SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on May 30, 2013 20:57:03 GMT -5
First Eric didn't create the NWO he took the idea from another promotion and brought it to his company, the Luchadors he got the idea again from ECW. Hogan tends to make himself the focal point of all major angles when other stars could be there or should be there. Eric basically took one of his own shows Devil's Ride which premiered in 2012 and the whole point of the show is the inside look at a biker club, look what pops up later in TNA a bunch of biker's that actually don't really ride bikes instead they drink and fight. Everybody steals ideas. Bischoff still made the nWo different to the NJPW angle though he had a lot of good ideas. The nWo videos everyone likes were his idea. The WWF guys coming in were his idea. Hogan/Sting was his idea. Turning Hogan heel was his idea. The whole WWF Vs WCW idea was his. As for the Luchadores thing. ECW stole that. ECW's entire business model was stolen from Japan (FMW) and Mexico (AAA)look at all the credit Paul Heyman gets though for starting a revolution and changing American Wrestling. Bischoff took the ideas used in smaller companies and made them national. He didn't know the Cruiserweights would work on National TV or the other small guys. He took that risk and marketed them properly. Without Bischoff. Rey Mysterio Jr probably never would of become a WWE Star. Jericho, Benoit, Malenko, Guerrero all would of been in ECW for life and today probably working the indies or being legends in Japan or Mexico. ECW is responsible for a few stars but Bischoff made the Luchadores and the Radicalz stars in the United States.
|
|
|
Post by ritt works hard fo da chickens on May 31, 2013 1:37:42 GMT -5
The thing is unlike Jarret, Dusty, or even most times Russo; Hogan and Bischoff are two of the best at taking credit but never taking blame. That's why people seem to jump on them so hard. If the ratings are good or overseas markets are good, its cause Hogan. If they are unchanged or lower well it's not Hogan's fault.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,057
Member is Online
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on May 31, 2013 1:41:14 GMT -5
Just going back, I want to know on what piece of paper the Nasty Boys v Team 3D in 2010 looked a good idea? I suspect it's the kind you put on your tongue to give you an.... interesting few hours. Even in their prime 20 years previously the Nastys were wastes of space and Team 3D was stale as heck. Well they're the two best brawlers in terms of tag teams possibly ever. I don't remember their matches but I'm sure in 2010 they could of had a nice hardcore match at least. Get the Dudleyz over a little more at the expense of the Nastys. Sure, It wasn't Flair/Steamboat but not everything has to be. It wasn't going to be even Test v Gangrel. I do remember their matches, they were horrible in the early 90s unless they were in there with teams like the Steiners or the Hart Foundation, teams that may actually be the greatest of all time, or guys like Mick Foley, in terms of brawling, again, one of the best ever. Other than that they were terrible and couldn't engage a crowd. At the end of the 90s Knobbs had a solo run in WCW's hardcore division, again, he was one of the worst guys in the company, he was literally less entertaining than David Flair who at least had a fun character. Over 10 years after that, unless they were being brought in as a favour to their great friend, there would be no reason to hire them, and no reason to think they'd be anything other than what they were, terrible. Also, even if they were the best ever, doesn't mean they'll always be the best. Michael Jordan was the best basketball player ever, the biggest draw, doesn't mean you should put him on the court today and expect a decent performance.
|
|
Rave
El Dandy
Perpetually Bored
Posts: 8,112
|
Post by Rave on May 31, 2013 6:35:35 GMT -5
Just going back, I want to know on what piece of paper the Nasty Boys v Team 3D in 2010 looked a good idea? I suspect it's the kind you put on your tongue to give you an.... interesting few hours. Even in their prime 20 years previously the Nastys were wastes of space and Team 3D was stale as heck. Well they're the two best brawlers in terms of tag teams possibly ever. I don't remember their matches but I'm sure in 2010 they could of had a nice hardcore match at least. Get the Dudleyz over a little more at the expense of the Nastys. Sure, It wasn't Flair/Steamboat but not everything has to be. Knobbs gets noticeably winded just giving promos. Dragging a half-decent match, even a standard hardcore brawl, out of him was nigh-impossible at that point.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on May 31, 2013 8:10:06 GMT -5
I was reading the other thread about the top 20 TNA Flops and number 1 were Hulk and Eric. The main writer of that article seemed to rate them number 1 because they simply didn't draw anymore ratings. The problem is that Hulk and Eric aren't the head writers. Bruce Prichard is. Why aren't the low ratings blamed on him, Or Vince Russo or whoever was the head writer when Hulk and Eric arrived? ... So, I post this to ask you all. What's so bad about these guys? Why don't they get credit? They do good work from what I can see and I'm sure ratings will improve some day. I don't want to be flamed and although this is a controversial topic I'd really like some serious answers. Firstly, Prichard is the head of Talent Relations (and is doing a crappy job given all the issues they've had), the head booker is Dave Lagana and anyone who thinks that Hulk Hogan has no say over the storylines is kidding themselves, given the way TNA became the Hulk Hogan Show under Russo, stopped briefly when Lagana took over, then resumed, worse than before. He has a track record of using creative control to make himself the focus of a company and keep himself on top, even when he has no business being there as the audiences aren't interested so I don't imagine for one second he's on a contract with TNA where he has no say in creative decisions whatsoever. Are TNA better off with Hogan and Bischoff than they were before? Honestly, I don't think so. For all the talk of Hogan being an amazing media ambassador, none of it has resulted in good publicity for the company, unless you consider Hulk getting media attention because of his creepy obsession with his daughter, getting his second rate DJ friend hired as part of a major angle, appearing in a sex tape with said friend's wife then suing a bunch of people to be great publicity for TNA, heck, people have been fired from wrestling companies for less. Sure he may get on a few more TV shows, but that hasn't resulted in any upside for the company, he generally plugs the Hogan brand and treats TNA as an afterthought. They haven't gotten any meaningful new programming because they have Hulk, costs have gone up as he, and the people he demanded be brought in are on big money, TV ratings have actually fallen and PPV's have done so well they've gone down to four a year. They certainly aren't getting great publicity, promos or matches from the Hulkster and he's not making new stars as he's being booked as the face of the company despite being unable to wrestle, while guys who are the present and future of the company are bumping around the midcard in a holding pattern, getting less over because they're feuding with the same old people, or the legendary Chavo Guerrero. He's not a great authority figure, he overshadows young talent he works with, not because he's a wrestling legend, but because he gets considerably more TV time than they do and he's given more to work with story wise than people who can still wrestle. The biggest expansion TNA have had in recent years is overseas, something that was happening anyway and would have continued without Hogan, in fact their biggest coup to date was Ring Ka King, which was Jeff Jarrett's brainchild, created, produced and broadcasted without the involvement of Bischoff and Hogan, and if Steiner is to be believed, they worked to actively sabotage it because of that. I think Hulk Hogan's name value outside of the US is hugely overestimated, if he really was doing WWE numbers on his Australia tour, he'd be a promoter in his own right now, but at the time, outside of the first few shows, there was talk of poor attendance despite their cutting ticket prices. When TNA have plugged their UK tours in recent years, they've used guys like Austin Aries and Magnus rather than the Hulkster, one would think they know on some level that he's not really as popular worldwide as he'd like to believe, heck, Magnus does virtually all of TNA's crosspromotion here, if Challenge TV want a TNA guy for a one off appearance, it's Magnus. The Hulkster may get a lot of money at meet and greets, but how much of that ends up in his pocket and how much ends up in TNA's coffers? How much are they making from Hulk Hogan merchandise, given how his trademarks are owned by Bischoff's company? At the end of the day, most of the good things that have happened to TNA in recent years would have happened without the Hulkster and Bischoff, the international growth, as I mentioned, was happening already, they'd already run successful tours in the UK and Germany and Russo was on his way out before Hogan as they had been searching for a new booker, they offered Paul Heyman the moon on a stick to try and get him in. The Hogan/Bischoff pairing brought in some 'great' talent, but it's easy to attract guys by throwing big money around, especially when it's not your own, Bischoff has repeated the mistakes he made in WCW and that isn't something he deserves any credit for. They brought in RVD, Ric Flair, Matt Hardy, Val Venis, the Nasty Boys and others, most of whom were more trouble than they're worth, heck, the only worthwhile former WWE guy brought in has been Jeff Hardy, and he brought a -LOT- of trouble along with him too, and he would have come in anyway, given how his departure was handled by the WWE and how he'd already been there and had friends backstage. I get the feeling the only real upside to his presence is a feeling of legitimacy for the people running the company, much like with Ric Flair, they can say one of the greatest wrestlers of all time worked for them for a time... which really, isn't enough to balance all the harm done, the focus on Hogan and his talentless daughter, the huge influx of WWE talent that turned them from a profitable company to one making record losses, the sudden, abrupt dumping of all storylines that were going on before his debut, the disastrous move to Monday nights, the live shows that cost a ridiculous amount to produce without any real benefit and so on and so forth.
|
|
bob
Salacious Crumb
The "other" Bob. FOC COURSE!
started the Madness Wars, Proudly the #1 Nana Hater on FAN
Posts: 78,377
Member is Online
|
Post by bob on May 31, 2013 8:29:29 GMT -5
While things are better now, remember all the stupid crap they did when they first arrived? The Orlando screw job. Getting rid of the 6-sided rings. The arrival of The Nasty Boys, Brooke Hogan, Garrett Bischoff and Bubba the Love Sponge. World Elite disbanded for no reason. Abyss becoming Hulk Hogan via his hall of fame ring.
And I'm sure I forgot several other things.
EDIT:
As was already said, they'll take all the credit but none of the blame. For some perspective even Vince McMahon admits that the XFL was a flop.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 31, 2013 9:02:41 GMT -5
Let's see.
Before Hogan & Bischoff: 1.1 rating Nearly 3 years later: 1.0 rating
So this high-dollar signing lost TNA viewers.
For a guy who is supposed to be the "biggest name in wrestling" and another who is supposed to be "the smartest mind in wrestling" that's a tremendous flop.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on Jun 1, 2013 0:28:00 GMT -5
Let's see. Before Hogan & Bischoff: 1.1 rating Nearly 3 years later: 1.0 rating So this high-dollar signing lost TNA viewers. For a guy who is supposed to be the "biggest name in wrestling" and another who is supposed to be "the smartest mind in wrestling" that's a tremendous flop. In 2001 WWE RAW used to get a 4.5 it now gets a 3.1. That's a tremendous flop. The wrestling business is hurting right now you can't blame them for that. Maybe the ratings did drop in a very small way but to be fair don't TNA stick around the 1.0-1.2 mark? Like they have done always? It seems as if a lot of responses in this thread are just people trying to find things to pick at the two about. Some people bring up great points but a lot of it is incredibly petty.
|
|
|
Post by ritt works hard fo da chickens on Jun 1, 2013 5:01:01 GMT -5
Let's see. Before Hogan & Bischoff: 1.1 rating Nearly 3 years later: 1.0 rating So this high-dollar signing lost TNA viewers. For a guy who is supposed to be the "biggest name in wrestling" and another who is supposed to be "the smartest mind in wrestling" that's a tremendous flop. In 2001 WWE RAW used to get a 4.5 it now gets a 3.1. That's a tremendous flop. The wrestling business is hurting right now you can't blame them for that. Maybe the ratings did drop in a very small way but to be fair don't TNA stick around the 1.0-1.2 mark? Like they have done always? It seems as if a lot of responses in this thread are just people trying to find things to pick at the two about. Some people bring up great points but a lot of it is incredibly petty. Really? Compare a 12 year period to a three year period? I guess if you want to be selective like that WWE is flopping. However WWE was pulling 3 something rating when Hogan arrived in TNA and did lose some viewers over the years. www.pwtorch.com/artman2/publish/WWE_News_3/article_38106.shtml#.UanCZEA3uyoMy point however is that WWE can fall and still be on top. tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2013/05/21/monday-cable-ratings-wwe-raw-bates-motel-defiance-warehouse-13-more/183649/However, TNA is in the Cable slums and the Hogan nostalgia tour hasn't helped that, ergo the money wasted on Hogan could be used for so many better purpose and wouldn't hurt them. tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2013/05/31/thursday-cable-ratings-nba-playoffs-win-night-pawn-stars-swamp-people-men-at-workbeyond-scared-straight-anger-management-more/185173/I mean if they are going to waste the money for nostalgia purposes Full House or Seinfeld reruns draw better then Hogan live. Once TNT figured out Law and Order was dollars per hours a better investment then Hulk Hogan it gave Jamie Kellner the excuse he needed to kill WCW forever. Sometime in the near future someone just may look over TNA's books and it will be hard to explain why they paid for no returns.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on Jun 1, 2013 5:20:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Jun 1, 2013 6:28:40 GMT -5
Improved production values, better entrance videos, hiring people who can actually wrestle, hiring qualified people to help them promote live events, advertising their tours better, covering the costs of some of their workers medical expenses to avoid the bad publicity that comes from them having to go cap in hand to the fans, rehiring people like Scott D'Amore to help revive the KO division, producing pilots for more TNA programming to pitch to spike or their overseas partners to expand the brand and so on. All these things would be a better use of the money currently going to Hulk Hogan as TNA have had no return on their investment.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on Jun 1, 2013 7:16:56 GMT -5
Improved production values, better entrance videos, hiring people who can actually wrestle, hiring qualified people to help them promote live events, advertising their tours better, covering the costs of some of their workers medical expenses to avoid the bad publicity that comes from them having to go cap in hand to the fans, rehiring people like Scott D'Amore to help revive the KO division, producing pilots for more TNA programming to pitch to spike or their overseas partners to expand the brand and so on. All these things would be a better use of the money currently going to Hulk Hogan as TNA have had no return on their investment. Only one thing you mentioned on there would result in TNA growing and making more money.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Jun 1, 2013 7:31:00 GMT -5
Improved production values, better entrance videos, hiring people who can actually wrestle, hiring qualified people to help them promote live events, advertising their tours better, covering the costs of some of their workers medical expenses to avoid the bad publicity that comes from them having to go cap in hand to the fans, rehiring people like Scott D'Amore to help revive the KO division, producing pilots for more TNA programming to pitch to spike or their overseas partners to expand the brand and so on. All these things would be a better use of the money currently going to Hulk Hogan as TNA have had no return on their investment. Only one thing you mentioned on there would result in TNA growing and making more money. Really? Things that will improve the overall product and help end some of the bad publicity that has plagued TNA over it's lifespan won't help TNA to grow? Even if the growth isn't immediate, it's still a better use of money than giving it to Hulk Hogan as he's brought nothing, no benefit at all in the years he's been there as every measure of success for a wrestling company is either down, or growing at the same rate it was before he arrived. At this point I genuinely believe that TNA could have gotten the same return on their investment had they put all the money that they've spent on Hogan and co in a trashcan in the middle of the ring an set it on fire.
|
|
SOR
Unicron
Posts: 2,611
|
Post by SOR on Jun 1, 2013 7:56:13 GMT -5
Only one thing you mentioned on there would result in TNA growing and making more money. Really? Things that will improve the overall product and help end some of the bad publicity that has plagued TNA over it's lifespan won't help TNA to grow? Even if the growth isn't immediate, it's still a better use of money than giving it to Hulk Hogan as he's brought nothing, no benefit at all in the years he's been there as every measure of success for a wrestling company is either down, or growing at the same rate it was before he arrived. At this point I genuinely believe that TNA could have gotten the same return on their investment had they put all the money that they've spent on Hogan and co in a trashcan in the middle of the ring an set it on fire. Well the ones that would help TNA would probably be better advertising for live events (But they already advertise them on TV) Production Values and Music Videos aren't going to change much people don't tune in or buy a ticket for that. Workers medical expenses, again. Nobody outside the internet cares that TNA doesn't pay X amount of dollars for someones medical expenses it doesn't help them draw. Scott Da'More and the TNA Knockouts Division won't draw money and TNA already has a show for international markets called Xplosion which is pretty quality. TNA needs big names. If you take away Hogan your top guy is Sting who is popular within wrestling but not a part of popular culture like Hoggan is. Hulk is a legitimate celebrity and people are paying to see the guy. Look at the merchandise sales, look at how many people go crazy when Hulk comes out, look at the money he does at fan fests for TNA. Whether people want to admit it or not Hulk is good for TNA financially. Some may find him boring on TV or feel he's on TV too much which is fine. Some may not want to see him wrestle which is fine but to say he's done absolutely nothing for TNA is crazy.
|
|
|
Post by The Dark Order Inferno on Jun 1, 2013 8:58:46 GMT -5
Really? Things that will improve the overall product and help end some of the bad publicity that has plagued TNA over it's lifespan won't help TNA to grow? Even if the growth isn't immediate, it's still a better use of money than giving it to Hulk Hogan as he's brought nothing, no benefit at all in the years he's been there as every measure of success for a wrestling company is either down, or growing at the same rate it was before he arrived. At this point I genuinely believe that TNA could have gotten the same return on their investment had they put all the money that they've spent on Hogan and co in a trashcan in the middle of the ring an set it on fire. Well the ones that would help TNA would probably be better advertising for live events (But they already advertise them on TV) Production Values and Music Videos aren't going to change much people don't tune in or buy a ticket for that. Workers medical expenses, again. Nobody outside the internet cares that TNA doesn't pay X amount of dollars for someones medical expenses it doesn't help them draw. Scott Da'More and the TNA Knockouts Division won't draw money and TNA already has a show for international markets called Xplosion which is pretty quality. TNA needs big names. If you take away Hogan your top guy is Sting who is popular within wrestling but not a part of popular culture like Hoggan is. Hulk is a legitimate celebrity and people are paying to see the guy. Look at the merchandise sales, look at how many people go crazy when Hulk comes out, look at the money he does at fan fests for TNA. Whether people want to admit it or not Hulk is good for TNA financially. Some may find him boring on TV or feel he's on TV too much which is fine. Some may not want to see him wrestle which is fine but to say he's done absolutely nothing for TNA is crazy. TNA with Sting and Kurt Angle as their top guys was doing better than TNA with Hulk Hogan on top, ratings were better and PPV buyrates were better, while not all of the contraction can be pinned on the arrival of the Hulkster, his presence has done nothing to stop it and attracting people to meet and greets, most of which feature other guys like Kurt Angle and knockouts, certainly isn't enough to pay what he's taking from the company. As for merch sales, that would explain why impact crowds are a sea of red and yellow, except when they aren't, which is most of the time. Currently, Hogan has what, 17 bits of merch on ShopTNA right now, compared to 27 for sting, and 56 for Jeff Hardy... Take from that what you will.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2013 8:59:28 GMT -5
Also, think about this- Hogan is associated with a very out dated time in wrestling. His whole schtick may appeal to a few old school fans, but he won't grow any new viewers who will actually stick around.
They need some more current and TV friendly to be the figure head for the company. Any potential new wrestling fan will see this old bizarre looking guy repping the company and probably be put off.
|
|
kidkamikaze10
Dennis Stamp
Trying to think of a new avatar
Posts: 4,275
|
Post by kidkamikaze10 on Jun 1, 2013 10:16:41 GMT -5
Frankly, any chance TNA had of being a true alternative, something new and different, instead of mining the past, died when Hogan and Bischoff came in.
To their credit, I do think guys like Hogan and Hardy helped TNA out when it came to getting the company's name out there. Advertisements, international deals, merchandise, whatever. I just think what they lost is far more important.
They could have filled an entirely different void than the one they fill now. Right now, they fill the nostalgia, "back in my day" void (and not that well, I might add). They could have been something different. Something more than that. And though I'm sure business is doing fine, I do think the brand, or at least it's rep, was permanently damaged for it.
|
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,057
Member is Online
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Jun 1, 2013 12:13:24 GMT -5
Really? Things that will improve the overall product and help end some of the bad publicity that has plagued TNA over it's lifespan won't help TNA to grow? Even if the growth isn't immediate, it's still a better use of money than giving it to Hulk Hogan as he's brought nothing, no benefit at all in the years he's been there as every measure of success for a wrestling company is either down, or growing at the same rate it was before he arrived. At this point I genuinely believe that TNA could have gotten the same return on their investment had they put all the money that they've spent on Hogan and co in a trashcan in the middle of the ring an set it on fire. Well the ones that would help TNA would probably be better advertising for live events (But they already advertise them on TV) Production Values and Music Videos aren't going to change much people don't tune in or buy a ticket for that. Workers medical expenses, again. Nobody outside the internet cares that TNA doesn't pay X amount of dollars for someones medical expenses it doesn't help them draw. Scott Da'More and the TNA Knockouts Division won't draw money and TNA already has a show for international markets called Xplosion which is pretty quality. TNA needs big names. If you take away Hogan your top guy is Sting who is popular within wrestling but not a part of popular culture like Hoggan is. Hulk is a legitimate celebrity and people are paying to see the guy. Look at the merchandise sales, look at how many people go crazy when Hulk comes out, look at the money he does at fan fests for TNA. Whether people want to admit it or not Hulk is good for TNA financially. Some may find him boring on TV or feel he's on TV too much which is fine. Some may not want to see him wrestle which is fine but to say he's done absolutely nothing for TNA is crazy. Improved production and music would make them seem more professional, closer to the level of WWE. It's indirect but makes a difference. If WWE got rid of the Tron and went back to the 1993 style neon doorway the product would look smaller and cheaper. No one outside the IWC notices the lack of medical bills? How about sponsors? More people may be willing to give them money if they weren't getting bad press for short changing injured people, money that can go towards improving the product. The Knockouts, when it was about Kong/Kim, drew the highest ratings week in week out, so yes, with some effort, they can draw. TNA has big names, it's not doing them any good, who else could they hire that would be bigger? Rock? Austin? Cena? You keep talking about how Hogan's a big name, well, if he's so big he'd be growing the audience. They need to focus on the product and the booking, and make stars. Hogan is big because he was made into a star. In 1985, Vince didn't have Bruno Sammartino calling the shots and taking up this much TV time, he pushed him into the background and had Hogan shine. He was the new big thing, Austin became big in the late 90s because he was the new, cool thing, Hogan got a resurgence because him as a heel was the new, cool thing. They need something new that people will connect with and run with it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2013 14:25:35 GMT -5
Hulk has added some level of name value to TNA, but even with that a lot of the shine is off of Hulk's mainstream recognition and ability to draw in viewers. As Hulk's fanbase gets older they naturally drift away from wrestling as they get caught up in their own lives, careers, and families. Sure a lot of younger fans know of his exploits both in WWF and WCW, but they don't have that connection with him for the most part that his original fanbase did.
Eric has brought with him improvements in the production department and things of that nature but his days as a creative force in wrestling have passed. To this day he is the only guy to give Vince a run for his money, but he's not at that level anymore(neither is Vince but that's for another thread).
So, yes, while they have added things to TNA I don't think that their pay can justify what they've brought to the table. I have no idea what they're getting paid, but I doubt that the biggest star in wrestling history and his friend that almost beat Vince work for cheap.
I actually think that both could add something to the broadcasts though. Bischoff would be great as a manager of a stable(not a group trying to take over the promotion-but as a Heenan Family type stable) doing the talking for guys that aren't that great on the mic. Dude is so smarmy that he would be great as a heel manager in that role.
I think that Hogan as an authority figure is okay but he really should just be there to pop the crowd and not really be involved in storylines unless he needs to make a ruling every so often.
I even think that Brooke Hogan could add something if she would seriously learn to wrestle. She is huge and would be decent in the KOs division as a monster KO.
I do think that TNA should be focusing on creating new stars however, that's how you make money in wrestling giving fans something new that they haven't seen before that's where all of the boom periods start with that simple concept.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,295
|
Post by The Ichi on Jun 1, 2013 14:44:06 GMT -5
I actually think people tend to exagerate Hogans name value these days. Not saying he's not still popular, but I imagine for the most part that if Hogan fans wanted to see Hogan, they'd just watch old footage from when he was actually in his prime.
I mean, I could see the ocassional fan who thinks to themselves "Hogan is still around? I gotta see this", but are people seriously tuning in week in, week out to see a crippled Hogan who can only throw a couple of punches and spends most of his time behind a desk now? The ratings say no.
|
|