Will there be another Hogan/Sammartino like reign?

[CKDaimen]

Here's something that I have been wondering ever since Brock Lesnar.....

Now that there are two brands, and a lack of main event talent, why NOT have another 2-5 year title reign? I know that sounds extreme and maybe even ridiculous in this generation, but think about it, what better time than now? For one, there are two brands, so while one guy, like say, John Cena is reigning for four years, there can be a constant change on Smackdown the way there has been since 1990. Plus, there is a lack of main event talent now, so why not use that to create a super champion like Hogan, Backland, Sammartino, who held the title for years? Back then there was only one brand, so if it didn't get old then, why would it get old now that there are two brands?? We are back in the PG era, so why not have a super face champion who reigned like Bob Backland and give the next generation somebody to believe in like past generations believed in Sammartino and Hogan?

I think John Cena should have at least a two year reign, but that's not what this thread is about (Because I'm sure that statement alone is controversial enough). It's about when, and if there should ever be a reign like that ever again. I think that it needs to happen while the brands are split, because once they are together, it will be too late. Like I said in the opening line, I thought that Brock Lesnar should have had a reign like this, while on Raw there could have been different reigns. Now I know that with Pay Per Views, storylines, etc. it might be next to impossible to happen again, but what if? And who?

So will there be another Hogan/Sammartino like reign? And if so, when, and if any time in the next 10 years, who do you think it could be? Personally, I don't think it will happen any time while any of us are still alive, but I thought it would be interesting to think about.

 

[klunderbunker]

No. It's just far too different of an era anymore for this to happen. Anymore these guys could be on TV five nights a week and that's just too much time for one guy to have the belt. If there was no television, then yes this could work, but with the aspect of people being all over the place like they are, the amount of injuries and Vince simply changing his mind so often, no there's no way that it's going to happen again.

 

[RVDgurl]

I do miss the days of the long title reigns. I wasn't a Hulk Hogan fan, but his title reign made it look like he really was superman. He was the champ and it almost felt foreign when someone else had the belt.

I think that is part of what I love about ROH- champions have lengthy reigns. Unfortunately, that just wouldn't work in the WWE anymore. People go crazy when someone has the title for more than 3 or 4 months, let alone 2 or 3 years. At this point, there are just too many egos that the WWE could never go back to catering to just one individual as they did with Hogan.

 

[Junior]

they tried this...remember cena reign was almost a year or just over a year and the fans started booing him bc they were tired of him winning so i dont think that would happen now a days...i know where ur comng from but not gonna happen...i think 4-6 months will be the longest reign we see for now on

 

[DownwardSpiral]

I understand where you're coming from. And I actually do think we could do with long title reigns again. There are a couple problems with this though. First being the era we're in. With so few main eventers in WWE, to have a long reign for one Champion, in this era he'd just be wrestling the same three people over the course of the 2+years he's the Champion.

The other problem with this is how the Champion's are booked these days. As mentioned before, WWE tried the 1 year reign with Cena, and the fans started to shit on him for it. It's because of the way Cena is always booked to be Superman.. Eventually fans get sick of the same guy beating the same people the same way for a year straight. Especially when he gets his ass kicked 90% of the match and then breaks out his 5 moves of Catastrophic Doom.

 

[S.O.B. Radio]

In order for this to happen, the television environment would have to change dramatically. If WWE had only Raw, a PPV every 6-8 weeks and two syndicated one hour programs, then longer title reigns of over one year would be possible because they would not have to place their champions in matches on a regular basis. They can protect guys and they would not have the myriad of injuries the current superstars sustain. Think about this one: when WWE television had less programming than they do now, the title reigns were longer. With more television has come shorter title reigns, more injuries and too many title defenses.

 

[Mitch Henessey]

If there were to be another long championship reign, I think Cena would be an the guy to have a long championship reign with him being the face and future of the WWE, but it wouldn't work. Cena already gets crazy mixed reactions as it is, and if Vince were to leave the belt on him for a year or two, Cena might start getting hostile reactions like he did at One Night Stand '06. Sure the kiddies would eat this up, but the mass majority of wrestling fans would turn on him after a while. I don't think another long championship reign would work in today's WWE. There are too many top guys in WWE both heel and face.

 

[Decarow]

Downwardspiral said it best. People started bitching about Cena's year-long title reign just because it was too long, and was slated to go on longer but he got injured. Plus society has changed so much since then, people get bored a lot easier. Plus WWE doesn't really look at stuff in the long-term. They look at each PPV and how it should play out.

 

[joop]

For a long title reign to work, I think they would need to stop defending the title at every single PPV. If the champ only defended it 4 times a year or less, it wouldnt be such a stretch to have him hold onto it, the other 8 PPV's he could be involved in other capacities, and the headliner could be number 1 contendership and the other titles.

 

[school-of-hard-knocks]

No, there will not. You have to remember than back in Hogan's days WWE did not have weekly TV shows to build their PPVs and they did not have PPVs every month for Hogan to defend the belt. A 6 month reign now days probably is equal to a 2-3 year reign from 20-30 years ago. And the fans turn on every wrestlers now days anyway who holds the belt for more than 6 months. It is hard to keep the things interesting without having new champions and WWE product is redundant enough as it is.

 

[LUMPYSULLIVAN]

I agree with you all that this would be a great idea but who do you use and would the fans buy in? It was mentioned briefly but Brock Lesnar but I believe Brock or Kurt Angle were the ones to hang this on. With legitimate wrestling backgrounds, at times they may have to be tweeners, but they would have been believable.

I'm sure if it was up to HHH he would gladly run with this but no one wants this. With the move towards steroid free wrestlers, perhaps CM Punk becomes 'that guy'?? I know his mike skills need some work, but he has a certain quality where depending on the opponent, he can out wrestle, or he can be believed to sneak out the victory also??

The other interesting thing about the three mentioned (Sammartino, Backlund, Hogan) is how different they were and they still had lengthy title reigns. Hogan's matches were so short it was all about the hype. Sammartino had matches that were revenge driven and Backlund could wrestle for 30-60 minutes nightly. What qualities/characteristics would the next champ have to have??

 

[rayisawesomeness]

I'd like see Cena do it with the WWE Title again, but for more than a year this time. First off, he's the face of the company and in my opinion, he needs to always hold the WWE Title. His year long reign from 06-07 was amazing and he was untouchable, I think he could easily pull this off again and maybe, he can defend his title against The Rock at WM 26... :O

 

[waylonmercy]

I dont think anyone will reign on top longer than 1 year. The scope of wrestling is so different from 25 years ago. No longer do we see Star vs. Jobber matches. It's not Star vs. Star. Main Events of PPVs are sometimes done on Raw or Smackdown which hinders the demand to see the PPV. There are very few dream matches left with active WWE superstars.

 

[aman7525]

I agree with what you all have previously mentioned about fans turning on a champion for having the title tooo long, but that got me thinking that would be a great way to make a mega heel. have someone like orton or punk or even a new heel reign for two years and people will be foaming at the mouth for him to lose. and when someone finally beats him there will be a new mega over face win win.

 

[TheLoyn]

Aman, this tactic was used back in 04/05 when JBL was WWE Champion for about 10 months, building up to losing the title to Cena at Maina 21 for Cena's first reign. It was effective, as everyone hated JBL and he went over such challengers as Undertaker, Eddie Guerrero, Booker T and Batista.
The trouble came when Vince, in my opinion, picked the wrong man to push as his uberface in Cena. He was too much of a throw back to the cartoon era for modern fans to accept. This is why the multi year long title reign for a face wouldn't work nowadays as modern fans don't get behind face wrestlers who pander to child audiances. The only face champion I could see modern fans getting behind for an extended period is someone of the stature of Eddie Guerrero, or possibly Chris Jericho (if handled properly). These wrestlers are more a representation of the heritage of wrestling that fans can respect.

 

[666_The_Game_666]

They could do another Hogan like rein but it bores the hell out of the fans. They tried to give Cena a rein not as long but a year and we turned on seeing Cena hold the belt and beat out guys like HBK and Orton. Having shorter reins lasting only a few months is better because the belt gets around more even though it goes around the same guys. Perhaps if a new guy gets it this would make a rein better

 

[troll]

I think the idea of long reigns are stupid and this is why..its too damn FAKE..
thats why...
when hogan had his reigns it REALLY seemed like he was unbeatable..even though its entertainment people were like "woa..this guy is damn good etc this WRESTLER is damn unbeatable.." wit sammartino its the samn damn thing.."it dont look like ANYONE is gonna beat this man he's just too good"...

however,,, NOW? it seems more COMPANY PACKAGED to do such a thing..when ANYONE has a title reign now its almost as if its like the company is PURPOSELY puttin the belt on this guy cause they just.... can...even when cena was almost unbeatable its seems that the backstage WRITERS are the ones putting the title on him as long as THEY WANT...whereas hogan it was THE WRESTLER that seemed UNBEATABLE...Sammartino- the WRESTLER that seemed unbeatable...i guess here in 2009 we know that the characters that we fall in love with are just that...CHARACTERS...theyre robots..they do what the company manifactures..and in this era we all know that...when hogan fought it atleast seemed this guy was literally unbeatable...

i know..it sucks...but thats the world we live in today....

 

[Evildeath]

If there is another Hogan like reign just imagine how many young wrestlers are going to be held back yet again. No suprise when people like Triple H and Batista run the show. They will never sell to younger "talent". They are greedy as sin and will run WWE low as long as they last.

 

[Razor]

Here's something that I have been wondering ever since Brock Lesnar.....

Now that there are two brands, and a lack of main event talent, why NOT have another 2-5 year title reign? I know that sounds extreme and maybe even ridiculous in this generation, but think about it, what better time than now? For one, there are two brands, so while one guy, like say, John Cena is reigning for four years, there can be a constant change on Smackdown the way there has been since 1990. Plus, there is a lack of main event talent now, so why not use that to create a super champion like Hogan, Backland, Sammartino, who held the title for years? Back then there was only one brand, so if it didn't get old then, why would it get old now that there are two brands?? We are back in the PG era, so why not have a super face champion who reigned like Bob Backland and give the next generation somebody to believe in like past generations believed in Sammartino and Hogan?

I think John Cena should have at least a two year reign, but that's not what this thread is about (Because I'm sure that statement alone is controversial enough). It's about when, and if there should ever be a reign like that ever again. I think that it needs to happen while the brands are split, because once they are together, it will be too late. Like I said in the opening line, I thought that Brock Lesnar should have had a reign like this, while on Raw there could have been different reigns. Now I know that with Pay Per Views, storylines, etc. it might be next to impossible to happen again, but what if? And who?

So will there be another Hogan/Sammartino like reign? And if so, when, and if any time in the next 10 years, who do you think it could be? Personally, I don't think it will happen any time while any of us are still alive, but I thought it would be interesting to think about.

Sadly, no. The last time the WWE tried anything like that was with Cena's one year title reign, and that ended with Cena being hated beyond anything you could think of. which is hilarious, because a decade of Edge being a heel didn't get Edge half as much heat as Cena got from holding a damn title and having great match after great match. Maybe Edge should get into the having matches business, as opposed to the running away for half a match before nailing a spear or getting hit with a finisher business.

I think the hatred came from (..probably more like comes from) the fact that Cena was on our TV every week, all the time. People say he was being shoved down our throats, but I think it was more along the lines of McMahon saw we liked him, so he gave Cena to us. However, there is such a thing as too much of a good thing. Chocolate milk is great, but too much and I'm puking everywhere.

The fans simply get tired of the person being on their screen. A 6 month title reign? Sure. A year? You're really pushing it. Once you get into 18 months on so on you really start to push on the patience of our era of viewer. Remember, these are the same people that have a new celebrity scandal every other day.

 

[Nature Boy]

As much as I would love to see a long length title reign, I just don't see it happening. At least, not in the WWE.

It's not so much that Wrestling has changed, although it has, but more so the audience has changed.

We live in a 'must have now' society, and people/consumers are 'taught' not to have patience.

In fact, in England there is an advertising slogan that reads 'Impatience Is A Virtue'.

The last long run I enjoyed was JBL , and at 10 months people were saying that that was far too long.

Plus, the talent level isn't there these days.

As much as I hate John Cena, and I would hate for him to have another long run, I must admit that he is great for the kids, and that's the audience the WWE mostly caters for.

But for a serious wrestling fan, I would say that the days of Bruno Sammartino, Pedro Morales, Dory Funk Jr, Jack Brisco and Hulk Hogan are sadly gone.