If this is already done, please move, and if this is in the wrong section please move. Also, my hats off to Ferbian for making a great series. This one, is a tribute and continuation of Rate the Gimmick .
Hulk Hogan: Possibly the greatest star in pro wrestling ever. Despite his massive ego he was the man who ruled over the golden age of wrestling. The hero to kids, a superstar who put on classic matches and could not ever be defeated.
Ultimate Warrior: A classic case of a rising star. People loved him, Vince loved him, management wasn't so hot for him, but still, the people were crazy about Warrior. His weird-ass promos were funny and entertaining. He was the guy who could beat anyone, anytime and ran to the ring like a machine.
This feud was to pass the torch from Hogan to Warrior, both massive egos, but both extremely popular during this time. Rate the Gimmick.
1- HORRIBLE
10- CLASSIC
First of all, who really cares about the egos? Every walk of life has egos, not trying to get philosophical here but people are people and egos exist EVERYWHERE, and when it comes to something like pro wrestling, let us not act so shocked, these people are entertainers and not humanitarians. It's irrelevant for us to talk about what was going on backstage as opposed to what happened in the ring that night on April 1, 1990. Because after all, we were never there to see any of these backstage antics go down. In my opinion, the best way to look at the "ego this" and "ego that" argument in pro wrestling is for the fan to just leave anything to possibility and to not be so quick to believe everything they hear backstage because again we are not really privvy to what happens and especially during this day and age where there was no such thing as wrestlezone.com and other sites, your average wrestling fan was just concerned about what the in ring product was like, after all this was still an era where breaking character and knowing anything beyond the curtain was just something no one bothered themselves with. Personally, this is an attitude we should all still have about the business, because we'd probably enjoy it more, instead of being concerned about antics that we don't see as they happen.
But anyway I am going to give this a 10, even when looking at how it wasn't a long term deal when Hogan lost to Warrior, since we all know Hogan remained more or less THE star of the company before leaving in 1993-94. Now to evaluate the story itself, let us begin:
Hulk Hogan vs The Ultimate Warrior had it all, drama, intrigue and a division of the fan base. That made for an excellent conflict in the storyline, and while I would fashion it as more of a rivalry and not a full out feud, it was an excellent match, and I thought it was rather well worked despite the power based styles of both individuals.
I have always felt that Hogan could rise to the occasion and have great matches that were outside of his atomic drop, big boot, suplex, overhand punches and leg drop formula. While there was nothing wrong with that per say (again for all these Hogan haters talk to the masses of people that put up with it for so long, if something works and the fans want it you don't screw with them and take it away), it was nice to see that in the storyline sense that repertoire did not work as well against The Warrior. I mean think of it, for the first time in six years, this was the match where Hulk Hogan unquestionably was defeated. This was a scenario that was over a half decade in the making. As we all know, about a year later we were back to Hogan being the top guy, but it was a great story to see someone finally match up against Hogan without any controversy when speaking in kayfabe. In hindsight it looks like a waste of time to have done this scenario considering that The Warrior did not replace Hogan like many would think, but just the same it is an eternal moment in WWF/E history which no one can take away. Which leads me to addressing the following statement...
I'm giving it a negative 5. While these two guys were crazy over, neither one seemed to be able to wrestle a technical match to save their lives. These two are quite possibly the most overrated "wrestlers" in the history of the sport. In fact, I really can't call this a feud seeing as they were both faces. Rivalry more like and it still sucked.
There's no need to state something in such a close minded way, if you are not a fan of Hulk Hogan and The Warrior that's fine, but by calling them overrated and putting cute little quotations in front of and at the end of the word "wrestlers" shows how no one should look at anything you just said with any merit. Do you think you could do any better of a job at working a match than they could?
While I can tell you that I myself was not an Ultimate Warrior fan and I will admit that you'll never see Hulk Hogan wrestle a match like a Bret Hart style worker would, to not call either of them wrestlers at least in the most basic form shows that you are just a one track minded and clueless "fan". Hell, I might even go one step and just call you a complete mark. Like I said in my opening statement, both men were over and by questioning that shows you have no real concept of the phrase "majority rules". People responded to the personas first and foremost and everything else second, again if Hogan and Warrior had no ability at all, they never would have made it past the opening bell and they would have been booed out of the building when they started paying their dues in the business.
It's really easy for someone sitting behind a computer desk talking all sorts of nonsense and having the gall to question Warrior and Hogan's place in the world of professional wrestling. In fact that takes a lot of nerve to say something like that and still call yourself a wrestling fan. Even if their styles are or seem limited, I'd like to see someone like you go out there and try to do it. Unless you can step through those ropes and try not only to make sure you don't hurt someone you're in the ring with and also entertain a crowd at the same time, then you might have a better platform to speak on. But until then, I'm reading nothing but the words of some miserable, misguided and irritating troll.
On a side note though, to say that the rivalry/feud or whatever you want to call it sucked, well it obviously didn't hurt Hogan's career any, a year later he was the champion again. If it was that much of a true bomb like you're trying to imply it to be...Hogan wouldn't have found himself back in the title picture, as far as Warrior's case goes though, hey he had the title for 9 months and off and on still had something of a career of course it was nothing compared to his days as a WWF Champion, but to this day people still talk about Hogan-Warrior at WrestleMania VI, so for something that sucked so bad, it seems to still be one of WWF/E's most memorable moments, whether you're liking it or not.
And while I know we are not talking about the rematch, I still think it needs to be mentioned especially with the nature of what your comments were trying to imply about both Hogan and Warrior. Now, I will admit that Hogan-Warrior II in WCW, definitely left something to be desired. But just the same, it says something when two men in their 40s could pull off what Warrior and Hogan did in the ring, even if it fell awfully short of the classic status that Hogan-Warrior I had. I mean most average men in that age bracket, would have a heart attack trying to work a match, even if it's one that we perceive as being of poor quality and not living up to the status of their first meeting.
So yeah, I get it you're probably going to be coming at me by saying this was your opinion, but a true opinion is going to have some weight added to it, and what you said doesn't. You were just using a tired old argument about Hogan and Warrior's abilities as performers, if you want to actually bring up a point and try to contribute to this thread positively then I am challenging you to tell me who you think could have been a better fit in the WWF title picture for WrestleMania VI that year. I'm challenging you to do that, take it as a personal attack if you will, I don't care, but I'd like to hear a true argument from you instead of just a mindless statement. Is that something that you can do, though? I am not sure, but yeah if you'd like, tell me what you thought would have been a better WrestleMania match for that particular event.
