Why didn't WWF revisit feuds in the Rock n Wrestlin Era?

[Hulk Hogan's Brother]

Somewhere between watching the Monday Night War series and the "greatness always finds greatness" video package for Orton/ Cena at Hell in a Cell, this idea popped up in my head.

If you look at Hogan's body of work in the 1980's you'll notice that he just kept jumping from one feud to another. He feuded with Piper, then Andre, then he moved on to Dibiase, then Savage, Zeus, Warrior and so on. The point that intrigues me is why didn't he ever have an extended program with the likes of Piper or Savage again.

I mean if you look at something like Austin/ Rock, you'll find that they first feuded in the undercard for the IC championship, then again for the WWF Championship with Austin as face and Rock as heel. Then, for a while, they were both faces and then Austin went heel. In their final program once again Austin was a face and Rocky was a heel. What I want to point out is the fact that in a 5 year period, both guys hooked up with each other quite a number of times. The same can be said for Rock/ HHH or Orton/ Cena.

Now, I feel that if the same would have happened in the Rock and Wrestling Era, the likes of Savage and Piper would have had greater legacies. Austin was the face of the AE and yet The Rock was just as popular . This was due to the fact that Rock was always seen as someone who could beat Austin and that happened as a result of them having tons of great matches with one another. The same could be said for Randy Orton even though Orton vs Cena hasn't exactly been on the Rock/ Austin level. Sting vs Flair is another such example. That could have been the same for Savage had he had a couple of more programs with Hogan.

I am just wondering why this was not the case. Was the mindset of the bookers somewhat different in those days in the sense that they did not really want to create more than one big face of the company?

Please share your views. Also I'm sorry if I'm not at my coherent best. I'm posting on the site after a really long time.

 

[FlairFan2003]

Look again.... Hogan had a lengthy program with Savage in 85 & 86 when Savage first won the IC Title, in fact more than anything else in his early days in WWE this was the moment that elevated Savage to top tier status, not only did he get to main event for several months against Hogan he was allowed to have much more offense and longer matches than what most of Hogan's early WWE Title era oppponents were allowed.

Most of Hogan's opponents during this time were over weight mid carders, pushed for their look and size, with little talent, and they faded quickly afterwards due to that fact. More talented opponents like Piper (turned face and retired), Harley Race (retired), Curt Henning (injured, out of action for two years) did not revisit feuds against Hogan for various reasons. Piper & Race (briefly) did un-retire for only brief times (and Piper & Hogan did feud again...in WCW).

However, Savage was one guy that had the talent to remain important after Hogan, he did, and they had two significant long term runs against each other, with a long term partnership in between, essentially leaving them linked in WWE storylines almost non stop from 86-90. They were similar in that respect to Flair & Sting in the NWA, essentially either as rivals or partners constantly linked to one another almost non stop 1988-91.

 

[justtxyank]

Harley Race didn't retire. He worked Puerto Rico, the AWA and Japan after leaving the WWF.

But, your overall point is dead on. Even though Race didn't retire, he might as well have. He was cooked. There wasn't any money left in a feud with him.

Orndorff could have worked Hogan again for good money. I'm sure there are backstage reasons as to why that didn't happen. Orndorff was sort never in GREAT graces with the WWF or Hogan personally.

Piper went face and then was in and out of the federation.

But there was also the problem that Hogan's feuds usually ended with him decisively putting down his enemy. There wasn't much to revisit.

 

[sdelfin]

It was the booking philosophy at the time. It was much easier to sell a big match or program the first time around. There were a lot of credible heels available to bring in for Hogan so they didn't have to revisit feuds. Behind the scenes, a lot of people were likely promised main event runs with Hogan when they signed. The nice thing is, with the amount of TV WWF was doing back in the days, they could take an old PPV main event, which would be harder to sell a second time, and do it on NBC television and pop a huge rating. That's what did did with Hogan and Andre. Bundy got another two big TV main events with Hogan as well.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

You have to remember the whole set up was different in the 80's... despite "going national" the reality is that WWF didn't move too far out of it's usual areas for regular shows, only the odd PPV's... It only really started moving to other places with Mania 6 in Toronto and 7 in LA. The "loop" in those days was cover the major markets, with MSG once a month without fail and the same match played at all arenas so with the gap between "big show payoffs" of feuds being not even quarterly until 1989 and the Rumble, it meant that they couldn't "revisit" feuds as often. If Savage faced Hogan in 85 for 5 months on the road, they couldn't then go back in 87 and do the same for 5 months... it would have killed interest. By the time they did face off again it was nearly 5 years gone, plenty of time for the "old matches" they had to be forgotten and Savage to "grow" in stature to make it a major draw. Andre and Studd had a "mini feud" also in 1989... it was long enough that the old "animosity" could show but the roles reversed with Andre the heel...

Apply the "Cena v Orton...again?" Argument from last month but without the monthly PPV's and RAW TV commitments... it may have happened two or three times tops over 10 years but the total length of time for those feuds would have been probably 3 years.. Starting around Summerslam, going all the way to Mania.

As well the nature of talent back then wasn't written deals unless you were Hogan, Piper and T... guys were working Pay Per Appearance contracts so were not always working for Vince alone... so they might not have been available to revisit an old feud...

The biggest reason though is that WWF feuds of that time worked VERY differently to today's... I always use Survivor Series as the example. In each SS show you had a "snapshot" of the roster, all were part of teams and each member had an individual feud...even Koko or Billy Jack Haynes. Each team had a captain who was a face or heel "on the up" or a main eventer, an upper midcard, a mid/lower guy or team and someone on the slide. Eliminations would tell you who was being pushed and who wasn't but the main reason SS was good was you could be a complete newcomer and by the end of the show (until 1991 anyway) know who was who, what the feuds were and how long they were going to go for... Take Martel and Jake at SS90, the cleansweep told you that this was a new feud and would get settled at Mania, even without the fake blinding but it got you interested enough in Martel's team as guys "moving up".

A WWF feud of that time had an express purpose and always led on to another one either higher or lower up the card... one guy was there to put the other over and they would "trade spots" by the end of it it was rarely about creating "two stars" at once which is more the norm today and only really started with Bret and Shawn at SS91.

If someone was feuding with Jake Roberts it was more about building them as a dastardly heel to face Hogan, or a change down from facing Hogan that kept their heat than making Jake look great so that when the Snake moment came, it popped whichever crowd got it and popped an attendance/buyrate.

When someone like DiBiase would feud with Jake, it was there to keep DiBiase strong as a heel rather than benefit Jake as he didn't need wins and losses or titles... he had the Snake... Once you saw Virgil "get the snake" or even DiBiase get it, you didn't need to ever see it again.. .if you never saw DiBiase get it, there was always hope Jake would get the Million Dollar belt.. but you didn't care cos then Dusty would go for it or then Piper and Virgil.

Take Rick Rude, his feuds were pretty sequential - Hercules, Ultimate Warrior, Snuka, Roddy Piper, Warrior... each took him further up the card... Piper was back and "hot" at the time before his injury so he took Warrior's spot for the "mini" feud, but Warrior was the only one who didn't "drop down the card" after their feud.

Likewise look at Warrior before his 1992 firing... Dino Bravo, Hercules, Rick Rude, Hogan, Perfect, Savage, Slaughter, Papa Shango, Savage...

Warrior rose up the card, then dropped down, each feud was the next logical step. Some like Rude and Perfect were more about building credibility but once he was losing the belt to Slaughter, even the Randy feud was a demotion...

Andre - Studd, The Machines era, Hogan/Savage, Warrior, Jim Duggan, Jake Roberts, Demolition... he moved up, then the others all moved up and he moved down...

You can look at every 80's and early 1990's guy the same and trace where a feud began, what it was planned to do, and where it took the person next... WWE didn't do "random feuds" or "hotshotting" like it does today or bury a feud after 2 weeks if they change their minds... that meticulous planning meant you couldn't revisit stuff too often as it was rare either would benefit from it if they did. It's often difficult to see the logic in feuds today, people look at Bray and Ambrose and partly think...we saw this already this year as the 6 man feud... and also, what is the reason?

 

[FlairFan2003]

Harley Race didn't retire. He worked Puerto Rico, the AWA and Japan after leaving the WWF.

But, your overall point is dead on. Even though Race didn't retire, he might as well have. He was cooked. There wasn't any money left in a feud with him.

Orndorff could have worked Hogan again for good money. I'm sure there are backstage reasons as to why that didn't happen. Orndorff was sort never in GREAT graces with the WWF or Hogan personally.

Piper went face and then was in and out of the federation.

But there was also the problem that Hogan's feuds usually ended with him decisively putting down his enemy. There wasn't much to revisit.

You're correct about Race....he did have one pretty good run vs Hogan in 87 post W-Mania but he was getting old and had health issues, he was part time at best after that as he bounced around before a lengthy (and very entertaining) stint as a manager in WCW.

 

[FlairFan2003]

You have to remember the whole set up was different in the 80's... despite "going national" the reality is that WWF didn't move too far out of it's usual areas for regular shows, only the odd PPV's... It only really started moving to other places with Mania 6 in Toronto and 7 in LA. The "loop" in those days was cover the major markets, with MSG once a month without fail and the same match played at all arenas so with the gap between "big show payoffs" of feuds being not even quarterly until 1989 and the Rumble, it meant that they couldn't "revisit" feuds as often. If Savage faced Hogan in 85 for 5 months on the road, they couldn't then go back in 87 and do the same for 5 months... it would have killed interest. By the time they did face off again it was nearly 5 years gone, plenty of time for the "old matches" they had to be forgotten and Savage to "grow" in stature to make it a major draw. Andre and Studd had a "mini feud" also in 1989... it was long enough that the old "animosity" could show but the roles reversed with Andre the heel...

Likewise look at Warrior before his 1992 firing... Dino Bravo, Hercules, Rick Rude, Hogan, Perfect, Savage, Slaughter, Papa Shango, Savage...

Warrior rose up the card, then dropped down, each feud was the next logical step. Some like Rude and Perfect were more about building credibility but once he was losing the belt to Slaughter, even the Randy feud was a demotion...

Actually, Savage & Warrior did have two major (although short lived) feuds...the Win Or Retire Match at W-Mania in 1991 and the S-Slam Title Match in 1992, so that was another major feud that was revisited in by WWE back in the day.

Certainly pre Attitude Era/Monday Night Wars/NWO we saw several incarnations of Brett vs HBK but TECHNICALLY this was during a different era of booking than what is referred to as the "Rock & Wrestling" or "Golden 80s" booking period.

 

[FromGlasgow]

I much prefered it this way, The feuds back in the day actually seemed to have had a story to them with a begining, middle and end. Nowadays it seems too hard to keep up and feuds appear to sudenly stop, then start up again and change back and forward all the time from week to week with no direction. I knew who everyone on the rosters enemies were back in the day now I hardly know any.

 

[JoeyJoeJoe]

It was rarer, but it did happen as some mentioned with Savage and Orndorff with Hogan, and Rude with Warrior. The big reason I think was that you had only a few PPVs per year, during a time of expansion for the WWF while many of the other territories were starting to wane. The WWF was able to nearly cherry pick the best talent, so there was a ready supply of guys who could main event. The national expansion also meant that the WWF had to play the same matches over a 3 month stretch across the country.

Compare that to the NWA/JCP, where you would see guys frequently face each other over and over in feuds that would be revisited often. Think of Flair and Rhodes through the years, or how often the Rock N' Roll Express came up against the Midnight Express. Feuds were more personal, and the history of wrestlers were played up more often. The rosters would change but slowly, and never carrying as many wrestlers as the WWF carried.