This is NOT Main Event Material.

[THTRobtaylor]

I've been banging this drum for years, that it's a fatal flaw in the "cannot develop talent argument" that WWE and the fans seem to have colluded to create a situation where someone who doesn't win a World title within 2 years of losing a mid-card one is a failure who gets binned. This doesn't allow for the Tito Santana's, Rick Martel's, Road Doggs, Goldusts, Regal's and Jake Roberts... guys who either never got a title or never a world title, yet were always involved in TV feuds over many, many years but with the exception of Regal, probably none of them would have really worked as a World champion...and only then Will's would have had a short reign.

Guys who should be in this bracket today:-

Dolph Ziggler - No way is he "main event material", but he's just fine as a mid card occasional upper midcarder just as Tito Santana used to be. First his name is impossible to take seriously as World champ... it screams "PHONEY WRESTLING NAME". He oversells to the point of offensiveness at times, also undermining the craft at times. Yet he can steal the odd show, so fine keep him around but get away from this notion he is an "annointed one" cos Curt Hennig never got the WWF title.

Wade Barrett - Wade is someone who COULD still move up, there is a possibility this gimmick could unlock that as he is untried in a face role, which is where BNB seems to be heading. But at the moment he isn't even wrestling and is one of the more entertaining parts of the show, a main eventer HAS to wrestle in the modern world, you can't have a Hoganesque insert with Mean Gene satisfy a crowd or audience. The jury is slightly out as he has proven he CAN handle it... but I am unconvinced he will ever be allowed to, and that is a different thread but as it stands he will always be a mid-upper mid guy.

Roman Reigns & Dean Ambrose - Forget the Diesel push, it will fail yet they seem intent on going there. Ambrose and Reigns should be allowed to organically grow together - much as Rock and Austin did so that in time they might become the new top pairing. Forcing the issue by pushing Reigns now and leaving Ambrose behind, or worse feeding Dean to Reigns to do so is a short sighted move. Both guys are fine in their upper midcard roles for at least the next 2 years. THEN have Ambrose knock off Taker the same night Reigns wins the gold = instant megafeud.

Batista - Controversial but true. Dave hasn't shown ANYTHING yet to make me believe he is main event material at this point other than his past, which was built on cronyism. He is there because he is contracted to be, it's part of the deal with he, Vince and the Marvel people that he be prominent. the sad thing is it is SO obvious that it is diminishing his return far more than any booking has. Dave would have been great in that Jericho role this year, working with Bray Wyatt or The Shield - even Sheamus but instead he HAD to win the Rumble and probably HAS to be the champion at Summerslam to fulfil his deal when the movie comes out.

Sheamus - Sheamus was an experiment that nearly worked - as a heel he was different enough to steam in and win the title so quickly. Then they decided he had to be a face so they could merchandise him more and it completely destroyed that aura. Now he is back he is almost the forgotten man in someways as him beating Cena and Bryan in 18 seconds seems so long ago. Does he NEED to be in the main event no... He's the perfect "Big Bossman" type role on the roster, a kid friendly, big lunk who can go and occasionally team with the big main eventers or have his own moment but not the "the guy" himself. If he can be satisfied with that, he would have a job for life almost.

Big E. - Big E is not the future, he is Mark Henry's direct replacement on the roster. Not Mark Henry who won the title after 15 years, but Mark Henry for those 15 years - a solid midcard big man who can win a few, lose a few but never really lose any momentum or respect either way. Pushing him to the title and main event would not be good for him, he has charisma but his personality is an "acquired taste" not what you need to front the company.

Guys who are rising and should be are guys like Wyatt - like him or loath him he has been MVP on 3 PPV's in the last 6 months and is improving all the time. His gimmick is such that he will be pushed and eventually replace Taker in that kind of role... not as a talent or with a streak but the creepy, but popular guy. Bryan will move up although not for long, he will get his 15 minutes as Punk did. Cesaro is worthy of moving up and I can see that being this year... not to win the title, but to be a regular challenger to Bryan before Dave swipes it (back?) just before Summerslam and the release of his movie.

 

[Hard Hit Prince]

I can give you 1000 proof as to why Rock is a bigger draw than Austin, but that's not what we're talking about, you said Rock was never the face of the company which is absolute BS!!

The only time he was the clear face of the company was when Austin wasn't around.

Rock was clearly the guy, THE FACE OF THE COMPANY from 2000, Jericho said it, Foley said it and even hunter said it.

Not from 2000 an on, in 2000 alone! He was the man in 2000 and nobody could touch him. Austin returns to beat the crap out of Rikishi and right back to main event PPV's in 2000 too.

Rocky main evented 13 PPVs in 2000 (of course any mid carder would've main evented the same).

Austin was not there until later October. In 2001 Austin main evented a whole lot more PPV's than Rock.

You say you know more than me? I doubt it. You could tell me you've been watching wrestling since 80s and I wouldn't buy it.

I've watched a lot of wrestling and I mean a lot. I've watched the Attitude Era, in fact I've all the shows here with me. I've seen not only Austin's rise to the top, but Rock's too. I do know more than you.

Most of you kids don't know what you're talking about.

Given that I'm not a kid. I do.

If you WERE a wrestling fan in the attitude era, you'd knew that at one point rock was an equal star as Austin and later a bigger star.

Rock was a big big star and nobody is denying that. WWE's the one to tell you that never in the history were two guys like them, because they were head to head easily.

The reason why Austin main evented over Rock in 2001 was because he was WWF champ, THAT SIMPLE.

That has never been the logic. The Rock had been WWF Champ before and Austin was main eventing PPV's against McMahon in seven minute match ups.

WWF wanted to keep Rock away from Austin because the plan was for Rock to finally beat Austin in a one on one match at Wrestlemania 18.

Austin was an heel, it made sense. Heels can not be the #1 babyfaces in the company and heels are never considered top draws.

WWF signed Hogan for a match against Rock. In an interview with OTR, Hogan said WWF wanted him to face Rock not austin.

It's really ironic that Hogan said that. What I know is that the match that was supposed to happen was Austin vs. Hulk Hogan at WM18, clearly the bigger match even in that time period, but Hogan refused to do the job for Austin, and Austin the same thing. I've also read that the only reason Hogan agreed with the loss to The Rock was if the WWE would turn him babyface and give him a shot with the world title, which they did.

In 2002, WWE wanted Brock to beat Austin and Hogan on raw and sd to build up a match with the #1 guy of the company The Rock.

When WWE wanted Brock to beat Austin, The Rock was not even with the company. The champ was The Undertaker by that time. They wanted to push Brock alone, not because he was going to fight The Rock.

In late 2002, WWF knew Austin was coming back. They signed him and the biggest match planned for Wrestlemania 19 was The Rock vs Goldberg not Austin.

The biggest match that happened at WrestleMania 19 was The Rock vs. the returning Steve Austin. Goldberg debuted after Mania 19 god dammit, that does not make any sense. Also Austin had left the company on bad terms, one should expect that WM19 plans didn't even consider him.

Rock was clearly the #1 guy and the face of the wwe, no point in arguing with a newbie hater.

He really wasn't. He was in 2000, mostly because Austin was not there. I think I'm done now. Go away... Austin was the biggest draw, some may say he was bigger than Hulk Hogan. The Rock was a great draw in his own right, but never bigger than Austin when Austin was there with him. HHH main evented lots os PPV's himself and that does not make him a bigger draw and not even a point of discussion.

 

[TheOneAndOnlyGOAT]

Not from 2000 an on, in 2000 alone! He was the man in 2000 and nobody could touch him. Austin returns to beat the crap out of Rikishi and right back to main event PPV's in 2000 too.

False. Austin returned to face Triple H at Survivor Series and all the hype of the PPV was surrounding this match.

This PPV ended up getting the lowest PPV buyrates of the year.

That's why WWF didn't trust Austin anymore to put him on a singles match at the main event of a PPV.

The Rock was on the main event of the 5 next PPVs and would've been on the 6th had he not took that 4 month break. Yeah he wasn't the face of the company lol.

Austin was not there until later October. In 2001 Austin main evented a whole lot more PPV's than Rock.

That's because Rock was absent half of the year lol.
Also, Rock was on the main event of the first 3 PPVs he was in until he left.

The only reason Austin was still main eventing because he was WWF champ.

But Rock still main evented at SummerSlam with the WCW world title match being the main event and not the WWF title lol.

I've watched a lot of wrestling and I mean a lot. I've watched the Attitude Era, in fact I've all the shows here with me. I've seen not only Austin's rise to the top, but Rock's too. I do know more than you.

Good for you. Also I never said I started watching wrestling in the AE, and you don't even know me to say that you know more than me.

Given that I'm not a kid. I do.

There was a 15 year old kid on Bleacher Report who posted on his BIO that he was 15 years old and acted like a tough hardcore Rock hater, said stuff like "I've been watching wrestling forever and said I've never liked Rock" and stuff like that then he changed his BIO saying he has been watching wrestling for 15 years lmao.

People lie on the internet. Not sure if you're a kid or not but oh well.

WWE's the one to tell you that never in the history were two guys like them, because they were head to head easily.

Extremely false. WWE has always been extremely biased towards Austin and shown that WWE went from bruno to hogan to austin to cena and basically showing Rock as if he was nothing. It was from hogan to Austin AND Rock. Never only Austin.

That has never been the logic. The Rock had been WWF Champ before and Austin was main eventing PPV's against McMahon in seven minute match ups.

Exactly. But back then Rock wasn't the face of company like he was post-2000.

Austin was an heel, it made sense. Heels can not be the #1 babyfaces in the company and heels are never considered top draws.

False. A great superstar draw regardless if he's a face or a heel. A recent example is Extreme Rules 2012 drawing great PPV buyrates with Brock Lesnar's return.

Also heels can never be considered "face of the company".

Austin was the top heel but Rock was the face of the WWF/E at the time, that simple.

What I know is that the match that was supposed to happen was Austin vs. Hulk Hogan at WM18

Again, false. That statement is extremely false.

The plan was from the minute they signed Hogan was doing a Hogan vs Rock match with a story of the old lion vs the young lion.

Rock was the biggest star by far at the time and he (unlike Austin who had many injuries) was able to carry Hogan in a match.

Austin marks / Rock haters said back then that they wanted Hogan-Austin but somehow with time, this Hogan-Austin match idea (that was never supposed to happen at WMX8) was the "original plan" lmao. No. It never was.

When WWF signed Hogan, that was plan. No way was that match ever the plan.

It was just desire from fans to see it but it was never the plan.

The idea for a Rock match at WMX8 was for him to be the undisputed #1 and that's by beating Austin in a non title match but then WWF signed Hogan and it was even better.

There was even dislike between Hogan and Austin in WCW and Rock grew up as a Hulkamaniac. There was no way Hogan vs Austin was going to happen.


The plan before for Austin was for him to be a heel in 2001 then face a babyface Hunter for the WWF title in WMX8, this got canceled after HHH's injury.

Austin also reportedly wanted to face Chris Benoit because he was a fan of his but they ended up doing a Austin-Hall/wNash.

Nash was there as a possible replacement for Hall if he doesn't make it to Mania.

However thankfully Hall stayed sober and the match took place.

When WWE wanted Brock to beat Austin, The Rock was not even with the company. The champ was The Undertaker by that time. They wanted to push Brock alone, not because he was going to fight The Rock.

False.

Rock was set to return. Win the title at Vengeance and lose to Brock at Summerslam.

However, Austin walked out so Rock had to return a month earlier and show up at KOTR.

The biggest match that happened at WrestleMania 19 was The Rock vs. the returning Steve Austin. Goldberg debuted after Mania 19 god dammit, that does not make any sense. Also Austin had left the company on bad terms, one should expect that WM19 plans didn't even consider him.

WWE were trying to get Goldberg to work WM19 but they failed to sign him before.

The Rock-Goldberg match was supposed to be the main event at WM19 but they couldn't reach to an agreement before Mania, that's why it ended up being at Backlash 03.

Austin was the biggest draw, some may say he was bigger than Hulk Hogan. The Rock was a great draw in his own right, but never bigger than Austin when Austin was there with him. HHH main evented lots os PPV's himself and that does not make him a bigger draw and not even a point of discussion.

Nope.

Austin is indeed a huge draw and in 98 he drew more than anyone in history but that doesn't make him the biggest draw.

HHH was a heel when he main evented PPVs so your argument is invalid.

And yes, Rock was bigger than Austin after 00.

And we're not talking about drawing ability, we're talking about face of wwe which Rock was after 2000.

 

[Mustang Sally]

.... who in the WWE entertains you and you're fine with the position he's in and don't think he should get pushed?

I agree with the inclusion of two guys already mentioned: Damien Sandow and Dolph Ziggler......but there's a difference between the two in regard to how the company sees them. With Dolph, I felt management regarded him as a future champion; the guy who was going to take WWE into the next decade. I didn't agree, and the company has apparently changed course, turning him into a glorified opponent (and sometimes, not so glorified). I say this is where he should have been all along; he just isn't main event material (which is, after all, the subject of this topic). On the other hand, no such grand plans seem to have been intended for Damien Sandow, whom I also feel is right where he belongs.....an entertaining, skillful mid-carder for life. It may have seemed the company was moving him toward the top, especially after his MITB program, but I don't think they ever intended him as a main eventer.....and I agree with that premise. Still, I think he's great to watch and wouldn't want him to leave the company.

Two others I would name as guys who are fine right where they are? Mark Henry and Cody Rhodes.

In Mark's case, the main event days are over. He had an unexpected (and surprisingly successful) run as world champion. Now, primarily because of his tendency to suffer repeated serious injuries that keep him on the sidelines for long, long periods of time, I'm entertained by him but feel he should stay right where he belongs. Even before his world title run, he was always presented as a fearsome presence, stomping to the ring and looking as if he was going to knock the stuffing out of his opponent.....and then he'd job. Now that he's done with his run at the top, I think he'll be fine going back to being a fierce looking jobber; perhaps one who gets a significant win here and there to keep him looking like a potent force. He can handle this as a face or heel; it doesn't really matter.

As for Cody, it's a repeat of Dolph Ziggler: In past years, they pushed the living hell out of him, giving him program after program.....going with it full boat....then abandoning it in favor of the next thing. I like Cody, I really do, but I don't see him as the holder of a major title, not with his bland personality. Yes, his ring skills are good, but that can be said of most everyone who works in WWE (the men, anyway). But I enjoy Cody's work and hope he stays around for years and years.....but as a mid-carder, not a main event performer.

 

[nWo2]

There are several superstars that I love to watch who I dont feel are main event talent, but I do believe they DESERVE to be in the WWE World Heavyweight Tittle picture because they're too good for mid-card titles and they've held major titles before.

The Miz, Del Rio, Dolph Zigger, Jack Swagger, Christian are all guys who deserve a shot, but with rising stars coming every year it's harder to do both. I love to see these guys work and establish credibility to whomever they wrestle, but I still want to see new faces rise to the top more than I want these guys to keep their spot.

Bray Wyatt, Roman Reigns, Daniel Bryan, CM Punk, Sheamus & Wade Barrett are ALL guys I would love to see in the main event picture the WWE's problem is lazy booking.

When I see potential stars throughout the card and the main event scene is being dominated by Cena & Orton and of course Batista its like 2008 all over again and 2008 sucked for WWE. We need an extensive and layered world title picture and not just because of gimmick PPVs but because it builds feuds and better stories for television. There was an Armageddon Hell In A Cell match with Rikishi, Angle, Taker, Triple H, Jericho & Austin that tore the house down. Do more of that!

 

[Hard Hit Prince]

False. Austin returned to face Triple H at Survivor Series and all the hype of the PPV was surrounding this match.

This PPV ended up getting the lowest PPV buyrates of the year.

That's why WWF didn't trust Austin anymore to put him on a singles match at the main event of a PPV.

The Rock was on the main event of the 5 next PPVs and would've been on the 6th had he not took that 4 month break. Yeah he wasn't the face of the company lol.




That's because Rock was absent half of the year lol.
Also, Rock was on the main event of the first 3 PPVs he was in until he left.

The only reason Austin was still main eventing because he was WWF champ.

But Rock still main evented at SummerSlam with the WCW world title match being the main event and not the WWF title lol.




Good for you. Also I never said I started watching wrestling in the AE, and you don't even know me to say that you know more than me.



There was a 15 year old kid on Bleacher Report who posted on his BIO that he was 15 years old and acted like a tough hardcore Rock hater, said stuff like "I've been watching wrestling forever and said I've never liked Rock" and stuff like that then he changed his BIO saying he has been watching wrestling for 15 years lmao.

People lie on the internet. Not sure if you're a kid or not but oh well.




Extremely false. WWE has always been extremely biased towards Austin and shown that WWE went from bruno to hogan to austin to cena and basically showing Rock as if he was nothing. It was from hogan to Austin AND Rock. Never only Austin.



Exactly. But back then Rock wasn't the face of company like he was post-2000.



False. A great superstar draw regardless if he's a face or a heel. A recent example is Extreme Rules 2012 drawing great PPV buyrates with Brock Lesnar's return.

Also heels can never be considered "face of the company".

Austin was the top heel but Rock was the face of the WWF/E at the time, that simple.



Again, false. That statement is extremely false.

The plan was from the minute they signed Hogan was doing a Hogan vs Rock match with a story of the old lion vs the young lion.

Rock was the biggest star by far at the time and he (unlike Austin who had many injuries) was able to carry Hogan in a match.

Austin marks / Rock haters said back then that they wanted Hogan-Austin but somehow with time, this Hogan-Austin match idea (that was never supposed to happen at WMX8) was the "original plan" lmao. No. It never was.

When WWF signed Hogan, that was plan. No way was that match ever the plan.

It was just desire from fans to see it but it was never the plan.

The idea for a Rock match at WMX8 was for him to be the undisputed #1 and that's by beating Austin in a non title match but then WWF signed Hogan and it was even better.

There was even dislike between Hogan and Austin in WCW and Rock grew up as a Hulkamaniac. There was no way Hogan vs Austin was going to happen.


The plan before for Austin was for him to be a heel in 2001 then face a babyface Hunter for the WWF title in WMX8, this got canceled after HHH's injury.

Austin also reportedly wanted to face Chris Benoit because he was a fan of his but they ended up doing a Austin-Hall/wNash.

Nash was there as a possible replacement for Hall if he doesn't make it to Mania.

However thankfully Hall stayed sober and the match took place.




False.

Rock was set to return. Win the title at Vengeance and lose to Brock at Summerslam.

However, Austin walked out so Rock had to return a month earlier and show up at KOTR.





WWE were trying to get Goldberg to work WM19 but they failed to sign him before.

The Rock-Goldberg match was supposed to be the main event at WM19 but they couldn't reach to an agreement before Mania, that's why it ended up being at Backlash 03.




Nope.

Austin is indeed a huge draw and in 98 he drew more than anyone in history but that doesn't make him the biggest draw.

HHH was a heel when he main evented PPVs so your argument is invalid.

And yes, Rock was bigger than Austin after 00.

And we're not talking about drawing ability, we're talking about face of wwe which Rock was after 2000.

I'm going to tell you this one more time - The Rock was the babyface of the company in 2000 alone. After 2000 The Rock was the #2 in the company. Austin is and always will be the perceived face of the company. Now, a face of the company is always and ALWAYS the good guy. When Austin was an heel, which means a villain btw, he could have not been the face, because a face is a good guy.

Also The Rock main evented SummerSlam against Booker T because that was the hottest feud. Other performers usually do that, specially when they are returning. But let's take this - Daniel Bryan v. Orton was the main event of HIAC - in any way, shape or form is Bryan or Orton bigger than Cena that was in the undercards? The Rock was not the face of the company whenever Austin was there. Also the match the WWE wanted and the one that would make more money for WM18 was Steve Austin v. Hulk Hogan, THAT WAS THE MATCH! Now the competitors DIDN'T AGREE WITH THE OUTCOME thus it never happened so it went for the #2 guy, which was The Rock. And you're telling me it was planned all along? What the hell? And your sources is your stupid logic for believing Rock was #1 and an interview where in ANY WAY shape or form will Hogan tell that he didn't want the match? Go ask Hogan if he wanted the belt at WM9 and he'll probably tell you it was Vince's idea. Oh wait, HE DID!

Your so called plans for Lesnar are full of crap. Nobody says that they were building Lesnar to go against The Rock, if anything the plan was to make Lesnar go over Austin to start a feud between them and never to build Lesnar to face The Rock. See it this way - Kingston beat Orton in 2009 when Orton was red hot on a MNR. It was not to put Kingston as a threat to John Cena, or Batista or whomever, it was to give Kingston some credibility.

The Goldberg vs. The Rock match was simply because Rock was the heel. But here it is the full report:

"After Wrestlemania 19, a new contract began in the WWE... The WWE had signed former WCW superstar, Bill Goldberg to a 1 year deal that included only working 1 televised wrestling show a week (RAW) and all Pay Per Views. It was quite a contract that reportedly had wrestlers talking backstage during 2003 but Vince McMahon felt Goldberg was worth it for several "dream match" possibilities. Vince probably wanted Steve Austin vs. Bill Goldberg but during the months leading up to Wrestlemania 19, Vince probably didn't predict that Austin's 3rd Wrestlemania match with the Rock would be his last WWE match. However, the WWE could still do the Rock vs. Bill Goldberg, and that they did at Backlash 2003. After beating the Rock, Goldberg laid low on the roster and had a brief feud with Chris Jericho while he awaited Triple H to end some of his storyline arcs. It was supposed to be SummerSlam 2003 where Goldberg would get his crack at Triple H."

Now shut your mouth. Really do it, because you are not right and as much as you want to believe that The Rock was #1 (which he was in 2000 and to an extent in other parts of 2001 depending on the storyline), the truth of the matter is that Steve Austin was the #1 guy in the Atittude Era and the most popular guy overall in wrestling. The Rock was bigger than John Cena in his hey day, so I can see why you could be confusing everything up, but Steve Austin was the man. He was the bigger star easily in the whole world. Now, The Rock is most likely as big as WWE in terms of popularity but that is his movie career alone. And I don't even know why I'm discussing this, I've always been a way bigger fan of Rock than Austin, but the truth is the truth and it doesn't matter how you try t hide it. Rock was #2 only because Austin was so far ahead as #1.

 

[KingJoe316]

I would just like to objectively state that Austin and Rock are my 2 personal favorite wrestlers of all time. From 98 through Summerslam 99 there was never a hotter performer than Austin. That includes Hogan and The Rock. After that though Rock took over and those that deny it are just delusional. Rock was overcoming Austin in crowd reactions and mainstream appeal. The WWE saw this and everyone knew it. The only thing that prolonged Austin was sadly his injury. By being out a year it gave him time to refresh and for the crowd to miss him, but through 2000 Rocky was the man and he never really relinquished that spot. Austin was always going to be beloved by the audience and often even had more crowd support at live events than Rock, but overall Rock was the new guy. It was clear when they allowed Austin to turn heel at Wrestlemania 17 and it was even clearer when Rock faced Hogan at Wrestlemania 18. It was only going downhill from there when they were going to job Austin to Lesnar on a Raw and build up to a Rock/Lesnar main event. I love Austin to death, but Rock is the biggest star wrestling has ever produced and if he didn't leave he would still be on top right now. Austin burned the brightest for a short time, but he was obviously settling into an HBK/Taker role in 2001 and 2. He was always going to be a legendary performer and main eventer, but his days of being top dog were over. Still in history I would place him over Rock, because of his legendary 97-99 run and the fact that he almost single handedly saved the company and helped change the business. He is still the face of the attitude era as well.

 

[SmattyG]

In line with the OP thread, I'll state who I'm entertained by and am happy with their place on the card.

Titus O'Neil - really entertaining on NXT, though I wasn't a big fan of PTP. Good solid mid carder.

Jack Swagger - I'll watch just about any match he has, but I don't really see him back in the WHC hunt for a while.

Erick Rowan - I love the Wyatt Family, but I fear what will happen to Erick once they disband. Happy to watch him every week in a tag team though.

Goldust - one of the best solid upper mid card guys ever. Glad to have him on TV every week. But I don't want to see him in the WHC hunt.

Big E - loved his NXT work. A credible IC champ, but no more. Yet.

Cesaro - have been a big fan for a long time. Love watching his push at the moment, so yes, very happy with where he is at for now. Definitely a WHC in the future, but not yet.

 

[TheOneAndOnlyGOAT]

I'm going to tell you this one more time - The Rock was the babyface of the company in 2000 alone. After 2000 The Rock was the #2 in the company. Austin is and always will be the perceived face of the company. Now, a face of the company is always and ALWAYS the good guy. When Austin was an heel, which means a villain btw, he could have not been the face, because a face is a good guy. .

Lmao. You're owning yourself.

The face of the company is Always the good guy.
Austin was a heel.

===> Conclusion: Austin was not the face of the company.

Also The Rock main evented SummerSlam against Booker T because that was the hottest feud.

This makes no sense. Austin was the leader of the Alliance and Angle was one of WWF's top stars and was portrayed as the ultimate american hero at the time. And the match was for the WWF title.

This was the TOP storyline. But The Rock main evented that PPV because he was the "face of the company".

Other performers usually do that, specially when they are returning.

Austin returned in 2000 for a year long injury not a 4 month absence and his match with Rikishi who was arguably the top heel at the moment at No Mercy 2000 was NOT the main event.

It was The Rock vs Kurt Angle for the WWF title which is ironically the same opponent for the same title that Austin had yet scsa couldn't main event.

But let's take this - Daniel Bryan v. Orton was the main event of HIAC - in any way, shape or form is Bryan or Orton bigger than Cena that was in the undercards?

That's because Bryan then Orton became WWE champ because Cena was leaving.

Same reason why Austin main evented and kept main eventing some PPVs after The Rock returned in 01.

Austin was in the main event (like Bryan/Orton) but Rock was the face of the company (like Cena). Thanks for proving my point.

The Rock was not the face of the company whenever Austin was there.

When WWF signed Hogan, it was face their biggest star / face of the company, THE ROCK.

When WWE wanted Lesnar to beat Austin on RAW and Hogan on SD, it was only to build up a match between Brock Lesnar vs their biggest star / face of the company, THE ROCK.

When the brand extension began, the first draft pick was their biggest star / face of the company THE ROCK.

When WWE signed Bill Goldberg, it was for him to face at WrestleMania, their biggest star / face of the company THE ROCK.

Also the match the WWE wanted and the one that would make more money for WM18 was Steve Austin v. Hulk Hogan, THAT WAS THE MATCH!

Nope. Many WWE insiders denied that. The plan was for a Rock vs Hogan match all along, the young horse vs the old horse.

Rock could've carried Hogan to a good match ( which he did ) unlike Austin who would've easily injured Hogan.

Austin vs Hogan was never bound to happen despite many people wanting to see it, then and now.

Rocky hating trolls just like to say that without any valid proof because there is no valid proof.

Hogan himself said that he was brought back and only accepted putting over because he liked the rock and Rock was a Hulkamaniac as a kid.

Your so called plans for Lesnar are full of crap. Nobody says that they were building Lesnar to go against The Rock, if anything the plan was to make Lesnar go over Austin to start a feud between them and never to build Lesnar to face The Rock. See it this way - Kingston beat Orton in 2009 when Orton was red hot on a MNR. It was not to put Kingston as a threat to John Cena, or Batista or whomever, it was to give Kingston some credibility.

Hmmm yes it was.

Rock was supposed to return at Vengeance, it was even on WWE.com's website in 2002.

Even Rock himself confirmed it in his promo when he came back, when he said "Austin can take his ball and go home" and he said he wasn't scheduled to come back until a month or something like that. Look it up.

The Goldberg vs. The Rock match was simply because Rock was the heel. But here it is the full report

I wipe my @$$ with your report lmao.
Vince was indeed looking for Goldberg vs Austin but WWE was planning for a Rock vs Goldberg match at WM19 (according to Wrestling Observer Newsletter), it was never meant to happen at Backlash. WWE tried to sign Goldberg BEFORE WM19 for more than a one year contract but Goldberg only wanted to sign a one year contract so they ended up agreeing to his demands.

Now shut your mouth. Really do it, because you are not right and as much as you want to believe that The Rock was #1

He was lol.

the truth is the truth and it doesn't matter how you try t hide it. Rock was #2 only because Austin was so far ahead as #1.

early 98-late 99 austin #1
late 99- early 01 rock #1
early 01- late 01 austin #1
late 01-mid 02 rock #1

After 1999, Rock was clearly the biggest star between the two.

Can't deny it kiddo.

 

[Hard Hit Prince]

early 98-late 99 austin #1
late 99- early 01 rock #1
early 01- late 01 austin #1
late 01-mid 02 rock #1

late 97 - until the very end of 99 - Steve Austin.
2000 - The Rock.
2001 onwards - Steve Austin was the bigger name. Rock was the #1 babyface. When they changed it, Austin was not only the bigger name but also the #1 babyface.

At WrestleMania 18 the match planned was Hulk Hogan vs. Steve Austin. Golden Era star vs. Attitude Era star. The two biggest stars. However since both man didn't agree with the outcome and didn't really want to do the favor for the other, WWE went with the second biggest thing they could. Austin flat out declined this match. Look it up everywhere.

At WrestleMania 19 the reported matches were: Rock/HBK and Austin/Goldberg. Now the only reason they could have thought about doing Rock/Goldberg first was because they had no idea that Mania 19 was going to be Austin's last match and the long term plan was to put Austin and Goldberg at Mania 20 and that is because Austin was the bigger star. Also Austin wanted to work with either Rock or HHH to get his send off and declined a in-ring program with Goldberg (which they had but not on a wrestling capacity anymore).

He does not need to be the most entertaining or liked, but he was the most popular as far as wrestling goes. He was the one people paid good money to see and The Rock was #2 and in that era being #2 is fantastic. Being #2 in that era is being #1 in any other era. Right now, Rock is miles away from Austin as far as casual perception goes, he's the highest grossing movie star of 2013 for god sake. But as far as wrestling goes, I'm willing to put my money on the table to weather or not a Steve Austin v. Cena match would draw bigger numbers that what Rock/Cena did.

You're an idiot. I'll not come back here and reply it again. The Rock was never the one when Austin was there. Austin turned heel and the fans didn't like the move because he was such an hot act as a babyface, ence why he turned back in less than a years time. He was still the #1 draw and denying that is crazy. You are from now on in my ignored list. I hate stupid guys that say stupid things with no knowledge whatsoever.

 

[TheOneAndOnlyGOAT]

late 97 - until the very end of 99 - Steve Austin.
2000 - The Rock.
2001 onwards - Steve Austin was the bigger name. Rock was the #1 babyface. When they changed it, Austin was not only the bigger name but also the #1 babyface.

He sure was the #1 babyface when him and Bradshaw were feuding with Hall and X-Pac while Rock was tag teaming with The Immortal Hulk Hogan lmao.

At WrestleMania 18 the match planned was Hulk Hogan vs. Steve Austin. Golden Era star vs. Attitude Era star. The two biggest stars. However since both man didn't agree with the outcome and didn't really want to do the favor for the other, WWE went with the second biggest thing they could. Austin flat out declined this match. Look it up everywhere.

Hahaha no. False rumours. Hogan already said that the planned match was Hogan vs Rock from the start.

Rocky haters / Austin marks say that this was the planned match because they like to discredit Rock for his accomplishments.

Maybe if Hogan returned and faced Austin in 98 or 99 then that match would've been nice but considering Austin was barely a mid-carder in 2002, the match wouldn't have made sense at all.

After the heel turn, Austin's career never really got back on track.

Rock was clearly the biggest star in 2002 and if you think otherwise, you're delusional.

At WrestleMania 19 the reported matches were: Rock/HBK and Austin/Goldberg. Now the only reason they could have thought about doing Rock/Goldberg first was because they had no idea that Mania 19 was going to be Austin's last match and the long term plan was to put Austin and Goldberg at Mania 20 and that is because Austin was the bigger star.

Extremely false.

First of all, the plan for WM19 was Rock vs Goldberg with Goldberg going over Rock and Rock beating him the next year but that plan was canceled.

Those were the "true original plans".

You're spewing out complete BS.

HBK never wanted to work with Rock. And Rock hated HBK's guts, why would they put these two in a match? lmao.

Also Austin wanted to work with either Rock or HHH to get his send off and declined a in-ring program with Goldberg.

He didn't decline an in-ring program with Goldberg because he was never asked to face Goldberg lmao such a fail.

You're an idiot. I'll not come back here and reply it again.

Yes you will lmao.

The Rock was never the one when Austin was there.

Yes he was lmao.

Austin turned heel and the fans didn't like the move because he was such an hot act as a babyface, ence why he turned back in less than a years time.

He sucked as a heel. Is that a good thing? lmao.

Also, no he wasn't a hot act as a babyface, he was doing the same thing for over 3 years and if he didn't leave for a year or turned heel, people would've have boo'd him.

He was still the #1 draw and denying that is crazy.

-Rock was in the highest rated segment in WWE TV history, Austin was not.
-Rock was in the highest rated match in RAW history.
-Rock was in 3 of the top 5 most watched pro wrestling matches in cable tv history.
-Rock broke gates record set by Austin (in 98) in 99 and then broke his own record in 2000.
-Rock led WWF to it's most succesful financial year 2000 in terms of ratings, ppv buyrates...
And when Austin returned in a main event PPV match at Survivor Series, the PPV buyrates flopped and Rock was in the main event of the next 5 PPVs hahahaha lmao.

According to Wrestling Observer Newsletter, the biggest draw in 99 and 00 was Rock not scsa.

I hate stupid guys that say stupid things with no knowledge whatsoever.

You must really hate yourself then



Bye bye.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Biggest load of crap I've ever read. What I hate more than an ignorant idiot is an ignorant idiot who tries to act smart and know what he's talking about.

Little boy, how about you watch this:

[YOUTUBE] watch?v=rr0yY3y91rg[/YOUTUBE]

The Rock says Stone Cold Steve Austin and his name gets boo'd.

[YOUTUBE]watch?v=bFjibRFbg-A[/YOUTUBE]

Look at the pop Rock gets at Survivor series 99 and look at all the crowd signs for the rock, Rock was voted most popular wrestler in 99 and biggest draw.

Dave Meltzer stated that Rock broke gates record set by Austin in 98, in 99 then went to break his own record in 00.


The Rock sold out arenas in Japan and other parts of Asia, something Austin never did.

Rock was in 3 of the 5 highest rated matches in wrestling history (on cable tv).

The Rock with Rock N Sock connection as a mid carder outdrew Austin in the main event, highest rated segment in wwe tv history.

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-4519988.html

Stone Cold was supposed to turn heel and put over Rock at WM2000 but Austin pusssied out for a surgery that he could've done at any time before.


THE ROCK was one of the biggest pop culture icons in the world. In 2000, he was everywhere and had more mainstream appeal than Austin ever did.

Rock led WWF to it's most successful financial year in 2000 in terms of ratings, ppv buyrates...

The Rock was the one on magazine covers, video games, he was bar none WWF's top star.

He was the one that addressed the people in NY when WWF's stocks went public on wall street while Austin was in the back doing nothing.

When Austin returned to face rikishi, Rock was main eventing against Kurt angle at no mercy 2000 for the wwf title.

When Austin was the one facing angle at Summerslam, and rock was returning, Rock was the one that main evented.

The Rock was owning Austin at every live event in late 2001, he beat up Austin on raw before survivor series 2001 and on the ppv.

He was also scheduled to beat him at wrestlemania 18 but wwf was able to sign Hogan and they had Hogan face the biggest and top star at the time, The Rock.

Austin sure was #1 guy when him and Bradshaw were feuding with hall and xpac in 2002.

WWF wanted their "biggest star", their "face of the company" to lose to Brock Lesnar without any build up, right? Rock was clearly the face of wwe since 2000, WWE wanted Brock to beat the former top stars Hogan and Austin on raw and sd to finally face their current biggest guy, The Rock at Summerslam.


Grow up you dumb Cena fan.

Let's pretend we have a company. CEO A brings it from damn near out of business to being the biggest and best in the industry and earning record revenue. Then he gets cancer and has to pass the torch to CEO R. Under CEO R, the company grows a bit more, but a lot of that is with ideas CEO A had and once CEO A comes back, the company grows even more.

This is why Austin will always be bigger than Rock. Austin gave Rock the reigns to an exploding star. Rock was good, but the WWF had a ton of momentum at the time.

As far as the topic, guys like Ziggler, Kofi, and Morrison have always been in the right spot. Until they get more over, they're just fun midcard guys.