Would The Sandman have trumped Austin if he signed with the WWE in the late 90's?

[Ubermensch]

I will preface this by saying I didn't get to watch ECW when it was at it's height. I believe it came on TNN late on Saturday nights before TNN became Spike and WWF left USA for Spike. So I can't say I am expert on The Sandman's in ring work or promo ability.

My question is this. Had the WWF acquired The Sandman roughly the same time Austin began his Push, would Austin's had ever occurred? Their gimmics seemed so similar with The Sandman even appearing a little more edgier than Austin.

 

[Slash-LN]

I personally doubt it.
Austin was better in the ring and on the mic.
Austin also had a better look.
Honestly Sandman wasn't much more than an entrance and a kendo stick.
He was good at hardcore but in terms of actual ring work he wasn't anywhere near Austin.

 

[dtroppe]

Absolutely nuts. There is no way in this world that such an idea should be considered. Stone Cold Steve Austin has always been way better on the mic and had a way better look than Sandman. Stone Cold had such a bad gimmick as the ringmaster, but it was his natural charisma and skill that catapolted him to the number 1 selling wrestler of all time. Sandman was given almost all of the same opportunities as Austin and didn't even make it to the 4th tier of famous wrestlers. This is just absurd.

 

[Fabulous Freebirds]

No. Austin was a great talker, wrestler. Austin was more than just drinking beer and swearing. That's all Sandman had: swearing and smoking and drinking beer. As a wrestler, he was pretty mediocre and as a talker, nothing special.

 

[klunderbunker]

No and for one simple reason: Sandman wasn't a wrestler. He was a sideshow act that got over in front of a bunch of fans that would have cheered ANYTHING if it was anti-establishment. Austin got over at the level he did because of a variety of things, not limited to incredible charisma, great wrestling skills, and the ability to capture an audience in the palm of his hand. The beer was just an aspect of his character whereas the beer was one of the primary parts of Sandman's persona. Sandman was the kind of guy who relied on nothing but spots and couldn't wrestle a coherent match if his life depended on it. Imagine him working with Rock in front of 67,000 people in the Astrodome. It would have been a DISASTER.

It comes down to one thing: Austin had incredible talent and Sandman drank a lot. That doesn't make you a competent wrestler.

 

[The_Reptile_]

No, and for one simple reason: Austin had talent, Sandman didn't. Their similar beer drinking, ass kicking personas are about as much in common the two have with each other as you're gonna get, because Austin could cut a promo, work a match and entertain with the best of them and had the tools to maintain success, while Sandman needed a famous song and a kendo stick to stay barely relevant.

 

[louchratis]

No way. Sandman was ultimately just an entrance. He was perfect for ECW but Austin could actually work in the ring. When you strip away the entrance Sandman wasn't much to get excited about.

 

[jmt225]

No and for one simple reason: Sandman wasn't a wrestler. He was a sideshow act that got over in front of a bunch of fans that would have cheered ANYTHING if it was anti-establishment.

That's untrue, KB. The Sandman got over with the WWE audience as well.

Now, of course Sandman could have never been what Austin was. Austin is one of the greatest wrestlers of all time. Fantastic inside the ring, outstanding promo work, and charisma out of this World. The guy had it ALL.

Sandman lacks two of those things. Of course, in the ring, he was nothing special. But he still had enough where he could put on entertaining matches with the right guys under the right circumstances, that's for sure. And on the mic, if he was functioning, he was good at best, but never great.

Charisma wise though, The Sandman matches Austin. That is a fact. And anyone with that much charisma and presence can find themselves in a great position in the pro wrestling industry. However, as much as a "genius" Vince is business wise, he's nowhere near the "genius" creative wise like a lot of people tend to believe. He wouldn't have known what to do with The Sandman. The fact that there are actually people out there who believe he could have been as big as Steve fucking Austin under the WWE flag shows you how unbelievably great Paul Heyman was at hiding the weaknesses of a wrestler. Vince never had that in him and never will.

Bottom line, The Sandman would have failed in WWE, big time. He would have been given a dumb gimmick and he would have disappeared after a few weeks. Vince simply doesn't know how to work with niche guys.

 

[DarksideEric]

That's untrue, KB. The Sandman got over with the WWE audience as well.

Now, of course Sandman could have never been what Austin was. Austin is one of the greatest wrestlers of all time. Fantastic inside the ring, outstanding promo work, and charisma out of this World. The guy had it ALL.

Sandman lacks two of those things. Of course, in the ring, he was nothing special. But he still had enough where he could put on entertaining matches with the right guys under the right circumstances, that's for sure. And on the mic, if he was functioning, he was good at best, but never great.

Charisma wise though, The Sandman matches Austin. That is a fact. And anyone with that much charisma and presence can find themselves in a great position in the pro wrestling industry. However, as much as a "genius" Vince is business wise, he's nowhere near the "genius" creative wise like a lot of people tend to believe. He wouldn't have known what to do with The Sandman. The fact that there are actually people out there who believe he could have been as big as Steve fucking Austin under the WWE flag shows you how unbelievably great Paul Heyman was at hiding the weaknesses of a wrestler. Vince never had that in him and never will.

Bottom line, The Sandman would have failed in WWE, big time. He would have been given a dumb gimmick and he would have disappeared after a few weeks. Vince simply doesn't know how to work with niche guys.

Actually no, that is a completely subjective opinion.

Sandman would have failed in WWE because Sandman isn't that good when compared to someone like Austin. I'm not going to state that as a fact because it's not, but it's far more widely acceptable than the thought of Sandman ever being as good as Austin.

Hell, one could even argue that Austin was more entertaining in ECW than Sandman was.

 

[supernatural1981]

Sandman would never of got over to the length of Stone Cold because Vince would never of allowed him to be the way he was in ECW.

The storylines in ECW helped to get him over to the extent he did there (Raven brainwashing Lori and his son) plus others. He was no more than a guy who would do run ins and swing the cane around not much else, as shown in his WCW days.

I loved ECW back in the day but not one of their wrestlers could live up to Stone cold when it comes to making that kind of impact in the attitude era.

 

[SinCityBlitz]

Uh no. The major reason being that he would have never been able to do a 3:16 speech like Austin did at KOTR. Sandman didn't have the charisma to pull it off.

 

[shafe_41]

Not a snowball's chance in hell. Sandman wasn't even a wrestler. He was a guy that used weapons, smashed beer cans on his head, and had an attitude problem in and out of the ring. His entire persona was a beer can and kendo stick. Austin was at least a great wrestler with a perfect gimmick to solidify his legacy.

KB pretty much nailed it above (as he usually does) saying Sandman was a sideshow act. That's pretty much nail on the head. Not much more to elaborate on there.

 

[Pedigree1]

Sandman in short was nothing more than a sideshow.. I dont think seriously he could upstage Doink the Clown let alone SCSA (Possibly the best ever).. Sandman drank a shitload,cussed and was against authority! But what sets Sandman and SCSA is SCSA had enormous talent while Sandman did not.. Maybe on Charisma sandman might be up there,but that alone would not get sandman into main event status. Vinnie Mac would have buried him as soon as sandman signed on the dotted line

 

[jmt225]

Actually no, that is a completely subjective opinion.

So The Sandman didn't have an insane amount of charisma? That is not a fact?

Just watch his entrance... that's charisma personified. The people didn't like him because of his music; there were plenty of popular songs that wrestlers came out to that got zero reaction. But as soon as people saw The Sandman, as soon as they saw Public Enemy, they saw something special and went bananas for them. That's all because of charisma. RVD had it, Sabu had it, Taz had it, even New Jack had it... that's what made those guys as over as they were. CW Anderson could go out there and do everything New Jack and The Sandman did and never get a reaction. Why? He was generic. Nothing separated him from the normal individual from the stands. That SHOULD have been true with The Sandman as well, but there was just something about him. He had "it," as they love to say.

The Sandman was never great in the ring, he was never great on the mic, but because of his charisma, he was the face of the third largest pro wrestling company in the World during perhaps the biggest doom period in history and also at a time most people consider the golden years of ECW (1994-1998). His charisma alone made him that, and to me, that's enough proof to say as an indisputable fact that he's one of the most charismatic pro wrestlers in history.

 

[DarksideEric]

So The Sandman didn't have an insane amount of charisma? That is not a fact?

Just watch his entrance... that's charisma personified. The people didn't like him because of his music; there were plenty of popular songs that wrestlers came out to that got zero reaction. But as soon as people saw The Sandman, as soon as they saw Public Enemy, they saw something special and went bananas for them. That's all because of charisma. RVD had it, Sabu had it, Taz had it, even New Jack had it... that's what made those guys as over as they were. CW Anderson could go out there and do everything New Jack and The Sandman did and never get a reaction. Why? He was generic. Nothing separated him from the normal individual from the stands. That SHOULD have been true with The Sandman as well, but there was just something about him. He had "it," as they love to say.

The Sandman was never great in the ring, he was never great on the mic, but because of his charisma, he was the face of the third largest pro wrestling company in the World during perhaps the biggest doom period in history and also at a time most people consider the golden years of ECW (1994-1998). His charisma alone made him that, and to me, that's enough proof to say as an indisputable fact that he's one of the most charismatic pro wrestlers in history.

"Charisma personified" falls onto the shoulders of Hulk Hogan, arguably Flair, Rock and Austin.

You're comparing Sandman to Austin, not the rest of ECW. During the era in which we're talking about Sandman would not even begin to rival Austin, most especially because he falls short in every other category.

 

[peter_midnight]

Good question. I remember my friend made a sign that got taken away from him at an old WWF show that said Taz + Sandman = Stone Cold Steve Austin, essentially saying that SCSA ripped those 2 off gimmick wise. If you look at Sandman's WCW run, one thing stands out. He tried to get into shape. This shows that he was willing to improve his game for the big time. If that's the case, in theory it's possible that he would've stepped up his in-ring game in the WWF had he gone there in the 90s. The real question here is whether the fans would've accepted Austin like they did IF they'd already seen a guy drinking beer and basically not giving a f**k. I have a lot of friends that saw Val Venis as nothing more than a ripoff of Rick Rude and they were casual fans, lol.

 

[ShinobiMusashi]

Good question. I remember my friend made a sign that got taken away from him at an old WWF show that said Taz + Sandman = Stone Cold Steve Austin, essentially saying that SCSA ripped those 2 off gimmick wise.

This is pretty close. It was really more of a hybrid of Sandman and Shane Douglas(circa 1995). When Austin came to ECW(while Shane Douglas was in WWF), Heyman just kind of gave him the same push he gave Douglas, cutting shoot promos about guys that buried him etc. Just a bitter guy that was screwed over by backstage politics one time too many, and he snapped.

Of course, Sandman would have never topped Austin, but I think he still would have been SUPER over in the Attitude Era. New Jack too. New Jack probably would have been one of the most over guys in WWE history had he gotten a run during the AE.

Sandman was nowhere near Austin's level in any way, but he's being bashed way too hard in this thread by a bunch of guys that don't know much about him outside of a few DVD's they've seen here and there. He actually had a great knack for the facial expressions and he sold better than a lot of the guys in the WWE today.

 

[thebarber]

all Sandman could do was bust a can on his head. Austin was one of the greatest of all time. How did this thread sneak past the moderators?????
Austin basically stole Sandmans gimmick when he passed through ECW IN 1995, but he raised the bar 100 fold with it.

 

[Ubermensch]

Probably because it's a legitimate question and contains no offensive language or spam.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

No and for one simple reason: Sandman wasn't a wrestler. He was a sideshow act that got over in front of a bunch of fans that would have cheered ANYTHING if it was anti-establishment. Austin got over at the level he did because of a variety of things, not limited to incredible charisma, great wrestling skills, and the ability to capture an audience in the palm of his hand. The beer was just an aspect of his character whereas the beer was one of the primary parts of Sandman's persona. Sandman was the kind of guy who relied on nothing but spots and couldn't wrestle a coherent match if his life depended on it. Imagine him working with Rock in front of 67,000 people in the Astrodome. It would have been a DISASTER.

It comes down to one thing: Austin had incredible talent and Sandman drank a lot. That doesn't make you a competent wrestler.

KB is absolutely spot on. Sandman made a decent career in wrestling without having pretty much ANY actual wrestling ability. Have you seen him trying to work a proper wrestling match? It's painful...and that is coming from someone who actually finds Sandman's act entertaining. When your entrance and hitting a beer can into your head til you bleed is the best part of your character, you aren't going to be one of the all time greats.

Compare this to Austin- one of the most charismatic, captivating and entertaining wrestlers of all time. Austin was primarily a brawler, but could work a fantastic match. His talent got him to the top, even when stuck with a dull gimmick in the WWE, he had the ability and charisma to make it and to become arguably the most over wrestler in history. His talent shits all over Sandman in every way.

If Sandman had joined the WWE at the same time as Austin, he would have been shown up and embarrased. He couldn't lace Austin's boots. The only similar thing about the two is they both drunk beer, but Sandman was actually drunk in the ring.

 

[deadman talking]

as basically everyone has already said, Austin had a whole lot more wrestling talent, in ring, presence and mic skills. He also had paid his dues on his way up. im not really sure about Sandmans background, but he didnt seem to have enough to be in that type of spot. his character was entertaining at times, but not enough in ring skill. not sure you could put a companies worth of trust into him either. more of an attraction to get some good pops here and there. betta tham some though. austin did it with several gimmicks

 

[ShinobiMusashi]

I would never put Sandman on Austin's level, but I definitely think he's been cut short here in this thread. He always was very awkward on the microphone, but the difference between an ECW hardcore match and a CZW or FMW hardcore match was due to guys like Sandman making things look worse than they really were. Even though the CZW or FMW stuff would make ECW's hardcore stuff look like Tiny Toons, the ECW stuff was usually much more dramatic because of some of the more subtle things that guys like Sandman did that get glossed over because he's not "telling a story". The Stairway To Hell match in early 98 is a good example. The match isn't anywhere near as extreme as some of the FMW/CZW stuff, but due to the selling and theatrics of Sabu and The Sandman in that match it was just so much more dramatic and interesting. I can't speak much for his 2006-2007 run, but in his prime there was a lot more to him than just bashing beer cans and swinging canes. He had enough talent to actually put forth a character that had more depth than a lot of current day wrestling acts. He was a wrestler that blue collar people could get behind. The kind of people that go out every day and pour concrete or swing a sledge hammer 10 hours a day for a living. He appeals to that demographic. When it came down to it, Sandman knew how to turn on the emotion and truly get you invested in his character as a result.

Take a look at the fans faces in the background(and those man boobs!). They truly cared about this guy. You can't get that kind of reaction on beer cans alone.

 

[jameyt2003]

I like to make attempts at defending confounding premises such as this, but I cant. Aside from the fact that SCSA is MY FREAKIN HERO! I cant expect a sandman to hold his own against the legends that SCSA feuded against. We know how SCSA made feuds legendary with Bret Hart and The Rock. SCSA was so great because he could hang with the other GREATS. Other greats include McMahon, HHH, Angle, and Undertaker.

 

[TWJC: The Beginning]

Not at all. Austin was an actual athlete. Sandman appealed to the ECW fans because he was as trashy and sleazy as they were.

Austin was blue collar but had ability. Sandman didn't. Take the booze, cigarettes, and smokes from Sandman and he's not entertaining. Austin is always entertaining in and out of the ring.

You also have to realize that being the star isn't just what you do in the ring. It's all the appearances, which I have doubts Sandman had the drive and selflessness to do.

 

[Gibby]

Hats off to jmt225 and ShinobiMusashi for talking sense in this thread.

Answer to the question in the subject line: probably not. These things are given to time and place. Austin was lucky to get the repackaging and push that he got, but once the stars aligned he really really ran with it. And he sounded great, and he wrestled great matches with lots of intensity and fire and skill against a great calibre of opponent (and Savio Vega). He became, as a result of luck and skill and timing and a whole hell of charisma, one of the best ever. Certainly in my top 5 all-time.

The Sandman is also a product of an era that can't be repeated. Hardcore is (probably rightly) marginalised these days and workers have to have that saleable look to get by. You might build SCSA on paper, but you would never invent The Sandman. As much as Austin did in WWE, The Sandman stepped up when pushed and revealed new depths to his character.

It's crass and deeply misunderstanding of what wrestling is to reduce a guy that was clearly over as 'just a [name of move/signature thing]' because 100s of wrestlers have imitated and gone before doing the same thing and it didn't work nearly as well as it did for The Sandman. And to say that he was just as trashy as ECW fans is a mean attack on their fans, a knowledgeable lot mostly with 1 or 2 famous assholes in their number. Unlike WWE fans of 2014, who are all fantastic human beings to a man.

Both guys maximised their talents with some help. They should both be looked up to by all wrestlers. One made it in the business with some respected title wins and rocked some killer houses. One made it all the way to the very top.