Whos place in WWE is bigger? Stone Cold Steve Austin's or Hulk Hogan's?

[pepentorresHHH]

This is going to be a great debate since the HHH Hart debate has been awesome..... Remember the rules of this thread, this is not about who your favorite between this 2 is..... Is who has a bigger legacy or importance in the WWE, NO WCW and no Outside Wrestling . just WWE

On one corner we have Hulk Hogan, one of the most charismatic personalities in the history of the WWE, he carried the WWE since he took the belt from the Sheik, until he passed it to Yokozuna in 93. Came back 02 with the rest of the NWO amd finally left the WWE completely around 07(correct me if i'm wrong) won the title multiple times, was champion for 4 years straight..... He main evented the first 9 wrestlemania, and had some ofmthe biggest feuds and matches with talent as the iron sheik, roddy piper, Paul orndorff, king kong bundy, Andre The Giant, Ted Dibiase, Randy Savage, sgt slaughter, the ultimate warrior, yokozuna. Mr perfect, the rock, shawn michaels, triple h, the undertaker and even Mr McMahon himself among Many others..... But what stood out was his ability to make people care, his entertainment and his charisma

On the other side you got Stone Cold Steve Austin, the bionic redneck and according to Vince, the greates WWE superstar of all times...... He had great matches with a LOT of people, his promos skills were second to none, he could be funny, serious, you name it, and people cared whatever it is he was doing! We was on top of the wwe unofficially since 97 but became champion at wrestlemania 14, and carried the wwe through its most succesful time period which ultimately beat wcw. He had great title runs, and great matches/feuds withguys like Mr McMahon, Brian Pillman, Bret Hart, Shawn Michaels,Triple H, The Rock, The Undertaker, Mick Foley, Kane, Kurt Angle, Jericho, Chris Benoit, Booker T, Ric Flair, the Big Show, among many others.

So, who has a bigger place, legacy, importance in the WWE?

 

[I am Mr. Excitement]

I'd say most certainley Stone Cold. I mean he was the baddest son of a bitch in the WWE to date. He didn't give a damn what Vince thought, he didnt care what anyone thought. He did things on his own terms and became the most successfull and most profitable superstar in the business.Don't get me wrong Hogan basically made the WWE if it wasnt for him there would be no Stone Cold or Rock etc.

 

[legendkiller1979]

There is no debate here. Hulk Hogan is light years ahead of stonecold. Without Hulk Hogan, there is no wrestlemania. Without Hulk Hogan, there is no Stonecold Steve Austin SCSA was a wildly popular wrestler who bought wrestling back to mega popularity But without Hulk Hogan, that comeback in wrestling's popularity doesn't happen because nobody cares about wrestling.

Let's be honest, wrestling history starts with the wrestlemania era. When we have debates about great wrestlers or great teams or great matches, guys who were big stars before 1985 don't get the credit like people who were big stars after 1985. In football, teams are measured with superbowl titles, not total titles. The superbowl era and wrestlemania era are the same thing. This is a direct result of Hulk Hogan

To sum it up, let me answer the question with a question. What would wrestling be like without each guy?

Wrestling without SCSA means the attitude era isn't nearly as popular and maybe never happens.

Wrestling without Hulk Hogan means no wrestlemania, no mainstream attention, no Stonecold Steve Austin, no attittude era and maybe no WWE.

 

[relentless1]

Hulk Hogan is the answer here, he paved the way for everybody after him, without him there would be no wwf for austin to be popular in, austin was mega popular sure, but when hogan did it he was larger than life, to this day anybody who knows zero about wrestling knows who hulk hogan is. 12 time champion, 3rd longest reigning wwf champion of all time and longest reigning wcw champion of all time, sure hes been a bit of a dick over the years, supposedly holding ppl down but austin was guilty of that as well. Hogan also did what austin never could and thats successfully reinvent himself arguably becoming the biggest heel of all time after being the biggest face of all time, he put wwf on top when he was there and put wcw on top when he was there. Hogan is the unsiputed greatest of all time, the stats support that.

 

[The Butcher]

I grew up a Hulkamaniac, was nWo 4 life (for a year or so), and went out of my way to go to an event to see Hogan as Undisputed WWE Champion. He was so big a hero to me in childhood that even after revealing himself as a scumbag in latter years, I still harbor reverent feelings toward Hulk. I fully expect to need a moment when I hear the news of his passing. In spite of all of this, I have to say that Austin is easily Hulk's equal.

Their legacies are roughly equal. Hogan did it longer; Austin did it during crunch time. Hogan expanded the company; Austin brought it back from the brink. Hogan defined his era, and Austin his. One could easily give the edge to either man for their role in making WWE a juggernaut.

Austin was unarguably the better worker of the two, even after his neck injury. However, credit should be given to Hogan, too. He could tell a story in the ring, sold well, and could put on a great match with the right partner. They were both products of their eras. Austin had to work a variety of styles from technical, to brawling, to hardcore. Hogan's days were simpler, and he just needed some right hands, the leg drop, and the occasional feat of strength.

Both had some great feuds. Austin/McMahon is arguably the greatest feud ever. Hogan/Andre the Giant is too, though. Austin's on-again off-again issue with The Rock would cause some people to give him the edge here. Hogan's foes, turned friends, turned foes affair with Randy Savage has always been a personal favorite. For me, who had the better feuds is a matter of personal preference.

Hogan built the house, and when the house was on the verge of collapse, Austin renovated that sucker. To say one man was more crucial to WWE than the other is shortchanging the guy that wasn't picked. It'd be like saying that Washington was more important than Lincoln; that is to say, both were the right man to be in the position they were in during the time they were in it.

 

[PinkStranger]

Stone Cold. The argument that Hogan came before Austin and therefore there would be no Austin without Hogan is flawed. Just because Hogan lifted WWE to great heights in the 80s, doesn't mean they would have gone out of business without him. However, WWE was in trouble in the 90s losing to WCW and without Austin versus McMahon they would have lost. Even with all Hogan accomplished in WWE, they would not be the unrivaled juggernaut they are today without Austin.

 

[I_Like_All_Wrestling]

It's Hogan. Let's say Austin is the better wrestler (and I think he is), let's say he's better on the mic (and I think he probably is), let's say he drew more money (and I think he did), let's say people liked him better personally, and let's say his career accolades are better...it's still Hogan.

Most of the argument here is along the lines that without Hogan there would be no Austin or WWE as it was. The other side of the coin says that without Austin, WWE may have gone out of business and instead were pushed to new heights.

The fact of the matter is this. Ask anyone who isn't a wrestling fan to name a wrestler and they're likely going to name Hulk Hogan. Whether they're 13, 30, or 60. Hulk Hogan is wrestling. No one came close to Hogan in the 80s. Savage was great. Piper was great. I do think WWE would have been okay without Austin though. The Rock is on par with him, and has had more mainstream success. Angle was a near Austin/Rock level guy at the time. WWE had DX. They had the Undertaker. They had guys who stood out more than the guys in the 80s (even if Savage and Piper were better).

Without Hogan wrestling wouldn't have jumped to the heights it did. Hogan was in movies. He was on morning shows and late night shows. He was in movies. He was a Saturday morning cartoon. Hogan's biggest movie was Rocky III and he was on the A-Team, Austin's biggest role was probably in The Longest Yard. Everyone knew Hogan. Everyone still knows Hogan. Even when Hogan wasn't in WWE people still knew him. He permeated pop culture like no other. Austin simply didn't (and no one today is even close). In the early 90's there was a topical joke saying "Why don't we just send Hulk Hogan to Iraq and he'll end the war?!" I've heard people tell the same joke all over the country. That's not something that happened with Austin.

And going back to WWE almost going out of business. A big part of that was because of Hogan and the NWO. Hogan.

Austin was a time. A great time. Maybe the most financially successful time. But Hogan is timeless.

 

[lowandmighty]

This is kind of a tough one because as someone else already mentioned, you can't just take away everything Austin did just because Hulk Hogan pretty much single handedly just on his look and character made WWE what it has become today. You see, metaphorically Hogan planted the seeds but Austin was there to feed water to the roots when it was slowing down a bit.

Its still Hogan though and it's not really a flawed argument that without him there wouldn't even have been a Stone Cold Steve Austin. There's something that happened in another wrestling company that resulted in Stone Cold being in WWE at all and it wasn't Hulk Hogans direct intention but it was because of his presence that forced management to think of certain decisions regarding their mid card wrestlers.

It was basically the style Hogan left behined that served as an environment for Austins somewhat controversial character to thrive in. Also the Rock, Mick Foley and even more Triple H who got WWE way on top of WCW, Austin did largely exist as the top guy while WWE was losing in the ratings to the other unmentionable company.

Hogan made WWE, Austin was just a result. So the answer is Hulk Hogan.

 

[waylonmercy]

There is no debate here. There is no way of proving whose place is bigger. Hogan was the main event for WM1 and for many years carried the WWE. Steve Austin was the biggest draw during a period when previously WWE was almost out of business and being dominated by WCW. If hulk hogan didnt take off in the 80s there may not have been a WM like there is today and without Austin there may not have been wrestling in the mainstream period. Both were Vinces final investment, if they didnt take off the company could have folded, especially in the 90s with Austin.

 

[clare houghey]

NOW THIS IS A HARD ONE LOL

IMO its going too be SCSA as he was the one who probely did the most the save the WWE in the monday night war's era and his feud with Vince has gotta be the best feud in pro Wrestling history. but it is a close call

 

[The Fabulous Rougeau's]

I have seen the argument that you hav to pick Hogan because withouthim there is no WWE. To me this is a flawed statement as it could have been someone else to elevate the company had Hogannot been around. On top of that just because a guy came before and helped save the compnay doesn't mean he was better. Just look at the NBA. By all accounts they were floudering in the lae 70's and had it not been for Magic and Larry and the Celtics/Lakers rivalry who knows what would be of the NBA today. Now does that mean that either guy is better than Michael Jordan who by most accounts is the greatest player of all time?

 

[AndThat'sTheBottomLine]

This is a tough one to call simply because both men saved the WWE. Hogan saved it after a down time in the 80's and Austin saved the WWE after a down time in the early to mid 90's. If not for Austin, we wouldn't have had the Attitude Era and quite possibly, no WWE. Without Hogan, you don't have the Rock n' Roll wrestling era and again, quite possibly no WWE. Hogan planted the seeds, turned over a crop, and abandoned it to go to a field that was growing faster. Austin took over after Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels failed to turn over a crop and left. Austin took it from a simple field, and made it into a the largest farm in the world. It even took over the rival farm where Hogan was at as well as a smaller farm that was going under. Without Austin, WWE doesn't become the monster that it is today and you might not see anything except TNA because WCW was going broke and ECW was broke. If WWE had gone under as well, TNA gets an earlier start and takes in stars from all three promotions and becomes a juggernaut. You could make the argument that Austin did more for WWE but to do so would dismiss what Hogan did. Hogan put them on the map while Austin turned them into the map. Both men are crucial to WWE history and neither should be made more important than the other.

 

[LoudClearVoice]

It's definitely Hulk Hogan. He IS professional wrestling. He made it "cool" and "mainstream" and he made it a part of nearly every American family that had kids. Hulk Hogan was larger than life and he put pro wrestling on the map. Sure, there were others before him that were big stars and legendary wrestlers but not at the level of Hogan. IMO, wrestling didn't become "mainstream" until Hogan's rise to prominence.

Stone Cold is right up there with Hogan BUT what he did was he revolutionized an era of wrestling. He made wrestling "cool" with the older audiences and brought it back into the mainstream media. Stone Cold's gimmick was one everyone could relate to. Rather than being a larger than life hero like Hogan, he was a beer drinking anti-hero redneck that felt more like the common man than some muscular beast.

But there never would have been a Stone Cold without Hulk Hogan. However, without Stone Cold, WWF/E and pro wrestling in general might have died out.

 

[CB420]

I have to agree with Legend Killer's opinion that Hogan is not only the correct answer... but LIGHT YEARS ahead of Stone Cold... (and I'm a Stone Cold fan who grew up hating Hogan).. and not for the argument that without Hogan there wouldn't be a Stone Cold either... Hogan's popularity in his era was untouchable... for a LONG time! Stone Cold had his run but let's face it... during his time... there were many other wrestlers at least within somewhat reaching distance in popularity if not greater (The Rock, Undertaker, Bret Hart, HHH?) The gap between #1 and #2 during Hogan's era was just heaven vs earth...

Just my 2 cents

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

There are two ways to look at this, there's the perception of the general public/those outside of WWE or the WWE themselves.

Looking at it from this perspective amongst people (even fans) who aren't part of WWE's marketing and promotion, I feel many will say Hulk Hogan, for the mere fact that this was a guy who started with the promotion in the late 70s as a young up and coming star. As we know, the Rocky III movie role led to a brief dismissal from the then-WWF, in turn he jumps ship to the AWA, gets the momentum of the crowd on his side, and there's no choice but to market him as a heroic figure. From there, the WWF gets new ownership and he's welcomed back into the promotion, which I might add could have been Verne and Greg Gagne's opportunity to take wrestling to new heights. Had they seen the change in the times and kept their other wrestlers in addition to Hogan, since several key figures defected to the WWF along with Hogan. But that's another story for another day. Then of course there was Hogan's return to the WWF/E in the early 2000s that redefined his standing with the fans, granted it was a nostalgia act. But several times later in that same decade he's returned to great fanfare.

And like many other posters said on this thread, if you ask people who don't even watch wrestling and you ask amongst a breadth of demographics/ages, to name a wrestler, more often than not you will hear the name Hulk Hogan uttered. Just because of how big this individual's impact was in the 1980s. And how this same momentum carried to phases in his career like his rebirth in WCW.

Yes, Steve Austin indeed contributed to the resurgence of the WWF, but a big part of that can be attributed to WCW's accession with the nWo angle, which Hogan was a huge part in. He wasn't the whole reason this era of wrestling took the artform to new heights, but he's arguably one of the most vital components of it. Therefore, in my opinion Hogan has a bigger place in the annals of WWE's history.

But, considering how these past few years, Hogan has gone off to other ventures such as TNA, and his own tour in Australia, WWE will suppress Hogan's role in certain aspects of their promotion. And let's not deny this, i.e. Hogan's placement on the Top 50 Superstars feature they did some years ago. Then of course, they took him out of their video intros for all their programming. Now, if Austin's walking out of WWF/E ten years ago resulted in him permanently leaving the promotion, you'd probably see the same measures taken, i.e. removal from video intros, and a selective method of referencing past events that Austin had an instrumental part in.

So in short, if you're an independent thinker, you're more likely going to go with Hogan as your pick for whose place in WWE's history is grander. But if you want to completely give up your free thought and just be a WWE zombie, then it's going to be Austin. However, to be fair despite my strong feelings on picking Hogan, I can also see where some will still pick Austin, because he did indeed contribute a major part to the WWF's transition into the Attitude era. For a few years, he was the man to beat, and for that such an accomplishment does speak volumes. And depending on what age group you are in, Austin might also weight heavily into your decision.

But his longevity compared to guys like Hogan just doesn't hold up, in my view. And with Hogan not being with WWE at this moment and time, WWE will only continue to place Austin in a more prominent role when it comes to looking at things in retrospect.

 

[FlairFan2003]

Hogan by a mile...their legacies are not even close. WWE was like the rest of the wrestling industry a regionally based promotion. Vince McMahon needed a strong lead to take his product national. He had to have someone fans wanted to see on his show when he played in rival territories towns, when he tried to convince local TV to air his shows. Hogan was not only the first true SuperStar of the modern era of wrestling he was the first one who truly was a national SuperStar. Even when you look at the other Iconic Figures of his time, Flair, Savage, Rhodes, & Piper, none of them reached the heights of popularity and recognition nationwide that Hogan did. Savage came close but only because he was featured on the same show as Hogan. National exposure on TBS and his days as a "Traveling Champion" certainly elevated Flair, but he was never the pop culture Icon Hogan was (you can argue Flair had more staying power as a pop culture figure, especially when you see how many of today's athletes like RG III, LeBron James, and notable stars of the 90s like LeVon Kirkland & Kevin Greene have associated themselves with his quotes, look, or with him personally), but along with Rhodes & Piper they all reached new heights because of increased attention and popularity brought to pro wrestling through Hogan's stature as the central figure in WWE's national expansion.

Austin at best is a short term phenom. Much of that is due I believe to injuries, some taking him out of the ring for extended periods of time, others prematurely ending his career. If he had stayed healthy he likely had another ten years left in him as major star. However, regardless he still was a short term phenom, he was The Ultimate Warrior and Goldberg. In fact, you can make strong arguments that both of them not only rivaled Austin in popularity (Especially Goldberg, but at his height UW was extremely big) but both would have had much longer and more impactful careers if not for outside reasons (UW's are well documented, Goldberg essentially wasnt interested in staying in the business).

Hogan also was a central figure in the biggest boom periods in wrestling history, at least since television first put the industry on the map in the 1950s. The NwO likely would have been a successful angle without Hogan, the "Invasion" and the presence of major stars in opposition like Flair & Sting would have made for great TV regardless of Hogan. There is no doubt that Hogan's involvement, particularly his heel turn, maybe the last real shocking moment in wrestling TV, elevated the status of that storyline to amazing heights and singlehandedly made WCW Nitro MUST WATCH TV. No other performer can say they played as integral a role in two such business booms. Certainly Flair was a factor in both but no one would argue he was a big a factor in either boom as Hogan. Same with Savage.

The argument that the NwO angle needed great opposition to succeed falls flat. All major stars need great opposition to succeed. How many people do you think will watch RAW next week if the main event is John Cena vs Random OVW guy no one knows of ? Im betting not many. That's not an indication that Cena isnt popular though, book him vs Lesnar and see what happens. Fact is, Hogan benefited from some very strong early opponents in the 80s, particulary Andre, Piper, & Savage, Paul Orndorff as well. Pretty soon Hogan could draw against marginal competition such as King Kong Bundy & Kamala. Likewise Austin needed a lot of help from Brett Hart to first get over as a legit main event caliber star at a time when Hart was easily one of the Top 3 or 4 guys in the company and Top 10 in all of wrestling. Vince McMahon did great work in helping Austin get over and both Shawn Michaels and The Rock were great opponents for him, as well as Undertaker. For that matter Savage in the 80s benefitted from the star status and great work Ricky Steamboat and Ted DiBiase did for him, as well as being associated with Hogan. Dusty Rhodes was a phenomenal adversary for Flair back then, as were Steamboat & Barry Whyndam.

In the end, it comes to impact and longevity. Austin made a huge impact helping WWE regain it's footing as the nationwide leader in the industry, albeit during a short run mared by long absences in which Rock & HHH & Taker were carrying the load. Hogan was the top star and poster child of the biggest boom period in the industry and particularly WWE's history, then was the central figure and storyline catalyst for the start of the 2nd biggest boom period in the industry's history. Due to his injuries, absences, and eventually early retirement I cant even say Austin had as much of an impact on the business as a whole as Flair or maybe Taker. Longevity counts.

In the end Hogan has been the biggest star over the longest time and had a much greater impact on business during that time. Austin's height, while rivaling Hogan, was not nearly as long or profound on business. Hogan is the benchmark for SuperStar Status in the industry... Austin, Flair, Savage, Piper, Rhodes, Rock, Taker, HHH, Cena et all line up under him.

As a side note, while I've clearly supported Hogan with my answer I was never a "Hulka-Maniac" even though I grew up in the 80s and lived in a major part of WWE's core territory. Even back then I found his character to be boring and in fact all of WWE to be boring compared to the action in the NWA airing weekly on TBS. As my screen name alludes to I was on Team Flair back then, and as such have a greater appreciation for Austin in terms of in ring ability and in my mind entertainment value. That said, I recognize fully Hogan's impact in two decades on the industry and WWE as a whole. Even in WCW he helped transform WWE into a more edgy, controversial product (you could argue Eric Bischoff's booking did this but again Hogan was the top star and storyline catalyst for it). I have no great affection for Hogan and enjoyed Austin much more but I cant deny his impact on the business. He's not just a legend, he is THE LEGEND

 

[AhSpicyDrop]

Hogan by a mile and then some. As many have said there never would have been a Stone Cold without Hogan & Vince blowing up the wrestling industry like they did. Austin was a superstar, and probably an easy #2 behind Hogan... People that didn't grow up in the Hulkamania era are more likely to choose Austin, and that's okay.

When Hogan blew up he was everywhere... EVERYWHERE. Not just people wearing his shirts and saying his catchphrases... But literally everywhere. You could ask anybody on the street about wrestling and if they'd never seen a match in their life they would say "I know Hulk Hogan." Hell, it's still that way today. More people know who Hogan is than Austin. When I mean Hogan was everywhere, I mean you could turn on Saturday morning cartoons and there was Hogan and Friends, rocking out and solving mysteries. Hogan had his own brand of vitamins. People dressed up like Hulk Hogan for Halloween.

As much as I love Steve Austin he had a lot more talent to work with and had a lot of help to climb to the top... Hogan had less charismatic talent to work with and carried a lot of feuds on his star power alone. Hogan could sell out an arena working a match with The Big Boss Man, or Dino Bravo.

Austin's run at the top in the WWE in terms of years was considerably less time than Hogan's as well.

 

[S.J. Maximus]

These two undoubtedly have the biggest legacies in WWE history and I was actually tempted to vote "Equal" but then I went with Hogan for two key reasons: Impact and Longevity.

Hogan dominated the WWF when it became nationally televised. He was its undisputed face from 1983-1993, a full ten years of selling out arenas worldwide and becoming not only a wrestling icon but a Hollywood icon. People who weren't even interested in wrestling knew who Hogan was, and although Austin got that big to a degree he never became the the Hollywood icon that Hogan and Rock did during their WWE careers. Austin wasn't truly on top of WWE until 1998-2001, which compared to Hogan's run seems like only a brief stint. He definitely was a bigger draw in his heyday and sold a bunch of merchandise but by 2002 Austin was already seemingly irrelevant and outdated compared to The Rock and Triple H (who was a major face at the time). Hogan survived the main event rises of Randy Savage, Ultimate Warrior, and Bret Hart to remain the top guy until leaving in '93 which is something Austin simply wasn't able to do.

No wrestler's place in the history of WWE is bigger than Hulk Hogan's. bar none

 

[EastCoastFan]

Even though I was never a fan of his, it's Hogan. He was the foundation Vince built on. He was able to take the WWF national and turn it into a huge multi-million dollar empire because of Hulk Hogan. Austin was a huge star in his own right, but when you adjust for how different the business was in the two eras, Hogan's still bigger overall.

 

[TheLittleOne]

HULK HOGAN.

when i hear talk about Austin Making the most money.. yea thats because Hogan's era had FOUR ppvs each year vs 12.. plus each ppv was not $40+.. ( not too mention most of us had those "black boxes" pre- digital cable)

figures were half the price in toys r us.. t shirts were more than %50 less, ticket sales were so much less money, DVDS didnt come out twice a month, just a VHS every 2-3 months..

so many differences. bottom line is they both entertained us, and were the best @ it.

i just wish Austin never broke his neck with owen in 97 and HBK never broke his back with taker in 98... BECAUSE then those two HEALTHY along with Rock, Taker, Foley, HHH would have been amazing..

austin's storylines & feuds were far more entertaining than Hogans.. but the times were different, the world become different.

i enjoyed Steve Austin's WWE career more than Hulk Hogans...
we got to see AUSTIN every monday and on PPV once a month

we saw HULK MUCH LESS..

but Hulk helped create the global stage which Austin helped grow larger.

 

[PerfectAngle45]

Didnt any of you guys hear what Vince McMahon said when he inducted Steve Austin into the HOF? He said Steve Austin was the best of all time. He did not say that for no reason, he most likely meant it.

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

Anyone who says Hulk Hogan was clearly born before the 80s. Or at least '85.

Stone Cold's lasting impression on WWF for the casual fan base is:
- Stunners
- Chugging beer

And let me tell you, this is not a bad thing. When casual fans look back on the attitude era, they look back fondly on both these things. In fact, if I were to ask most of my friends to name a pro wrestler, most of them would say either Austin or the Rock, because of that, and because of the success they had in the late 90s in wrestling's last boom.

The Rock is unfair because he has transcended the business by going hollywood, but still.. to this day, i still have friends and strangers knowing stunners and middle fingers and chuggin beer because of Stone Cold.

Austin made wrestling cool. And at the very least, less embarrassing as a fan to talk about. And that still holds true today.

 

[lowandmighty]

I've changed my mind about this. I said hulk Hogan before but I've thought more about it and I think Stone Cold's place in wwe will inevitably be bigger.

Hulk Hogan actually does deserve the bigger place hands down and anyone who thinks otherwise is just plain wrong end of story.

However, Vince McMahon doesn't like Hogan anymore and hasn't for years and this attitude towards the Hulkster would definitely have rubbed off on the rest of the McMahon's (Triple H included) no matter how much they originally liked him, because in person Hulk Hogan really is a painfully nice guy. despite that, at the end of the day blood is thicker than water and McMahon will get his wish in the end and phase Hogan out of the history of the company as time goes by and Hogan will be left as nothing more than a foot note on the ass of Stone Cold Steve Austin.

It almost even calls for an "and thats the bottom line". Sad but true.

 

[HBsam31]

This one is real tough. I would say Hogan did for WWE in the 80's what Stone Cold did in the 90's. Hogan revolutionized the sport bringing it to the mainstream, while Austin pulled them out of a slump that could have put them out of business. Stone Cold made wrestling more popular than it ever was before. They were both merc cash cows, and they both brought in a whole new group of fans. It is really hard to pick one over the other so I am going with equal.

 

[thebarber]

Hands down Hulk Hogan. Without Hogan, there would never have been an Austin, Rock, Hart, Michaels.....the list is endless. Hogan is wrestling, Austin cashed in on the popularity. Sure Austin took off and became as big a star as Hogan, but if both guys were on the same happy place with Vince, he would always go to Hogan over Austin.
At least with Hogan, when it came time to do business, he did business the right way in WWE. Austin only did business when it suited him, otherwsie he took his ball and ran off, belted around his wife and shot innocent animals