So, that doesn't mean that Rock was inferior to Austin. 2000 had the highest PPV average in WWE/F history with the 12 PPV a year format, go look it up. As far as merchandise sales go Rock was starting to catch up with Austin by 2001 and I'm sure that if he stayed for another few years he would've eventually beat Austin out, Austin isn't even #1 in merchandise sales anymore. Austin wasn't really a huge draw anymore by 2001, even when he turned face again by the end of the year some of his drawing power was gone, while Rock's remained strong during that time, as Summerslam 2002 drew a huge buyrate even though business was going down at the time. Yeah Shawn Michaels returned helped a little bit, but even if he wasn't on the card the event would've still drawn a great buyrate, mainly because Shawn Michaels was never that big of a draw to get the buyrate Summerslam '02 got.
Did the WWF/WWE see The Rock as inferior to Stone Cold?
- Thread starter Why Always Me
- Start date
- Status
So, that doesn't mean that Rock was inferior to Austin. 2000 had the highest PPV average in WWE/F history with the 12 PPV a year format, go look it up. As far as merchandise sales go Rock was starting to catch up with Austin by 2001 and I'm sure that if he stayed for another few years he would've eventually beat Austin out, Austin isn't even #1 in merchandise sales anymore. Austin wasn't really a huge draw anymore by 2001, even when he turned face again by the end of the year some of his drawing power was gone, while Rock's remained strong during that time, as Summerslam 2002 drew a huge buyrate even though business was going down at the time. Yeah Shawn Michaels returned helped a little bit, but even if he wasn't on the card the event would've still drawn a great buyrate, mainly because Shawn Michaels was never that big of a draw to get the buyrate Summerslam '02 got.
Hell no!
And I'll tell you why in full detail:
Ok in late 1999-early 2000 Austin and Undertaker are gone, so other than The Rock, Triple H(who was still in his early stages of getting over as a main event heel), and Mick Foley(who was on his way out), there were no other main event stars. The only other stars who were above mid-card level were The Big Show and Kane, but they were never long-term main eventers, so they weren't seen as up the to the other 3's level when it comes to being able to carry the company at the top. Everyone else other than the 3 I mentioned were nowhere near main event level guys, so because Rock, Mick Foley, and HHH "supposedly can't draw" without Austin being around, you'd expect the ratings to go down and business to decline right? Isn't that right?
Wrong!!!!
Business is a strong as ever without Austin and it doesn't dip at all, as a matter of fact Smackdown especially receives a huge ratings boosts, getting even 5's at the time, and 2000 remains Smackdown's best year in the ratings, which was "The Rock's show". Now back to 3 who carried the main event scene, Foley retires early in the year, so that only leaves The Rock and Triple H to carry the main event scene, does business go down?
No!!!
Business is still strong as ever and this is only with The Rock and Triple H in the main event scene and no one else. But unlike Triple H, who only feuded with The Rock and Mick Foley as the champion(Big Show, Undertaker, and Kane also had The Rock in the mix so Rock was the real draw with those 3), The Rock had numerous feuds with guys as the champion other than Triple H.
I mean the nWo T-Shirt also sold a huge amount but The Rock at his peak was probably bigger than the nWo were at their peak. If The Rock were "inferior" he wouldn't have been able to draw high ratings and buyrates with him being the only true main event babyface that year. If anything Triple H was inferior to The Rock because he probably wouldn't have been able to be the top babyface of the company and still be the same draw that The Rock was, and it's been proven in the past too, when Triple H returned from his quad injury in 2002 they tried to push him as the biggest babyface in the company but it failed big time. He got the huge pop the night he came back but soon after the Royal Rumble that year his drawing power declined and it got worse by the end of the year when he was given the World Title and he actually brought ratings down at the time. In 2000 Triple H needed The Rock to get over and draw, but The Rock didn't need Triple H, because The Rock was even able to get The big Show over as a heel and a draw, something Triple H probably wouldn't have been able to do.
So it goes like this, The Rock is on Austin's level, but Triple H is below both of them, since he was given his shot at being the top babyface of the company and it flopped. It was probably one of the worst main event babyface pushes of all time and Triple H wasn't even booked badly at the time. How could he have been booked badly when he was engaged to the bosses' daughter? There was no real excuse for Triple H, other than he just couldn't get the job done. I think that if The Rock were still wrestling today and weren't making movies he would've already exceeded Austin, because at the end of the his career he was pretty much the only one in Austin's league when it comes to drawing ability.
That's what I think, and I'm sure most of you will agree with what I said.
And I'll tell you why in full detail:
Ok in late 1999-early 2000 Austin and Undertaker are gone, so other than The Rock, Triple H(who was still in his early stages of getting over as a main event heel), and Mick Foley(who was on his way out), there were no other main event stars. The only other stars who were above mid-card level were The Big Show and Kane, but they were never long-term main eventers, so they weren't seen as up the to the other 3's level when it comes to being able to carry the company at the top. Everyone else other than the 3 I mentioned were nowhere near main event level guys, so because Rock, Mick Foley, and HHH "supposedly can't draw" without Austin being around, you'd expect the ratings to go down and business to decline right? Isn't that right?
Wrong!!!!
Business is a strong as ever without Austin and it doesn't dip at all, as a matter of fact Smackdown especially receives a huge ratings boosts, getting even 5's at the time, and 2000 remains Smackdown's best year in the ratings, which was "The Rock's show". Now back to 3 who carried the main event scene, Foley retires early in the year, so that only leaves The Rock and Triple H to carry the main event scene, does business go down?
No!!!
Business is still strong as ever and this is only with The Rock and Triple H in the main event scene and no one else. But unlike Triple H, who only feuded with The Rock and Mick Foley as the champion(Big Show, Undertaker, and Kane also had The Rock in the mix so Rock was the real draw with those 3), The Rock had numerous feuds with guys as the champion other than Triple H.
I mean the nWo T-Shirt also sold a huge amount but The Rock at his peak was probably bigger than the nWo were at their peak. If The Rock were "inferior" he wouldn't have been able to draw high ratings and buyrates with him being the only true main event babyface that year. If anything Triple H was inferior to The Rock because he probably wouldn't have been able to be the top babyface of the company and still be the same draw that The Rock was, and it's been proven in the past too, when Triple H returned from his quad injury in 2002 they tried to push him as the biggest babyface in the company but it failed big time. He got the huge pop the night he came back but soon after the Royal Rumble that year his drawing power declined and it got worse by the end of the year when he was given the World Title and he actually brought ratings down at the time. In 2000 Triple H needed The Rock to get over and draw, but The Rock didn't need Triple H, because The Rock was even able to get The big Show over as a heel and a draw, something Triple H probably wouldn't have been able to do.
So it goes like this, The Rock is on Austin's level, but Triple H is below both of them, since he was given his shot at being the top babyface of the company and it flopped. It was probably one of the worst main event babyface pushes of all time and Triple H wasn't even booked badly at the time. How could he have been booked badly when he was engaged to the bosses' daughter? There was no real excuse for Triple H, other than he just couldn't get the job done. I think that if The Rock were still wrestling today and weren't making movies he would've already exceeded Austin, because at the end of the his career he was pretty much the only one in Austin's league when it comes to drawing ability.
That's what I think, and I'm sure most of you will agree with what I said.
Tazzmanian Devil
New Member
Yeah you do have a point there, the successful buyrate for Summerslam that year was because of The Rock, although I think Shawn Michaels return did have a helping hand.
Imagine if Triple H was the one main eventing Summerslam instead, and think of the buyrate for that?
And also, as far as "Rock didn't bring in as much money as Austin", wasn't 2000 WWE's most highly profitable year before business took a downturn the next few years afterward? Supposedly Rock being the top star without Austin being around would've cost the company to lose revenue, not gain. When you look at the roster in 2000, who was the second biggest babyface that year next to The Rock, Chris Jericho. What was he doing throughout that year, mainly wrestling as an Intercontinetal Title contender, Jericho was never a World Title contender that year, the only thing he did that resembled "main event" was a one month feud with Triple H then he went right back down to the IC Title ranks. The main eventers is what puts the asses in the seats, and that was The Rock in 2000. Like I said Triple H had a helping hand but Triple H obviously can't draw without The Rock being around, The Rock feuded with The Big Show and still drew huge numbers, Triple H feuding with The Big Show and they still would've brought in the same numbers? I don't think so.
ROCKANDAUSTIN1998TO1999
New Member
at least mankind got over at SS99 . Austin may have got booed but the rock didnt get mch of a pop either so the crowd was probably not as hyper as usual so that video demonstrates nothing about who was more popular.
Austin was bigger than The rock but the rock was definetly nearly as popular.
some ppl are stupid on here. Austin's rise began when he started bullshiting his speech at the 1996 king of the ring, when he challenged bret hart at survivor series 1996 and wm13.So austin was already poplular b4 he fought vince for the 2 years.
Austin's return at UNFORGIVEN 2000 was unreal.
Austin's entrance at the 2001 royal rumble match was unreal.
His entrance at NO WAY OUT 2003 vs Bischoff was huge after a year out.
They were 3 deciding factors showing austin's popularity.
TWJC: The Beginning
Royal Rumble Winner
Vince doesn't say one guy is better than another on ANY other basis other than who drew more. Vince sees the detailed finances, so I'm guessing Austin was a bigger draw.
Plus realistically, how many NEW fans did Rock bring in? Or was he just turning Austin fans into Rock fans when Austin was hurt? I'm guessing Austin was just a better draw.
Really, neither guy was "on top" very long in comparison to others. It's why I think it's so stupid to look at title reigns and then go "fuckin Cena" when Cena has been on top for longer and with 2 titles, no shit he's going to have more. Austin couldn't stay healthy and Rock couldn't stay.
As a draw, in their primes, Austin was the bigger draw of the two. It's their job to draw in money and it's what Vince cares about, that's the most objective way to look at it.
Plus realistically, how many NEW fans did Rock bring in? Or was he just turning Austin fans into Rock fans when Austin was hurt? I'm guessing Austin was just a better draw.
Really, neither guy was "on top" very long in comparison to others. It's why I think it's so stupid to look at title reigns and then go "fuckin Cena" when Cena has been on top for longer and with 2 titles, no shit he's going to have more. Austin couldn't stay healthy and Rock couldn't stay.
As a draw, in their primes, Austin was the bigger draw of the two. It's their job to draw in money and it's what Vince cares about, that's the most objective way to look at it.
"Vince doesn't say one guy is better than another on ANY other basis other than who drew more. Vince sees the detailed finances, so I'm guessing Austin was a bigger draw."
Really?! Vince said that austin is the biggest star in wwe history, does that mean that austin is truely bigger than hogan?
"Plus realistically, how many NEW fans did Rock bring in? Or was he just turning Austin fans into Rock fans when Austin was hurt? I'm guessing Austin was just a better draw."
Just for the record, rock was already popular even before austin got hurt. During the SS 99 triple threat match build up, you can tell more fans were in rock's side. They wanted him to win that match. Hell, during that time, you can hear some boos when austin's on the mic or just someone mention his name. The bottom line is, his popularity was in its way down, that's why the original plan was to turn him heel. And to answer your Q about the fans rock brought, The year 2000 was wwe's best in terms of popularity, profit, PPV buyrates, and shows rating.
"Really, neither guy was "on top" very long in comparison to others. It's why I think it's so stupid to look at title reigns and then go "fuckin Cena" when Cena has been on top for longer and with 2 titles, no shit he's going to have more. Austin couldn't stay healthy and Rock couldn't stay."
What does this have to do with the discussion?!
"As a draw, in their primes, Austin was the bigger draw of the two. It's their job to draw in money and it's what Vince cares about, that's the most objective way to look at it."
The way I see it, vince owes austin big time. If it wasn't for austin there would be no wwe. Vince is giving back, by building him as the greatest. LOL the funny thing is, when austin "took his ball and went him" they did the same thing with rock. They made him a 7 time champion, and they were building him as the greatest wwe champion of all time. They did the same thing with bret. It's all about politics. Oh, and one last thing, making austin look good will also make vince look good, since he's austin's biggest rival..no need to explain how big vince's ego really is...
Austin might be the bigger star in wrestling community, but there is no way in hell he's the bigger star in the mainstream, even in 2001.
- Status
Similar threads
