|
|
Post by The Rick Jericho on Jan 14, 2021 22:30:18 GMT -5
Simple question. Did you like the WWF better when Steve Austin was the #1 babyface with all the WWF title programs. Or were you a Rock guy and preferred Rock 2000 as the lead babyface for the company? 2000 did produce better matches at the top, due to the talent influx from WCW.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,038
|
Post by Mozenrath on Jan 14, 2021 22:39:28 GMT -5
2000 Rock for me. I think that 1999 had a problem of getting pretty convoluted at points, especially with regards to the Corporate Ministry.
The McMahon-Helmsley stuff involved some of the same players, but also felt more coherent, and generally felt like a better foil. Triple H and Rock had way more chemistry than Austin and Undertaker ever had in the ring, plus both were at the top of their game. Smaller feuds like Benoit vs Rock also turned out some really good matches, and the emergence of Kurt Angle also gave Rock a very good enemy to play off of.
Lot of 1999 just felt like 1998's reruns.
|
|
|
|
Post by thegame415 on Jan 15, 2021 1:26:59 GMT -5
1998 Austin > 2000 Rock
|
|
|
|
Post by dynamitekidd on Jan 15, 2021 6:04:59 GMT -5
Stone Cold. I always preferred heel Rock.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nickybojelais on Jan 15, 2021 8:14:50 GMT -5
Rock 2000 wins this one easily.
I've recently been watching 1999 chronologically on the network and was surprised at just how little Austin featured between Summerslam and his exit at Survivor Series. He basically did nothing for 3 months...albeit still being awesome and the most popular man on the roster!
Versus 1998 Austin though, I think Rock loses by a landslide.
|
|
Venti
Unicron
Posts: 2,994
|
Post by Venti on Jan 15, 2021 11:46:13 GMT -5
I have a huge Stone Cold bias, so I'd say Stone Cold. The Rock being a close second in my eyes is no insult to Rock's skills, he's amazing.
But man, Stone Cold at the top of his game is just untouchable to me.
The best example of him in 1999, even though it's overshadowed by the beer truck itself, is the promo he cut on top of the truck. I don't think any top babyface in WWE has shown that much fire since then.
|
|
WR91
Bubba Ho-Tep
FAN 14685
Posts: 535 
|
Post by WR91 on Jan 15, 2021 11:53:38 GMT -5
I vote for 2000's Rock.
And I dare say Rock owned 1999 as well.
Austin's year was 1998. So maybe if the poll was different I would have voted the other way. Who knows?
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,278
|
Post by The Ichi on Jan 15, 2021 15:47:51 GMT -5
I'd say Rock. By 99 I was done with the Austin/McMahon feud, and they just kept dragging it on.
Rock in 2000 was amazing. So many people he worked with that year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Jan 15, 2021 22:51:00 GMT -5
The Rock
|
|
4real
Wade Wilson
Posts: 27,644
|
Post by 4real on Jan 16, 2021 5:46:22 GMT -5
The Rock on top in 2000 took WWE to bigger heights and made Rock a superstar (not the WWE buzz word but an actual Superstar). Also Rock did well considering Austin was a very hard act to follow. WWE could have lost momentum with Austin’s injury but 2000 is arguably their greatest year ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Jan 18, 2021 16:10:16 GMT -5
I mean.
I think Austin was better than the Rock at almost anything in wrestling, but the product around him at the time was total garbage.
What I would like is '99 Austin, on 2000 Rock's shows.
|
|
