Now, this folks is how it's done. Wonderful post, wondeful logic. This is how you do it. Unfortunately, I'm going to have to try and tear it apart.
Just some more thought on this excellent topic. Austin's coronation was big for Steve Austin's career. It was big for WWE, in hindsight, because it was the birth of the rattlesnake. It was a cool moment, but by no means as memorable a moment as Hogan turning NWO.
There are people that can quote that entire speech from memory, man. I mean, form beginning to end. I know, I've seen it. People endlessly refer to this moment as "Steve Austin's breakout".Yes, Hogan was memorable, and today there still are comparisons (read: The LeBron going to Miami thing. Now that's culture crossover.) But at the time, everyone still was saying Austin 3:16 Says I just whipped your ass. You remember how many of those pretty black shirts got bought? It's the #1 piece of merchandise in the history of professional wrestling, probably admittedly rivaled by an nWo shirt, or old Hulkamania stuff. Still, people remember that Austin coronation just as much as they do Hogan's betrayal. If they didn't, that shirt wouldn't have caught on the way it did.
Vince would not have given Austin the ball to run with if he had not pulled off such a great speech at the KOTR, probably, unless he pulled that speech off on a Raw or pay per view at any point in the next year or two.
Here we're in agreeance.
But the Hogan heel turn happened at the exact right place at the right time for WCW. In brought instant success and enraged (as well as engaged) WCW's audience.
Again, we agree here to. It was instant shock and credibility for the nWo. It made you want to tune into Nitro. Would never try to dispute that.
Austin's character over the course of a few years would mean more to wrestling than the NWO angle and Hogan's heel turn. But Hogan's heel turn meant more to wrestling in July 1996,
Again, agreeance, that for that one night, it meant more. That said, this thread is about the most important moment to the history of wrestling. You can't throw away the two year build up to Steve, because it was all tied to this one interview, which pretty much introduced us to a new character.
it meant more to smartening the WWE up, it meant more at the time to the Attitude era than Austin's 3:16 speech.
Again, I give more credit to ECW than I do to WCW for that one.
In hindsight, Austin's speech meant a lot more than it did at the time. It doesn't mean a whole lot right now though because we're in the PG era. But it did mean a lot because there is still a WWE today (although i'd argue there always would be with Stone Cold or not).
Well, that's the thing, we do have the gift of hindsight, man, we really do. To not use it would be ignoring the past. I'm intrigued to hear why you believe the WWE would have survived without Stone Cold, though. We all know that as late as 1997, the WWE was in dire financial straits, to the point that they had to give up Bret Hart. Do you believe Vince wanted to give up Bret? Hell no.
Steve Austin meant a lot to WWE but his 3:16 speech didn't instantly change wrestling in June 96. Hogan's legdrop on Savage did though. Hogan's heel turn to the NWO had a lasting impact on wrestling until the PG era and so did Austin's run as the rattlesnake. But i can think of another memorable happening that perhaps meant more to wrestling than either. And that was the Montreal Screwjob.
I won't bother to get into the Montreal Screwjob, but I will let you know I read it. It's a very good defense, and I'd be open to bringing it into the discussion. That said, I don't think Vince would have performed it if he didn't know he had Steve Austin in his back pocket. Just an opinion, but the way I see it. If Vince didn't know Steve could bail him out, we may not have had a Screwjob. And as to your last point regarding the subject, I agree, the immediate value is undeniable. But over the long term, Austin's speech defined the Austin character that would last for years. That just can't be ignored, man.
