|
Post by lildude8218 on Jul 15, 2009 16:00:24 GMT -5
So the story goes that WM13 was supposed to be Bret/Shawn (I don't want to get into Montreal, who was right, who was wrong, whatever here) but Shawn forfeited the belt for whatever reason (once again, not here to talk about if he was really injured or not) and plans were changed.
Here's what's confusing to me. They wanted Bret to walk out of Wrestlemania as champion. Sure HBK was gone and THAT match couldn't happen but why not continue with the basic plan anyway? Austin wins the title at the Final Four match. Bret beats him at Mania. Their classic match still happens, double turn still happens. Bret leaves with title. Instead Bret wins the Final Four, loses the next night. Sid/Taker for the belt with Taker leaving as champion.
Bret and Austin had an extremely hot and intense feud. THAT should be for the belt. Not 2 other guys who didn't even realy look at each other prior to being signed for the match.
So why didn't the WWF just do it that way?
|
|
|
Post by blazinblueberry on Jul 15, 2009 16:12:22 GMT -5
Couldn't tell ya. Was this before or after Austin's IC run where he really established himself?
|
|
Convoy
El Dandy
Rusev admits to being a sex addict to large applause.
Posts: 7,545
|
Post by Convoy on Jul 15, 2009 16:16:22 GMT -5
Though there is no definite answer to my knowledge, I could see them not wanting to give Austin the belt until later. He could take the main eventers to the limit, but it was hard to picture him defeating them clean.
Plus, Hart/Austin didn't need a belt involved. Their feud was so over with the fans that the idea of pride as a driving force worked perfectly. It would be similar to HHH/Orton today. They do not need to be fighting over the title, since their feud is extremely personal.
|
|
fw91
Patti Mayonnaise
FAN Idol All-Star: FAN Idol Season X and *Gavel* 2x Judges' Throwdown winner
Tribe has spoken for 2024 Mets
Posts: 39,174
|
Post by fw91 on Jul 15, 2009 16:35:02 GMT -5
It worked out for the best. Taker deserved it
|
|
|
Post by rnrk supports BLM on Jul 15, 2009 16:35:45 GMT -5
If the plan was ever for Bret Hart to leave WM13 as champ, it was scrapped long before HBK forfeited the belt.
Bret's heel turn had been building up for months. By the night after the Rumble, when he whined about how Monsoon and the fans didn't care that he was being screwed over, it was pretty clear where things were going.
And for all the early steps towards Attitude that WWF was making at the time, Vince was *not* going to have a heel win the Wrestlemania main event in early '97. Not at a point when he still thought the Rocky Maivia character would get over as a future star.
|
|
|
Post by lildude8218 on Jul 15, 2009 16:38:01 GMT -5
Though there is no definite answer to my knowledge, I could see them not wanting to give Austin the belt until later. He could take the main eventers to the limit, but it was hard to picture him defeating them clean. Plus, Hart/Austin didn't need a belt involved. Their feud was so over with the fans that the idea of pride as a driving force worked perfectly. It would be similar to HHH/Orton today. They do not need to be fighting over the title, since their feud is extremely personal. Keep in mind that for Austin to get the belt, he would've just had to win a 4 man battle royal and it wouldn't have had to been clean. Just as long as he didn't get thrown over and go back into the rung again. I know they didn't need the belt to be involved in the feud but it wouldn't have hurt.
|
|
|
Post by Paul E. Funk on Jul 15, 2009 17:02:05 GMT -5
I just don't think they wanted Austin in the top match at Mania at that point, on a lesser PPV sure but at that stage Austin's character was going through changes and was still very much a tweener which probably unnerved Vince a little.
Sid vs. Taker, to some anyway, probably seemed a little more fitting as a Main Event as it was a battle of giants and resulted in a popular ending for the show. With the longserving, super over Taker finally getting his hands on the belt after never really losing it 5 years prior. I think they did it right, come Mania 14 Austin was more than ready to take over the reigns.
|
|
repomark
Unicron
For Mash Get Smash
Posts: 3,054
|
Post by repomark on Jul 15, 2009 17:14:19 GMT -5
I personally believe that they had the intention of building Austin before giving him the belt - and that even then they had the plan that WM14 a year later would be his spot. Jumping the gun and having Austin win it in the fatal four way would have taken away the AUSTIN ERA HAS BEGUN moment at WM14. Winning the belt for the first time at mania gave it more of a special feel.
Although I do see your point - if Bret was the man they wanted to carry the belt why not go with it anyway? That said, I think the way that they did it was just fine.
|
|
|
Post by Big Daddy Bad Booking on Jul 15, 2009 17:26:06 GMT -5
As sucktastic as Sid/Taker was, I wouldn't have booked it any other way. Taker deserved to be champion on that night.
|
|
|
Post by lildude8218 on Jul 15, 2009 17:34:09 GMT -5
I'd also like to say that I'm not saying they SHOULD have done it that way. Just wondering why they didn't. Although I guess I did make it seem that way. I was just more going on pros of the situation I presented.
I just remember it being a very bizarre era. In the span of 8 weeks we had 4 different World champions.
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Jul 15, 2009 18:51:15 GMT -5
Simple, Austin/Hart had enough heat on it to begin with without the added title stipulation. This match worked wonders for both guys, it furthered Austin as a face and Bret's continued dive into heeldom. It gave The Undertaker a run with the belt he deserved while Bret built up his new heel character and Austin went around raising hell. It added a strong element to the undercard where it was more about a matter of pride of oneself and ones country than the need for the title.
I think a strong product is built from the middle up. When you aim all your focus on the title picture you tend to neglect the rest of the show. I think that happens all too often now. But I think a big part of WWE's resurgance was the build of the Austin character in contrast to the Bret Hart character without burning out the fans with them constantly having title matches with one another or NOT defending the WWE title because one or the other were injured.
|
|
Magnus the Magnificent
King Koopa
didn't want one.
I could write a book about what you don't know!
Posts: 12,518
|
Post by Magnus the Magnificent on Jul 15, 2009 20:22:31 GMT -5
Wasn't Austin injured at Final Four, and they had to change the plan mid-match? I think Austin was supposed to win it, and then drop the title to Sid the next day anyway, so it didn't really matter. At that point, the plan was probably for Taker to be champ at Wrestlemania, so he couldn't win it. Vader was never the go-to guy in the WWF, so he wouldn't be champ. Wasn't he already eliminated by the time Austin gets injured anyway? I can't remember. That leaves Hart to be champ at Final Four, only to loose it to Sid to set up Wrestlemania.
|
|
Mayhem
Don Corleone
BANNED.
No dreams breed in breathless sleep...
Posts: 1,590
|
Post by Mayhem on Jul 15, 2009 22:02:19 GMT -5
I think they were still trying to build Austin at this point, so a cheap WWF Title run wouldn't have worked out. If I remember correctly, it was the feud with Bret that really made him (as far as WWF), so he wouldn't have been ready for the big strap just yet. I actually think they paced his rise pretty well.
As far as Bret leaving champion, he could have just not dropped the belt and simply defeated Austin in a title defense though, once again, I don't think Austin was in the position where he'd really earned a WWF Title shot by that point.
|
|
|
Post by destrucity on Jul 16, 2009 0:21:47 GMT -5
Wasn't Austin injured at Final Four, and they had to change the plan mid-match? I think Austin was supposed to win it, and then drop the title to Sid the next day anyway, so it didn't really matter. At that point, the plan was probably for Taker to be champ at Wrestlemania, so he couldn't win it. Vader was never the go-to guy in the WWF, so he wouldn't be champ. Wasn't he already eliminated by the time Austin gets injured anyway? I can't remember. That leaves Hart to be champ at Final Four, only to loose it to Sid to set up Wrestlemania. No, that is just another Internet NEWZ story that was proven false by Bret Harts autobiography. Bret Hart walked into the final-four match knowing he was going to win the title.
|
|
|
Post by The Blue Blazer on Jul 16, 2009 1:33:51 GMT -5
Plus, Hart/Austin didn't need a belt involved. Their feud was so over with the fans that the idea of pride as a driving force worked perfectly. It would be similar to HHH/Orton today. They do not need to be fighting over the title, since their feud is extremely personal. I look at it like this. Hart vs. Austin would have been great with or without the WWF World Title being on the line. Sid vs. Undertaker without the belt is blah.
|
|
|
Post by DiBiase is Good on Jul 16, 2009 2:03:18 GMT -5
With the longserving, super over Taker finally getting his hands on the belt after never really losing it 5 years prior He was pinned by Hogan. How did he never really lose it?
|
|
Cranjis McBasketball
Crow T. Robot
Knew what the hell that thing was supposed to be
Peace Love and Nothing But
Posts: 41,996
|
Post by Cranjis McBasketball on Jul 16, 2009 2:07:11 GMT -5
With the longserving, super over Taker finally getting his hands on the belt after never really losing it 5 years prior He was pinned by Hogan. How did he never really lose it? It was an illusion............ Hogan never really lost the belt...... There, that oughta get the IWC up in arms.
|
|
CMWaters
Ozymandius
Rolled a Seven, Beat the Ads.
Bald and busy
Posts: 63,110
Member is Online
|
Post by CMWaters on Jul 16, 2009 2:23:10 GMT -5
He was pinned by Hogan. How did he never really lose it? It was an illusion............ Hogan never really lost the belt...... There, that oughta get the IWC up in arms. So Doink was responsible, even though he wouldn't debut until a few years later and wouldn't show his illusion mastery until WrestleMania IX?
|
|
Ken Ivory
Hank Scorpio
This sorta thing IS my bag, baby.
Posts: 5,282
|
Post by Ken Ivory on Jul 16, 2009 2:28:18 GMT -5
I'm guessing the WWF weren't too sure of Austin in the main event just yet. At that stage they were still kind of priming him to be the bad ass character he would become. It wasn't until his match at WM13 that people (we I anyway) started to take notice of the guy.
|
|
dabossftw
Unicron
wants Yappapi in the proper position.
Posts: 2,581
|
Post by dabossftw on Jul 16, 2009 2:40:25 GMT -5
It was certainly a transitional period in the WWF around this time. Starting to move toward the "Attitude" stuff, testing the waters. Like someone else said, Vince still thought Rocky Maivia might be a star with his "baby kissin', always smiling" babyface gimmick. The title changes were exciting, but I remember feeling let down on the Sid/Taker main event. Taker coming back in his retro ring gear was a big mark-out moment. The Hitman/Stone Cold match (as many of you have noted) didn't need any belt. Bret blading Steve and him bleeding like a faucet, along with the double-turn was enough to save the rest of the otherwise lackluster card.
|
|