|
Post by glorydays on Oct 12, 2009 7:24:32 GMT -5
I love both of them, and I took Flair over Hogan in the other poll, but for this, I had to vote for Austin. See, this logic does not make sense to me. Hogan was a huge money draw for 3 different decades, and by far the biggest name in wrestling history, but Steve Austin (a big draw for 3 different YEARS) was "better"? Without any factoring of inflation, technology, markets, etc? Does that not strike anyone as a bit odd? I agree Austin should be ranked higher than Flair, but to suggest Flair was more important to the business than Hogan and then turn around and say Austin was more important than Flair is the most mind boggling thing I have seen here. What happened to "more little kids emulated Flair's style in the ring"? What happened to "drawing money does not equal importance"? Are we just picking and choosing our favorites here? Hogan created something when nothing was there (the 80's). There was no WM. There was no international market. There was no established national market. There were no PPV's. There was no internet to boost up merchandise sales. There were no 5 hours of weekly television on cable/network TV to promote house shows. You wanted Hogan merchandise....you took your ass to a house show to buy his stuff directly from the WWF (not sit in front of your computer and click a button to have it delivered to you in 4-6 weeks). People saying Austin drew more money seem to forget that variables exist between two different decades, and those variables have to be factored in. I think the chain here, and I would imagine most would agree, would be: Hogan --> Austin --> Flair (if only discussing these 3 guys). Otherwise change this thread to "who do you like more".
|
|
BxB
Unicron
Only the shift key stands between him and copyright infringement.
Posts: 2,849
|
Post by BxB on Oct 12, 2009 7:26:04 GMT -5
Yeah, I was going to say the same thing as the above poster. If you're picking Austin over Flair due to him leading a boom period, you can't leave Hogan behind. If it wasn't for Hogan leading the Rock n Roll era of wrestling, we might not even have PPV's and weekly TV shows.
|
|
|
Post by JerryvonKramer on Oct 12, 2009 7:30:04 GMT -5
If we asked 300 famous pro wrestlers this question, I wonder what the response would be.
|
|
|
Post by Evilution E5150 on Oct 12, 2009 7:31:27 GMT -5
If we asked 300 famous pro wrestlers this question, I wonder what the response would be. this has really upset you hasnt it?
|
|
|
Post by JerryvonKramer on Oct 12, 2009 7:33:43 GMT -5
this has really upset you hasnt it? It really has
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Oct 12, 2009 9:10:55 GMT -5
It has upset me too. In the Flair/Hogan thread I simply tried to state that Hogan could be considered more important but that it shouldn't be a blow out it should be a closer race. In this thread I don't think there is any reason that Ausin should be considered more important to wrestling. This should be a blow out for Flair. If you wanted to discuss who was more important to the WWE I can see Austin winning, but not who was more important to the entirety of wrestling. Selling many shirts does not equal more important to the business.
Let's face it, a very large portion of the fans Austin brought in are already gone.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Schlapowitz on Oct 12, 2009 9:43:41 GMT -5
Jerry, Is it that hard for you to accept the fact that, God forbid, people might have different opinions than you? On this particular topic, absolutely! If Flair/ Hogan was like comparing Dylan and Elvis, this is more like comparing Dylan to Kurt Cobain. It should be a total no brainer. People have different personal tastes. It's that simple. I guess we're not all "Wrestling Historians".
|
|
Ben Wyatt
Crow T. Robot
Are You Gonna Go My Way?
I don't get it. At all. It's kind of a small horse, I mean what am I missing? Am I crazy?
Posts: 41,552
|
Post by Ben Wyatt on Oct 12, 2009 9:48:08 GMT -5
Flair, but I can see the argument for Austin (though I dont completely agree with it)
|
|
Jiren
Patti Mayonnaise
Hearts Bayformers
Posts: 35,163
|
Post by Jiren on Oct 12, 2009 9:54:00 GMT -5
Austin
|
|
|
Post by JerryvonKramer on Oct 12, 2009 10:00:48 GMT -5
On this particular topic, absolutely! If Flair/ Hogan was like comparing Dylan and Elvis, this is more like comparing Dylan to Kurt Cobain. It should be a total no brainer. People have different personal tastes. It's that simple. I guess we're not all "Wrestling Historians". I can't argue with you because your avatar is simply too awesome.
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Oct 12, 2009 10:11:16 GMT -5
Flair is a legendary figure in wrestling but he's just not on the level that Hogan and Austin are in terms of importance. I simply can't believe I'm hearing this argument now. As I said in the other thread: This statement is a damning indictment of a shallow age in which fame and money are the only barometers of importance or success. Steve Austin himself will tell you that Flair is more important to wrestling history than he is. I'm in shock. What about what Ric Flair says about Steve Austin? If you hold Flair in such high regards, you obviously need to respect his opinion on the matter, if you're not going to respect the opinions of any of the other people who post something in contrast to your OPINION. Austin is bigger IMO, for the simple reason I think legitimately wrestling would be worlds different today if not for him. WWF didnt have much riding on anybody else at the time, they went from sure fire bankrupcy to a company that turned a half a billion dollar profit. That doesnt happen unless you catch fire in a bottle and do it with great help from a once in a generation competetor like Steve Austin. Others caught on, but I'd wager that WWF changed their programming around the "Attitude" provided by AUstin and the company flourished, it wasnt ALL Austin but he was THE guy who set the mood for the next 6-7 years. Does he have the longevity of Ric Flair? No, nobody really does, and Ric Flair has hand less than a handful of good matches in the last 15 years too, and basically embarassed himself towards the end of his career by being the worst wrestler in the WWE not named "The Great Khali". Flair basically was a heel molded in the times. The eighties were an era of corporate high rolling, yuppies, super rich guys in limos and private jets.. and thats what Flair did, he was excellent at it, but he didnt define the era, he let the era define his character and put on some outstanding matches during the time. Austin through his breif run as the greatest star in the business changed the wrestling landscape, something Flair never did.
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Oct 12, 2009 10:34:07 GMT -5
I voted Austin for reasons other posters have said themselves plus other reasons. We can;'t take anything away from Flair and how important he was out side of the biggest wrestling company since the 1980's and the wrestlers he helped establish and put over. Flair is a legend however their are other more important wrestlers in the history of wrestling. Including Andre 'The Giant', The Rock and arguably Savage. These wrestlers got wrestling over in the mainstream and helped make wrestling huge in the 1980's. In the mean time Flair was a big fish in a small pond who not many had heard of outside the die hard wrestling fans. Flair came into the WWF in 1991 and ratings, buy rates and attendance fell with Flair the WWF Champion. Hogan went to WCW in 1994 and by 1996 he helped to establish WCW as the new number one wrestling company on the planet and put WCW ahead of WWF in the Monday night wars for over 80 weeks. Flair was on the mid card floundering and the fans loved Hogan on top with the NWO during this time.
Austin came into the WWF in 1996 it was one of the biggest down times in WWF and wrestling history. before WCW and NWO helped to start another boom. Austin with his feuds with Hart, McMahon and Rock not only helped WWF get out of the red, he was the main reason WWF stayed afloat and pulled off a miracle in coming out on top of WCW in the Monday Night Wars. It;s not about T-Shirt sales it's about the fact. Austin almost single handedly. Kept WWF afloat in t time where it looked like the might of thew WWF was sure to fold. Thanks mostly to Hogan, NWO and WCW. Austin lead WWF from it;'s most down time in 1996-97. To the biggest boom in wrestling and WWF history. He lead buy rates and ratings and merchandise sales through the roof and if it wasn't for Austin in his fairly short reign in wrestling. There would be now WWE around now (and perhaps no WCW either depending on the AOL merger in 2001). Austin was taking the world by storm when Flair was washed up in the mid card in WCW which was a sinking ship. Flair also tarnished his legacy more than anything by wrestling from 2000 on wards where as Austin bowed out gracefully in the early 2000's. Forced into retainment by injury's or not. There is no taking away that Flair is a legend. How ever as far as importance of the wrestling business he is no where near Hogan or Austin.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2009 10:52:54 GMT -5
The argument can be made that whilst Hulk Hogan, the Rock and Stone Cold Steve Austin became household names during their time on top of the wrestling industry both to your diehard wrestling fans, your casual wrestling fans and even the public at large, Flair is only really a household name to wrestling fans. A thousand times this. There really can't be any kind of argument made as to if anyone else was more important to the business than these three. It's strange to think that the only people who are able to become true household names are the ones who have significant mainstream success outside of wrestling (save for Austin, who was lucky enough to be the top guy during wrestling's biggest boom). I'd say that Jesse Ventura and maybe Randy Savage also belong to the elite "household name" group. Personally, I'm a huge fan of both Flair and Hogan, and I don't care for Austin. However, as big as he is within wrestling, to the complete non-fan who could probably describe a little about Hogan, Austin, and Rock, Ric Flair will be met a resounding, "who?" One may say that it's not fair to Flair.
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Oct 12, 2009 11:21:17 GMT -5
I said this multiple times in the Hogan/Flair and it looks like I need to say it again though it will likely fall on blind eyes once more.
When discussing the importance of someone to pro wrestling how known they are OUTSIDE of wrestling means absolutely NOTHING. By definition these facts are outside of wrestling and have zero to do with things in wrestling.
If you disagree and think being known OUTSIDE of wrestling is an important factor INSIDE of wrestling then please go ahead and state why. I am not completely close minded, and I will readily admit that I overlooked something if it is brought to my attention. But until I hear why being known outside wrestling is important to the history of wrestling I will continue to consider that a bogus argument.
Another argument I feel the need to vent about is the argument that Flair wasn't as big as Austin during Austin's prime. What difference does that make? Flair was far bigger during Austin's prime then Austin was during Flair's prime.
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Oct 12, 2009 11:30:28 GMT -5
Another argument I feel the need to vent about is the argument that Flair wasn't as big as Austin during Austin's prime. What difference does that make? Flair was far bigger during Austin's prime then Austin was during Flair's prime. Sorry but no if Flair was bigger than Austin and more of a draw than Austin was during his prime NWA and Jim Crockett Promotions would have been bigger than WWF was during the biggest boom in wrestling history during the 90's. NWA and Jim Crockett Promotions was not that big outside of their territory and Flair was never really that big of a draw. I think your missing the point when the emphasis is on how big Austin was and how big a draw he was for the WWF who were a sinking ship before Austin caught fire. Flair was the biggest draw for Jim Crockett Promotions which went under and didn;lt draw as WWF champion when he came in.WCW hit it;s boom with the NWO in 1996 and Flair was a mid carder during those years. What a wrestler draws outside of the ring matters also and how well recognized he is in the mainstream also matters as this shows how far the wrestler has brought the company he is working for and wrestling in general. It is not everything but it does matter a great deal.
|
|
|
Post by Ultimo Chocula on Oct 12, 2009 11:31:30 GMT -5
The "household name" argument doesn't hold water for me. Austin might be well known, but of all those people who are going to buy a ticket to a show if his name shows up on a marquee? Few, because most the people who know who he is are not wrestling fans. He was like Hogan, the face of the company when wrestling was hot. Compare that to Ric Flair, everyone who knows who he is are wrestling fans. Therefore, he'll get people to the show. Austin might draw and get a few extra viewers, but it will be because of passing interest.
People know who Dane Cook is, but if I want to see a comedy show I'll go see Jim Gaffigan. Same deal. If I want to see somebody hobble around the ring screaming "ass" every other word and hit someone with a sloppy stunner, I'll see Austin. If I want to see an actual match, regardless of quality, I'll go see Flair because at least he's trying.
|
|
|
Post by triplealbert on Oct 12, 2009 11:38:06 GMT -5
The "household name" argument doesn't hold water for me. Austin might be well known, but of all those people who are going to buy a ticket to a show if his name shows up on a marquee? Few, because most the people who know who he is are not wrestling fans. He was like Hogan, the face of the company when wrestling was hot. Compare that to Ric Flair, everyone who knows who he is are wrestling fans. Therefore, he'll get people to the show. Austin might draw and get a few extra viewers, but it will be because of passing interest. People know who Dane Cook is, but if I want to see a comedy show I'll go see Jim Gaffigan. Same deal. If I want to see somebody hobble around the ring screaming "ass" every other word and hit someone with a sloppy stunner, I'll see Austin. If I want to see an actual match, regardless of quality, I'll go see Flair because at least he's trying. Are you serious with that answer?
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Oct 12, 2009 11:39:46 GMT -5
Another argument I feel the need to vent about is the argument that Flair wasn't as big as Austin during Austin's prime. What difference does that make? Flair was far bigger during Austin's prime then Austin was during Flair's prime. Sorry but no if Flair was bigger than Austin and more of a draw than Austin was during his prime NWA and Jim Crockett Promotions would have been bigger than WWF was during the biggest boom in wrestling history during the 90's. NWA and Jim Crockett Promotions was not that big outside of their territory and Flair was never really that big of a draw. I think your missing the point when the emphasis is on how big Austin was and how big a draw he was for the WWF who were a sinking ship before Austin caught fire. Flair was the biggest draw for Jim Crockett Promotions which went under and didn;lt draw as WWF champion when he came in.WCW hit it;s boom with the NWO in 1996 and Flair was a mid carder during those years. What a wrestler draws outside of the ring matters also and how well recognized he is in the mainstream also matters as this shows how far the wrestler has brought the company he is working for and wrestling in general. It is not everything but it does matter a great deal. I was not trying to say Flair was bigger in his prime than Austin was in his prime. I thought I saw someone say when Austin was in his prime he was bigger at that moment than Flair was in the same moment. Perhaps I read that wrong, cruising the forums via my phone makes me less likely to spend time to check. If that is what was said I felt the need to point out that during Flair's prime Austin was unknown so Austin being bigger during the Austin 316 era didn't mean much to me
|
|
BxB
Unicron
Only the shift key stands between him and copyright infringement.
Posts: 2,849
|
Post by BxB on Oct 12, 2009 11:40:59 GMT -5
People know who Dane Cook is, but if I want to see a comedy show I'll go see Jim Gaffigan. Same deal. If I want to see somebody hobble around the ring screaming "ass" every other word and hit someone with a sloppy stunner, I'll see Austin. If I want to see an actual match, regardless of quality, I'll go see Flair because at least he's trying. You're mixing personal preference with who actually had a bigger impact, and trust me Austin brought a whole lot more than "passing interest". There are a lot of wrestlers on the roster today that were inspired by him, not to say a legion of fans he brought in, that still watch the product. You aren't giving Austin his due.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2009 11:41:38 GMT -5
I'm just shocked that we now have Jim Gaffigan in this thread
|
|