|
Post by Mister Pigwell on Jan 8, 2019 18:26:04 GMT -5
Yeah I'm not in favor of Hogan being around anymore but regardless of that, him being out there to honor Gene was the right call.
He's the best guy to have done it as far Mean Gene's wrestling career is concerned IMO.
|
|
|
Post by Cyno on Jan 8, 2019 18:29:38 GMT -5
Hogan was there to pay tribute to his friend, and outside of the typical Hulkisms here and there he mostly kept it straight, and I made my peace with that.
He's a piece of shit still and I probably won't ever be able to get past his racism and general piece-of-shit-ness both within the industry and outside of it, but the man's friend died and he wanted to pay his respects. I can put aside any problems I have with him for a bit out of respect for Mean Gene.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 18:30:49 GMT -5
God bless you fam.
We got nothing to talk about. Good day to you, hope you have a blessed one.
Did you at least read the rest of my post where I said why I think that? I apologize if I’m wrong but it feels like you are writing off my opinion and somehow thinking less of me as a person because it’s not what you believe. I just disagree and have my reasons. Oh I saw what you said, I'm just not agreeing with it. We just don't see things the same so given that I'm just not even going to argue with you about it. As long as you said "yeah we disagree and I'll say what you said I should say" then I got nothing else to talk to you about.
Lastly, nowhere in any of my posts about this have I talked about who Hogan is as a person, what he's done and what not. In every one of my posts regarding the Mean Gene tribute I'm speaking on the gravity of someone coming out and doing the tribute compared to someone else in those same circumstances who's always there. If Hogan had been on screen for the past 3 years and did the tribute, I wouldn't have said a thing given he's commonly on screen. This however is a different story given instead of it being a story all about Mean Gene it's become a story about "Mean Gene gets a tribute and Hogan returns to Raw after numerous years off." I'm speaking on the double headlines here.
If Bret did the tribute I'd say the same thing given the light would be shined on Bret returning a bit rather than all on Mean Gene. It would be a double headline in that case.
You can say it's cool and think it made sense but me personally? If someone dies I want all the headlines being about the person rather than it being a double headline about someone returning let alone how it happened. That's the difference. I want the one who isn't here to get all of the headlines but from what I can see, if I go to Google and type in Mean Gene every headline starts with Hogan and is spent about his tribute and him rather than Gene and yeah, I don't agree with that. Nah, definitely not.
|
|
Perd
Patti Mayonnaise
Leslie needs to butt out for fear of receiving The Bunghole Buster
Posts: 31,970
Member is Online
|
Post by Perd on Jan 8, 2019 18:36:49 GMT -5
Yeah, my full stance on this is, I didn’t think Hogan needed to be there at all. WWE has payed tribute to many recently deceased legends without having to bring out some other legend. But, considering Hogan was there, it went about as well as you could hope.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 18:36:56 GMT -5
mobile.twitter.com/WWEShop/status/1082351228456235008They tweeted that hours before RAW. That's what the whole thing was about. I don't doubt Hogan is legit mourning a longtime friend, but overall, WWE wanted him back to make some money, they saw Mean Gene's death as an opportunity to do that.
|
|
|
Post by edgestar on Jan 8, 2019 18:37:15 GMT -5
Case in point: the first 2 words starting this thread, are "Mean Gene", and most of the talk, is about Hogan.
I do appreciate you guys keeping it civil, though.
|
|
Johnny Flamingo
Hank Scorpio
Killing the business one post at a time
Posts: 6,484
|
Post by Johnny Flamingo on Jan 8, 2019 18:37:19 GMT -5
Did you at least read the rest of my post where I said why I think that? I apologize if I’m wrong but it feels like you are writing off my opinion and somehow thinking less of me as a person because it’s not what you believe. I just disagree and have my reasons. Oh I saw what you said, I'm just not agreeing with it. We just don't see things the same so given that I'm just not even going to argue with you about it. As long as you said "yeah we disagree and I'll say what you said I should say" then I got nothing else to talk to you about.
Lastly, nowhere in any of my posts about this have I talked about who Hogan is as a person, what he's done and what not. In every one of my posts regarding the Mean Gene tribute I'm speaking on the gravity of someone coming out and doing the tribute compared to someone else in those same circumstances who's always there. If Hogan had been on screen for the past 3 years and did the tribute, I wouldn't have said a thing given he's commonly on screen. This however is a different story given instead of it being a story all about Mean Gene it's become a story about "Mean Gene gets a tribute and Hogan returns to Raw after numerous years off." I'm speaking on the double headlines here.
If Bret did the tribute I'd say the same thing given the light would be shined on Bret returning a bit rather than all on Mean Gene. It would be a double headline in that case.
You can say it's cool and think it made sense but me personally? If someone dies I want all the headlines being about the person rather than it being a double headline about someone returning let alone how it happened. That's the difference. I want the one who isn't here to get all of the headlines but from what I can see, if I go to Google and type in Mean Gene every headline starts with Hogan and is spent about his tribute and him rather than Gene and yeah, I don't agree with that. Nah, definitely not. Totally understand. We just disagree on this and no use going back and forth. Well put.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Pigwell on Jan 8, 2019 18:39:56 GMT -5
Case in point: the first 2 words starting this thread, are "Mean Gene", and most of the talk, is about Hogan. I do appreciate you guys keeping it civil, though. Well, there's a whole Mean Gene RIP thread. This thread is specifically about Hogan's involvement.
|
|
|
Post by edgestar on Jan 8, 2019 18:43:27 GMT -5
Case in point: the first 2 words starting this thread, are "Mean Gene", and most of the talk, is about Hogan. I do appreciate you guys keeping it civil, though. Well, there's a whole Mean Gene RIP thread. This thread is specifically about Hogan's involvement. It's been mentioned that if you search Gene, Hogan pops up. This was my point....
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Jan 8, 2019 18:51:41 GMT -5
Oh I saw what you said, I'm just not agreeing with it. We just don't see things the same so given that I'm just not even going to argue with you about it. As long as you said "yeah we disagree and I'll say what you said I should say" then I got nothing else to talk to you about.
Lastly, nowhere in any of my posts about this have I talked about who Hogan is as a person, what he's done and what not. In every one of my posts regarding the Mean Gene tribute I'm speaking on the gravity of someone coming out and doing the tribute compared to someone else in those same circumstances who's always there. If Hogan had been on screen for the past 3 years and did the tribute, I wouldn't have said a thing given he's commonly on screen. This however is a different story given instead of it being a story all about Mean Gene it's become a story about "Mean Gene gets a tribute and Hogan returns to Raw after numerous years off." I'm speaking on the double headlines here.
If Bret did the tribute I'd say the same thing given the light would be shined on Bret returning a bit rather than all on Mean Gene. It would be a double headline in that case.
You can say it's cool and think it made sense but me personally? If someone dies I want all the headlines being about the person rather than it being a double headline about someone returning let alone how it happened. That's the difference. I want the one who isn't here to get all of the headlines but from what I can see, if I go to Google and type in Mean Gene every headline starts with Hogan and is spent about his tribute and him rather than Gene and yeah, I don't agree with that. Nah, definitely not. Totally understand. We just disagree on this and no use going back and forth. Well put. Seeing this resolution occur was beautiful.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 19:37:58 GMT -5
Is anyone really going to say "no Hogan didn't take any shine off of Mean Gene and the result of Hogan being there was all about Mean Gene in the headlines, social media, comments and views" in response? If so then hey, go on and say it. Yes, I will say it. Hogan took NOTHING away from Mean Gene. I think he added to the tribute and made it more emotional. We saw a larger than life person who looked very human and humbled. Saw a sometimes unemotional person totally breaking down. To me that really cemented how loved Gene was. Because of Hogan more people know about Mean Gene. Hogan added to the shine. To many seeing the biggest star in wrestling history talking about him cemented how good Gene was. In no way did I find it in poor taste. I’m sorry but I don’t think Hogan deserves to be blackballed from making occasional appearances. Last night showed he can be effective if utilized correctly. This right here, so much.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 8, 2019 21:48:11 GMT -5
I can only speak for myself but Hulk doing the tribute really helped to sink in the reality of the situation. Hulk and Gene were synonymous with each other in my youth, so seeing Hulk in 2019 tearfully memorializing Gene in passing was pretty powerful and I think he was the best guy for the job.
|
|
King Devitt
Grimlock
It gets better the longer you stare at it
Posts: 13,743
|
Post by King Devitt on Jan 8, 2019 22:32:33 GMT -5
mobile.twitter.com/WWEShop/status/1082351228456235008They tweeted that hours before RAW. That's what the whole thing was about. I don't doubt Hogan is legit mourning a longtime friend, but overall, WWE wanted him back to make some money, they saw Mean Gene's death as an opportunity to do that. Yup, I appreciate some people are being glass half full on this one, but we know Vince, we know Hogan, and as much as it may have had a tinge of authenticity, plenty other equally as important figures have passed without an MC coming out to talk about them. I feel that Vince told Hogan "let's wait til the time is right" and Vince took this tragedy and used it. Some see it as good. I see it as a strategic maneuver and a marketing ploy. I'm not saying that Hogan wasn't upset at the loss of his friend, but no one else in recent memory that passed got this much of a farewell. Vince was waiting for the "right" moment, and if you think about it, it's actually in poor taste. Did Gene deserve that farewell? Hell yes. But so have plenty of other people who have passed away and some barely got the graphic at the beginning of the show. This was bordering on poor taste masked as a feel good moment. Some people are buying it as the latter, and that's totally fine. But this was completely on purpose. And not all in a good way.
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Jan 9, 2019 0:08:31 GMT -5
Same mindset here. Hogan's tribute was very heart felt and emotional yes. But, the thing is most are acknowledging Hogan's contribution and whether or not he should have been out in the first place over the entire point of the segment. Said segment had me on the verge of tears despite my only exposure to Gene Okerlund, outside of the wwe network, being mid to late WCW. Great segment, lessened by the fact you had a still controversial person MCing the whole thing. Honestly a video of various people, including Hogan, saying something about him probably would've worked better. Could have mixed it in the video shown. Yep. Even on WWE's Youtube the Hogan part has way more views and is trending compared to the actual tribute to Mean Gene. Even all the websites mention Hogan over Mean Gene. It put the light on Hogan more than the man himself who's not longer with us. Regardless if people are for or against Hogan, that's the fact and that's just not something that should happen. I don't see anyone saying "Hogan didn't overshadow Mean Gene" there because he absolutely did. It's just nasty. I’ve gotta disagree with you, here. I think Hogan brought more attention to Gene. I think if they just did the ten bell salute and then the video, it would have had much less of a lasting impact on the viewer than the Hogan speech, which added a lot to the tribute. I think the real question is not comments regarding Hogan vs. comments about Gene, it’s the amount of comments/attention there would have been about Gene without the Hogan tribute vs. the comments/attention there has been about Gene because of the tribute as it was.
|
|
DZ: WF Legacy
King Koopa
Porcupine Tree
Posts: 12,105
Member is Online
|
Post by DZ: WF Legacy on Jan 9, 2019 0:17:46 GMT -5
Advantageous timing to ease Hogan back in further after Crown Jewel? Absolutely. This was an opportunity and they seized it. Really nice tribute by real life friends that made sense given the situation? Absolutely. Those two are synonymous with each other when it comes to classic wrestling promos.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,070
|
Post by Mozenrath on Jan 9, 2019 0:22:39 GMT -5
I do not like Hogan.
That said, he was obviously a big part of Gene's career, taking him from AWA to WWF, and then to WCW, and they clearly meant a great deal to each other. He built Gene's house, so to speak.
That said, Hogan can f*** off forever for all I care, the one night of reprieve's over.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2019 0:28:32 GMT -5
Yep. Even on WWE's Youtube the Hogan part has way more views and is trending compared to the actual tribute to Mean Gene. Even all the websites mention Hogan over Mean Gene. It put the light on Hogan more than the man himself who's not longer with us. Regardless if people are for or against Hogan, that's the fact and that's just not something that should happen. I don't see anyone saying "Hogan didn't overshadow Mean Gene" there because he absolutely did. It's just nasty. I’ve gotta disagree with you, here. I think Hogan brought more attention to Gene. I think if they just did the ten bell salute and then the video, it would have had much less of a lasting impact on the viewer than the Hogan speech, which added a lot to the tribute. I think the real question is not comments regarding Hogan vs. comments about Gene, it’s the amount of comments/attention there would have been about Gene without the Hogan tribute vs. the comments/attention there has been about Gene because of the tribute as it was. You're basically saying that with the "Hulk Hogan Stimulus Package" Gene's getting more coverage than without. What I'm saying is that same coverage has most of the story about Hulk Hogan compared to the man who's just passed, Mean Gene. If you think it was worth those stories having Hogan as most of the discussion compared to Gene then you can think that. Me? Nah, when I see most of the replies and comments about the situation even on this forum where people mention mostly about Hogan rather than Gene? That's not something I rock with. Gene deserves more than having to share a spotlight with Hogan's return when he's passed.
If you think it was worth it then you can think that. I think that's nasty. You can disagree with that but I'm not changing my mind on it. It doesn't matter how much Gene was mixed in with Hogan. When headlines, replies, comments and views show more Hogan than him, the man who's passed who the tribute's about, that's gross.
And that's the last time I'm talking in this thread about it because I'm done talking about why a man who's passed doesn't need to share the spotlight in his tribute with a man who's returning after years off in turn the responses to the tribute are split between the both of them. Ugh, gross.
|
|
|
Post by KofiMania on Jan 9, 2019 0:43:28 GMT -5
I’ve gotta disagree with you, here. I think Hogan brought more attention to Gene. I think if they just did the ten bell salute and then the video, it would have had much less of a lasting impact on the viewer than the Hogan speech, which added a lot to the tribute. I think the real question is not comments regarding Hogan vs. comments about Gene, it’s the amount of comments/attention there would have been about Gene without the Hogan tribute vs. the comments/attention there has been about Gene because of the tribute as it was. You're basically saying that with the "Hulk Hogan Stimulus Package" Gene's getting more coverage than without. What I'm saying is that same coverage has most of the story about Hulk Hogan compared to the man who's just passed, Mean Gene. If you think it was worth those stories having Hogan as most of the discussion compared to Gene then you can think that. Me? Nah, when I see most of the replies and comments about the situation even on this forum where people mention mostly about Hogan rather than Gene? That's not something I rock with. Gene deserves more than having to share a spotlight with Hogan's return when he's passed.
If you think it was worth it then you can think that. I think that's nasty. You can disagree with that but I'm not changing my mind on it. It doesn't matter how much Gene was mixed in with Hogan. When headlines, replies, comments and views show more Hogan than him, the man who's passed who the tribute's about, that's gross.
And that's the last time I'm talking in this thread about it because I'm done talking about why a man who's passed doesn't need to share the spotlight in his tribute with a man who's returning after years off in turn the responses to the tribute are split between the both of them. Ugh, gross. Agree to disagree! I think Gene is getting much more non-Hogan attention because of Hogan’s involvement than he would have if they did the standard video and salute only. Not too controversial a statement.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Neglia on Jan 9, 2019 3:04:51 GMT -5
I'm of a very mixed opinion here - and this is strictly my own subjective opinion - but while I agree that Hogan deserved to be the one to eulogize Gene (and that does not absolve Hogan of any of his missteps in being a decent human being), something about the execution of the whole thing felt really...off-putting to me. It seemed to go from awkwardly-forced into pop-for-all-these-names and seemed to lose the point of Gene being part of it at all as Hogan kept dialing up his shtick. Playing to the crowd right before and after didn't help, and knowing that WWE did it as much because it was a sudden deus ex machina to their dilemma of how to bring Hogan back as it was to actually honor Gene...I dunno.
|
|
|
Post by I'm Team Bayley and Indi on Jan 9, 2019 4:58:35 GMT -5
I said in the previous locked thread that they have never brought in to eulogize anybody before and I did watch Hogan on Raw and it was done respectful, so I will just say I will judge this on when somebody else passes away and whether they bring somebody in to eulogize or not
|
|