline;
ReplyDeleteOld Guys: Nash, Sid, Sting, Hogan, DDP,
Younger Guys: Goldberg, Booker T, Scott Steiner, Vampiro,
Mike Awesome.
Really should have just put the strap on Goldberg and built to him vs Steiner.
Jarrett was better than everyone on that list other than Goldberg, Booker, and Steiner.
ReplyDeleteI love his interviews for the most part but these last two episodes were awful. Austin by himself is not very interesting, and interviewing himself was just a weird idea. It'd be better if he did what Marc Maron did on WTF and have someone else interview him (Maron had Birbiglia come in). I don't know if they know each other, but Colt Cabana would be a good candidate for that as he's another wrestler with podcast interviewing experience.
ReplyDeleteYeah his interviews with wrestling colleagues are great, but the ones by himself where he's just rambling about whatever, not so much.
ReplyDeleteAustin vs. Jarrett - Smell the ratings!
ReplyDeletecouldn't disagree more. i find him entertaining as shit by himself just ranting off whatever comes to mind. they're my favorite ones. #27 probably made me laugh more than any of the others.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, the above time frame features a nine month injury leave, so it's really only less than two years.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, why cherry pick the PPVs? He had plenty of matches with other guys on RAW and Smackdown. He would get in there and work a match with (just about) anybody they asked him to.
And if you're bringing the buys with a certain feud, why not stretch that out for several shows? Programs were stretched out over six months or even longer during the eighties. and nobody thought that was unusual in the least.
Jarrett at his peak was never as over as Vampiro was when Russo & Jarrett came in. I'm talking about the Brothers in Paint. Of course they turned him put him over Sting then he went on to feud with dale torborg. Vampiro was a better interview and much cooler character than the Chosen One ever was.
ReplyDeleteAll the old guys were better than Jarrett too.
Mike Awesome definitely had the look and was over with the career killer gimmick.
Well, like a lot of people who compare the attitude era to today fail to realise is that the programming is incredibly different. For example, compared to today, WWE programming had 2 hours of "storyline" television per week and a bunch of other shows that revolved around those two hours, also with a single roster with a few champions and each title had it's own stand alone division you had maybe 3-4 guys each division on tv. That's why they could get away with doing each fued for 2-3 months.
ReplyDeleteNow you have 13 ppvs a year, two full rosters, two titles for each division and tons of guys for each one. It also doesnt help that the midcard titles are pretty much one big division of every and any wrestler, and the world title division is filled to the brim with new unbuilt guys and vets. The business moves way too fast for any champion not to have tons of different contenders. To be fair Cena is on his second contender of his run so far.
Regardless of any speculation as to whether or not Owen apologized or any other such bullshit…
ReplyDeleteDude broke your neck, even if by accident. You gonna trust to work with him again? You'd have to be an idiot, and the idea that you'd risk it again with a career midcarder, of all people, is just retarded.
Well said. He needed to start hitting women with guitars to get ANY type of reaction.
ReplyDeleteSaying that Vampiro was more over than Jarrett at any point is just flat out wrong. Jarrett was mega over in 98. That is a fact. Vampiro was all look, that's it. His matches with Sting were beyond terrible.
ReplyDeleteAnd if people still wanted to see Nash, Sid, Sting, Hogan and DDP in 2000-01, WCW wouldn't have went out of business.
Jarrett in 98 was a comedy character don't piss me off was fun I'll give you that but Vampiro was at the glass ceiling. If you're going to talk match quality name 1 great WCW title match Jarrett had in his push to the top.
ReplyDeletePeople wanted to see Sting, Hogan, Nash, DDP et al. Reason WCW went broke was Russo got rid of all the draws tanked the product and put out paper champions with no credibility like Jeff Jarrett in his master plan "rebuild".
WCW had potential in 1999, in 2000 it was beyond repair.
Yup! Look at Hogan. From 1989-1993, the only singles matches he worked was against Savage, Warrior, Slaughter, Yokozuna, Sid, Earthquake
ReplyDeleteRight off the top of my head, Jarrett's matches with Booker. Vampiro never had one match that came close to those.
ReplyDeleteJarrett being champion isn't even in the top 10 reasons why WCW tanked. WCW needed new blood, Guerrero and Benoit were gone, Booker and Jarrett were the best choices.
Well, that statement is misleading in a completely different way.
ReplyDeleteHe worked with two McMahons on PPV: Vince and Shane.
ReplyDeleteUndertaker, 2x.
ReplyDeleteCompletely forgot those two bouts! Good catch.
ReplyDeleteYeah, it proves that even with less PPV's and factoring in Survivor Series elimination matches + Rumble matches that Hogan worked with more opponents. Hence why Hogan > Austin.
ReplyDeleteThere was one when he took calls from listeners and gave advice and it was terrible.
ReplyDeleteI do like the variety of guests he has. WWE and TNA wrestlers and MMA fighters.
Business-wise, Steve Austin's probably the smartest guy in wrestling.
ReplyDeleteAgreed. The one about buying tampons was incredibly funny!
ReplyDeleteIt was a very storyline-driven era when Austin was on top. It's like an ensemble drama where the characters are in and out of one anothers "lives" depending on the storyline. Austin faced Undertaker, man to man. Then Undertaker and Kane reunite and Vince uses them to go after Austin. Then Undertaker turns on Vince and Kane and goes after Austin on his own. Then Undertaker feuds with Vince while still being anti-Austin. Then it turns out Undertaker was working for Vince all along and he faces Austin with Vince's career on the line. It's Undertaker/Austin over and over but the circumstances change.
ReplyDeleteJohn Cena is like a Super-Hero movie. They villain changes every time but even if you make 8 of them they're all essentially the same.
I love his commercial breaks.
ReplyDeleteI'd rather listen to Austin talk to Nash, Bret, even Lance Storm, about wrestling than watch wrestling these days.
Shamrock, Big Show, Jarrett in 99. Vader in 98 as a McMahon hired gun. Jericho in 01.
ReplyDeleteAustin vs Shamrock deserved a PPV build for sure
ReplyDeleteI'm shocked that Shawn would be stirring it up.
ReplyDeleteAnd don't forget, WWE makes a lot more money off TV than the WWF did back in '98 or '99, so that's one of the reasons why you see bigger matches on TV than you did during the Attitude Era.
ReplyDeleteI don't watch Smackdown so I'm a little confused... aren't the rosters merged? I didn't know they were still going with two separate rosters.
Austin vs. Undertaker was old by 2001. I couldn't care less about the Austin-HHH and Undertaker-Kane feud.
ReplyDeleteAnd then they wanted to just do Brock/Austin on a random Raw. That could have been a money feud if they decided to plan it out.
ReplyDeleteI'm not gonna try to defend Vampiro, but I wouldn't say Jarrett was "mega over" in '98. I just re-watched all those Raw's not too long ago and Jarrett wasn't "mega over". He was an average midcard act. Almost never drew significant crowd reactions.
ReplyDeleteCompared to most midcard acts, he was getting way more heat. Outside of the main event, he was leaps and bounds over the other guys he was positioned with.
ReplyDeleteGod yes. Jarrett is one of those guys who really depended on the entire promotional machine to get him over. His daddy as booker, etc. They had to give him a new gimmick, new look, the hottest chick in the company as his manager, a ton of catchphrases, etc., to do it, and then he got pissy because Austin (correctly) decided Jarrett wasn't in his league.
ReplyDeleteI do recall a bit about Austin refusing to job to HHH and Foley being the go-between, but at the time, fans were still more anti-HHH because it felt like he was being forced into the storylines. It took the McMahon/Helmsley Regime before the IWC really accepted him.
ReplyDeleteI miss that story driven era. I really do.
ReplyDeleteJeff Jarrett was quite possibly the only guy in my history of watching wrestling that actually made me CHANGE THE CHANNEL. I can't decide what I hated more: his wanna-be-Flair blonde hair (with that moronic perm to it), his absolute abortion of a strut, with his mouth agape like a window-licking helmet wearing mouth-breather,
ReplyDelete