How big of a mistake was it?

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

Ok, I’m going to go out on a limb here and ask everyone the following question:

When I woke up this morning, did I somehow end up switching places with an alternate universe version of myself?

Because I remember vividly on the evening of March 17, 2002 at WrestleMania 18, Hulk Hogan losing his match with The Rock. Again, someone on this thread PLEASE let me know if this is the case, because if it is a lot of what I am about to say may not even apply since I’m assuming I am indeed in a dimension where The Rock got ran over by that Hulkamania runnin’ on wild on him and stuff.

But with that said, I am going to assume that this isn’t the case. I am pretty certain that I’m indeed living in a world where Hulk Hogan did indeed lose at his first WrestleMania appearance in nine years when “he went one on one with The Great One”.

Austin was smart as he knew the games Hogan played. Hogan did it to Warrior at WM6 (he even admits in his book he deliberately handed the belt to Warrior so fans would pay attention to him rather than the new champion) and he did it to Rock at WM18. Austin wanted no part of Hogan (due to his WCW dealings with him) and, from Austins point of view, I don't blame him. His body was falling apart, silly to use one of your last big matches against someone you can't stand.

Which big time star hasn’t played games? Hell, that same year Austin played one by walking out on the company. Again, part of me still thinks it might’ve been part of the storyline but who knows? If it wasn’t a storyline, then Austin is no better than the people that supposedly screwed him over in his career. As far as the case with Warrior and Hogan goes, it’s easy for Hogan to say something like that now that the Warrior proved to be a long term bust. But to play devil’s advocate, if it was a prerogative of Hogan to really make Warrior look bad, WrestleMania VII would’ve seen a rematch between the two. Warrior in my opinion made himself look bad, he didn’t need Hogan’s help do it. Remember, it was Warrior who walked out on the company months after ironically defeating Randy Savage in a career match.

From my point of view, I'm gutted it didn't happen. The two biggest stars in wrestling history going one on one...would've eclipsed Hogan vs Andre as the biggest WM moment ever

No doubt about it. And I said earlier, if I’m indeed on the same planet Earth I’ve remembered living in for all these years, then I’m pretty certain if Hogan did the job to The Rock, he would’ve done it for Austin as well. If memory serves me right, The Rock even beat Hogan with no outside interference. But to be serious for a mere moment before I get back on my rant, Austin and Hogan would have in my view eclipsed WM III.

I always believed it was more of a situation where Hogan refused to lose to Austin. A case where Hogan didn't want to be seen as the lesser of the two in comparison, and considering the politics Hogan has been known to play backstage, it really makes this a valid theory in my opinion. Also, I think Austin played a part in it as well, as I remember hearing that Austin didn't like Hogan personally, and just simply didn't want to work with him.

I scoff at this notion, you’re entitled to your opinion despite how ridiculous it might be but c’mon man, I’m not going to give Hogan the “get out of jail free” card because I don’t see anyone in the entertainment/sports world ever being a complete humanitarian or a nice guy. I absolutely DO believe these guys play their star power card. But you’re predicating much of your rationale on “backstage stories” and speculation and you’re trying to pass it off as fact. If the WWF was going to book Hogan losing to The Rock, I don’t see how they wouldn’t have done the same with Hogan. And despite Hogan’s ego and politics, I’m pretty sure the WWF had the final say on everything.

I really don't think Austin was ever concerned with the crowd reaction he received. The reaction for Hogan would have been the same at Wrestlemania X8, regardless of who he was against, but I think Austin would have embraced the response, and by the end would have much of the crowd back on his side.

People were cheering both The Rock and Hogan after their showdown, so yes it’s possible that a similar outcome may or may not have occurred if it was Austin and Hogan instead. Your next set of statements I’m going to have to tear apart though.

Hogan never put HHH over, in fact Hogan killed HHH's feel good return from injury be beating him for the Undisputed Title a month after HHH won it. Sure Hogan lost it to Taker soon after, but Hogan' s politics showed up again where he just had to have the title, no matter what.

No, in my opinion, Hogan didn’t kill Triple H’s feel good return. The modern style of wrestling booking is what did that. When you have 12 pay per views a year, and you need to get the next hook for someone to buy said events, you have to do stupid crap like hot potato title changes. Only three years earlier in 1999, the WWF title change hands 11 times. In 2002, it was 7 times, in between that I will admit there was a lesser number of times the title changed hands. But out of those 7 times in 2002, Hogan only got the title once and his reign was the same length as Triple H’s. Later that year Triple H would go on to get the Big Gold Belt and hold it for almost a full year. So spare me the rhetoric on Hogan killing anything Triple H did. In fact, Triple H beat Hogan in a rematch to get another crack at the World Title against The Undertaker.

WWE Title Stats Courtesy of WWE.com - Click To Read More

Even his tag title run with Edge wasn't about giving Edge a rub, it was more of Hogan feeding his ego by teaming with a man who was quickly becoming the new star of WWE.

While it wasn’t necessary to have Hogan win a tag team title, what was the harm either? Especially considering how much of a farce tag team wrestling has been over the years, Hogan and Edge winning the straps was the least harmful they could do. Keep in mind, five years later John Cena and Shawn Michaels would be WWE World Tag Team Champions heading into WrestleMania 23. At the biggest event of the year, all the titles should have a role, but the tag team titles took a backseat that year, just like a lot of other titles have over the years. Hogan and Edge held the title for a few mere weeks and the titles went to someone else. And more or less WWE, has had the same rinse and repeat cycle with their tag team titles. Edge for the next decade headlined multiple events and had several WrestleMania moments to boo. I’m sure he’s so angry about having to team with Hulk Hogan prior to all that though, because lord knows that set his career back by ages. Let’s put it this way man, it was a step up from arguing with Booker T over who was going to get a storyline shampoo commercial endorsement.

Booker T Loses Commercial Endorsement To Edge

Also throw in a still young Orton, who Hogan could have done the right thing and put him over, but Hogan had to beat him too. Just imagine how the "Legend Killer" gimmick for Orton would have exploded had he got a win over the almighty Hulk Hogan. So while there were a couple exceptions, Hogan never really put anyone over.

Bull to the crap on this one, if memory serves me right. Orton was serving a legitimate suspension back in 2006, supposedly Bruce Prichard found him smoking pot backstage, if he did all the power to him, stupid thing is that he got caught. However, I’m sure with all the PR work WWE was starting to invest with their wellness policy, the last thing they wanted was to see it get unravelled because Orton was “4:20ing” it up backstage.
Lord knows that would have nothing to do with how he was being pushed and booked afterwards. Again, I could be wrong and forgive my presumptions for being so. I take it, that it's just a figment of imagination or my previously mentioned theory is right that in your plane of existence, Randy Orton ended up never winning the WWE Title on multiple occasions a year after his mini-feud with Hogan. Again, I just have to eliminate the possibilities here, because it's possible that I've been living inside of a bubble where all I thought was true actually isn't.

Again for a guy like Hogan who’s been such a blight in the wrestling landscape and so “difficult” to work with. WWE sure can’t resist bringing him back time and again to work with. In fact, Hogan wasn’t this invincible juggernaut in his 2002 run that he was in years past and WWF/E still decided to give him title reigns anyway. If you want to vent your frustrations anywhere vent them towards Vince and WWE.

Anyway, in regards to why Austin vs Hogan never happened, everything is speculative. But let’s not forget that both Austin and Hogan have egos. Let’s not forget that at all, and Vince of course has his ego too. At the end of the day, business still gets done and Vince is the one that I’m assuming is going to have the final say. It’s regrettable that Hogan and Austin didn’t happen, but The Rock vs Hogan was still a legendary moment, and it was a rare moment in that it did see Hulk Hogan lose to his opponent. Again though, that’s if I’ve actually been right all this time about somehow being transported to an alternate reality where such a thing never did happen.

Here’s one question, then if I am in an alternate reality, is Hulk Hogan still at the age of nearly 60 your WWE Undisputed Champion, please clarify, that way I can figure out how to get back to my own world where all is right and such a terrifying concept isn't a reality.

 

[jrush1978]

I think some of us are giving these guys too much credit. Especially whoever said that it was because Austin prided himself and knew it woulldnt be a good match. Yes what im about to say is personal opinion and I admit that. I dont think it had anything to do with whether they thought it would be a good match, or who they thought would get cheered and boo-ed, I think it boiled down to Austin wouldnt lose to Hogan and Hogan wouldnt lose to Austin. I dont think any of the rest would have completely gotten in the way of the match happenning.

 

[willross]

Austin felt he deserved to face Hogan at WMX8, which really started to kick off his rampage against the company. He said so himself in his latest DVD.

As for the rumour that they wanted to do the match at WM23, Austin refused because he said himself, he felt that he nor Hogan was in good enough condition to have even a decent match, tell the right story, and not completely stink the joint out.

I can't blame him because Hogan was done in 2006 pretty much, and went on a string of surgeries after his match with Randy Orton.

The chance was WMX8 but Vince wanted Rock in that spot instead. Its easy to look back now and say, it should of been Austin cause they could have done Rock/Hogan some other time (which they did) but what they ended up doing drew 68,000 people, made a lot of money, and made some great memories.

 

[willross]

Hogan had also publicly said that he had no problem putting Austin over in their match and I believe that cause he did a lot of losing and a lot of midcard stuff in his 2002/2003 run with the company.

This one is on Austin, and he will be the first one to tell you that

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Rock was a great choice to face Hogan on a stacked WrestleMania card that incuded Austin-Hall, Flair-Taker, and HHH-Jericho for the Undisputed Title. Rock was about as big as Austin, they were both huge, and like Hogan The Rock was an international star outside of wrestling, more so than Austin.

Yes, Vince couldnt get Hogan-Hart to work, both wrestler's have vastly different takes on why (it' almost like two totally different stories really). My money is Hogan didnt think Hart was big enough to "Pass The Torch" to so he wanted a screwjob loss to a major villain that would both boast the villain's profile as a main eventer and allow Hogan a graceful return if he wanted. Enter Yokozuna.

With Flair the steroid investigation took the glean off that match up. Foolishly WWE booked them on two house show tours through out the US, one of them when niether had the belt. This match should have been saved for a major PPV. Flair's super-impressive win at Royal Rumble and Hogan's WrestleMania dominance would seem to have added some luster back but it was a foregone conclusion that Hogan & Piper were leaving after WM due to the federal steroid probe. Hogan (and I believe Vince too) werent going going to damage Hogan's brand with a loss to his arch rival if there was no timetable for a return (remember Yokozuna needed a win over Hogan to be established, Flair was the biggest thing in wrestling that wasnt Hogan already, beating him at WM would have elevated him well past Hogan in the fans view). Likewise since Flair was staying it made little sense to have Hogan beat him and leave, why damage his brand for nothing when he would still be working for you. I believe that is why we got Hogan's Retirement Match vs Sid (horrible match, lazy feud, a lousy send off considering Hogan's status) and the critically acclaimed Flair-Savage match and subsequent feud. If it hadnt been for the steroid investigation I think Vince would have pulled this one off.

Where it went wrong for Hart and Hogan was more the mechanics of Hogan taking the loss. They could never get a way that Hogan was happy with as it would have involved submission. Had Hart used an impact finisher I am sure Hogan would have not had as much issue, but him losing by submission was unheard of - the correct finish would have been the one eventually used by Hart and Austin but with Hogan being the guy to "pass out bloodied" but back then blood was frowned upon and for whatever reason Hogan needed to lose to monsters.

At the end of the day the Austin/Hogan feud would have been awful. Austin by then was almost at the stage of self parody with the "What?" chants. Can you imagine that duelling promo?

Hogan: "What'cha gonna do brother?..."
Austin: "What?"
Crowd: "What?"

I am sure the WCW stuff came into play and Austin didn't want to lose to anyone at that point, and why should he when Hogan wouldn't either?

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

In the sense that the WWE probably missed out on a big payday, I think they made a mistake. WWE made decent use of Hogan by having him face off against Rock, Triple H, Angle, Undertaker, and later Michaels, and Orton, and in almost each case, having Hogan on the card helped get more buys than not.

The big question is how many more PPV buys would they have gotten for Austin Vs. Hogan than they would've already received? I think you could have made the argument that Austin Vs. Hogan would've probably made Summer Slam 2002 or WrestleMania 19 a bigger success. If you go back and look at the PPV buys for both of those events, SS 2002 was a dropoff from the previous year, and WM 19 was a big disappointment.

Fast forward to the PPV buys for SummerSlam 2005, and look at the jump...650,000 buys for Hogan Vs. Michaels.

From a business perspective, that pretty much makes the case for me. Was it a big mistake? It was a loss of a big PPV, but it wouldn't have made much of an impact going forward. Much like today, the WWE can use guys like Undertaker, Rock, and Lesnar for one time big events, but it causes the rest of the PPVs to suffer in comparison. This would've probably had the same effect.

Would Austin-Hogan have sucked as a match? Yeah, probably.

Hogan was patently ridiculous in the ring with some guys. For instance, Michaels. His antics at the end of Summer Slam 2005 were unprofessional, and yet....fuck Hogan. That lame ass Hulk up ending of his just no longer made sense at that time, and yet he had no other way to finish a match. Could you have imagined Hogan doing a Hulk-up against Austin, and all of a sudden all of Austin's punches and stunners doing nothing? Hogan was a product of his time. He was smart enough to update it for the NWO, and turn heel, and it kept the fans interest for a time, but everything after was just silly.

 

[reddevil69]

Vince wasn't the problem. Austin was the problem. Austin refused to work with Hogan, knowing the fans would cheer Hogan more just like they did for Hogan when faced the Rock. At least that's the theory I heard about why Austin refused the match. Austin took his ball and went home instead of playing ball.

Absolutely no truth to that whatsoever. Austin enjoyed being a heel more than a face so why would he care about being booed? Fact is, he wouldn't have been booed. You have to remember Rock at that time was getting stale, the fans were on to him, they knew he was actively pursuing a career in Hollywood and the wrestling purists were starting to turn on him, that is why he got booed and also Toronto, which is where I live, is notorious for shitting all over what they're supposed to cheer and go the other way, which is why they cheered a heel Hogan over Rock.

Fast forward two months later and they tried to force Undertaker down everyone's throat as a heel and it didn't work. He beat Hogan at Judgement Day for the belt and the crowd was split, that's why McMahon came down to help Taker, so he could add the heel rub to him. He aligned with Taker several times during this period to force fans to boo Taker. It failed.

Undertaker went back to being a face by fan reaction a couple months later.

Austin didn't get Hogan because in 2002 he was not in good shape physically, had alot of nagging injuries, was going through serious marital issues with Debra his wife and I don't think the office felt that he would be able to physically give them the match they needed and be able to carry Hogan. Austin was basically reduced to a brawler by this point, Hogan in no way could work that style in the shape he was in at that time in 2002.

Rock's style, more flash than wrestling or physicality was better suited to the match.

It's not a coincidence that shortly after Austin walked out on WWE and when he returned in Jan. 2003 he had two more matches.....one against Eric Bischoff which wasn't a real match, and he put Rock over at Wrestlemania in what would be his final match of his career.

The excuse WWE gives is that he walked because he refused to put Lesnar over for free on TV, which to me makes sense. Austin was right, and WWE was wrong here. Austin earned the right to decide who he works with and how, and they should have given him that respect, same as Undertaker decides who he's working with at Mania. The point of the company is to create revenue, you don't have your top guy touch your next big thing for free on tv and job to him....how do you come back for a PPV main event after that?

Austin had issues, that's why he walked and that's why he was charged for assaulting his wife just a few weeks later.

How well would Rock/Cena have drawn if either one beat the other guy on RAW two years ago?

I have also heard rumblings that Hogan told Vince that he didn't want to put Austin over as well the following year, there was animosity stemming from when they were in WCW.

I tend to believe this, that it was Hogan not wanting to do business, just watch the Hall Of Fame from 2006, when Austin comes out to induct Bret Hart he makes several jabs at Hogan and the audience laughs, camera shows Hogan was clearly not amused.

Hogan is known as a politician in the business, Austin has the respect of his peers, Hogan doesn't....there is a reason for it.

As far as who would be cheered or booed, Vince McMahon said it himself on TSN's Off The Record: Rock was a big star but he was never Stone Cold Steve Austin.

Of course this was said in 2005, but the point is, Rock may be a huge movie star and the fan's were glad to have him back after eight years, but as far as who's a bigger star in the confines of wrestling, Austin has Rock beat.

I think if Austin were to come back and face either Punk or Cena next Mania it would be bigger than Rock/Cena, which did not live up to expectations two years in a row from a buildup and match standpoint.

 

[nWo2]

The nWo in WWE would have been great had they started recruiting members before Hogan turned face or IF they stuck with the original plan....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1i19kU0HUZ8

The new members were easy to pick, try with members of The Kliq & former WCW wrestlers that wrestled for WWE at the time.

Big Slow, Ric Flair (older), Rob Van Dam, Edge, William Regal, Booker T, DDP, Ron Simmons, JBL

Now heres a few ideas about who SHOULD have led the nWo in WWE
The Rock
After Wrestlemania and Hogan's face turn, THE ROCK could have turned HEEL on Hogan and become the new leader.

SCSA
After Hogan turned face and Austin defeated Hall w/ Nash. They could have swerved us and had Austin turn HEEL in a tag match with Hogan vs. Hall & Nash only to remind fans of Bash At The Beach.

Triple H or HBK
If you added these guys NO ONE NEEDED TO LEAD, Every 90s wrestling fan WANTED to see The Kliq as an on-screen stable and that would have worked VERY WELL with Austin, Taker, Hogan and Rock as faces that would leave Hall, Nash, Triple H & HBK to play the REAL "WWE" nWo because thats what they had done in WWE off camera almost a decade earlier. Triple H had just won the Undisputed title from Y2J so he would have been the front runner

Chris Jericho
My dark horse pick for the nWo's new leader in WWE was NOT only a former WCW import to WWE, but he was already having kayfabe problems with Triple H & Stephanie AND he was the defending WWE Champion AND he was about the coolest guy in WWE aside from The Rock. This would have given nWo NEW BLOOD and a GREAT heel in Jericho who TO DATE has NEVER led a stable.

With any of these variations new members could have been added and thge gimmick wouldnt have been as lax as it was in 2002. Hall would have STILL left and Nash would still have had lingering injuries, but the lack of interest and the lack of a viable main event title contender left this run less than memorable.

 

[tak161]

I scoff at this notion, you’re entitled to your opinion despite how ridiculous it might be but c’mon man, I’m not going to give Hogan the “get out of jail free” card because I don’t see anyone in the entertainment/sports world ever being a complete humanitarian or a nice guy. I absolutely DO believe these guys play their star power card. But you’re predicating much of your rationale on “backstage stories” and speculation and you’re trying to pass it off as fact. If the WWF was going to book Hogan losing to The Rock, I don’t see how they wouldn’t have done the same with Hogan. And despite Hogan’s ego and politics, I’m pretty sure the WWF had the final say on everything.

I never said Hogan didn't put anyone over, I said that there were only a few that he really, truly put over in his career. In the case of Rock, look at the facts, which are proven by the way. At the time of this match, Hogan was in WWE for the foreseeable future as a regular performer, while Rock was on his way out to go film movies. It makes sense that Hogan would agree to put Rock over, simply because Rock was not going to be there much, and Hogan could easily get back his heat later on. Sure Rock made sporadic appearances after this, but his WWE time was quickly drawing to a close.

No, in my opinion, Hogan didn’t kill Triple H’s feel good return. The modern style of wrestling booking is what did that. When you have 12 pay per views a year, and you need to get the next hook for someone to buy said events, you have to do stupid crap like hot potato title changes. Only three years earlier in 1999, the WWF title change hands 11 times. In 2002, it was 7 times, in between that I will admit there was a lesser number of times the title changed hands. But out of those 7 times in 2002, Hogan only got the title once and his reign was the same length as Triple H’s. Later that year Triple H would go on to get the Big Gold Belt and hold it for almost a full year. So spare me the rhetoric on Hogan killing anything Triple H did. In fact, Triple H beat Hogan in a rematch to get another crack at the World Title against The Undertaker.

That's all well and good that you know your history, but let me ask you this question? What exactly was the point of putting the belt on Hogan at this time? If the end result of the whole thing was to put the belt on Taker, don't you think it made more sense to have Taker beat HHH instead. Hogan's reign to me was just WWE trying to please him so that he would be happy. Another case of Hogan wanting the spotlight for himself. And why wouldn't he allow HUH to beat him later, he already had his title reign, so there was nothing to lose.

While it wasn’t necessary to have Hogan win a tag team title, what was the harm either? Especially considering how much of a farce tag team wrestling has been over the years, Hogan and Edge winning the straps was the least harmful they could do. Keep in mind, five years later John Cena and Shawn Michaels would be WWE World Tag Team Champions heading into WrestleMania 23. At the biggest event of the year, all the titles should have a role, but the tag team titles took a backseat that year, just like a lot of other titles have over the years. Hogan and Edge held the title for a few mere weeks and the titles went to someone else. And more or less WWE, has had the same rinse and repeat cycle with their tag team titles. Edge for the next decade headlined multiple events and had several WrestleMania moments to boo. I’m sure he’s so angry about having to team with Hulk Hogan prior to all that though, because lord knows that set his career back by ages. Let’s put it this way man, it was a step up from arguing with Booker T over who was going to get a storyline shampoo commercial endorsement

I never said Edge was angry about teaming with Hogan, in fact I'm sure he was excited to team with with him. My problem here lies in the fact that it would seem Hogan was using Edge to get more spotlight. Edge was becoming a star, and Hogan latched on to make himself the center of attention once again. Hogan was never a tag team wrestler, so why all of a sudden would he care to win those belts? The spotlight is why, and in my opinion it he only reason he wanted to team with Edge.

Bull to the crap on this one, if memory serves me right. Orton was serving a legitimate suspension back in 2006, supposedly Bruce Prichard found him smoking pot backstage, if he did all the power to him, stupid thing is that he got caught. However, I’m sure with all the PR work WWE was starting to invest with their wellness policy, the last thing they wanted was to see it get unravelled because Orton was “4:20ing” it up backstage.
Lord knows that would have nothing to do with how he was being pushed and booked afterwards. Again, I could be wrong and forgive my presumptions for being so. I take it, that it's just a figment of imagination or my previously mentioned theory is right that in your plane of existence, Randy Orton ended up never winning the WWE Title on multiple occasions a year after his mini-feud with Hogan. Again, I just have to eliminate the possibilities here, because it's possible that I've been living inside of a bubble where all I thought was true actually isn't.

See once again, you have misinterpreted what I said. I was not in the least saying that Orton' s overall career was damaged by losing to Hogan. What I was simply saying was that his "Legend Killer" gimmick could have been so much more had he got the win over Hogan. The fact that Orton was serving a suspension at the time has no bearing on what should have been done. Orton was going to be pushed after the suspension, so that should have no effect on this match. Besides, as a business, which would you rather have win here, a man who is just there for the payoff and will leave immediately after the match, or a man who is going to be there day in, day out for the company and has a bright future? I'd go with the guy who was going to be with me after the match was over instead of the guy that leaving as soon as his check came in.

Again for a guy like Hogan who’s been such a blight in the wrestling landscape and so “difficult” to work with. WWE sure can’t resist bringing him back time and again to work with. In fact, Hogan wasn’t this invincible juggernaut in his 2002 run that he was in years past and WWF/E still decided to give him title reigns anyway. If you want to vent your frustrations anywhere vent them towards Vince and WWE.

Again, never said that Hogan was bad for business. My problem with him is that if he doesn't like what you are going to do, he refuses to work, or has to have a screwy finish so that the Almighty Hulkster doesn't look vulnerable. I give you Starrcade 97 as an example of this. Sting was obviously going to win and should have won. But Hogan refused to put him over in the match unless it was an unclean finish. Thus, we were given the debacle of a finish to the match, and for all intents and purposes, killed the best character WCW had in Sting. I'd love to see you or anyone dispute this fact.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

Absolutely no truth to that whatsoever. Austin enjoyed being a heel more than a face so why would he care about being booed? Fact is, he wouldn't have been booed.

It’s possible that there might have been a bigger split between the crowd with Hogan and Austin in a match, akin to Warrior vs Hogan 12 years earlier at WrestleMania. But at the very same time, we might have seen the same thing unfold with Hogan and Rock, if it were to be Hogan vs Austin. All this is speculative and not certainty. Very easy for hindsight to be 20/20. Neither you, I, nor anyone else on this forum can truly know for sure if this would have been the case.

You have to remember Rock at that time was getting stale, the fans were on to him, they knew he was actively pursuing a career in Hollywood and the wrestling purists were starting to turn on him, that is why he got booed and also Toronto, which is where I live, is notorious for shitting all over what they're supposed to cheer and go the other way, which is why they cheered a heel Hogan over Rock.

Oh give me a break, you’ve lost total credibility alone with this asinine and farcical statement. The Rock was starting to get stale? To hell with that. I’m from the Northeast and that alone is a rough crowd to deal with at times, and despite the fact that there was a certain number of fans booing and heckling him when I went to shows in places like Long Island, it was a very small amount. Yes, I know a vocal minority can make a difference at times. But in the case of The Rock’s stardom and his standing in the WWF/E, those fans that were booing The Rock did nothing to diminish or change his standing. The Rock was on the rise and he was surpassing names like Hogan and Austin in the way of crossover appeal.

For as big of a Hogan fan as I am, let’s be honest The Rock might not have had the same longevity career wise as Hogan and by comparison Austin, but outside of wrestling The Rock has them both beat. Because let’s be honest, there’s no way you can The Condemned and No Holds Barred can hold a candle to The Rock’s movie outings, even if I prefer The Rock as a wrestler as opposed to an action star. The reactions Hogan got after WrestleMania X8 were still awe inspiring and it wasn’t just because of the Toronto crowd that Hogan was getting those nostalgia pops. What delusion on your part.

Fast forward two months later and they tried to force Undertaker down everyone's throat as a heel and it didn't work. He beat Hogan at Judgement Day for the belt and the crowd was split, that's why McMahon came down to help Taker, so he could add the heel rub to him. He aligned with Taker several times during this period to force fans to boo Taker. It failed. Undertaker went back to being a face by fan reaction a couple months later.

The Undertaker was a heel since the fall of 2001, months before Hulk Hogan made his WWF return. His heel run lasted a little over half a year and not a mere couple of months.

Check out the following video below to see The Undertaker’s heel turn, this event happened shortly after Survivor Series 2001 and it continued well into the year 2002. Again, predating the return of Hogan, Hall, and Nash.

​

I’ll admit, I wasn’t as much of a fan of Undertaker being a heel, but I’ll tell you this, I think the run worked for the time it did. Again, I’m used to things in wrestling not lasting like I think they should. So for the time, Taker had an interesting run as a heel that saw him show his heel prowess with the likes of Maven, Rob Van Dam, The Rock, Jeff Hardy, and Ric Flair. Granted, Maven isn’t someone I’d put in the upper echelon but his brief run against Taker was done pretty well. And trust me, Undertaker got a good response as a heel. His brutal dragging of Hogan on motorcycle around the arena was proof of that. There was no force feeding at all. I personally think Taker should have been a heel longer, if anything I don’t think he needed to turn face against Jeff Hardy after their title match on a SmackDown episode in July of 2002, but it didn’t really hurt things in regard to his character either. Bottom line, there is no correlation with Hogan’s return and Undertaker’s heel turn, it was already underway. I call bullshit on your opinion, especially when you didn’t even bother to back up that claim with any sort of facts.

Austin didn't get Hogan because in 2002 he was not in good shape physically, had alot of nagging injuries, was going through serious marital issues with Debra his wife and I don't think the office felt that he would be able to physically give them the match they needed and be able to carry Hogan. Austin was basically reduced to a brawler by this point, Hogan in no way could work that style in the shape he was in at that time in 2002. Rock's style, more flash than wrestling or physicality was better suited to the match.

But Austin was in good enough shape to handle a Scott Hall, who was a shell of his former self? And Hogan needed carrying? Give me a break! Even though, Austin had some memorable battles in the WWF namely against guys like Bret Hart, The Rock, Undertaker and Kurt Angle. Austin’s better matches were in WCW, in WWF he reverted to a lot more of a brawling style WELL before 2002. Hogan did well enough for himself when he needed to, again I’m never going to put him in the same category as a Bret Hart or Shawn Michaels because we are talking two different styles of performer. That’s like trying to compare Shaquille O’Neil to Michael Jordan. Yes they both play basketball, but they both have different roles on the court.

Even though Hulk Hogan vs The Rock was not a move for move human chess match that say Shawn Michaels Vs Bret Hart at WrestleMania XII was, that doesn’t make it any less a professional wrestling classic. Again, different styles and there’s nothing wrong with that. Austin was wrestling on the same show that night, and I’m more than sure that his martial issues and nagging injuries wouldn’t have affected him wrestling Hogan. After all, if he could’ve tolerated a now unreliable Scott Hall as an opponent. Hulk Hogan wouldn’t have been an issue either.

The excuse WWE gives is that he walked because he refused to put Lesnar over for free on TV, which to me makes sense. Austin was right, and WWE was wrong here. Austin earned the right to decide who he works with and how, and they should have given him that respect, same as Undertaker decides who he's working with at Mania.

Although there were bright spots in his WWF career after returning from a neck injury in 2000, Austin was never quite the same again in the WWF. He did have an epic meeting with The Rock at WrestleMania X7. But during the time he was gone, Triple H had risen as a star in the company, and The Rock’s profile was getting even bigger. Chris Jericho jumped ship to the WWF and would hold both the WCW and WWF titles a couple years later. Kurt Angle made a fast track towards the main event scene, and The Undertaker reinvented himself. Austin still stood out as a marquee name, but it wasn’t the same as the late 90s. There was more competition and in a mere couple years, he retired. Therefore, putting over Brock Lesnar on free TV wouldn’t have been the crime that all of the crybabies in the rest of our IWC inner circle make it out to be.

The point of the company is to create revenue, you don't have your top guy touch your next big thing for free on tv and job to him....how do you come back for a PPV main event after that?

Sorry to break it to you, but The Rock even on what was morphing into a part time role in WWE, had a bigger profile than Austin, and was more reliable and much healthier by this point. He was the guy to put Brock over and that was the match that was waiting for pay per view. And Hogan on free TV lost to Brock in a convincing fashion en route to Lesnar’s rise to the top of WWE. Again, I don’t find it a crime that we got to see a match like that on free TV. Lord knows, I want to always pay an exorbitant amount of money to watch an epic wrestling match. That whole part about always wanting to pay for PPV quality matches was sarcasm by the way. If Austin did the same thing, it wouldn’t have been a crime either. Again, Austin’s star power was dwindling, just face it.

Austin had issues, that's why he walked and that's why he was charged for assaulting his wife just a few weeks later.

Yeah, we all get plagued with issues from time to time. I’ve got spinal degeneration and torn ligaments in my knee, which has irreparably damaged my mobility. I might not even be able to walk at all one day if the issue get worse. On top of it all, I had to leave a previous career over said injuries. Therefore, I should go and start assaulting people too and doing all sorts of things to break society’s laws. Again, I have issues so it has to be ok right?

Are you freaking kidding me man? You’re making Hogan’s supposed “unwillingness” to do business with Austin out to be a sacrilege but it sounds like you justify Austin’s beating of his wife and walking out on WWE, unless the latter was kayfabe, these days who knows? In the case of Austin’s WWE sabbatical, I don’t know what to really believe, but I definitely don’t think a single thing you’ve said thus far has any merit or logic. Bottom line.

I have also heard rumblings that Hogan told Vince that he didn't want to put Austin over as well the following year, there was animosity stemming from when they were in WCW.

Again, that’s all speculative. Like your wording states, you “heard” things. Were you actually there at contract negotiations and creative team meetings at Titan Towers to really know what the plans were? Also, why not provide us with a link or resource to confirm this? And don’t give the lame excuse that you’re not going to do any research for anyone if you’re challenged on this. My rationale is, if you want to contribute to a discussion thread and make a claim to support an argument, back it up. Because I know I never “heard” of such a rumbling.

I tend to believe this, that it was Hogan not wanting to do business, just watch the Hall Of Fame from 2006, when Austin comes out to induct Bret Hart he makes several jabs at Hogan and the audience laughs, camera shows Hogan was clearly not amused.

If I remember right, all Steve Austin said was that he had a can of whoop ass with Hulk Hogan’s name on it, that was Austin’s catch phrase and in character lingo. While the Hall Of Fame ceremonies are supposedly “out of kayfabe”, I tend to think on certain occasions that isn’t the case. Just watch Iron Sheik’s induction from 2005, and you’ll get what I mean.


Cut to the 4:10 mark. After making the little “verbal jab” at Hogan, he went straight into talking about Bret Hart.

Hardly is that “several jabs”. Basically, the crowd had been wanting a Steve Austin and Hulk Hogan match, and Austin was feeding into the crowd. Again, while it’s more ambiguous during Hall Of Fame time, I think what you’re confusing as reality, is still more kayfabe. In my view, Hogan was just selling it and going along with the whole thing.

Hogan is known as a politician in the business, Austin has the respect of his peers, Hogan doesn't....there is a reason for it.

Other than the various internet rumor mill and “shoot interviews” of disheveled, embittered former wrestling stars. What’s your actual proof of whether or not Hogan has any respect in the wrestling business? Again, other than your role as a fan, what do you really know? As I’ve said before, I’m a Hogan fan so there’s going to be some bias. I’m honest. At the same time, I’m more than willing to admit that Hogan’s not perfect but again, I’m sure Austin’s stock skyrocketed amongst the boys for his domestic abuse situation. To give you a heads up, that was a little more sarcasm.

That leads me to think then, that the prerequisite to earn respect and be a man is to beat a woman. At least in your twisted view. Any ego and star power cards that Hogan plays pale in comparison to someone who can’t control his temper and resorts to beating a woman. Considering that this isn’t Austin’s first rodeo, I tend to believe that to be more serious than any backstage politics on Hogan’s part.

Steve Austin - Smoking Gun Article - Click To Read

Now, I always take this stuff with a grain of salt, but at the same time this website has been pretty on the mark about fuck ups more often than not. I’ll take this as being a lot more legitimate over conjecture from us IWC folks any day. Especially with the way you’re so quick to downplay Austin’s domestic issues but yet try to magnify the speculation about Hogan’s backstage antics.

I think if Austin were to come back and face either Punk or Cena next Mania it would be bigger than Rock/Cena, which did not live up to expectations two years in a row from a buildup and match standpoint.

Well, we’ll have to wait and see if that ever happens. And while I wasn’t a fan of the Cena-Rock WrestleMania sagas, people out there were buying. The vast majority were eating it up, and the Mania events that featured Rock and Cena were successes. Therefore far outweighing any personal opinions you and I may have on the matter.

But to round this out, Hogan vs Austin would have been intriguing, it would have been classic. Despite the reputations of both men, I would’ve loved to seen it. Why it never really happened, I’ll not know and seriously neither will you. Especially, if you’re deluded enough to give the reasons you do to begin with. And also not even bother to bring any sources to the table when making your statements. What would be best for you to do, is to make sure you keep the boundaries of fantasy and reality apart in the same way that you would with gasoline to an open flame.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

I never said Hogan didn't put anyone over, I said that there were only a few that he really, truly put over in his career. In the case of Rock, look at the facts, which are proven by the way. At the time of this match, Hogan was in WWE for the foreseeable future as a regular performer, while Rock was on his way out to go film movies. It makes sense that Hogan would agree to put Rock over, simply because Rock was not going to be there much, and Hogan could easily get back his heat later on. Sure Rock made sporadic appearances after this, but his WWE time was quickly drawing to a close.

Good points as well, in my view and again this is my speculation on this, Hogan was playing the same role Andre was playing going into WrestleMania III. He was the aging performer who represented the previous era. Hogan in 1987 was already an established star but his star power was only further legitimized when taking on Andre and beating him. The Rock got that same rub when he beat Hogan, and while I had just recently posting statements saying that Austin wasn't at his same level when he came back from injury in 2000, a similar effect would still have occurred had it been Hogan and Austin instead. In fact an Austin victory could have been even bigger for Austin because of everything he came back from.

That's all well and good that you know your history, but let me ask you this question? What exactly was the point of putting the belt on Hogan at this time? If the end result of the whole thing was to put the belt on Taker, don't you think it made more sense to have Taker beat HHH instead. Hogan's reign to me was just WWE trying to please him so that he would be happy. Another case of Hogan wanting the spotlight for himself. And why wouldn't he allow HUH to beat him later, he already had his title reign, so there was nothing to lose.

I've always questioned why Hogan won the title in 2002, I don't think it was the best move. But, I personally feel WWF/E chose to do what they wanted to do by giving Hogan the belt. Hogan's whole obsession over World titles and creative control I find to be laughable at times. Not to say I don't think he's never leveraged himself into situations where he'd get the belt. But the whole creative control clause amuses me because what good is creative control for one guy if several other people have it. If you noticed, especially towards the end of his WCW run, Hogan had the belt less and less. If Hogan had the all encompassing grasp on creative direction he's often been accused of having, he'd have never lost the WCW World Title on July 17, 1994.

I think Taker vs HHH would have been the better way to go from the beginning, but it didn't happen the way I think it should've. And in Triple H's rematch with Hogan, it was a clearcut victory this time. While in the first match, you had both Jericho and Undertaker interfering on Hogan and HHH's behalves. In most of Hogan's 2002-2003 run, most of his victories were by the skin of his teeth.

I never said Edge was angry about teaming with Hogan, in fact I'm sure he was excited to team with with him. My problem here lies in the fact that it would seem Hogan was using Edge to get more spotlight. Edge was becoming a star, and Hogan latched on to make himself the center of attention once again. Hogan was never a tag team wrestler, so why all of a sudden would he care to win those belts? The spotlight is why, and in my opinion it he only reason he wanted to team with Edge.

I don't agree. Again, the tag team titles have been afterthoughts for years. What was the harm in an older superstar going after the tag straps? There wasn't. Plain and simple. Would it have been a better move to have Hogan take the pinfall when he and Edge lost the straps? Absolutely? But the match ended in classic heel fashion, it's not like Edge was buried when he got pinned by Lance Storm. Jericho interfered and knocked him out. Simple as that, it was a brief run as a tag team with Hogan and Edge, but I don't see where any spotlight was taken from anyone.

See once again, you have misinterpreted what I said. I was not in the least saying that Orton' s overall career was damaged by losing to Hogan. What I was simply saying was that his "Legend Killer" gimmick could have been so much more had he got the win over Hogan. The fact that Orton was serving a suspension at the time has no bearing on what should have been done. Orton was going to be pushed after the suspension, so that should have no effect on this match. Besides, as a business, which would you rather have win here, a man who is just there for the payoff and will leave immediately after the match, or a man who is going to be there day in, day out for the company and has a bright future? I'd go with the guy who was going to be with me after the match was over instead of the guy that leaving as soon as his check came in.

Hogan losing to Orton would have absolutely made sense, but it didn't happen, and I do think his conduct probably didn't do him any favors when going up against Hogan. Do I think what Hogan did in the storylines for The Rock, Angle and Lesnar should have been done for Orton? Yes. Do I really know why this didn't happen? No. I just accept it for what it is. And what that is, is that I don't really know what's going on, I can only speculate.

Again, never said that Hogan was bad for business. My problem with him is that if he doesn't like what you are going to do, he refuses to work, or has to have a screwy finish so that the Almighty Hulkster doesn't look vulnerable. I give you Starrcade 97 as an example of this. Sting was obviously going to win and should have won. But Hogan refused to put him over in the match unless it was an unclean finish. Thus, we were given the debacle of a finish to the match, and for all intents and purposes, killed the best character WCW had in Sting. I'd love to see you or anyone dispute this fact.

There's no doubt that Starrcade 97's ending was underwhelming. That whole addition of Bret Hart probably wasn't needed. But I think Nick Patrick just as easily botched his spot, again I think, I don't know but who really knows. Despite all that silliness, Sting still beat Hogan and faced insurmountable odds in the way of nWo interference and what not.

It's not like there aren't other stars who don't protect their image. Again, what we see on the screen and what happens behind the scenes to make what we on screen possible, it's all just a mystery. And just because we have the internet these days doesn't mean we "know it all". Sting's character was far from being killed after that, WCW had opportunities to do better for itself, but Hogan was only one of many egos to deal with in that promotion.

As I've said before, I feel there's more to why Austin vs Hogan didn't happen, and it's not for all the reasons we think, just because the internet gives us supposed knowledge that says otherwise.