Post by Boo! on Nov 20, 2013 8:55:22 GMT -5
Firstly there's no denying two things. Firstly more people tuned in to watch Steve Austin than ever have John Cena, secondly that Austin's place in the annuls of the wrestling world is secure.
But in terms of legacy I think Cena's will out last Austin's, and it all comes down to audience. A large portion of fans during the Attitude era weren't there because they were wrestling fans, they were there because wrestling was 'current' at the time. Now that's always been the case. Was with Hogan (twice), was with Austin and it will be for the next guy there when the boom breaks out. It's just what happens with anything. Once it gains popularity everyone wants a piece. But I think what the Attitude era failed to do that the first Hogan era did and what this 'Cena era' is doing now is attract younger people who'll be the cornerstone fanbase for years to come.
I'm no huge fan of Bret but if you ask people today in their 20s why they're a wrestling fan, a lot of them will say 'Bret Hart'. It goes without saying for Hogan and it'll go without saying in years to come for Cena. Now there's no denying Austin brought young fans in and a lot of people will also claim they're wrestling fans because of Steve Austin but the demographics are different. If you get a child into Bret Hart or John Cena they're likely there as a fan base for years. Get a guy in his late teens or early 20s into something he's never shown any interest in before and won't after, I don't think the long-term impact is as strong.
The difference between Cena and Austin's legacy I think in the years to come will be that Austin fans will remark "Yeah, I remember Austin, he was cool, that's when wrestling was fun", speaking about a business they've cast aside to only occasionally remember fondly whereas Cena fans will say "I got into wrestling because of John Cena", and the difference is many of them will still be fans.
But in terms of legacy I think Cena's will out last Austin's, and it all comes down to audience. A large portion of fans during the Attitude era weren't there because they were wrestling fans, they were there because wrestling was 'current' at the time. Now that's always been the case. Was with Hogan (twice), was with Austin and it will be for the next guy there when the boom breaks out. It's just what happens with anything. Once it gains popularity everyone wants a piece. But I think what the Attitude era failed to do that the first Hogan era did and what this 'Cena era' is doing now is attract younger people who'll be the cornerstone fanbase for years to come.
I'm no huge fan of Bret but if you ask people today in their 20s why they're a wrestling fan, a lot of them will say 'Bret Hart'. It goes without saying for Hogan and it'll go without saying in years to come for Cena. Now there's no denying Austin brought young fans in and a lot of people will also claim they're wrestling fans because of Steve Austin but the demographics are different. If you get a child into Bret Hart or John Cena they're likely there as a fan base for years. Get a guy in his late teens or early 20s into something he's never shown any interest in before and won't after, I don't think the long-term impact is as strong.
The difference between Cena and Austin's legacy I think in the years to come will be that Austin fans will remark "Yeah, I remember Austin, he was cool, that's when wrestling was fun", speaking about a business they've cast aside to only occasionally remember fondly whereas Cena fans will say "I got into wrestling because of John Cena", and the difference is many of them will still be fans.
