Can We Really Equate Starrcade to Wrestlemania?

[fw91]

This isn't meant to say that Starrcade sucks, but I was looking up past cards and watched bits and pieces on the network, and to be honest, besides the NWA days in the 80's, these mostly feel like any other WCW PPV. A lot of these cards are lackluster imo, in the sense that you'd find a lot of these matches would be on any other show. Some big names are just thrown in lower card matches against lower card guys. There doesn't seem to be a "grandaddy of them all" aura to many of them. Even Wrestlemania's in smaller arenas seemed bigger than the rest of the shows of the year. With some exceptions of course because not all Manias were good, they felt different. They looked different. Marquee matches up and down the card. With Starrcade after they withdrew from the NWA, none of them feel like the biggest show of the year. Of course I missed the hey day of the supershows of the 80's but from the 90's onwards they seem kinda weak. Hell even 97 really just had Sting/Hogan.

In simpler terms, I don't think there is much of a different feel between Starrcade and Halloween Havoc, Superbrawl etc. Wrestlemania feels different from the rest of the pact on sheer spectacle alone even if the show ends up as a dud.

Does anyone agree, or am I just a ignorant hater? (I swear I'm not trying to be the latter lol)

[Cyno]

To be fair, outside of a few exceptions like WM3, 6, and 8, Wrestlemanias tended to feel like just another show, too through a lot of the 80's and 90's. It wasn't until 2001 when they started regularly running much larger venues for Mania like baseball and football stadiums. And even then, they took a break for a few years to run standard arenas in NY, LA, and Chicago before going back to larger venues with WM23 and forward.

I'd say where WWF succeeded is in making its other big shows feel distinct from Wrestlemania that wasn't really present in WCW. WCW had stuff like War Games and World War III, but they were never put over in the same way as shows like the Royal Rumble and Survivor Series. Or even King of the Ring back when that actually meant something.

[Dr. Bolty, Disaster Enby]

So, wasn't there for pretty much the entirety of WCW, but:

This is a sentiment I feel I have seen before, so I think there is something to it. The impressions I get are that 1. NWA/WCW was never (outside of 1997) actually that interested in making Starrcade the biggest show of the year, and 2. WWE has inflated the importance/"bigness" value of many earlier Wrestlemanias in the recounting, and the two factors combine to make Starrcades look underwhelming.

[Clash, Never a Meter Maid]

Didn’t Vince have many major arenas pretty loyal to him and WWF for booking wrestling cards for a while? That and general budget differences probably played a factor, outside of some of the Nitros held in the Superdome or Georgia Dome (the one where Goldberg won the belt for reals had a borderline Wrestlemania vibe).

[fw91]

Apr 19, 2020 18:56:57 GMT -5 Clash, Never a Meter Maid said:

Didn’t Vince have many major arenas pretty loyal to him and WWF for booking wrestling cards for a while? That and general budget differences probably played a factor, outside of some of the Nitros held in the Superdome or Georgia Dome (the one where Goldberg won the belt for reals had a borderline Wrestlemania vibe).

perhaps, but other things that happened lead me to create this thread. Like a couple of them were centered around Battlebowl which is a fun gimmick, but not really something you'd do for your biggest show. Hogan/Piper 96 being non title. Hogan Butcher. 95 being a cross promotional showcase with Japan. And those last few cards yeesh... Even the smallest/weakest of wrestlemanias had marquee matches on paper.

[Cyno]

What also hurt WCW big name shows, especially in the last years, were wrestler egos (okay, it was Hogan 99% of the time) tanking overall card health to put themselves and their boys over. Giving Hogan complete creative control was probably one of the worst single decisions ever made by a major promotion.

[TOK Hehe'd Around & Found Out]

Bischoff talks about how the WCW front office never really considered Starrcade their flagship show all the time on 83 Weeks. It was their first PPV and was one of the bigger shows of the year, but never was THE show like Wrestlemania was.

[Cranjis McBasketball]

Apr 19, 2020 19:17:40 GMT -5 TOK Hehe'd Around & Found Out said:

Bischoff talks about how the WCW front office never really considered Starrcade their flagship show all the time on 83 Weeks. It was their first PPV and was one of the bigger shows of the year, but never was THE show like Wrestlemania was.

Did he say tent pole 7 million times?

[David-Arquette was in WCW 2000]

I definitely think Starrcade lost its lustre over the years and became just another show. The last truly important year would have been 1988, as far as staying true to the original vision of Starrcade.

The following year had the Iron Man tournaments; no feuds or Title matches. 1990 was actually a stacked card with feud ending matches - as well as the tag tournament - but this was during the 'Herd era' and not remembered fondly.

The less said about 'Battlebowl' the better.

If I remember correctly Starrcade '93 was a return to form, with no gimmicks, and Flair winning the World Title.

The following years are a mix of gimmicks, Hogan's politics, nWo crap, and just general tedium. I think WWE have built up the history of the event to be bigger than it really was to get over just how big Wrestlemania is in comparison.

To be honest, though it would suffer a similar fate, Great American Bash had as much importance as Starrcade. It did have its fair share of crappy booking but it wasn't overrun with gimmick premises.

[evilone]

Apr 19, 2020 18:51:26 GMT -5 Cyno said:

To be fair, outside of a few exceptions like WM3, 6, and 8, Wrestlemanias tended to feel like just another show, too through a lot of the 80's and 90's. It wasn't until 2001 when they started regularly running much larger venues for Mania like baseball and football stadiums. And even then, they took a break for a few years to run standard arenas in NY, LA, and Chicago before going back to larger venues with WM23 and forward.

I'd say where WWF succeeded is in making its other big shows feel distinct from Wrestlemania that wasn't really present in WCW. WCW had stuff like War Games and World War III, but they were never put over in the same way as shows like the Royal Rumble and Survivor Series. Or even King of the Ring back when that actually meant something.

Halloween Havoc was the show you knew some bad ass gimmick stuff matches gonna happen. Until Hogan killed that off too in '95. From what I can remember Starcade and Halloween Havoc were equally important household shows for WCW.

[jason1980s]

I remember a few shows in the 1980s that were in stadiums for the NWA. I think if they somehow did more stadium shows, even just for Starrcade, it would have helped a bit more. Maybe it still wouldn't be on par with WrestleMania in terms of storyline and match quality but it would have put over Starrcade more importantly than other PPVs. And as many mentioned, the problem was most of their other PPVs had an equal feel of importance as Starrcade. I'm guessing with the stadium shows and TV and PPV being more important, that promotions didn't want half empty stadiums being shown on TV or PPV. After Wrestlefest 88 I don't believe WWF ever did a full stadium show on video outside of WrestleMania VI and VIII. NWA seemed to have quite a bit of stadium big event shows but then it seemed to stop around 1986 or 1987.

[Jaws the Shark]

Apr 19, 2020 18:51:26 GMT -5 Cyno said:

To be fair, outside of a few exceptions like WM3, 6, and 8, Wrestlemanias tended to feel like just another show, too through a lot of the 80's and 90's. It wasn't until 2001 when they started regularly running much larger venues for Mania like baseball and football stadiums. And even then, they took a break for a few years to run standard arenas in NY, LA, and Chicago before going back to larger venues with WM23 and forward.

I'd say where WWF succeeded is in making its other big shows feel distinct from Wrestlemania that wasn't really present in WCW. WCW had stuff like War Games and World War III, but they were never put over in the same way as shows like the Royal Rumble and Survivor Series. Or even King of the Ring back when that actually meant something.

This. I think because it's now this enormous flagship event sold as "the Superbowl of wrestling" or whatever, we forget that Wrestlemania was often a pretty ordinary show for the first couple of decades of its existence. Especially the early ones where outside of a couple of marquee matches, the cards were often stacked with short, nothingy filler matches. I think Wrestlemania beginning to be sold on the Wrestlemania brand around the early/mid 2000s has skewed our perception of the largeness of Wrestlemania in the eighties and nineties somewhat.

[fw91]

Apr 20, 2020 10:42:59 GMT -5 Jaws the Shark said:

Apr 19, 2020 18:51:26 GMT -5 Cyno said:

To be fair, outside of a few exceptions like WM3, 6, and 8, Wrestlemanias tended to feel like just another show, too through a lot of the 80's and 90's. It wasn't until 2001 when they started regularly running much larger venues for Mania like baseball and football stadiums. And even then, they took a break for a few years to run standard arenas in NY, LA, and Chicago before going back to larger venues with WM23 and forward.

I'd say where WWF succeeded is in making its other big shows feel distinct from Wrestlemania that wasn't really present in WCW. WCW had stuff like War Games and World War III, but they were never put over in the same way as shows like the Royal Rumble and Survivor Series. Or even King of the Ring back when that actually meant something.

This. I think because it's now this enormous flagship event sold as "the Superbowl of wrestling" or whatever, we forget that Wrestlemania was often a pretty ordinary show for the first couple of decades of its existence. Especially the early ones where outside of a couple of marquee matches, the cards were often stacked with short, nothingy filler matches. I think Wrestlemania beginning to be sold on the Wrestlemania brand around the early/mid 2000s has skewed our perception of the largeness of Wrestlemania in the eighties and nineties somewhat.

I see your point about the filler matches of early mania's, but otherwise I disagree. Whether it was celebrity involvement, the announcers in tux's and most of the shows (not all) had more than a couple of"marquee" matches. Whether or not it was a small arena, Mania for the most part always felt special.

[Toilet Paper Roll]

Not anymore. WCW is gone and has been for 20 years. It’s no more on par with Wrestlemania as Parade of Champions or Superclash

[thecrusherwi]

One of my favorite things about WCW is that there wasn’t a flagship PPV. It made the whole year feel more unpredictable and really rewarded those who watched all the time. Some years Starrcade was the big show. Some years it was SuperBrawl. Some years it was Bash at the Beach. If you don’t treat any show like the biggest show of the year, it’s a lot easier to convince the fans that something meaningful actually might happen at Slamboree or Road Wild.

[Jaws the Shark]

Apr 20, 2020 10:49:02 GMT -5 fw91 said:

Apr 20, 2020 10:42:59 GMT -5 Jaws the Shark said:

This. I think because it's now this enormous flagship event sold as "the Superbowl of wrestling" or whatever, we forget that Wrestlemania was often a pretty ordinary show for the first couple of decades of its existence. Especially the early ones where outside of a couple of marquee matches, the cards were often stacked with short, nothingy filler matches. I think Wrestlemania beginning to be sold on the Wrestlemania brand around the early/mid 2000s has skewed our perception of the largeness of Wrestlemania in the eighties and nineties somewhat.

I see your point about the filler matches of early mania's, but otherwise I disagree. Whether it was celebrity involvement, the announcers in tux's and most of the shows (not all) had more than a couple of"marquee" matches. Whether or not it was a small arena, Mania for the most part always felt special.

Perhaps I'm viewing them in hindsight, but there are a good few past Wrestlemanias where I don't get the "special" feeling from them. The mid/late nineties ones in particular, XI through XVI don't feel like that much of a spectacle, the undercards and even some of the main events really feel as if they could've been any pay-per-view from that period.

But like I said, that may just be me looking back at them compared to the big stadium extravangaza that it is now. I don't even really mean it as a slight, I somewhat prefer it being a larger than average show rather than something where the actual card is secondary to the Wrestlemania brand.

[salz4life]

I think the first 3 or 4 were a really big deal. Then they moved the 87 one to Chicago and the WWF pulled the Survivor Series shenanigans which both created issues. IMO, once they did the Battle Bowl concept in 91 (or was it 92)... it was just another PPV to me. 97 was an exception because they really built that show up to be the biggest thing in history.

[fw91]

Apr 20, 2020 12:34:33 GMT -5 thecrusherwi said:

One of my favorite things about WCW is that there wasn’t a flagship PPV. It made the whole year feel more unpredictable and really rewarded those who watched all the time. Some years Starrcade was the big show. Some years it was SuperBrawl. Some years it was Bash at the Beach. If you don’t treat any show like the biggest show of the year, it’s a lot easier to convince the fans that something meaningful actually might happen at Slamboree or Road Wild.

that's a really good point. Nowadays you on;y expect the big moments to happen at the big 4 and The Rumble and Survivor Series seem to be stretch.

[Milkman Norm]

In the WCW era with a few exceptions it was never presented as *the* show. So I'd agree with the OP. But Starrcade doesn't draw the comparison to Wrestlemania because of the WCW years. It draws it because of the Crockett years. It had the history of the Thanksgiving night tradition in Greensboro & Atlanta behind it. Even after it was moved to December & Turner bought the company they played up the history of the show.

[Celexa Bliss 54]

Apr 19, 2020 19:17:40 GMT -5 TOK Hehe'd Around & Found Out said:

Bischoff talks about how the WCW front office never really considered Starrcade their flagship show all the time on 83 Weeks. It was their first PPV and was one of the bigger shows of the year, but never was THE show like Wrestlemania was.

That makes a lot of sense. Bash at the Beach and Halloween Havoc were often bigger deals than Starrcade was. Look at 1996, where Bash at the Beach was built around who would be the third man, then Halloween Havoc was the blow-off to the Hogan/Savage feud that started at Bash at the Beach, then Starrcade was merely the next chapter in a Hogan/Piper feud that would run off and on for the next two years.

In 97, the Bash had Rodman's in-ring debut. The only reason Starrcade was bigger than Havoc that year was because of Sting. They were full-bore into Sting/Hogan by that point, so all other shows from August on were filler. I mean, Road Wild felt like a bigger event to me than the September, October and August offerings.

In 98, Bash at the Beach had Karl Malone vs. Dennis Rodman, Havoc had Hogan vs. Warrior, but also DDP/Goldberg, Sting/Bret, Steiner/Steiner and Hall/Nash, arguably one of their strongest cards of the year on paper. By the time Starrcade rolled around, they were firmly in the routine of only advertising three or so matches for PPVs, so most people didn't even know what to expect if they ordered.

I think Bischoff wanted to try and do things differently than WWF, with every PPV being part of the story. The problem was when he would start focusing on one major angle, because then a lot of PPVs felt similar to each other or worse, like an episode of Nitro, like most PPVs in 1998 and 1999.