Hulk Hogan/FOTH gets his ass handed to him over and over again

[Slyfox696]

It is valid, they have both chosen to make music for most of their lives and shown dedication to it. Why do something for half your life that you hate when you could easily do something different?

The difference lies in who is telling them how to create.

What? The record companies hired them because they thought their music at the time could make them a profit, what other reason is there?

But, the record companies didn't tell them how to create their music.

That's the difference.

As for Flair and Hogan, why did their companies hire them? Because they thought there was money there. How is that different from why Spears and Osbourne got their deals? It's the same reason, money.

The difference, like I've said many times now, is the control the company has. If Britney Spears and Ozzy were both told to create their music for the sole purpose of selling the most albums to the greatest number of people, and to create their music in a certain fashion in order to achieve that goal, then yes, Britney would be better.

Why? Neither of us will change our minds so why bother?

I'm curious to read your answer.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

Debunking Myths, brought to you by the Shockmaster.

1. A well accomplished Tag Wrestler or Intercontinental Champion. This means nothing, see Shelton Benjamin, Chris Jericho, John Morrison or scores of other guys that have held mid card titles that don't translate to jackshit at the main event level.

2. Stole the Show at Mania X: See Bret Hart vs. Owen Hart

3. Headline Wrestlemania XI:

Debunking myths? Sounds like a load of what I'm dropping in the can right now.

1) Let's look at some other accomplished mid-card singles and/or tag team wrestlers:
-Edge
-Randy Savage
-BRET HART
-Steve Austin
-Ultimate Warrior
-Rocky Maivia
-Mankind
-Hunter Hurst Helmsley
-Owen Hart
-Christian
-Jeff Hardy
-Rob Van Dam
-Randy Orton
-Jeff Jarrett

I'm sure those guys had one single individual who singlehandedly was responsible for the wrestler's rise to stardom. Give me a break.

2) Everyone has his/her opinion, I suppose. You Hogan marks like to quote statistics and ratings. Well, if you take 10 random wrestling fans and ask them to list a match from Wrestlemania X, I would bet 100 bucks that AT LEAST 8, probably 9, would list HBK v. Razor. FACT.

3) I said "headline," not main-event. There's a difference. For example, Wrestlemania XVIII: main event = Triple H v. Jericho. Headline match? Hogan v. Rock. Hogan v. Rock was way bigger than Diesel v. HBK, but it was still the WWF title match at freaking Wrestlemania. Thus, headline.

 

[Moon Knight]

Why bother Sly? Nothing I can say will change your mind. I am tired of going back and forth while never getting anywhere. And yes, it's same basic structure.

MATCH 1
[youtube]5JX7-eVI5A4[/youtube]

[youtube]G0gA1ucGP_o[/youtube]

[youtube]-mji6vgg2CQ[/youtube]


MATCH 2

[youtube]ghiJgHV0j3Y[/youtube]

[youtube]Puy5UimlMdQ[/youtube]

[youtube]i2hQRwtQX2Y[/youtube]

[youtube]Mxpi8jVYkHM[/youtube]

[youtube]D8a0t3fClCI[/youtube]


Look pretty different. But as I said before neither of us are going to change our minds, so this is just going to go back and forth with neither of us giving an inch.

 

[Gifted Music]

And the matches with Orton and HBK were meant to be one time deals, and only one time deals. To say that HBK and Orton didn't get a positive rub by simply being in the same ring the calibre of someone like Hogan is wrong. HBK has been in precisely how many main events of Summerslam since his return? Let's see, the wonderful Eliminatino Chamber and the match with Hogan. It kinda proves what I've been saying, HBK is nothing more then a glorified upper mid carder, not a main eventer. He was only in the main event of WM 23 because of an injury, outside of that, nothing significant. Randy Orton rode a great wave of momentum of being associated with Hogan. All that being said, I dare ask, who do you think the people paid to see in those two matches, the answer is the common denominator, and those people went home happy with the results.

All that being said, those were designed to be one time matches. Let's take a look back to 2002, Hogan's last significant run in the company. Put over the Rock, put over the Undertaker, Put Over, Kurt Angle, put over Brock Lesnar. That's more guys he's put over then Triple H has the last 7 years, and that was in a 4 month span.

Actually, HBK/Hogan was supposed to be a 2 match deal.. Hogan would win the first then HBK would win the 2nd.. But after Hogan won, when it was time to repay the favor, he complained his knee was acting up again, thus nixing the rematch.. It's that sole reason as to why Austin wants no part of a Hogan/Austin WM match. And Hogan's at the stage where his credibility will not be affected by a loss.. With that said, he could've easily put Randy Orton over.. Triple H did, Ric Flair did, Mick Foley, Shawn Michaels, RVD, Chris Jericho, Dusty Rhodes, The Undertaker, Eddie Guerrero, ALL future hall of famers and all willingly did the job to Randy Orton.. And due to Hulk Hogan knowing Cowboy Bob Orton and the history there, It should've been easier for Hogan to put Orton over as he should've known he was gonna be a star.

 

[Slyfox696]

Debunking myths? Sounds like a load of what I'm dropping in the can right now.

1) Let's look at some other accomplished mid-card singles and/or tag team wrestlers:
-Edge
-Randy Savage
-BRET HART
-Steve Austin
-Ultimate Warrior
-Rocky Maivia
-Mankind
-Hunter Hurst Helmsley
-Owen Hart
-Christian
-Jeff Hardy
-Rob Van Dam
-Randy Orton
-Jeff Jarrett

I'm sure those guys had one single individual who singlehandedly was responsible for the wrestler's rise to stardom. Give me a break.

But, what you're missing, is that none of those guys were big time stars when they had achieved midcard titles. It wasn't until gaining the main belt did the majority of them become major stars (and in the case of some, they still haven't reached that status)

2) Everyone has his/her opinion, I suppose. You Hogan marks like to quote statistics and ratings. Well, if you take 10 random wrestling fans and ask them to list a match from Wrestlemania X, I would bet 100 bucks that AT LEAST 8, probably 9, would list HBK v. Razor. FACT.

You don't suppose the fact that Michaels is still wrestling and Hart is not has anything to do with it, do you?

3) I said "headline," not main-event. There's a difference. For example, Wrestlemania XVIII: main event = Triple H v. Jericho. Headline match? Hogan v. Rock. Hogan v. Rock was way bigger than Diesel v. HBK, but it was still the WWF title match at freaking Wrestlemania. Thus, headline.

You just proved his point. LT vs. Bam Bam headlined it, not HBK vs. Diesel. LT vs. Bam Bam was the big selling point of the card, which is why it went on last. The fact that it gained the main-event over the WWF title should prove, without a shadow of a doubt, what was the marquee match.

 

[Slyfox696]

Why bother Sly? Nothing I can say will change your mind. I am tired of going back and forth while never getting anywhere. And yes, it's same basic structure.

How was it the same basic structure? That's what I'm asking.

MATCH 1
[youtube]5JX7-eVI5A4[/youtube]

[youtube]G0gA1ucGP_o[/youtube]

[youtube]-mji6vgg2CQ[/youtube]


MATCH 2

[youtube]ghiJgHV0j3Y[/youtube]

[youtube]Puy5UimlMdQ[/youtube]

[youtube]i2hQRwtQX2Y[/youtube]

[youtube]Mxpi8jVYkHM[/youtube]

[youtube]D8a0t3fClCI[/youtube]


Look pretty different. But as I said before neither of us are going to change our minds, so this is just going to go back and forth with neither of us giving an inch.

We'll see.

Actually, HBK/Hogan was supposed to be a 2 match deal.. Hogan would win the first then HBK would win the 2nd.. But after Hogan won, when it was time to repay the favor, he complained his knee was acting up again, thus nixing the rematch.. It's that sole reason as to why Austin wants no part of a Hogan/Austin WM match. And Hogan's at the stage where his credibility will not be affected by a loss.. With that said, he could've easily put Randy Orton over.. Triple H did, Ric Flair did, Mick Foley, Shawn Michaels, RVD, Chris Jericho, Dusty Rhodes, The Undertaker, Eddie Guerrero, ALL future hall of famers and all willingly did the job to Randy Orton.. And due to Hulk Hogan knowing Cowboy Bob Orton and the history there, It should've been easier for Hogan to put Orton over as he should've known he was gonna be a star.

And Hogan's put over more than his fair share of guys.

Finally, Hulk Hogan DID put over Randy Orton. He made Orton relevant, and began his steam towards the WWE title a year later. Orton didn't get the win, but he did get put over.

 

[Moon Knight]

The difference lies in who is telling them how to create.

Still the same concept.

But, the record companies didn't tell them how to create their music.

How do you know that?

The difference, like I've said many times now, is the control the company has. If Britney Spears and Ozzy were both told to create their music for the sole purpose of selling the most albums to the greatest number of people, and to create their music in a certain fashion in order to achieve that goal, then yes, Britney would be better.

Still the same concept, they were hired because the companies thought there was money to be had, same reason Flair and Hogan got their jobs. That is the sole purpose they got their deals. The concept as I said before is the same.

I'm curious to read your answer.

Wait longer. I don't feel like going back and forth. And I have seen those matches before, but to be honest I didn't watch the links.

 

[Slyfox696]

Still the same concept.

No, it's not.

How do you know that?

Can you prove that they did? Because that's the only way you can prove it's the same.

Wait longer. I don't feel like going back and forth. And I have seen those matches before, but to be honest I didn't watch the links.

Did you find it as bothersome as I did to link all those Youtube tags? That got old fast.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

But, what you're missing, is that none of those guys were big time stars when they had achieved midcard titles. It wasn't until gaining the main belt did the majority of them become major stars (and in the case of some, they still haven't reached that status)

You don't suppose the fact that Michaels is still wrestling and Hart is not has anything to do with it, do you?

You just proved his point. LT vs. Bam Bam headlined it, not HBK vs. Diesel. LT vs. Bam Bam was the big selling point of the card, which is why it went on last. The fact that it gained the main-event over the WWF title should prove, without a shadow of a doubt, what was the marquee match.

1) That didn't address my point whatsoever.
2) You might have a point there, but if you ask 10 smarks, the same would result.
3) Again, you missed the point, jerky.

 

[Moon Knight]

No, it's not.

See what I mean? Back and forth.

Can you prove that they did? Because that's the only way you can prove it's the same.

Doesn't matter the concept is still the same. The reasons they got their deals is the same. Flair/Hogan, Spears/Osbourne, all got their deals because the company say money to be made.

Did you find it as bothersome as I did to link all those Youtube tags? That got old fast.

Yes I did. And I got accounting homework due today to do that I don't understand. I've put it off for 3 days.

 

[Slyfox696]

1) That didn't address my point whatsoever.

Yes it did. Those guys weren't successful in the undercard, thus saying that midcard titles is proof of success is false.

2) You might have a point there, but if you ask 10 smarks, the same would result.

Asking 10 smarks hardly makes a point. Ask those same 10 smarks and they'll tell you that ROH is far superior to the WWE, and will never have heard of Bruiser Brody.

3) Again, you missed the point, jerky.

What was your point then? Because, it was my understanding that your point was the HBK vs. Diesel was the main attraction. But, it wasn't.

 

[Moon Knight]

What was your point then? Because, it was my understanding that your point was the HBK vs. Diesel was the main attraction. But, it wasn't.

For a match to be the main attraction it needs to be the main event. IMO anyway. I combine the two, he may mean something else.

 

[Slyfox696]

For a match to be the main attraction it needs to be the main event. IMO anyway. I combine the two, he may mean something else.

And in the case of LT vs. Bam Bam, it was both. The main attraction, the main-event, the headliner, and the marquee match.

 

[Joaquim Akaem]

Can I just ask?
At what point does doing the same stuff in every match become a bad thing?
Wrestlers that do this are just giving their fans what they want, thats why so many people pay to see them. Guys like Hulk Hogan knew their audiences and thats why they became so successful.
If i was a mindless Hogan mark and i bought a ticket to see one of his matches, I would be pissed if he didn't do his arm waving moves and his leg drop.
Its like a vending machine concept, I want to see Hulk no-selling and a 20 minute pose down, so i pay my money, if i don't get that.... i would feel like i just got robbed.
Same with Flair, I'm sure most people couldn't care less about how many different suplexes or chain submissions he could do... just a few simple chops, fall on the face, an occasional low blow and a figure four leglock would be enough to satisfy most arenas.
Thats my take on it all anyway. Nowadays, i'd get bored of that shit on my TV all the time, but back in the 80's it was ALL about ticket sales from putting on shows.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

I said "headline" as to differentiate from the BamBam-LT match. Note the example I used from Mania X-8. And "headline" very well may have been the wrong word to use. Bottom line: he fought in the WWF title match at Mania...that's big.

I wasn't arguing that those guys were successful in the midcard. I was trying to bring up other guys who moved up through the mid-card that were studs (unlike the Shelton Benjamin reference that Shocky made, pfft).

 

[Slyfox696]

Can I just ask?
At what point does doing the same stuff in every match become a bad thing?
Wrestlers that do this are just giving their fans what they want, thats why so many people pay to see them. Guys like Hulk Hogan knew their audiences and thats why they became so successful.
If i was a mindless Hogan mark and i bought a ticket to see one of his matches, I would be pissed if he didn't do his arm waving moves and his leg drop.
Its like a vending machine concept, I want to see Hulk no-selling and a 20 minute pose down, so i pay my money, if i don't get that.... i would feel like i just got robbed.
Same with Flair, I'm sure most people couldn't care less about how many different suplexes or chain submissions he could do... just a few simple chops, fall on the face, an occasional low blow and a figure four leglock would be enough to satisfy most arenas.
Thats my take on it all anyway. Nowadays, i'd get bored of that shit on my TV all the time, but back in the 80's it was ALL about ticket sales from putting on shows.

You make a very good point. Many cases, it's not bad. However, a match should be suited to the circumstances and the situation. If Umaga just works squash matches, and then is asked to make another worker look good and put him over as a star, then Umaga using a squash match wouldn't make sense.

Matches should fit characters, situations, storylines, and circumstances. When, in the course of 20 years, you never adapt your style, it's highly unlikely the match is serving is best function.

 

[Slyfox696]

I said "headline" as to differentiate from the BamBam-LT match. Note the example I used from Mania X-8. And "headline" very well may have been the wrong word to use. Bottom line: he fought in the WWF title match at Mania...that's big.

Michaels fought in a title match on the undercard to a match between a mid card wrestler and a football player.

Do you think Hulk Hogan going for a World Title would be in the undercard to a midcard worker and an untrained worker?

 

[Gifted Music]

How was it the same basic structure? That's what I'm asking.

We'll see.
And Hogan's put over more than his fair share of guys.

Finally, Hulk Hogan DID put over Randy Orton. He made Orton relevant, and began his steam towards the WWE title a year later. Orton didn't get the win, but he did get put over.

Randy Orton was relevant looooong before the Hogan/Orton feud.. Randy Orton had feuded and gained victories over The Undertaker, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Mick Foley, and Ric Flair prior to this.. So Orton WAS relevant... He needed that next step.. He needed the step from Relevant to Main Player..A victory over the Immortal Hulk Hogan would've given him that.. Hogan had NOTHING to gain whatsoever from defeating Randy Orton. Nothing except another payday.. Randy Orton defeating Hulk Hogan would've been the biggest victory of his career hands down. And he lost.. You don't hear anyone today saying "Yeah, Randy Orton really benefitted from that loss to Hulk Hogan".. But if Orton had defeated Hulk Hogan, people would've mentioned that first when talking about the guys Orton's beaten.. They'd be talking about it even today.. Even more than his victories over Triple H and Shawn Michaels. Hulk Hogan could've done so much more to help the younger guys in his latest WWE run and all we got was him coming back for a couple months, defeating a big name or up and coming big name, then leaving after he collects his money.

 

[Shocky]

Debunking myths? Sounds like a load of what I'm dropping in the can right now.

1) Let's look at some other accomplished mid-card singles and/or tag team wrestlers:
-Edge
-Randy Savage
-BRET HART
-Steve Austin
-Ultimate Warrior
-Rocky Maivia
-Mankind
-Hunter Hurst Helmsley
-Owen Hart
-Christian
-Jeff Hardy
-Rob Van Dam
-Randy Orton
-Jeff Jarrett

I'm sure those guys had one single individual who singlehandedly was responsible for the wrestler's rise to stardom. Give me a break.

2) Everyone has his/her opinion, I suppose. You Hogan marks like to quote statistics and ratings. Well, if you take 10 random wrestling fans and ask them to list a match from Wrestlemania X, I would bet 100 bucks that AT LEAST 8, probably 9, would list HBK v. Razor. FACT.

3) I said "headline," not main-event. There's a difference. For example, Wrestlemania XVIII: main event = Triple H v. Jericho. Headline match? Hogan v. Rock. Hogan v. Rock was way bigger than Diesel v. HBK, but it was still the WWF title match at freaking Wrestlemania. Thus, headline.

1. Easy
Edge-Mick Foley
Savage- Hulk Hogan
-BRET HART - Mr. Perfect
-Steve Austin - Bret Hart
-Ultimate Warrior - Hulk Hogan
-Rocky Maivia - Steve Austin
-Mankind - Terry Funk, Vader
-Hunter Hurst Helmsley - Mick Foley
-Owen Hart - Bret Hart
-Christian - Still waiting on him
-Jeff Hardy - LAWLZ
-Rob Van Dam - John Cena
-Randy Orton - Mick Foley
-Jeff Jarrett - Vastly Under rated

2) Everyone has his/her opinion, I suppose. You Hogan marks like to quote statistics and ratings. Well, if you take 10 random wrestling fans and ask them to list a match from Wrestlemania X, I would bet 100 bucks that AT LEAST 8, probably 9, would list HBK v. Razor. FACT.

No OPINION. Go ahead, go out and ask people, tell me what they say.

3) I said "headline," not main-event. There's a difference. For example, Wrestlemania XVIII: main event = Triple H v. Jericho. Headline match? Hogan v. Rock. Hogan v. Rock was way bigger than Diesel v. HBK, but it was still the WWF title match at freaking Wrestlemania. Thus, headline

Except that everything leading up to WM 11 was built around Bam Bam Bigelow vs. LT. Do you realize, that it takes something incredibly special to be in a title match at Mania, and not be in the main event. The entire pay per view is built around the Championship and HBK didn't get in the main event, period.

 

[Shocky]

Actually, HBK/Hogan was supposed to be a 2 match deal.. Hogan would win the first then HBK would win the 2nd.. But after Hogan won, when it was time to repay the favor, he complained his knee was acting up again, thus nixing the rematch.. It's that sole reason as to why Austin wants no part of a Hogan/Austin WM match. And Hogan's at the stage where his credibility will not be affected by a loss.. With that said, he could've easily put Randy Orton over.. Triple H did, Ric Flair did, Mick Foley, Shawn Michaels, RVD, Chris Jericho, Dusty Rhodes, The Undertaker, Eddie Guerrero, ALL future hall of famers and all willingly did the job to Randy Orton.. And due to Hulk Hogan knowing Cowboy Bob Orton and the history there, It should've been easier for Hogan to put Orton over as he should've known he was gonna be a star.

Austin wants no part of Hogan because Austin fears that what happened to the Rock at WM X-8 is going to be the exact same thing that happens to Austin. Austin spent so much time brooding and being pissed at Bischoff and Hogan that his ego couldn't take it if for some reason the crowd reacted better to Hogan then to him. People might throw in the politicking, whatever, but Austin fears Hogan, and that's the bottomline.

And when did Triple H ever, ever put over Randy Orton....waiting, waiting, waiting, nope didn't happen.

 

[Danmen001]

Take these long posts outside the bar room. Seriously.

 

[Moon Knight]

Take these long posts outside the bar room. Seriously.

You don't have to come in here you know.

 

[Slyfox696]

Randy Orton was relevant looooong before the Hogan/Orton feud.. Randy Orton had feuded and gained victories over The Undertaker, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Mick Foley, and Ric Flair prior to this.. So Orton WAS relevant... He needed that next step.. He needed the step from Relevant to Main Player..A victory over the Immortal Hulk Hogan would've given him that.. Hogan had NOTHING to gain whatsoever from defeating Randy Orton. Nothing except another payday.. Randy Orton defeating Hulk Hogan would've been the biggest victory of his career hands down. And he lost.. You don't hear anyone today saying "Yeah, Randy Orton really benefitted from that loss to Hulk Hogan".. But if Orton had defeated Hulk Hogan, people would've mentioned that first when talking about the guys Orton's beaten.. They'd be talking about it even today.. Even more than his victories over Triple H and Shawn Michaels. Hulk Hogan could've done so much more to help the younger guys in his latest WWE run and all we got was him coming back for a couple months, defeating a big name or up and coming big name, then leaving after he collects his money.

But Orton WASN'T relevant when he went into his feud with Hogan. I've already mentioned why.

And, a year after his feud with Hogan, Orton was a World Champion.


I don't see how people can say that Hogan did anything but help Orton.

Austin wants no part of Hogan because Austin fears that what happened to the Rock at WM X-8 is going to be the exact same thing that happens to Austin. Austin spent so much time brooding and being pissed at Bischoff and Hogan that his ego couldn't take it if for some reason the crowd reacted better to Hogan then to him. People might throw in the politicking, whatever, but Austin fears Hogan, and that's the bottomline.

And when did Triple H ever, ever put over Randy Orton....waiting, waiting, waiting, nope didn't happen.

Repped...again.

I hate spreading it around.

Take these long posts outside the bar room. Seriously.

No.

 

[Shocky]

I know, I owe so many people rep at this point.

 

[Steamboat Ricky]

Michaels was still main eventing before his mania feud w/ Hart.