The G.O.A.T.
Don Corleone
This post may or may not be credited to Rajah.com
Posts: 1,433
|
Post by The G.O.A.T. on Dec 18, 2006 14:45:39 GMT -5
I have a dumb question.....any shot Hogan was in a dark main event at SS' 92?
|
|
|
Post by skskillz on Dec 18, 2006 14:55:00 GMT -5
Hogan forgetting that he wrestled Andre after their huge match at WM3 is hardly a mistake and neither is Hogan thinking he wrestled at some show he was never on. That is different then Bret not knowing his WCW-title history when he didn't even wrestle there. Owen botching a move was a mistake, but Goldberg injuring someone else was an accident waiting to happen. During an in-ring promo with Shawn during their feud, Hogan said something factually incorrect about Montreal (forgot the exact quote). Did this forum let it slide? Of course not. Hogan didn't even work for the WWF during that time (1997), but who cares, right? If Hogan messes up history, it's taboo. If Bret does it, it's a mistake. Hell, Bret Hart said he didn't want to job in his hometown of CANADA during the whole screwjob thing. If Hogan said he didn't want to job to Goldberg in Atlanta because he's an American hero that shouldn't job in America, what would the reaction be? You tell me. Bret and Hogan have both said and done outlandish things in the past. One specific incident (embellishing WrestleMania III) making any mistake Hogan does a case for the police, while Bret doesn't get similar treatment, is a double standard. Sorry, as much as you want to believe it's not; it is. Again, was this quote by Bret a big deal? Of course not. I was just piggybacking off what someone else mentioned. It's worth noting every now and then.
|
|
STMP
Hank Scorpio
Wild and Only 50
Posts: 5,569
|
Post by STMP on Dec 18, 2006 15:07:14 GMT -5
Hogan forgetting that he wrestled Andre after their huge match at WM3 is hardly a mistake and neither is Hogan thinking he wrestled at some show he was never on. That is different then Bret not knowing his WCW-title history when he didn't even wrestle there. Owen botching a move was a mistake, but Goldberg injuring someone else was an accident waiting to happen. During an in-ring promo with Shawn during their feud, Hogan said something factually incorrect about Montreal (forgot the exact quote). Did this forum let it slide? Of course not. Hogan didn't even work for the WWF during that time (1997), but who cares, right? If Hogan messes up history, it's taboo. If Bret does it, it's a mistake. Hell, Bret Hart said he didn't want to job in his hometown of CANADA during the whole screwjob thing. If Hogan said he didn't want to job to Goldberg in Atlanta because he's an American hero that shouldn't job in America, what would the reaction be? You tell me. Bret and Hogan have both said and done outlandish things in the past. One specific incident (embellishing WrestleMania III) making any mistake Hogan does a case for the police, while Bret doesn't get similar treatment, is a double standard. Sorry, as much as you want to believe it's not; it is. Again, was this quote by Bret a big deal? Of course not. I was just piggybacking off what someone else mentioned. It's worth noting every now and then. People aren't bringing that up time after time. Whenever people talk about Hogan changing history they talk about his outrageous claims. NOBODY talks about that promo. And I don't even know exactely what you mean. Because that is how often it doesn't come up. And you have to agree that Montreal is a very touchy subject. That people have been talking about for years, wether it was real or not and if Bret was right or wrong. So EVERY opinion about that, no matter who says it, gets drawn out and is talked about. That has nothing to do with Hogan. And the thing with Bret. Well, watch Wrestling with Shadows to understand why he didn't want to do it. It had to do with Bret being a babyface his entire carreer, then having to turn heel and then losing that spot to Shawn Micheals leaving Bret in a difficult situation. Then Canada came and there is nothing as anti-climatic as the hometown hero losing. And especially when it's the hometown hero's last match. And Bret said he didn't want to lose the title, but he didn't say he wanted to win the match. That is completely different then Hogan refusing to wrestle Bret because he thought he was too small. Hogan has a history of refusing to job and hurting the WWE by doing that. With Bret there was months of build up, angles and backstage problems that led to him being in a position where he didn't want to lose. That is the NOT the same. So why do you act like it is? Hogan not wanting to job can be compared to Micheals not wanting to job. And people do shit on Micheals because of that, while pretty much everyone will say he is one of the best wrestlers ever and probably the best or second best wrestler of the 90's. So it's not about 'workrate' or 'double standards'.
|
|
|
Post by seanwalsh on Dec 18, 2006 15:10:35 GMT -5
So Hogan not knowing the details behind the Montreal incident.......honest mistake then? Bret said that the day after Rick Rude died while eulogizing a friend with (probably) some sort of newspaper deadline. Hogan said Bret got beat by Zeus king of the Olympic gods at Superclash 54 in Tulsa, OK is just Hogan being an idiot.
|
|
|
Post by Ultimo Chocula on Dec 18, 2006 15:15:24 GMT -5
Poor Rick Rude. Can't get any respect, not even in his own thread.
|
|
|
Post by valiens on Dec 18, 2006 15:26:55 GMT -5
I'm a huge Hitman fan as well as Hogan. So let me kill this thread with my bipartisan take on what everyone means here: Hogan will lie about things. Bret will not.
THE END.
Hogan's intentions may not be bad. He may aggrandize himself to proliferate the myths of Hulkamania for all the kids out there who still "golly gee" over this modern day Hercules defeating titans like Andre. Doesn't matter. What matters is, whether it's a product of acting or a product of not wanting to get anyone else over, he can't be trusted to give an historically accurate account of his career.
|
|
JMA
Hank Scorpio
Down With Capitalism!
Posts: 6,880
|
Post by JMA on Dec 18, 2006 15:27:06 GMT -5
Vince is lucky that Rude didn't punch him. Rude was a legit bad-ass.
|
|
|
Post by Ultimo Chocula on Dec 18, 2006 15:30:19 GMT -5
Vince is lucky that Rude didn't punch him. Rude was a legit bad-ass. Yup. Knocked out the Warrior with one open hand slap. True fact.
|
|
JMA
Hank Scorpio
Down With Capitalism!
Posts: 6,880
|
Post by JMA on Dec 18, 2006 15:31:33 GMT -5
Vince is lucky that Rude didn't punch him. Rude was a legit bad-ass. Yup. Knocked out the Warrior with one open hand slap. True fact. Indeed. That's actually my favorite backstage fight story.
|
|
|
Post by HMARK Center on Dec 18, 2006 15:36:38 GMT -5
Rude was also part of one of the greatest collections of talent in our time: early 90's WCW, with him, Cactus Jack, Vader, the Horsemen, Sting, Steamboat, the Steiners, Mike Rotunda, the Dangerous Alliance, et. al.
God, it's a mystery how WCW screwed that era up; SO much great talent.
Though the Steamboat/Rude 30 minute Iron Man match from Bash at the Beach (I think) was class.
|
|
|
Post by skskillz on Dec 18, 2006 15:37:11 GMT -5
People aren't bringing that up time after time. Whenever people talk about Hogan changing history they talk about his outrageous claims. NOBODY talks about that promo. And I don't even know exactely what you mean. Because that is how often it doesn't come up. And you have to agree that Montreal is a very touchy subject. That people have been talking about for years, wether it was real or not and if Bret was right or wrong. So EVERY opinion about that, no matter who says it, gets drawn out and is talked about. That has nothing to do with Hogan. They don't have to bring it up time after time. No one is going to remember Bret's misquote about Rude/Austin 5 minutes from now, much less months from now. The point is, when Hogan flubbed, people were all over him. The question posed was very valid: if Hogan had messed up a name like Bret did, people would be blasting him for it. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't want to make this a Montreal debate, but how is Bret's rationale for not jobbing any more or less justified than any of Hogan's non-jobs? Hogan didn't want to job to Bret because he was too small. Bret didn't want to job to Shawn because the event was in Canada (even though Bret was leaving after the event). Austin didn't want to job to Brock Lesnar because it was on free television. As my old business teacher used to say: people judge themselves by their intentions, while judging others on their results. Everyone has a reason not to job once in a while, and they all feel justified in that decision/opinion. That doesn't make it any more or less justified in the grand scheme of things. If Hart refuses to job at a PPV during the culmination of a 2 year feud, then we (as fans) should look at that in the same light as Hogan not wanting to job to Bret because he was too small. With Hogan, Warrior, Andre, and guys from that era, it's always about workrate or double standards. If you couldn't work but were popular, you're evil (modern day example would be Bill Goldberg).
|
|
MCCW > IWC*
AC Slater
What is MCCW? It's better than you!
Posts: 132
|
Post by MCCW > IWC* on Dec 18, 2006 15:50:04 GMT -5
Bret Hart claiming that Rick Rude beat Steve Austin for the U.S. Title seems like an honest mistake to me. Hogan claiming he main evented SS92 in honor of a dying cancer boy when he wasn't even on the card . . . not so much. I'd say ther'es a pretty distinct difference. What if Hogan said Ricky Steamboat beat Harley Race for the IC title at WrestleMania III? How many people here would call Hogan dillusional and proceed to crack hyperbole-driven jokes about Andre, etc? Bret says something like that, and no one would have noticed/cared had lildude not mentioned it. Just pointing out the double standard, that's all. Owen Hart almost paralyzes someone, and it was an honest mistake. Bill Goldberg kicks Bret in the head, and Bill is a reckless killer. Again, double standard. Same deal. Couldn't have said it better.
|
|
STMP
Hank Scorpio
Wild and Only 50
Posts: 5,569
|
Post by STMP on Dec 18, 2006 18:15:39 GMT -5
They don't have to bring it up time after time. No one is going to remember Bret's misquote about Rude/Austin 5 minutes from now, much less months from now. The point is, when Hogan flubbed, people were all over him. The question posed was very valid: if Hogan had messed up a name like Bret did, people would be blasting him for it. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't want to make this a Montreal debate, but how is Bret's rationale for not jobbing any more or less justified than any of Hogan's non-jobs? Hogan didn't want to job to Bret because he was too small. Bret didn't want to job to Shawn because the event was in Canada (even though Bret was leaving after the event). Austin didn't want to job to Brock Lesnar because it was on free television. As my old business teacher used to say: people judge themselves by their intentions, while judging others on their results. Everyone has a reason not to job once in a while, and they all feel justified in that decision/opinion. That doesn't make it any more or less justified in the grand scheme of things. If Hart refuses to job at a PPV during the culmination of a 2 year feud, then we (as fans) should look at that in the same light as Hogan not wanting to job to Bret because he was too small. With Hogan, Warrior, Andre, and guys from that era, it's always about workrate or double standards. If you couldn't work but were popular, you're evil (modern day example would be Bill Goldberg). And that says enough that people won't bring up Bret's mistake. You fail to recognize why people won't bring it up. Because it barely happens. Hogan has said multipile things that were either factually wrong or plain lies. His book is full of it. That is why people bash Hogan. Because he keeps on doing it. Bret makes 1 simple mistake that anyone could make. So of course it's not a big deal. You turned it into a big deal to 'expose' everyone's double standards which made no sense at all since the two things were completely different. So there is no 'double standard' because people bash Hogan for plain lying to get himself over and you bring up Hart getting a little fact wrong. Well, first of all. Hart only refused to job once, afraid of losing all his heat, which would get him into a terrible business situation. Hart was pushed into a corner and to him the only way to keep any credibility was to make sure he wouldn't lose in his hometown which would hurt his popularity in Canada. Hart wasn't a prima donna as Hogan or as hard to work with as Austin. Hart was a companyman who only refused to job when he was pushed into a corner. So how is that the same? How can you compare that? One is a prima donna who thinks he is better then others and has a long history or holding others down which hurts the business in the long run. And the other one was a loyal company man who only refused to job once against the man he hated, after he felt he had to save his own carreer. Once again, Bret is harder to blame for his decision then Hogan. And that has nothing to do with double standards. It is a fact that Hogan was harder to work with then Hart. And it is a fact that Hart carried Austin to become the most important wrestler in the late 90's, while Hogan only took care of himself and his buddies. Has nothing to do with double standards, but simply who's decisions benefited the wrestlingindustry the most. And you're last line is complete bullshit and only exposes yourself as someone who wants to bash the 'smart marks'. Hogan and Warrior have been very unprofessional at times and they were extremely limited in their wrestling. A professional WRESTLER or even a SPORTS-entertainer, need to be able to work. Hogan had great crowd psychology and knew how to reach the crowd. Warrior didn't have that and you can't build a company around someone like him. Same with Goldberg. You can not have a credible champion who sucks on the mic and needs to be carried by his opponents. The perfect wrestler is a combination of all of those things like charisma and talent, like Kurt Angle for example. People have good reason to bash Hogan, Warrior and Goldberg. Yet you act like it is complete nonsense because for some reason they were popular so that makes it all good. No they sucked. Even Hogan will admit he's not the greatest wrestler. But they clicked with the crowd. That is all. And Andre doesn't get that much bashing. He was a special attraction and people know that and also know he was in terrible shape at the end of his carreer.
|
|
|
Post by Al Wilson Lives: Thread Killer on Dec 19, 2006 13:18:00 GMT -5
So Rick Rude... I'd heard he slapped PN News unconscious but hadn't heard about Warrior. I love Rick Rude.
|
|
STMP
Hank Scorpio
Wild and Only 50
Posts: 5,569
|
Post by STMP on Dec 19, 2006 13:32:23 GMT -5
So Rick Rude... I'd heard he slapped PN News unconscious but hadn't heard about Warrior. I love Rick Rude. The Warrior story was that Rude was feuding with Warrior and Warrior was too stiff. So Rude said complained to Warrior about that and told him to stop working so stiff. According to the story Warrior replied something like 'I don't have to! I'm the Warrior!' So Rude slapped him, knocking him out. But that story sounds too similair to the PN News story and Andre hitting Warrior, so I've always taken it with a grain of salt. Since it could be two stories mixed up into a new story.
|
|
|
Post by Ultimo Chocula on Dec 19, 2006 14:07:43 GMT -5
So Rick Rude... I'd heard he slapped PN News unconscious but hadn't heard about Warrior. I love Rick Rude. The Warrior story was that Rude was feuding with Warrior and Warrior was too stiff. So Rude said complained to Warrior about that and told him to stop working so stiff. According to the story Warrior replied something like 'I don't have to! I'm the Warrior!' So Rude slapped him, knocking him out. But that story sounds too similair to the PN News story and Andre hitting Warrior, so I've always taken it with a grain of salt. Since it could be two stories mixed up into a new story. That's the way I heard it. The PN News version was he was just being a dick backstage and Rude told him to knock it off. He didn't and got laid out. The Andre one was they were doing a series of house shows and Andre did that bit where he got tied up in the ropes. Warrior would clothesline him and make it way too hard every night even though Andre told him to soften it up a bit. Finally one night Andre got fed up and waited for the rope bit. Warrior ran in for the clothesline and Andre suddenly moved his fist and Warrior nailed it, knocking him goofy. The next night when they did the bit Warrior was way softer and Andre turned to Heenan and said "He's learning."
|
|
|
Post by cuneo77 on Dec 19, 2006 14:07:47 GMT -5
i think if the rude story was true they would have gladly mentioned it in the warrior dvd
|
|
|
Post by Al Wilson Lives: Thread Killer on Dec 19, 2006 15:16:43 GMT -5
Is Warrior known to trash Rude in interviews? If so, I'm more inclined to believe Rick slapped him silly. I'd like to see a Rick Rude DVD, however I can see the last part of his career when he jumped ship before passing away being spin-doctored by Vince and Co. so that it was in fact WCW that killed Ravishing Rick. If that's too hard for some people to believe, they didn't see the Miss Elizabeth peice on Confidential.
|
|
Sajoa Moe
Patti Mayonnaise
Did you get that thing I sent ya?
A man without gimmick.
Posts: 39,683
|
Post by Sajoa Moe on Dec 19, 2006 15:31:11 GMT -5
Rick Rude doubted El Dandy.
|
|
|
Post by Confused Mark Wahlberg on Dec 19, 2006 15:40:56 GMT -5
Wait...
Rude was still in DX then, right? Or maybe not, I don't remember.
Are we to assume he didn't know Bret was going to get screwed?
|
|