Now I'm not saying HBK didn't suffer a legitimate back injury at the Royal Rumble in 1998. He obviously was in agony for the next two months up until Mania and looked in pain in his match against Austin when he lost the belt. After Mania he was gone for four years apart from sporadic appearances and everyone thought he had retired because of his debilitating back injury. People were sad about it but moved on and new stars came through that helped change wrestling forever.
Then suddenly he comes back in 2002, free of his career ending injury and carries on performing at the highest level for the next eight years, going on tours and only missing a few months due to different injuries. Something a little fishy about that isn't there? It never really dawned on me until recently that perhaps his career ending injury was not really an injury at all, but a career ending addiction. I think we all know HBK was messed up in those days and in his DVD's he talks about giving up drugs after his son was born and becoming a born again Christian. Coincidentally, this ties in with the period he was out of wrestling.
So my question/theory is, was his injury actually no where near as bad as the WWE made it out to be and just for kayfabe sake. The real reason he was gone for four years was because he was an unreliable junkie who couldn't deal with losing the belt or having to put over new talent and either quit or got fired. It was only when he cleaned up did Vince think about bringing him back in. I just can't imagine anyone miraculously healing from a career ending injury and then going on to wrestle for another eight years. It doesn't make sense and they never really talk about how he did get through it, so I assume he didn't and it was just a lie to save face. Thoughts?
Then suddenly he comes back in 2002, free of his career ending injury and carries on performing at the highest level for the next eight years, going on tours and only missing a few months due to different injuries. Something a little fishy about that isn't there? It never really dawned on me until recently that perhaps his career ending injury was not really an injury at all, but a career ending addiction. I think we all know HBK was messed up in those days and in his DVD's he talks about giving up drugs after his son was born and becoming a born again Christian. Coincidentally, this ties in with the period he was out of wrestling.
So my question/theory is, was his injury actually no where near as bad as the WWE made it out to be and just for kayfabe sake. The real reason he was gone for four years was because he was an unreliable junkie who couldn't deal with losing the belt or having to put over new talent and either quit or got fired. It was only when he cleaned up did Vince think about bringing him back in. I just can't imagine anyone miraculously healing from a career ending injury and then going on to wrestle for another eight years. It doesn't make sense and they never really talk about how he did get through it, so I assume he didn't and it was just a lie to save face. Thoughts?