|
Post by poi zen rana on Oct 13, 2009 8:17:58 GMT -5
Of course attracting mainstream attention and more fans to the product is causing an impact in terms of the history of the business. This is why the household name argument holds water as Flair, as much as I think he did have a huge influence on the business, never had that impact on the mainstream. No the household name argument does not hold water. I harper on this in the Hogan thread after seeing various posts stating that more random people off the street know who Hogan was. What you just did was explain why drawing fans in is important. I agree with that. I would be quite foolish to deny bringing in fans was important. However once they become fans they are no longer outside of wrestling are they? This is why those people were not the ones I was speaking of. When I said the being known outside of wrestling argument was bunk I was not counting new fans being brought in as "outside of wrestling". The ones I was talking about with that comment are those that are not fans. Let's put it this way. I know zero about football. I do know who pacman Jones is though because of his time with TNA. Does this simple fact of me knowing who he is a matter of importance to the NFL? No because even if there were a million like me and we all knew who Pacman was we wouldn't watch NFL because we aren't in to it. Again to avoid confusion, the things you are talking about bringing in new fans and things like that are good and factor in. Being known by non wrestling fans who are not brought in as fans is worthless to wrestling. One of the first "well he is know outside of wrestling" comments I read said "if you ask a random person on the street who Flair is they wouldn't know but they would know Hogan". This is of little consequences when discussing importance to the wrestling business because if that random guy on the street knows who Hogan is and still isn't a wrestling fan then Hulk's fame did nothing to bring that person in so it doesn't matter.
|
|
|
Post by wasimperviz on Oct 13, 2009 9:05:26 GMT -5
No matter what everyone says I think the poll speaks for itself and Austin is leading by 70%
|
|
|
Post by Ultimo Chocula on Oct 13, 2009 11:58:53 GMT -5
Overwhelming majority doesn't mean that everybody's right, I'm afraid.
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Oct 13, 2009 12:04:46 GMT -5
No matter what everyone says I think the poll speaks for itself and Austin is leading by 70% Yip absolutely. What's funny is the Austin side (such as myself and many others) have already said (and wrote a huge list) why Austin was more important to the business than Flair. Flair fans have not said much for vice versa. They have simply dismissed logic and solid arguments and put their own personal opinion ion why they think that Austin was not that important to business and simply not saying much more than 'and Flair was'. We have gave evidence as to why Austin (and the other poll Hogan) was more important to wrestling than Flair (and I wrote a last post with well documented evidance to how important Austin was compared to Flair). However the Flair fans have done nothing more than dismiss and try to play down Austin 9and Hogan) rather than build up and put forward a solid case for Flair. Flair was important to wrestling but he was not as important as 'smarks like to think' which is ultimately what this 9and the Hogan poll0 have proved. Austin (and Hogan) are head and shoulders far and away more important than Flair.
|
|
|
Post by "Playboy" Don Douglas on Oct 13, 2009 12:26:57 GMT -5
Yip absolutely. What's funny is the Austin side (such as myself and many others) have already said (and wrote a huge list) why Austin was more important to the business than Flair. Flair fans have not said much for vice versa. They have simply dismissed logic and solid arguments and put their own personal opinion ion why they think that Austin was not that important to business and simply not saying much more than 'and Flair was'. We have gave evidence as to why Austin (and the other poll Hogan) was more important to wrestling than Flair (and I wrote a last post with well documented evidance to how important Austin was compared to Flair). However the Flair fans have done nothing more than dismiss and try to play down Austin 9and Hogan) rather than build up and put forward a solid case for Flair. Flair was important to wrestling but he was not as important as 'smarks like to think' which is ultimately what this 9and the Hogan poll0 have proved. Austin (and Hogan) are head and shoulders far and away more important than Flair. I've stopped posting in all of these "Flair or" threads because no one paid any attention to what I said anyway. Which has led me to write most of it off as part of the ongoing trend on wrestling sites to downplay Flair . I'm sure several people WILL pay attention to that line and dismiss it and call me a bitter old mark or something. Doesn't matter, I won't see it. I'm done with all of these.
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Oct 13, 2009 12:50:06 GMT -5
It is not that those saying Flair have no argument to make it is that it falls on deaf ears. I mostly post here from work on my phone so it is tough for me to cruise links on careers and historys and link to them and so on and so forth. So what I have been doing is trying to show some flaws in logic from the anti-Flair side hoping to cause some debate to arise but usually my posts just go unresponded to and people continue to make the same arguments that I has stated I find flawed without providing their view as to why those flaws I find are unfounded. I just get aggravated by these threads, especially this one.
This is a no brainer Flair was more important. Look at all the big names he worked with early on that went on to become huge. Look at the often imitated Four Horsemen. Look at the stars he helped legitamize. Look at the fact that he wrestled far longer than Austin. Austin was huge but how could he have possibly done more in his few years than all of Flair's years combined?
|
|
|
Post by Ultimo Chocula on Oct 13, 2009 13:10:40 GMT -5
No matter what everyone says I think the poll speaks for itself and Austin is leading by 70% Yip absolutely. What's funny is the Austin side (such as myself and many others) have already said (and wrote a huge list) why Austin was more important to the business than Flair. Flair fans have not said much for vice versa. They have simply dismissed logic and solid arguments and put their own personal opinion ion why they think that Austin was not that important to business and simply not saying much more than 'and Flair was'. We have gave evidence as to why Austin (and the other poll Hogan) was more important to wrestling than Flair (and I wrote a last post with well documented evidance to how important Austin was compared to Flair). However the Flair fans have done nothing more than dismiss and try to play down Austin 9and Hogan) rather than build up and put forward a solid case for Flair. Flair was important to wrestling but he was not as important as 'smarks like to think' which is ultimately what this 9and the Hogan poll0 have proved. Austin (and Hogan) are head and shoulders far and away more important than Flair. Ok, Satchmo. I'll play your game. First and foremost above everything else, Ric Flair is a wrestler. Pure and simple. Steve Austin (at least SCSA version) was a sports entertainer. Let's just get that out of the way. But right, what's so great about Flair? Here we go. Flair put over the business. Period. Watch his old promos and take a good hard listen. In between the Whoooo!s and Space Mountains there was a phrase he said a lot during his promos that people rarely comment on. "This great sport of ours". When he talked he made wrestling sound like the biggest thing on the planet. And not just that, he made his opponents seem like they were heavy stuff. He made Dusty, Magnum, Wahoo, sound like legit threats just by talking. Sure he would add "but you're no Ric Flair", but that just adds to it. Why does he do this? So the big match at Starcade looks even bigger. Why would anyone care if Flair was facing some schmuck? Flair knew how to put over his opponents, the event, the business, and still come off being "Slick Ric". Which brings me to promos themselves. Flair knew how to talk. And it wasn't just the same catchphrases over and over. You wanted a guy to act crazy? Flair did that. Need someone to be cocky as hell? Flair could do that too. He could also come off screaming pissed, cowardly, or any or thing you needed. Hell, there was a promo where he was being interviewed inside his house and he was polite, cordial, and referred to the cameraman by his first name and he STILL came off as an arrogant douche. Must every body else has one note. Loud. Flair was multi dimensional. But let's go back for a second and talk about how he made his opponents look good in the ring. How many people did he make look legit just by having a match with them? Countless. Before the very first Clash Of The Champions Sting was just a guy with face paint and a ton of charisma. After going to a 45 minute draw with Flair he was main event. One match did that. I know this because I watched it happen live. It was huge. And he did this seemingly every six months. Hell, I'll bet you thousand dollars he helped make a young punk named Stunning Steve look legit. Then of course the matches themselves. I'll just say there's a reason why the phrase "Flair/Steamboat" is shorthand for five star matches. Everything I just said had to do with the actual art of pro wrestling. Not selling T shirts. Selling tickets. Flair did that. And he did it during the territorial days that, no matter how you slice it, is a far different beast than going national. Believe me, as an 11 year old boy from Portland Oregon, as far from Flair country as you can get geographically, socially, and politically, you still knew who Ric Flair was. That name carried weight even if the WWF was the big kahuna in the wrestling biz. Ric Flair was still a big, big deal. And he did all of this over consistently over the course of decades. After he broke his back in an airplane crash. Did Flair stick around too long? Yes he did. Just like every other pro wrestler who sniffed the big time. That doesn't make him any different. Austin stuck around too long too, or did everybody forget about the "What?" phase of his career? The difference is that Flair, once again, put guys over to build up new stars so the company would have something to build on. How many people did Austin put over before he left? Zero. Flair has his faults, who doesn't, but just because he wasn't a part of the WWF during the biggest periods in the industry does not mean he wasn't important. To say that Austin was more important because he was the main attraction during a time that's best left viewed through rose colored glasses is naive and short sighted (have you seriously gone back and watched some of that stuff? It's embarrassing.) Austin was a flash of light, Flair was the torch. That's the difference.
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Oct 13, 2009 13:38:12 GMT -5
Yip absolutely. What's funny is the Austin side (such as myself and many others) have already said (and wrote a huge list) why Austin was more important to the business than Flair. Flair fans have not said much for vice versa. They have simply dismissed logic and solid arguments and put their own personal opinion ion why they think that Austin was not that important to business and simply not saying much more than 'and Flair was'. We have gave evidence as to why Austin (and the other poll Hogan) was more important to wrestling than Flair (and I wrote a last post with well documented evidance to how important Austin was compared to Flair). However the Flair fans have done nothing more than dismiss and try to play down Austin 9and Hogan) rather than build up and put forward a solid case for Flair. Flair was important to wrestling but he was not as important as 'smarks like to think' which is ultimately what this 9and the Hogan poll0 have proved. Austin (and Hogan) are head and shoulders far and away more important than Flair. Ok, Satchmo. I'll play your game. First and foremost above everything else, Ric Flair is a wrestler. Pure and simple. Steve Austin (at least SCSA version) was a sports entertainer. Let's just get that out of the way. But right, what's so great about Flair? Here we go. Flair put over the business. Period. Watch his old promos and take a good hard listen. In between the Whoooo!s and Space Mountains there was a phrase he said a lot during his promos that people rarely comment on. "This great sport of ours". When he talked he made wrestling sound like the biggest thing on the planet. And not just that, he made his opponents seem like they were heavy stuff. He made Dusty, Magnum, Wahoo, sound like legit threats just by talking. Sure he would add "but you're no Ric Flair", but that just adds to it. Why does he do this? So the big match at Starcade looks even bigger. Why would anyone care if Flair was facing some schmuck? Flair knew how to put over his opponents, the event, the business, and still come off being "Slick Ric". Which brings me to promos themselves. Flair knew how to talk. And it wasn't just the same catchphrases over and over. You wanted a guy to act crazy? Flair did that. Need someone to be cocky as hell? Flair could do that too. He could also come off screaming pissed, cowardly, or any or thing you needed. Hell, there was a promo where he was being interviewed inside his house and he was polite, cordial, and referred to the cameraman by his first name and he STILL came off as an arrogant douche. Must every body else has one note. Loud. Flair was multi dimensional. But let's go back for a second and talk about how he made his opponents look good in the ring. How many people did he make look legit just by having a match with them? Countless. Before the very first Clash Of The Champions Sting was just a guy with face paint and a ton of charisma. After going to a 45 minute draw with Flair he was main event. One match did that. I know this because I watched it happen live. It was huge. And he did this seemingly every six months. Hell, I'll bet you thousand dollars he helped make a young punk named Stunning Steve look legit. Then of course the matches themselves. I'll just say there's a reason why the phrase "Flair/Steamboat" is shorthand for five star matches. Everything I just said had to do with the actual art of pro wrestling. Not selling T shirts. Selling tickets. Flair did that. And he did it during the territorial days that, no matter how you slice it, is a far different beast than going national. Believe me, as an 11 year old boy from Portland Oregon, as far from Flair country as you can get geographically, socially, and politically, you still knew who Ric Flair was. That name carried weight even if the WWF was the big kahuna in the wrestling biz. Ric Flair was still a big, big deal. And he did all of this over consistently over the course of decades. After he broke his back in an airplane crash. Did Flair stick around too long? Yes he did. Just like every other pro wrestler who sniffed the big time. That doesn't make him any different. Austin stuck around too long too, or did everybody forget about the "What?" phase of his career? The difference is that Flair, once again, put guys over to build up new stars so the company would have something to build on. How many people did Austin put over before he left? Zero. Flair has his faults, who doesn't, but just because he wasn't a part of the WWF during the biggest periods in the industry does not mean he wasn't important. To say that Austin was more important because he was the main attraction during a time that's best left viewed through rose colored glasses is naive and short sighted (have you seriously gone back and watched some of that stuff? It's embarrassing.) Austin was a flash of light, Flair was the torch. That's the difference. To answer your first question. Yes I have went back and watched many of the Austin story lines.l The Attitude Era does not hold up today when watched back like it did at the time. The 80;s were the best time in wrestling and do hold up. Most of the attitude era was based on shock value which when the storyline is over and the shock is reviled the storyline loses it's watching back value. However I stil;l stick by my point and I made a more legit point as to why Austin is more important to the history of pro wrestling than Flair (saving WWF in 1997 with his Austin 3.16 run). You have made a few great point as to why Fl;air was a great wrestler and entertainer. However the question was not who was the greater wrestler it was who was more important to wrestling and it was Austin. Without Austin there would be no WWE now and no Monday Night Wars. Also you say Austin put over no one. He put over Triple H and helped establish him as a main player who then establish two of this decades top stars (Orton and Batista). A good case can be made for Flair but Austin is far more important to the history of pro wrestling Also this thread could go on forever based on peoples personal tastes and opinions. Don;t make any one right or wrong really. Just different opinion.
|
|
|
Post by JerryvonKramer on Oct 13, 2009 13:43:21 GMT -5
Ok, Satchmo. I'll play your game. First and foremost above everything else, Ric Flair is a wrestler. Pure and simple. Steve Austin (at least SCSA version) was a sports entertainer. Let's just get that out of the way. But right, what's so great about Flair? Here we go. Flair put over the business. Period. Watch his old promos and take a good hard listen. In between the Whoooo!s and Space Mountains there was a phrase he said a lot during his promos that people rarely comment on. "This great sport of ours". When he talked he made wrestling sound like the biggest thing on the planet. And not just that, he made his opponents seem like they were heavy stuff. He made Dusty, Magnum, Wahoo, sound like legit threats just by talking. Sure he would add "but you're no Ric Flair", but that just adds to it. Why does he do this? So the big match at Starcade looks even bigger. Why would anyone care if Flair was facing some schmuck? Flair knew how to put over his opponents, the event, the business, and still come off being "Slick Ric". Which brings me to promos themselves. Flair knew how to talk. And it wasn't just the same catchphrases over and over. You wanted a guy to act crazy? Flair did that. Need someone to be cocky as hell? Flair could do that too. He could also come off screaming pissed, cowardly, or any or thing you needed. Hell, there was a promo where he was being interviewed inside his house and he was polite, cordial, and referred to the cameraman by his first name and he STILL came off as an arrogant douche. Must every body else has one note. Loud. Flair was multi dimensional. But let's go back for a second and talk about how he made his opponents look good in the ring. How many people did he make look legit just by having a match with them? Countless. Before the very first Clash Of The Champions Sting was just a guy with face paint and a ton of charisma. After going to a 45 minute draw with Flair he was main event. One match did that. I know this because I watched it happen live. It was huge. And he did this seemingly every six months. Hell, I'll bet you thousand dollars he helped make a young punk named Stunning Steve look legit. Then of course the matches themselves. I'll just say there's a reason why the phrase "Flair/Steamboat" is shorthand for five star matches. Everything I just said had to do with the actual art of pro wrestling. Not selling T shirts. Selling tickets. Flair did that. And he did it during the territorial days that, no matter how you slice it, is a far different beast than going national. Believe me, as an 11 year old boy from Portland Oregon, as far from Flair country as you can get geographically, socially, and politically, you still knew who Ric Flair was. That name carried weight even if the WWF was the big kahuna in the wrestling biz. Ric Flair was still a big, big deal. And he did all of this over consistently over the course of decades. After he broke his back in an airplane crash. Did Flair stick around too long? Yes he did. Just like every other pro wrestler who sniffed the big time. That doesn't make him any different. Austin stuck around too long too, or did everybody forget about the "What?" phase of his career? The difference is that Flair, once again, put guys over to build up new stars so the company would have something to build on. How many people did Austin put over before he left? Zero. Flair has his faults, who doesn't, but just because he wasn't a part of the WWF during the biggest periods in the industry does not mean he wasn't important. To say that Austin was more important because he was the main attraction during a time that's best left viewed through rose colored glasses is naive and short sighted (have you seriously gone back and watched some of that stuff? It's embarrassing.) Austin was a flash of light, Flair was the torch. That's the difference. Amen to this. And I'll just say: take Austin out of the history of pro-wrestling and what do you lose? One feud and some t-shirt sales. Take Flair out of the history of pro-wrestling and you'll be left with more holes than a block of swiss cheese. The people who are voting for Austin are essentially saying that the 3 short years of the Attitude era were more important than the entire history of the NWA. It's an attitude to which I have no sympathy at all because it is not only borne of a lack of knowledge, but also a lack of respect.
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Oct 13, 2009 13:47:32 GMT -5
Ok, Satchmo. I'll play your game. First and foremost above everything else, Ric Flair is a wrestler. Pure and simple. Steve Austin (at least SCSA version) was a sports entertainer. Let's just get that out of the way. But right, what's so great about Flair? Here we go. Flair put over the business. Period. Watch his old promos and take a good hard listen. In between the Whoooo!s and Space Mountains there was a phrase he said a lot during his promos that people rarely comment on. "This great sport of ours". When he talked he made wrestling sound like the biggest thing on the planet. And not just that, he made his opponents seem like they were heavy stuff. He made Dusty, Magnum, Wahoo, sound like legit threats just by talking. Sure he would add "but you're no Ric Flair", but that just adds to it. Why does he do this? So the big match at Starcade looks even bigger. Why would anyone care if Flair was facing some schmuck? Flair knew how to put over his opponents, the event, the business, and still come off being "Slick Ric". Which brings me to promos themselves. Flair knew how to talk. And it wasn't just the same catchphrases over and over. You wanted a guy to act crazy? Flair did that. Need someone to be cocky as hell? Flair could do that too. He could also come off screaming pissed, cowardly, or any or thing you needed. Hell, there was a promo where he was being interviewed inside his house and he was polite, cordial, and referred to the cameraman by his first name and he STILL came off as an arrogant douche. Must every body else has one note. Loud. Flair was multi dimensional. But let's go back for a second and talk about how he made his opponents look good in the ring. How many people did he make look legit just by having a match with them? Countless. Before the very first Clash Of The Champions Sting was just a guy with face paint and a ton of charisma. After going to a 45 minute draw with Flair he was main event. One match did that. I know this because I watched it happen live. It was huge. And he did this seemingly every six months. Hell, I'll bet you thousand dollars he helped make a young punk named Stunning Steve look legit. Then of course the matches themselves. I'll just say there's a reason why the phrase "Flair/Steamboat" is shorthand for five star matches. Everything I just said had to do with the actual art of pro wrestling. Not selling T shirts. Selling tickets. Flair did that. And he did it during the territorial days that, no matter how you slice it, is a far different beast than going national. Believe me, as an 11 year old boy from Portland Oregon, as far from Flair country as you can get geographically, socially, and politically, you still knew who Ric Flair was. That name carried weight even if the WWF was the big kahuna in the wrestling biz. Ric Flair was still a big, big deal. And he did all of this over consistently over the course of decades. After he broke his back in an airplane crash. Did Flair stick around too long? Yes he did. Just like every other pro wrestler who sniffed the big time. That doesn't make him any different. Austin stuck around too long too, or did everybody forget about the "What?" phase of his career? The difference is that Flair, once again, put guys over to build up new stars so the company would have something to build on. How many people did Austin put over before he left? Zero. Flair has his faults, who doesn't, but just because he wasn't a part of the WWF during the biggest periods in the industry does not mean he wasn't important. To say that Austin was more important because he was the main attraction during a time that's best left viewed through rose colored glasses is naive and short sighted (have you seriously gone back and watched some of that stuff? It's embarrassing.) Austin was a flash of light, Flair was the torch. That's the difference. Amen to this. And I'll just say: take Austin out of the history of pro-wrestling and what do you lose? One feud and some t-shirt sales. Take Flair out of the history of pro-wrestling and you'll be left with more holes than a block of swiss cheese. The people who are voting for Austin are essentially saying that the 3 short years of the Attitude era were more important than the entire history of the NWA. It's an attitude to which I have no sympathy at all because it is not only borne of a lack of knowledge, but also a lack of respect. Completely missing the point of why Austin came about and how important he was to WWF. Take Flair away and your not missing much. Take Austin away and WWF goes out of business in 1997. That;s the bottom line (no pun intended). On top of that Flair was never a big draw. If he was WCW would have had no reason to hire Hogan in 1994 to help them get above WCW in the ratings and they done that while pushing Flair to mid card. Again the results of this poll say it all with Austin way ahead.
|
|
|
Post by poi zen rana on Oct 13, 2009 13:59:54 GMT -5
quantum, just a reminder I am still waiting for you to convince me why WWE would have gone under without Austin and why this would be the end of American wrestling. I have seen you state it is fact multiple times but have yet to hear your reasoning for saying this. Please do enlighten us as I am not against this "fact" of yours but I still have not seen anything that would suggest it besides it being repeated over and over.
Also I dofindit funny that you credit Austin for making HHH and in turn credit HHH for making Batista and Orton. Wasn't there someone else in Evolution? Wasn't there someone else who helped establish Orton and Batista? I am thinking of an older gent, his name is on the tip of my tongue...
|
|
|
Post by Macho Dude Handy Damage on Oct 13, 2009 14:36:25 GMT -5
I'll say Austin, cause, well I've never been a big Flair fan. And again, it depends on what you want to focus on. Importance for the popularity of the business, good matches, feuds or technical ability....
|
|
|
Post by JerryvonKramer on Oct 13, 2009 15:21:03 GMT -5
Completely missing the point of why Austin came about and how important he was to WWF. Take Flair away and your not missing much. Take Austin away and WWF goes out of business in 1997. That;s the bottom line (no pun intended). On top of that Flair was never a big draw. If he was WCW would have had no reason to hire Hogan in 1994 to help them get above WCW in the ratings and they done that while pushing Flair to mid card. Again the results of this poll say it all with Austin way ahead. Oh, so keeping the NWA going pretty much as the only top draw for a decade so WCW was even possible counts for nothing I take it? If Flair was never a big draw, why did Vince not only bring him in in 1991 but give him one of the best title wins of all time (Rumble '92)? Why did he come in at the top of the card? Does wrestling history begin and end with the history of the WWF? And one thing more: Is it FAIR (to Flair ;D) that the pro-Austin people consistently highlight the parts of Ric's career when he wasn't on top? And then systematically ignore Austin's 5 years in WCW? Why is Flair to be judged on the last 16 years of his career rather than at his peak? The last 16 years are just a bonus. It's Maradonna at the 1994 World Cup, it's George Foreman coming back at 45. The legend was made 75-95, anything beyond that is just a bonus. Oh and the poll result SAYS NOTHING. If you ran this poll among pro wrestlers it'd be 99% Flair. Austin himself would vote Flair. HHH, Batista, Steamboat, DiBiase, whoever, they'd all vote Flair. The poll says nothing.
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Oct 13, 2009 15:42:07 GMT -5
quantum, just a reminder I am still waiting for you to convince me why WWE would have gone under without Austin and why this would be the end of American wrestling. I have seen you state it is fact multiple times but have yet to hear your reasoning for saying this. Please do enlighten us as I am not against this "fact" of yours but I still have not seen anything that would suggest it besides it being repeated over and over. Also I dofindit funny that you credit Austin for making HHH and in turn credit HHH for making Batista and Orton. Wasn't there someone else in Evolution? Wasn't there someone else who helped establish Orton and Batista? I am thinking of an older gent, his name is on the tip of my tongue... Do some research you'll find what I am saying is accurate (I think that's why you are mainly arguing against the fact of Austin saving WWF from going bankrupt it is a well know fact.) Ric Flair was a bit player in Evolution. Evolution would have worked without Flair but not HHH. HHH was booked as the leader of Evolution where as Flair was booked as pretty weak and made to job to the spirit squad.
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Oct 13, 2009 16:01:32 GMT -5
Completely missing the point of why Austin came about and how important he was to WWF. Take Flair away and your not missing much. Take Austin away and WWF goes out of business in 1997. That;s the bottom line (no pun intended). On top of that Flair was never a big draw. If he was WCW would have had no reason to hire Hogan in 1994 to help them get above WCW in the ratings and they done that while pushing Flair to mid card. Again the results of this poll say it all with Austin way ahead. Oh, so keeping the NWA going pretty much as the only top draw for a decade so WCW was even possible counts for nothing I take it? If Flair was never a big draw, why did Vince not only bring him in in 1991 but give him one of the best title wins of all time (Rumble '92)? Why did he come in at the top of the card? Does wrestling history begin and end with the history of the WWF? No the history of wrestling don;t begin and end with the WWF/E by any means or stretch of the margin However Flair was never heard of in the mainstream, he never brought any new fans in and any angles or storylines he was involved with was only attractive to the wrestling fans and fans of the NWA or Jim Crockett Promotions. Flair when he was WWF Champion did not draw to highly and he was a mid carder during the biggest boom of wrestling history (1990';s). Vince would have kept Flair for longer if he was a bigger draw (he would have happily stayed in WWF) and also if Flair was a big draw the WCW would not have needed Hogan to kick start the Monday Night Wars and the 90;s boom when Flair was in the mid card. Not many fans flocked to see Flair 9that;s why Bischoff kept him on the mid card) like they did Hogan or Austin Flair. Jim Crockett who's promotion went out of business can tell you that and Flair was supposed to be their 'Saviour' (like Austin and the WWF)
|
|
|
Post by stevieraymark on Oct 13, 2009 16:07:12 GMT -5
Judging by the standards in this thread, That would mean David Beckham is the most important player in football history because noone's sold more shirts than him, or been as big a mainstream star as him. Ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by tehoh1 on Oct 13, 2009 16:18:27 GMT -5
Is this really that big of a deal for people?
Hell, I deleted my original post because it's pointless. Arguments from both sides are just going to get shot down anyways, so why is this still going? Nobody who thinks Flair is going to listen to an argument for Austin or vice versa.
I'm going to just repeat my answer, which was Austin, but I am basing it on more important to me, not wrestling. Me.
|
|
|
Post by quantum on Oct 13, 2009 16:20:45 GMT -5
Judging by the standards in this thread, That would mean David Beckham is the most important player in football history because noone's sold more shirts than him, or been as big a mainstream star as him. Ridiculous. Completely missing the point also and Iam not explaining it again as I already have i n this thread (pg 4). As to why Austin is more important to the history of pro wrestling than Flair
|
|
|
Post by Tea & Crumpets on Oct 13, 2009 16:49:07 GMT -5
The thing I'm noticing is people are confusing mainstream wrestling with the whole wrestling business. Who was mroe important to mainstream wrestling? Austin by a country mile. Who was more important to the wrestling business as a whole? Flair. People are also seeming to prioritise short term peaks over long term prosperity. Who had the bigger success at any 1 individual point[/b? Austin.
Who had the greater impact over a long period of time? Flair.
Austin was more relevant and important at his best than Flair was at his best, but Flair was more relevant for a longer period of time. Austin was important from 97-02. Flair was important for over 20 years.
Austin was more important to mainstream wrestling, Flair to the whole wrestling industry. As such my vote goes to Ric.
EDIT:
quantum, just a reminder I am still waiting for you to convince me why WWE would have gone under without Austin and why this would be the end of American wrestling. I have seen you state it is fact multiple times but have yet to hear your reasoning for saying this. Please do enlighten us as I am not against this "fact" of yours but I still have not seen anything that would suggest it besides it being repeated over and over. Also I dofindit funny that you credit Austin for making HHH and in turn credit HHH for making Batista and Orton. Wasn't there someone else in Evolution? Wasn't there someone else who helped establish Orton and Batista? I am thinking of an older gent, his name is on the tip of my tongue... Do some research you'll find what I am saying is accurate (I think that's why you are mainly arguing against the fact of Austin saving WWF from going bankrupt it is a well know fact.) Ric Flair was a bit player in Evolution. Evolution would have worked without Flair but not HHH. HHH was booked as the leader of Evolution where as Flair was booked as pretty weak and made to job to the spirit squad.
Think you need to do a bit of research yourself. Firstly Spirit Squad were over a year AFTER Evolution broke up. Secondly Flair was not just a bit player of Evoltuion. Yes he was booked as the easiest to beat (he is in his 50s though, so its not surprising booking and if he was booked as tough people would claim he was overpushed), but that doesn't make him a bit player as he still had equal importance to the group- he was booked as the one who ensured HHH kept the title numerous times, for one thing.
Plus his tag title runs with Batista were what FIRST established Batista as somebody. Here's a guy who was D-Von Dudley's pretend deacon. Now, he's paired with the legendary Ric Flair, who takes him on as his personal protege. That in itself is a rub. Then, they start teaming and win the titles. Why? Because of HHH running in and sledgehammering everyone? Because of Superric? Nope. Because Flair gets killed every match but then cheats a bit, switches out to batista who destroys everyone. You've got a legend in Flair getting handily beaten by 2 guys, then in comes Batista and crushes both of them by himself. That's another big rub. Without his tag run with Flair Batista would never have got as over as he did, never have gotten the pops for being such a badass, never had the big face turn. He might've been another Umaga, he might've been another Snitsky. The HHH feud made Batista, yes. The Flair tag run was what gave Batista the chance to break through the glass ceiling.
Then let's move on. Take Carlito. Flair did a respect-earning angle with Carlito, then they teamed and won the tag titles. The announcers sold it as huge, Flair put Carlito over on the mic, and again in the ring Carlito was booked as the driving force of the team (as best as I remember). Of course Carlito never succeeded in breaking through, but his run with Flair probably saved him from jobberdom.
And I say this as somebody who, up until his match at WM24, thought Flair had long outstayed his welcome. Fact is when you look back, Flair did more even in the last few years than people realise.
|
|
repomark
Unicron
For Mash Get Smash
Posts: 3,072
Member is Online
|
Post by repomark on Oct 13, 2009 17:09:41 GMT -5
Judging by the standards in this thread, That would mean David Beckham is the most important player in football history because noone's sold more shirts than him, or been as big a mainstream star as him. Ridiculous. Nice work. I liked this anology even though I disagree with it lol. I would say Austin is more Zinedene Zidane, Hogan is Pele and Flair is Eusabio. Eusabio was a great player - highly regarded to those who know about football/soccer but not that well known to the youngsters nowadays. Pele is a player that most of the youngsters have heard of because he was held in even higher regard and more world renound. Zidane was an excellent player and still fresh in the youngsters memory - but no one is really sure if he was as good as Pele and never will be. Fewer ask if he was as good as Eusabio though - even though in terms of raw skill and flair Eusabio was probably better. I have expanded this metaphor too far to the point where I am not even sure it still makes sense lol. In terms of the David Beckham thing - not really a comparison. In a competitive sport like football it is largely about your successes on the pitch in terms of how many trophys you won and how many goals you score or whatever. In wrestling it is and was more about putting butts on seats and selling ppvs. David Beckham would have never got a game if he was not a good footballer - it just so happens he became incredibly marketable as well which was a bonus. I believe Jose Mourinio (spelling?) who refused to sign him for Chelsea though because, and I quote, "We want footballers here, not movie stars." Where as a player having charisma and marketability can be a nice bonus in terms of replica shirt sales in football, it can also be an unwelcome distraction when their pop star wife doesn't want to live in Manchester. It is also not essential for them to be a success - I mean Wayne Rooney has zero charisma but he is a great footballer. In wrestling it is absolutely essential for any wrestler to be a success to the level of an Austin, a Flair or a Hogan for them to have charisma and be marketable. It is the bread and butter of the wrestling industry, so its not really a fair comparison I am afraid however much I liked it.
|
|