|
Post by Vice honcho room temperature on Dec 28, 2014 19:49:22 GMT -5
Hogan vs Flair already had as much hype as it was going to have. The only argument I'd think about is that you could do great numbers with Hogan vs. anyone as a first match so you can hold off his match vs Flair after the first match glow. Either way sometimes delaying the inevitable just ends up with the same number and same hype.
|
|
|
Post by lildude8218 on Dec 29, 2014 2:51:33 GMT -5
comparing Hogan/Flair to Joe/Angle is like comparing ice cream to horse manure
|
|
Boo!
Dennis Stamp
Posts: 4,417
|
Post by Boo! on Dec 29, 2014 3:00:08 GMT -5
Just watched it (thanks network!) It was pretty fun and hyped as hell, but man did Austin/Steamboat blew it out of the water. How WCW didn't see money in Steve Austin is baffling. Not really as great work-rate and great matches never made him a huge draw. What made him the superstar was the anti-authority, redneck gimmick, which had no relation to his technical wrestling ability. Indeed his popularity coincided with a much altered brawling in-ring style. So it's unfair on WCW to say how they didn't see money in Austin. Push THAT Austin to the top without the Stone Cold persona and it wouldn't have been money at all. You could take any guy from any promotion over the years, switch companies, give him a new gimmick that was over like alcohol at a frat party and then ask "Why didn't the first company see the money they could make with him?". Austin left and got given a fantastic gimmick and made it work brilliantly. The fact that 5 years before he was having great matches on the undercard isn't relevant. If having great matches meant it was logical you'd go on to become huge draw the industry would look very different to what it does. When listing the main attributes of Austin and Hogan for their peak WWF runs, with Hogan work-rate wouldn't be on the list at all and with Austin I'd be very surprised if it was anywhere near the top of the list if people answered honestly and would be behind: look, attitude, gimmick, promos etc.
|
|
Cranjis McBasketball
Crow T. Robot
Knew what the hell that thing was supposed to be
Peace Love and Nothing But
Posts: 41,905
Member is Online
|
Post by Cranjis McBasketball on Dec 29, 2014 6:33:39 GMT -5
I was 9 when this match would have occurred had it happened at Mania 8. I can't speak to the crossover appeal. I mean, I knew who Flair was, my folks didn't like wrestling, so wrestling was wrestling so I'd see WCW/NWA or just get Apter mags. I knew Flair, I knew the belt he had.....but Hulk Hogan. I'm glad the match never happened, because I don't think the endless bitching about how Hogan killed Flair's run and blah blah blah would be worth it.
It's how I feel when people insist Mania 4 should have had a Steamboat vs. Savage rematch in the tournament. Can you imagine the endless bitching when Savage goes over in 5 minutes in a face vs. face match???
"The horror....the horror".......
|
|
auph10imitated
Dennis Stamp
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 4,951
|
Post by auph10imitated on Dec 29, 2014 7:12:13 GMT -5
Macho vs Flair is one of my all time favs so I am much happier with the PPV how it was, in fact I was routing for Macho at the WM press conference and was as pissed as Sid Justice when Hogans name was called. BOGUS!!! In terms of why they didnt do it, I dont believe the theory of it not drawing at House Shows, because WM was selling its self, it could have drawn shit at house shows but the PPV still would have done a great gate, simple as and besides I bet a Justice/Hogan house show run wouldnt have fared any better so it disproves the theory. Like already said I believe Justice was promised the main event when he arrived, the conference and the swapping of the matches was just all part of the (clever) storylining. Its like people who believe Bret dropped the belt to Mountie because he was he was in negotiantions with WCW, bullshit, dropping it was always the plan to set up Bret vs Piper again it was very clever story telling rather than conspiracies theories and "changes" being made. I think Hogan/Sid, Macho/Flair, Bret/Piper were all probably in the pipeline way back in Nov/Dec 1991 because everything just slid perfectly into place. Including Jake/Taker. I do love seeing that rare match graphic though, anyone recall how many times this was used? Was it just the one week?
|
|
Magnus the Magnificent
King Koopa
didn't want one.
I could write a book about what you don't know!
Posts: 12,455
|
Post by Magnus the Magnificent on Dec 29, 2014 7:23:32 GMT -5
The only thing I would change about it is that Hogan throws Flair over the top rope, causing a DQ, because "Hogan was new in WCW and din't knew the rules". Then have Hogan go over in the rematch, presumably to an even higher gate/buyrate.
|
|
auph10imitated
Dennis Stamp
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 4,951
|
Post by auph10imitated on Dec 29, 2014 8:33:55 GMT -5
I didnt understand the point of Hogan winning the belt so fast. Surely the chase would have built a better buyrate for further PPV's
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2014 10:47:33 GMT -5
Was it considered as big of a deal then as it would have been at WrestleMania VIII? I mean did Bash at the Beach have a big level of hype or was it meaningless because it was early 90s WCW and not WRESTLEMANIA and WWF? I would think asking this question probably provides the answer without a single reply. I recall it being a big deal at the time.... ........but 20 years later a wrestling fan is still asking it, and another fan who's been watching since 1989 is having a tough time remembering much about it other than "I recall it being a big deal at the time."
|
|
auph10imitated
Dennis Stamp
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 4,951
|
Post by auph10imitated on Dec 29, 2014 17:17:41 GMT -5
They made a big deal of it, but honestly WCW, ECW and TNA could never make a bigger deal of a match than WWE can with a top Wrestlemania match. Doesn't matter which PPV those companies called thier "WM" it just never felt as big as the Wrestlemania to me
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 29, 2014 20:09:03 GMT -5
Boo! is completely right about Austin. Austin became a huge star just as much in spite of Vince as he did WCW. It's true that Austin was screwed when they jobbed him to Duggan, but other than that he had a brilliant run in WCW. It's purely a myth that Vince did these brilliant things and made Austin a star. Austin had pretty much the worst gimmick of his career when he started in WWE, but to his credit he got over in spite of it. Vince just rode what Austin was doing to the bank and cashed in. I'm currently watching WCW '94 and I am pleasantly surprised by how good they did with Hogan-Flair. I had seen it before, but never paid as close of attention. They did a remarkable job capitalizing on a dream match whose shelf life had all but expired and made it into a very entertaining rivalry. Their BATB and COTC rematch were things of beauty. I'm looking forward to seeing if the quality holds up for their Halloween Havoc match.
|
|
|
Post by berlynwright on Dec 30, 2014 5:34:03 GMT -5
the cage match was even better. if i recall correctly it was the only Hogan match to get 4+ stars in Observer
|
|
|
Post by Oh Cry Me a Screwball on Dec 30, 2014 5:51:13 GMT -5
I didnt understand the point of Hogan winning the belt so fast. Surely the chase would have built a better buyrate for further PPV's The known formula for Hogan's success at the time had always been giving the guy the belt and letting him have it for long periods of time. The idea of a face chasing the belt works better when you have an underdog type. Hogan was more of a rock the company could lean for extended periods of time.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2014 9:22:52 GMT -5
I didnt understand the point of Hogan winning the belt so fast. Surely the chase would have built a better buyrate for further PPV's The known formula for Hogan's success at the time had always been giving the guy the belt and letting him have it for long periods of time. The idea of a face chasing the belt works better when you have an underdog type. Hogan was more of a rock the company could lean for extended periods of time. Hogan was really bigger than the belt in either company. They could either give him the belt or put him in a feud with someone that was not over a belt and it would work fine, but if you were wanting Hogan to be the top guy (which he was, whether the promoter wanted him to be or not), it just made sense to give him the belt. He just didn't work as a title chaser, whereas a guy like Sting was ALWAYS better as the chaser because he didn't quite have what was needed to carry the company.
|
|
efarns
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,273
|
Post by efarns on Dec 30, 2014 13:25:32 GMT -5
The known formula for Hogan's success at the time had always been giving the guy the belt and letting him have it for long periods of time. The idea of a face chasing the belt works better when you have an underdog type. Hogan was more of a rock the company could lean for extended periods of time. Hogan was really bigger than the belt in either company. They could either give him the belt or put him in a feud with someone that was not over a belt and it would work fine, but if you were wanting Hogan to be the top guy (which he was, whether the promoter wanted him to be or not), it just made sense to give him the belt. He just didn't work as a title chaser, whereas a guy like Sting was ALWAYS better as the chaser because he didn't quite have what was needed to carry the company. In NWA/WCW, the archetypical storyline was always Ric Flair cheating stronger opponents out of the title belt. Having Hulk Hogan come in and just rehash the same old thing would have defeated the purpose of signing Hulk Hogan. Having Hogan go over Flair clean in the first try was a fresh direction for the company.
|
|
auph10imitated
Dennis Stamp
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 4,951
|
Post by auph10imitated on Dec 30, 2014 17:36:18 GMT -5
I guess put that way it makes sense but they could have got a rematch out of it with Hogan winning 2nd time round. Then again I think the opposite of Luger and Yoko in 93 so yeah..
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Dec 30, 2014 19:12:42 GMT -5
I still think WCW could have had their cake and eaten it too. They had two main belts at that point capable of main eventing a PPV, so it was feasible to have Hogan debut and take the International World title while Flair continued on as WCW champion.
The build was pretty decent but in the long run Hogan coming to WCW was really the death knell of the company for so many reasons. The product had turned around considerably in the first half of 1994 and Hogan bringing in his cronies just killed the overall nature of WCW. WCW ceased being a legit alternative to the WWF and became this ultra campy retread of 1980s WWF. It didn't help that during the course of 1994 WCW lost Rude to a career ending injury, Steamboat as well to injury, Foley left, and they buried guys like Austin and Pillman. I sorta wonder if they jobbed Austin so hard to Duggan because they blamed him for ending Steamboat's career.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 30, 2014 19:28:26 GMT -5
I still think WCW could have had their cake and eaten it too. They had two main belts at that point capable of main eventing a PPV, so it was feasible to have Hogan debut and take the International World title while Flair continued on as WCW champion. The build was pretty decent but in the long run Hogan coming to WCW was really the death knell of the company for so many reasons. The product had turned around considerably in the first half of 1994 and Hogan bringing in his cronies just killed the overall nature of WCW. WCW ceased being a legit alternative to the WWF and became this ultra campy retread of 1980s WWF. It didn't help that during the course of 1994 WCW lost Rude to a career ending injury, Steamboat as well to injury, Foley left, and they buried guys like Austin and Pillman. I sorta wonder if they jobbed Austin so hard to Duggan because they blamed him for ending Steamboat's career. I don't see that they "buried" Austin or Pillman. Jobbing Austin to Duggan was unfortunate, but it wasn't a burial by any stretch. When seeing that, I couldn't help but think of how Warrior surprised HTM and beat him within seconds. I think WCW was going for the same thing. It wasn't to say that Austin was inferior to Duggan, but it was played out that Duggan caught Austin so off guard that he couldn't do anything but go down. Hogan coming to WCW was far from its death knell. You could argue that his entourage made it a cheesy product for a few years, but on the other side of that was the greatest period of success for the company. Years before the end, none of the entourage he brought with him in '94/'95 were even around or relevant anymore.
|
|
efarns
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,273
|
Post by efarns on Dec 31, 2014 9:24:36 GMT -5
Hogan's arrival changed the company, but I'd hardly call it a death knell. They went on to unparalleled heights with Hogan at the top of the card.
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Dec 31, 2014 10:26:48 GMT -5
In the long run it was a bad thing for the company. WCW drew for a while but over time Hogan's backstage politics and the NWO refusing to ever die wrecked the company. Say what you will, but if Hogan doesn't go there I think WCW would be around today, even as a non Turner property.
As far as Austin goes, the guy was totally buried by the end of 1994. The guy started the year as US champ and potential future world champ and by Starrcade wasn't even on PPVs. Pillman's depush started pre Hogan though and he drifted aimlessly until joining the Horsemen.
|
|
efarns
Don Corleone
Posts: 1,273
|
Post by efarns on Dec 31, 2014 11:02:19 GMT -5
The death knell was the purchase by AOL/Time-Warner. They didn't want wrestling.
|
|