Bret Hart started the attitude era.

[amaron]

Sept 10, 2012 8:36:19 GMT -5 Gelatinous Parasite said:

Sept 10, 2012 3:43:52 GMT -5 Cranjis McBasketball said:

I believe Foley believes it started the night of a huge talent meeting, I believe the night Pillman was found dead, where he admitted maybe WWF was passe and let the guys have way more input on their characters.

This is what I don't understand. In so many retrospectives about the enormous success of guys like Stone Cold, The Rock and even the Attitude Era in general, they credit this success to giving them creative freedom and letting them run with it. Why is everything so tightly scripted and controlled now? Raw feels like one of the most overly-produced shows on television, to the extent that it's very name is ironic. Don't get me wrong, I still love WWE and occasionally there are glimpses of spontaneity; although this comes mainly from already established and experienced guys like CM Punk. It feels like they know what works but they want to keep tight reins on everyone.

Let's be honest. Things such as AW's comment wouldn't have been an issue in the AE. Bryan wouldn't have been fired because of the tie choke. The list could go on and on.

IMO, while some of it could be to appease advertisers, the reason WWE is so PG to the point where it is basically G is Linda senate run(s).

[TGM]

For me, the beginings were Steve Austin vs. Bret Hart at Survivor Series 1996. So I credit them both.

[Gelatinous Parasite]

Sept 10, 2012 8:40:39 GMT -5 amaron said:

Sept 10, 2012 8:36:19 GMT -5 Gelatinous Parasite said:

This is what I don't understand. In so many retrospectives about the enormous success of guys like Stone Cold, The Rock and even the Attitude Era in general, they credit this success to giving them creative freedom and letting them run with it. Why is everything so tightly scripted and controlled now? Raw feels like one of the most overly-produced shows on television, to the extent that it's very name is ironic. Don't get me wrong, I still love WWE and occasionally there are glimpses of spontaneity; although this comes mainly from already established and experienced guys like CM Punk. It feels like they know what works but they want to keep tight reins on everyone.

Let's be honest. Things such as AW's comment wouldn't have been an issue in the AE. Bryan wouldn't have been fired because of the tie choke. The list could go on and on.

IMO, while some of it could be to appease advertisers, the reason WWE is so PG to the point where it is basically G is Linda senate run(s).

I guess the point is, WWE don't realise that being PG and being 'edgy' aren't mutually exclusive things. They could always allow the talent to have a little more freedom but issue a checklist that includes "no swearing" and "no rape jokes."

[molson5]

Sept 10, 2012 8:36:19 GMT -5 Gelatinous Parasite said:

Sept 10, 2012 3:43:52 GMT -5 Cranjis McBasketball said:

I believe Foley believes it started the night of a huge talent meeting, I believe the night Pillman was found dead, where he admitted maybe WWF was passe and let the guys have way more input on their characters.

This is what I don't understand. In so many retrospectives about the enormous success of guys like Stone Cold, The Rock and even the Attitude Era in general, they credit this success to giving them creative freedom and letting them run with it. Why is everything so tightly scripted and controlled now? Raw feels like one of the most overly-produced shows on television, to the extent that it's very name is ironic. Don't get me wrong, I still love WWE and occasionally there are glimpses of spontaneity; although this comes mainly from already established and experienced guys like CM Punk. It feels like they know what works but they want to keep tight reins on everyone.

I mostly agree but one thing that got tired about wrestling in late 90s, is that if you give wrestlers the freedom to develop their own characters, 99% develop the same character - "cool heel." Well, except Bret Hart. Which is why I think he made the whole thing work in the WWF

[DoubleDare]

While austin and bret was helping pave the way, it was clear that the wwf still didn't grasp how to market themselves in spring 97, as shown here in these forgotten ads. If these took off, we'd be referring to it as the reality check era.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=epszjpvqST0
www.youtube.com/watch?v=EX9aeUkzrjI
www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=TVdu96B6GeI

[Turd Ferguson]

Nobody began the Attitude Era, it was the natural course of progression from New Generation.

[hitch]

A lot of revisionism has gone on as to what started the Attitude era. if you look at Austin's popularity at KOTR 96 or even through to WM the following year, it was nothing much at all. He'd get reaction but he was scarcely one of the top 5 'over' people on the card. He didn't really get that until the McMahon feud, much later.

However it's now remembered as this anti-hero who the fans loved and WWE had no choice but to run with. The truth is the fans were well behind the office in this regard. McMahon had earmarked Austin for a push long, long, long before he started getting notable crowd reactions.

[Lance Uppercut]

I didn't notice the change in "attitude" until the fans started booing Shawn and Rock. Never before have I heard the audience be as mean as "Shawn is gay" and "Die Rocky Die" and they were faces at the time. Hence I thought Shawn's change in attitude was appropriate and couldn't find him as a heel (my first favorite heel).

[Lance Uppercut]

Sept 10, 2012 8:46:44 GMT -5 TGM said:

For me, the beginings were Steve Austin vs. Bret Hart at Survivor Series 1996. So I credit them both.

Let's not forget those months of Austin Promos burying Bret out (with Pillman). Then Austin killing Pillman. Pillman attacking a fan. And those Black and White Survivor series commercials with Austin.

[Slingshot Suplay]

Sept 10, 2012 11:48:53 GMT -5 Turd Ferguson said:

Nobody began the Attitude Era, it was the natural course of progression from New Generation.

Maybe for the performers themselves, but not for Vince. He was out of touch with the product at the time, and if he didn't listen to the talent and to Russo and stayed the course he was going, the wrestling world might be a completely different place right now.

[Crappler El 0 M]

I have read and heard some revisionist history over the last two years concerning the Austin 3:16 promo. To paraphrase, I've heard the argument that the promo wasn't an important as people made it out to be and that Austin didn't get pushed till many months later.

Before winning King of the Ring and delivering the Austin 3:16 promo, Steve Austin was floundering and not making too many waves in WWE. Winning King of the Ring and delivering the promo had an immediate impact on Austin. However, NO it did not automatically right then make him the biggest star in the business. You can't get an accurate idea of what Austin's push was like following King of the Ring simply by reading PPV results. This doesn't give you the full picture.

Back in 1996, Raw was only an hour long. Unlike today, you would not always have all of the top stars on every show and certainly they would not be wrestling on every show. On the Raw after King of the Ring, Steve Austin was in a main event match against The Undertaker. They were given a lot of time for a one hour show and the match ended in a disqualification so that Austin didn't actually lose. Before King of the Ring, Austin would never have been given a spot in the main event of Raw with Undertaker where he is booked to be a strong contender. This does not show up on a PPV results list.

It's true that Austin didn't have any MAJOR feuds after King of the Ring and didn't appear in significant matches on PPV until Survivor Series with Bret. I've heard many say, "Austin wasn't even on SummerSlam!" Well, no he wasn't on the main card. He wrestled Yokozuna on the Free for All. He was not on the Free for All because WWE didn't want to feature Austin, but because they needed time to fix the ring after a spot where Yokozuna broke-off the turnbuckle.

WWE decided soon after King of the Ring that Austin would be Bret's first opponent after he returned. He had left since losing the title to Michaels at Mania. WWE had BIG plans for Austin, but they were taking their time to build up to the match between Bret and Austin in Madison Square Garden at Survivor Series. A couple of months after winning the King of the Ring, Austin called out Bret Hart, talked trash about him, and started challenging him. Just like his match with Undertaker, these challenges will not show up by simply looking at PPV results. Bret Hart finally agrees to come back and answer Austin's challenge and when they finally meet up at Survivor Series, Austin loses the match, but was allowed to look like he strong. He would continue this feud with Bret Hart until the summer of 1997. It was during the feud with Bret that Austin became a babyface and started to garner a huge following.

The Austin 3:16 promo was huge for Steve Austin. Looking back on it with 2012-eyes and looking at PPV results following King of the Ring DOES NOT give you an accurate picture of what Austin's push was like following the promo. WWE immediately started planning a big feud for Austin and they planned ahead instead of hot-shotting Austin right into a new program. They let his feud with Bret build until they would actually meet months later. The promo is as significant as people say it is.

[Crappler El 0 M]

I have read and heard some revisionist history over the last two years concerning the Austin 3:16 promo. To paraphrase, I've heard the argument that the promo wasn't an important as people made it out to be and that Austin didn't get pushed till many months later.

Before winning King of the Ring and delivering the Austin 3:16 promo, Steve Austin was floundering and not making too many waves in WWE. Winning King of the Ring and delivering the promo had an immediate impact on Austin. However, NO it did not automatically right then make him the biggest star in the business. You can't get an accurate idea of what Austin's push was like following King of the Ring simply by reading PPV results. This doesn't give you the full picture.

Back in 1996, Raw was only an hour long. Unlike today, you would not always have all of the top stars on every show and certainly they would not be wrestling on every show. On the Raw after King of the Ring, Steve Austin was in a main event match against The Undertaker where he was allowed to look strong. They were given a lot of time for a one hour show and the match ended in a disqualification so that Austin didn't actually lose. Before King of the Ring, Austin would never have been given this spot. This does not show up on a PPV results list.

It's true that Austin didn't have any MAJOR feuds after King of the Ring and didn't appear in significant matches on PPV until Survivor Series with Bret. I've heard many say, "Austin wasn't even on SummerSlam!" Well, no he wasn't on the main card. He wrestled Yokozuna on the Free for All. He was not on the Free for All because WWE didn't want to feature Austin, but because they needed time to fix the ring after a spot where Yokozuna broke-off the turnbuckle.

WWE decided soon after King of the Ring that Austin would be Bret's first opponent after he returned. He had been gone since losing the title to Michaels at Mania. WWE had BIG plans for Austin, but they were taking their time to build up to the match between Bret and Austin in Madison Square Garden at Survivor Series. A couple of months after winning the King of the Ring, Austin started calling out Bret Hart and talking trash about him. Just like his match with Undertaker, these challenges will not show up by simply looking at PPV results. Bret Hart finally agrees to come back and answer Austin's challenge. They will eventually face-off at Survivor Series. Austin loses the match, but looks very strong in the loss. He continues his feud with Bret Hart until the summer of 1997. It was during this feud that Austin caught fire and started becoming one of the biggest stars in the business.

The Austin 3:16 promo was huge for Steve Austin. Looking back on it with 2012-eyes and looking at PPV results following King of the Ring DOES NOT give you an accurate picture of what Austin's push was like following the promo. WWE immediately started planning a big feud for Austin and they planned ahead instead of hot-shotting Austin right into a new program. They let his feud with Bret build until they would actually meet months later. The promo is as significant as people say it is.

[hitch]

But that shows it was the office behind Austin's push as opposed to this version we are to believe now where somehow the fans 'organically' took to him. Before his massive KOTR push, the fans didn't give a s***. Even after that it took them over a year to care to any real eye-catching degree.

[hitch]

If we define the Attitude era as the 'anything can happen' era, then surely that started on Nitro?

[Celgress]

Sept 9, 2012 23:21:33 GMT -5 @linecookguy said:

Austin 3:16

[Hit Girl]

The Bret vs Austin feud was pretty much the start of the Attitude Era for me.

[Crappler El 0 M]

I think of 'Attitude' as WWE's own marketing term and I believe the very first Attitude promo aired on Survivor Series 1997. If I HAD to choose a date for the beginning of the Attitude Era, I'd pick Survivor Series '97 due to that being the first time WWE began its 'Attitude' marketing campaign. This campaign reflected the direction which had already been present in WWE.

I don't like when people try to have big, definitive statements about when was the exact date that the Attitude Era began. It developed over time as WWE transitioned into it.

[Deleted]

Sept 10, 2012 12:39:04 GMT -5 hitch said:

If we define the Attitude era as the 'anything can happen' era, then surely that started on Nitro?

Definitely. The nWo angle (Hall and Nash invading, and then Hogan turning) was the beginning of the late-90's boom. If you missed a second of Nitro in 1996-97, there is a good chance you missed something of importance. That is how "must see" it was. Unpredictable and completely revolutionary for American mainstream wrestling.

The WWF copied much of WCW's concepts (live every week, gang wars, tweeners, etc) but didn't really catch fire until late-97.

[molson5]

Sept 10, 2012 12:35:06 GMT -5 Crappler El 0 M said:

The Austin 3:16 promo was huge for Steve Austin. Looking back on it with 2012-eyes and looking at PPV results following King of the Ring DOES NOT give you an accurate picture of what Austin's push was like following the promo. WWE immediately started planning a big feud for Austin and they planned ahead instead of hot-shotting Austin right into a new program. They let his feud with Bret build until they would actually meet months later. The promo is as significant as people say it is.

It was definitely important for Austin's career, but whether it started the attitude era is a tougher question. It was one step I guess, but the attitude era doesn't go back as far as the second half of 1996, I don't think.

[Crappler El 0 M]

Sept 10, 2012 13:52:20 GMT -5 molson5 said:

Sept 10, 2012 12:35:06 GMT -5 Crappler El 0 M said:

The Austin 3:16 promo was huge for Steve Austin. Looking back on it with 2012-eyes and looking at PPV results following King of the Ring DOES NOT give you an accurate picture of what Austin's push was like following the promo. WWE immediately started planning a big feud for Austin and they planned ahead instead of hot-shotting Austin right into a new program. They let his feud with Bret build until they would actually meet months later. The promo is as significant as people say it is.

It was definitely important for Austin's career, but whether it started the attitude era is a tougher question. It was one step I guess, but the attitude era doesn't go back as far as the second half of 1996, I don't think.

Just to be clear, I wasn't arguing that it started the Attitude Era, but just wanted to respond to some revisionist history I've been reading and hearing.