Hogan Knows Best?

[Pay Per Ghost]

This is a little complex of a subject here so bear with me people.

Remember all the stories about Hogan not dropping the title to people because he didn't think they were over enough and he would vehemently practise this over the years He, however, did this for a few people, a little recap:

Ultimate Warrior, The Undertaker, Yokozuna, Bill Goldberg.

I was debating with myself about including Brock Lesnar or not because him destroying Hogan was a great moment of pushing a talent. All of these talent became huge in their own regard. You can make a case for Yoko but he was always gonna be a monster heel and he did that better than anyone I have seen. Him dropping the title to these people and elevating the right people (save Warrior through no fault of Hogan) was justified as they went on to be huge draws and marquee names.

Anyway, fast forward to the year 2002 and Austin calls in on an episode of Byte This! and blasts the creative's handling of his character. He soon walked away. After this story came out, people have been in two corners, some of said what he did was the most unprofessional thing under the sun, while some of defended him saying that he needed to do that to protect his character from further sullying.

My questions to you:

Are they partially correct in saving their character from what can be deemed as bad booking, by exercising creative control or walking away when left no other choice?


Who do you see in the current timeline that will be most justified to do so?

 

[klunderbunker]

At the end of the day, it depends on who you are. There is no WWE today without either of those two, period. The company would have gone under or not have gotten huge in the first place. As for Hogan not dropping the title, yeah it's unprofessional but when you've made the money he's made, it's hard to argue with him. With Austin, yeah it's unprofessional, but he dragged them through some very dark times and got them back on top, with Vince himself saying no one did more for the company. If say, Sam Houston or Evan Bourne did this, they'd be lucky to be able to get a job in TNA or WCW if they got down on their knees every night and made Bischoff/Jarrett see stars. It was unprofessional, but when you're Hulk Hogan and Steve Austin, you've earned the right to be able to get away with things like that.

 

[Mustang Sally]

Are they partially correct in saving their character from what can be deemed as bad booking, by exercising creative control or walking away when left no other choice?

It's hard to say because we don't really know how much of the creative control they exercised was based on a genuine desire to help the company......or only a genuine desire to help themselves. This especially applies in the case of Hogan; he claimed to be an expert on professional wrestling, even having "taught" the business to Vince McMahon. But he knew about how to entertain a crowd while furthering his own character; this doesn't mean he possessed the business acumen to guide the direction of a wrestling company. Everything I've read about Terry Bollea suggests he thought his success was due entirely to himself; that he would have become a wrestling icon with whatever sports entertainment organization he chose to grace.

Steve Austin? Who knows what he knew? Yes, he also had the power to tell WWE that things will be done only one way......his way. If they didn't like it, he'd go home, which is just what he did. Ironically, this sounds so much like the "Stone Cold" character that it might have been humorous had it not resulted in an acrimonious split between performer and employer.

Was it smart? Image-wise, I don't think it was. Years after he took his ball and went home, he still seemed to feel his legend was so imprinted on society that he'd become a huge movie star. Problem is, this came years after his monster success in the Attitude Era. Who cared about Steve Austin (outside of a wrestling ring) by that point? A string of "straight to DVD" action films suggests that not many did......at least not many compared to what his presence in movies would have commanded when he was at the height of his popularity.

The whole argument boils down to this: Did either Hogan or Austin possess the knowledge to determine whether their characters were subject to bad booking by WWE....... or were they so interested in protecting their own "heroic" images that they couldn't be objective enough to see how things really were?

Today, John Cena is in this position. The $106 Million Dollar Man possesses the power to tell WWE "my way or the highway." Hopefully, he's smart enough to work with the company rather than against them.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

Was it smart? Image-wise, I don't think it was. Years after he took his ball and went home, he still seemed to feel his legend was so imprinted on society that he'd become a huge movie star. Problem is, this came years after his monster success in the Attitude Era. Who cared about Steve Austin (outside of a wrestling ring) by that point? A string of "straight to DVD" action films suggests that not many did......at least not many compared to what his presence in movies would have commanded when he was at the height of his popularity.

The whole argument boils down to this: Did either Hogan or Austin possess the knowledge to determine whether their characters were subject to bad booking by WWE....... or were they so interested in protecting their own "heroic" images that they couldn't be objective enough to see how things really were?

Today, John Cena is in this position. The $106 Million Dollar Man possesses the power to tell WWE "my way or the highway." Hopefully, he's smart enough to work with the company rather than against them.

And The Rock was smart. He cashed his chips when he was still red hot, but he struggled like every other wanna be sportstar turned actor.

Austin has been commended on his knowledge by a few people. I remember (and I know he isn't wrestling Jesus) Paul Heyman lauding Austin and the sense he had as to how to handle his character. I remember reading that Steve designed a lot of his own T-Shirts as well. I believe the top stars do get some amount of creative control of what they can and cannot do, but the bottom line is their decision to walk away or not 'play ball', could it be justified as to where they are now?

If they would've listened to creative and job to every new comer that management thought was the next big thing, how bad would it be for their image and legacey?

 

[rayz789]

Put it this way, Hogan started saving the wwf in the 80s when they were close of being out of business with his popularity and the reactions he gets by the fans. And Austin in the attitude era save the wwf from running out of business when wcw was destroying wwf badly.

 

[agentmichaelscarn]

I think they were justified in doing what they did. During Hogan's WWE run was there any wrestler more over than him or "hotter" than him that he didn't drop the title to? I can't think of any. The only guy you may have a case for is Bret Hart, just because WWE was grooming him to be their next star so Hogan could've done them a solid and put him over. But even that is debatable.

When guys got really hot he would drop the strap to them like he did to Warrior. It just wouldn't make sense for him to lose to somebody that wasn't doing their job as good as him. The bottom line is that a victory over Hogan could catapult a wrestlers career and Hogan made sure to keep it that way by not jobbing to just anybody. If he lost all the time it wouldn't mean nearly as much. If you were worthy he would do the job and I think that is why he knew best.

 

[harrythem]

save Warrior through no fault of Hogan

I'd say Hogan did his best to sabotage Warrior as THE guy in WWF. Hogan himself admitted he didn't want Warrior as number one and went out of his way to steal the spotlight from him at Mania 6 (says it in his book). Granted, Hogan was right that Warrior wasn't going to make it as THE guy with his one dimensional routine, but he sure as hell made it even harder for him from the start.

Judging by Hogan's run on top (and the ratings/money he drew) I'd say he was bang on in his first major run with the WWF. The guy was just a dollar printing machine and it seemed that, even if certain portions of the fanbase don't enjoy it, the majority did.

I'd say Austin was right in 2002....well, what he was saying, not his actions. He was right that throwing Austin Vs Lesnar as a KOTR qualifier was a waste of a potentially massive PPV Main Event (which it would've been) and the whole handling of his character (and the entire company from the presentation of Rock Vs Austin at WM17 onwards) was a complete shambles compared to what could have been. So, to me, I'd say Austin was speaking about the entire creative process being crap rather than just his character.

Still, as all main event level guys have shown, you've gotta put your needs before being a "team" player if you want to make it at the top. There are only a few massive money spots and, when you've got one, sure you'd want people close to you, but you sure as hell wouldn't want them to become your "equal" as that can see you moving down the card rather quickly (as Austin found out when Rock & Triple H were seen as his complete equals).