Wrestlemania 7: A Retrospective Look

[enviousdominous]

You know what, I absolutely loved the blind fold match. To be honest, this was one of my favorite shows from my childhood and I can't bring myself to pick a worst match. Every one of those matches stood out to me, but the blindfold match was extra special.

I would have lengthy debates with my Dad regarding whether or not pro-wrestling was fixed. I was nine years old at the time, but already had a reputation with my teachers at school as someone you'd be foolish to debate. I embarrassed them over their assumption that World War 2 inspired Tolkien to write a series of books that were published before Hitler invaded Poland. Moving on.

My father and I watched Rick Martel vs Jake the Snake Roberts over and over again. I was completely self-indoctrinated with the belief that all pro-wrestling was a legitimate contest of skill between two athletes and all events during the match were completely random occurrences. We would pause the tape at certain points, he would pause to explain an occurrence that proves that pro-wrestling is fixed, I would pause to prove the contrary. It was like we were debating conspiracies behind the events of the Zapruder film.

It wasn't just an attempt to hold onto the precious notion that these real life super-heros were fighting the forces of evil strictly on my behalf, there was no way in hell I was going to lose a debate to anyone much less my own father. We went over that match every day for a couple weeks.

The final verdict? It was indeed staged, and both men could see well enough to recognize their surroundings. It was an eye opening experience for me and it inspired me to apologize to my teachers for being such an arrogant prick over one meager debate.

I realized that the WWE is as real as Star Wars or an episode of Perry Mason, so I didn't stop marking out.

 

[thebarber]

Favourite match: Randy vs Warrior
Worst match: split between Demolition match and the LOD squash over Power and Glory
Changes: I would have had LOD vs Demolition, have the match built up and guys exchanging victories leading to a loser leaves WWF match at Wrestlemania 7. LOD go over and the match has a point. Power and Glory could have gone against the Japanese guys in a nothing match instead.
I also would have not had the Big Bossman in the IC Title match, he was never believably a chance of beating Hennig. Not sure who I would have changed him with, but I didnt like Bossman in that match.

 

[The Brain]

WrestleMania VII is very underrated, in my opinion. As Brain mentioned, in his post that came 4 minutes after the OP's--work ahead much? nice cut/paste--it was hurt by the venue.

Yep, I've been a couple steps ahead the whole time. Already have my WM8 response typed up. That's as far as I've gotten though. I had another thought cross my mind regarding the venue. What if the Coliseum was never announced? What if all along the location was the LA Sports Arena? Then no one would give the venue a second thought and just accept the show for what it was. Even if the WWF was losing popularity in 1990 and couldn't sell out the Coliseum does that mean the event was bad? Just because they weren't going to sell 100,000 tickets doesn't mean the event didn't turn out great anyway.

The main difference I would make would be keeping the strap on Warrior and making the Macho/Warrior match the main event as well as a title v career match. It made no sense for Macho to put his career on the line for just a regular match with Warrior. The build was that Warrior wouldn't give Macho a title match (kinda weird since Warrior was a face) so the natural solution would be to have Macho put his career on the line for the shot. Slaughter and Hogan should have still went down, just didn't need the title. Hogan was going against Slaughter for America and that should have been enough.

Just to be clear it wasn't only Savage's career on the line. I'm sure you're aware both careers were on the line but the way you wrote it you imply only Savage had anything to lose. I think the career stipulation made the match much more intense than a title match would have. Hogan and Slaughter needed the title much more than Warrior and Savage did.

Overall the only thing I would have changed was the Blindfold Match between Martel and Roberts. They certainly should have had a Mania match, the stipulation made sense with Martel blinding Jake on the Brother Love Show but blindfold matches just don't work, never had, never will and sadly this was probably the best blindfold match ever. I would have given them either a regular match or another stipulation where they could work a match, both were very good in the ring and giving them 10 minutes in a singles match is more than enough to get it over.

I've thought about this too and I'm not sure where I stand. The blindfold match was kind of lame and a regular match would have been better but you have to admit the crowd ate that match up. With the live crowd so into it it's hard to say WWF got that one wrong.

Which brings us to the Warrior v Savage - Warrior's best non-Rude match and a classic moment of reconcilliation for Randy and Liz... but it didn't NEED to be a retirement match, especially as Savage was active again just 6 months later. They could have put it in a cage and had Savage so beat up he just took 6 months away.

I think this match did need to be a career match for it to work as well as it did. It gave the match a major sense of urgency which Gorilla and Heenan sold beautifully during their commentary. The fact that it could have been Savage's farewell was the whole reason for Elizabeth being there. Honestly I can't believe anyone would ever suggest changing anything about this match as the entire thing was total perfection and one of the best examples of a legendary WrestleMania match and moment. To each his own though.

 

[justtxyank]

I'm with The Brain on this one being underrated. It's actually one of my favorite Wrestlemanias. Today it's popular to hate on Hulk Hogan, but back then it wasn't. Oh sure, everyone on the Internet ALWAYS hated Hogan (yeah right) and apparently everyone on the Internet fully understood the backstage happenings when they were 5 or 6 but hey...

Honestly I wouldn't change a thing about the show. Obviously the BEST match is Savage/Warrior, but I absolutely loved Hogan/Slaughter. The Slaughter heel turn was a great thing and worked incredibly well. The only problem was they didn't build him up enough before he took the title off of Warrior at the Rumble.

As for why the buyrate was so low, people need to realize that wrestling business was in the process of collapsing at this point. It wasn't just the WWF that saw business drop. The AWA had died off after business collapsed, you had indies around the country dying off, WCW was suffering badly...Wrestling goes through cycles. When a generation ages out of the fan cycle it takes time for the next gen to replace them.

 

[spaldoni]

This is tough because it takes away Warrior/Savage but the only main event that had a chance at 100,000 fans would of been Hogan/Warrior 2. They should of went with that plan and booked Warrior a lot better. He should of had the Summerslam angle with Quake. Then an angle with Savage at the Royal Rumble. I think these two opponents would of been crucial in his title reign. Hogan wins the Rumble eliminating Slaughter. I think eliminating Slaughter would of been great momentum for Hogan. So both Warrior and Hogan look strong going into Mania 7. Now in my fantasy world, I book the Savage/Liz reunion at the Royal Rumble. Bobby Heenan shreds on it big time and does it every chance he gets. That could set up an epic Perfect/Savage match at Mania for the IC title with Liz walking down the aisle with Savage. Savage holding Liz on one shoulder with his newly won IC title on the other shoulder is a pretty good Mania moment. Then I throw in Duggan/Slaughter in a boot camp match. I really liked Power and Glory so I have them take the tag titles from the Hart Foundation. Anyways that's some of the matches at WrestleMania 7 I would of wanted to see.

 

[Weems2k]

I remember renting this on VHS many moons ago. Knowing what happened to Hogan at the end of the match, the video version never showed the backstage fireball to the face by Slaughter. Does anyone know if that was ever aired live during the PPV?

 

[MMK]

This is arguably the worst booked Wrestlemania of them all

Here's what could have been:

The Rockers vs The Nasty Boys
The Hart Foundation were supposed to drop the tag titles to Rockers in late 1990 but due to the infamous broken rope match, the ttle change was never recognized. The Rockers deserved at least one run with the titles. They should have been defending against The Nasty Boys here. It would have been punk rock vs glam rock, the nasty boys against the pretty boys, not to mention that both teams featured a blonde and a brunette. Instead, the Rockers fought Barbarian and Haku in what was a surprisingly fantastic opening match. But I still would have preferred a Rockers tag team title run.

Bret Hart vs Mr.Perfect
If the Harts had dropped the straps to The Rockers back in late 90 as was originally planned, Bret could have broke out on his own and challenged Perfect for the IC title in a classic Mania battle. Instead we got Mr.Perfect vs Big Bossman. Wha?

L.O.D vs Demolition
IGNORE all those who say this match was past it's prime. It's still better than LOD vs Power and Glory, or Demolition vs Tenryu and Kitao. If anyone tells you it's better as it was, then do them a favor and smack them across the face. LOD vs Demolition in a street fight or a steel cage would have been just fine. As for Tenryu and Kitao, why not put them up against Tanaka and Kato. T & K vs T & K. Or better yet don't have them at Wrestlemania at all.

Hogan vs Slaughter
No need for this to be a title match. A simple flag match would have sufficed. Have the Iraqi flag in one corner, and the American flag in the other. They rushed to put the belt on Slaughter just so they could get it back on Hogan. The whole exploitation of the Gulf war was sickening, but was to be expected from the likes of McMahon. But if you're going down that low brow road, the title doesn't need to be at stake. It was never about that anyway. Hogan opposed Slaughters treasonous acts and anti-american rhetoric. Isn't that enough to start a feud? I guess Hogan doesn't care about standing up for his country's reputation unless the title is also at stake.

Warrior vs Savage.
This was the only match they got right. Except for one little problem. NOTHING could possibly follow this match. So why stick it in the middle of the card? This should have been the main event. This should have closes the show. Warrior should have retained the title all the way to Mania, while the Macho KING won the ROYAL Rumble. King...Royal...get it? Macho then challenges Warrior for the title, with the added career ending stipulation still in place.

This way Mania could have ended with the reunion of Savage and Elizabeth, as the Macho Man took one final bow.

Of course that would require Hulk Hogan to not be in the main event, which as we know is humanly impossible.

 

[Kool Aid Man]

I think most would agree Warrior's match with Savage was his best work. His career was plagued with squash matches and this match actually had a little breadth to it. Unfortunately this main event match with Hogan in it seemed like another insertion of Hogan into the main event fray without very much buildup.

 

[The Brain]

Hogan vs Slaughter
No need for this to be a title match. A simple flag match would have sufficed. Have the Iraqi flag in one corner, and the American flag in the other. They rushed to put the belt on Slaughter just so they could get it back on Hogan. The whole exploitation of the Gulf war was sickening, but was to be expected from the likes of McMahon. But if you're going down that low brow road, the title doesn't need to be at stake. It was never about that anyway. Hogan opposed Slaughters treasonous acts and anti-american rhetoric. Isn't that enough to start a feud? I guess Hogan doesn't care about standing up for his country's reputation unless the title is also at stake.

Warrior vs Savage.
This was the only match they got right. Except for one little problem. NOTHING could possibly follow this match. So why stick it in the middle of the card? This should have been the main event. This should have closes the show. Warrior should have retained the title all the way to Mania, while the Macho KING won the ROYAL Rumble. King...Royal...get it? Macho then challenges Warrior for the title, with the added career ending stipulation still in place.

This way Mania could have ended with the reunion of Savage and Elizabeth, as the Macho Man took one final bow.

Of course that would require Hulk Hogan to not be in the main event, which as we know is humanly impossible.

I just don't understand this. Some people say Hogan and Slaughter didn't need the title in their feud. It was Warrior and Savage that didn't need the title. Their match and story was perfect as it was. Would the title have really made that match any better? Slaughter was despised but the hatred reach another level when he became champion. It was shocking. Hogan and Slaughter needed the title far more than Warrior and Savage.

I think most would agree Warrior's match with Savage was his best work. His career was plagued with squash matches and this match actually had a little breadth to it. Unfortunately this main event match with Hogan in it seemed like another insertion of Hogan into the main event fray without very much buildup.

Without very much build? I assume you weren't watching in 1991. That's fine but FYI there was plenty of build.

 

[MMK]

I just don't understand this. Some people say Hogan and Slaughter didn't need the title in their feud. It was Warrior and Savage that didn't need the title. Their match and story was perfect as it was. Would the title have really made that match any better? Slaughter was despised but the hatred reach another level when he became champion. It was shocking. Hogan and Slaughter needed the title far more than Warrior and Savage.

Perhaps. But like the song says, "if you hurt Hulks friends and you hurt his pride, he's gotta be a man. He can't let it slide." Hulk vs Slaughter doesn't need a title. A belt seems rather unimportant when war and peace are at stake. Slaughter insulted Hulks country. That's all that needed to happen to set up the feud. Besides, Slaughter had only been wrestling in the WWF since October 1990. He didn't even have a major singles victory, yet he receives a WWF Title shot in January? He even lost at Survivor Series to the team of Tito Santana, the Bushwackers, and Volkoff. Why should he recieve a title shot before The Macho King?

They rushed the belt on Slaughter simply to capitalize on exploiting the gulf war. Hulk vs Slaughter in a cage or some type of bloody brawl would have sufficed. Closing the show with Savage and Elizabeth would have been a story book ending. Anytime someone's career is about to end, whether it's Flair, Michaels, or Savage, that's the match that should always close the show. The only reason it didn't was Hogan's ego.

The moment Sarge insulted America you knew Hogan was going to face him at Mania. So having Sarge win the belt so quickly and Hogan win the rumble on the exact same night was just way too easy and lazy a setup for the match. Hogan's standing up for his country would have felt more genuine if he had nothing to gain in the match.

But if you still insist that Sarge vs Hogan be for the belt, I'm fine with that. But its placement on the card should still have been switched with the career ending match. As I said, anytime someone's career is going to end, that's the match that should always end the show. When Flair and Shawn's careers were on the line at Mania's 24 and 26, neither match was for the title yet both those matches still ended the show. Same should have gone for Savage. But clearly Hogan's ego wouldn't allow that to happen.

 

[HeenanGorilla]

not to mention that both teams featured a blonde and a brunette

T & K vs T & K.

King...Royal...get it?

These have to be some of the stupidest "reasons" to change a card I have ever seen. Ugh, how awkward you are..

"Welcome everyone to WrestleMania VII, where tonight we have a tag team match where the combatants on both sides have the same initials. We realize we blew it not having Red Rooster fight Rick Rude at WMV and we have finally thought of a way to make it up to the fans.

Speaking of tag team action, we have two teams composed of one blonde and one brunette squaring off against each other. There's no telling how the hair colors will play a role here.

Finally, we have a King that won the Royal Rumble. This is clever and will in no way make every other Rumble winner ever seem less significant, given his lack of crown.

Let's go to Howard Finkel to kick off the nonsense!"

Yep...WWF missed one there.

 

[The Brain]

Perhaps. But like the song says, "if you hurt Hulks friends and you hurt his pride, he's gotta be a man. He can't let it slide." Hulk vs Slaughter doesn't need a title. A belt seems rather unimportant when war and peace are at stake. Slaughter insulted Hulks country. That's all that needed to happen to set up the feud. Besides, Slaughter had only been wrestling in the WWF since October 1990. He didn't even have a major singles victory, yet he receives a WWF Title shot in January? He even lost at Survivor Series to the team of Tito Santana, the Bushwackers, and Volkoff. Why should he recieve a title shot before The Macho King?

Slaughter was clearly brought back to win the title and lose it to Hogan at mania. It's not like he was just coming back anyway and they decided to put the belt on him a couple months later. If they weren't going to put the belt on him they wouldn't have brought him back at all. Besides, it's not like Slaughter was some new guy that hadn't paid his dues. He was a star in the WWF before Hulkmania was born.

They rushed the belt on Slaughter simply to capitalize on exploiting the gulf war. Hulk vs Slaughter in a cage or some type of bloody brawl would have sufficed. Closing the show with Savage and Elizabeth would have been a story book ending. Anytime someone's career is about to end, whether it's Flair, Michaels, or Savage, that's the match that should always close the show. The only reason it didn't was Hogan's ego.

I despise the Hogan's ego argument. What do you base that on? Internet hearsay and IWC hate? Do you think Vince and the creative team had the idea of having a Savage vs. Warrior main event title match at mania and Hogan somehow stopped that from happening? No way. Hogan was still the biggest star and belonged in the title match and the main event.

The moment Sarge insulted America you knew Hogan was going to face him at Mania. So having Sarge win the belt so quickly and Hogan win the rumble on the exact same night was just way too easy and lazy a setup for the match. Hogan's standing up for his country would have felt more genuine if he had nothing to gain in the match.

No, putting the belt on Slaughter was a shocking move and turned his heat nuclear. Hulk was going to win the title back for the good old USA.

But if you still insist that Sarge vs Hogan be for the belt, I'm fine with that. But its placement on the card should still have been switched with the career ending match. As I said, anytime someone's career is going to end, that's the match that should always end the show. When Flair and Shawn's careers were on the line at Mania's 24 and 26, neither match was for the title yet both those matches still ended the show. Same should have gone for Savage. But clearly Hogan's ego wouldn't allow that to happen.

I'm not sure if you were watching in 1991 but I have a feeling either you weren't or your memory is fuzzy. Hogan vs. Slaughter was the clear main event. I absolutley loved Savage vs. Warrior. It's one of my favorite matches ever. I once wrote a ridiculously long thread just telling the story of that match. It should not have been the main event.

I don't agree that a career match has to go on last. Putting it in the middle of the card does not take anything away from it. Want proof? You fondly remember Flair vs. Michaels. So much so that you think it closed the show when it actually took place in the middle of the card.

Savage vs. Warrior was perfect exactly as it was. Honestly, would the title or putting it as the last match have made it any better?

 

[MMK]

I despise the Hogan's ego argument. What do you base that on? Internet hearsay and IWC hate? Do you think Vince and the creative team had the idea of having a Savage vs. Warrior main event title match at mania and Hogan somehow stopped that from happening? No way. Hogan was still the biggest star and belonged in the title match and the main event. Hulk was going to win the title back for the good old USA.

I'm not sure if you were watching in 1991 but I have a feeling either you weren't or your memory is fuzzy. Hogan vs. Slaughter was the clear main event. I absolutley loved Savage vs. Warrior. It's one of my favorite matches ever. I once wrote a ridiculously long thread just telling the story of that match. It should not have been the main event.

I believe ending the night with Savage and Elizabeth taking one final bow would have been a much better ending. That was unpredictable. Whereas Hulk the American beating up the Iraqi sympathizer was more than a little expected. If you know anything about drama or storytelling, the unpredictable is always a better ending than the predictable.

Hogan could have simply kicked his a$$ for the good ol usa. As I said, if Hogan had nothing to gain in the match his gesture would have been MORE patriotic. If you're truly standing up for something, you shouldn't need a reward to be at stake to peak your interest. It devalues the gesture.

And no I am not basing the "Hogan ego" argument on IWC hate. IWC is a lame trendy term guys like yourself love to throw around. We're all just fans. No need to come up with a condescending label. For the record, I base it off the evidence. MOST career ending matches end the night. Especially if it's a guy like Savage. I also believe the only reason Hogan never fought Flair at Wrestlemania 8 was once again due to Hogan's ego. Flair was cheered at the Rumble, while Hogan was starting to hear the boos. My best guess is the reason that match was scrapped was because Hogan, or possibly Vince, didn't want to risk having the majority of the crowd booing Hogan so he was instead given a safer opponent in Sid. Just MY OPINION.

I base my opinion and comments solely on the same things you base yours on. You don't know anymore than I do. Just because you're a moderator doesn't mean you have more knowledge about wrestling than I do. It just means you have more time on your hands.

And finally, I am so TIRED of you constantly telling everyone "I'm not sure you were watching in...." etc. You say that to at least one person on EVERY forum I've read. Please get some new material. For the record, YES I was watching in 1991. Been watching since 85. Maybe even longer than you. Imagine that. In fact, maybe you were the one who wasn't watching in 1991? Maybe you're just reading stuff off wikipedia. Just because you're a moderator doesn't give you the right to condescend to others who comment. Play nice Brain.

 

[Mantaur Rodeo Clown]

The best match on the card was the Barbarian vs. The British Bulldog.

Those two men had no right to be moving as quickly and as smoothly as they did with that many steroids pumping through their respective systems.

Good pace, great power battle, loved it.

Good lord, I can see the tren pulsing through their rippling muscles when I watch it on youtube.

Vince never got his wish of Gary Strydom becoming a big star, but I'll bet he was all over this match.

Just terrific.

 

[MMK]

The best match on the card was the Barbarian vs. The British Bulldog.

Sorry to be a prick by correcting you, but it was actually Warlord. I know that's what you probably meant to write. And you're correct. That match was surprisingly good. I guess it benefited from low expectations. Bulldog is an underrated wrestler. Not only could he hang with the likes of Shawn and Bret, but he could even make guys like The Warlord look good.

 

[HeenanGorilla]

My best guess is the reason that match was scrapped was because Hogan, or possibly Vince, didn't want to risk having the majority of the crowd booing Hogan so he was instead given a safer opponent in Sid. Just MY OPINION.

I think that the crowd cheering when Sid tossed Hogan out of the Rumble, along with Hogan being booed when he pulled Sid out--and afterwards when he and Sid faced off in the ring and Hogan tried (unsuccessfully) to get the crowd behind him--showed Vince that Hogan's time was ending and his character was starting to turn people off. I know I was sick of him by then and that moment when he pulled Sid out sealed it for me. I can see what MMK said about them fearing Flair would be the crowd favorite over Hogan. Whether it was Hogan's ego or Vince feeling it was smart to keep Hogan out of that situation, I can see that being the reason we didn't see the dream match we could have.

I base my opinion and comments solely on the same things you base yours on. You don't know anymore than I do. Just because you're a moderator doesn't mean you have more knowledge about wrestling than I do. It just means you have more time on your hands.

And finally, I am so TIRED of you constantly telling everyone "I'm not sure you were watching in...." etc. You say that to at least one person on EVERY forum I've read. Please get some new material. For the record, YES I was watching in 1991. Been watching since 85. Maybe even longer than you. Imagine that. In fact, maybe you were the one who wasn't watching in 1991? Maybe you're just reading stuff off wikipedia. Just because you're a moderator doesn't give you the right to condescend to others who comment. Play nice Brain.

I still get an awkward feeling reading MMK's hair color and same initial suggestions from earlier. (Sorry, bud, but I do) BUT, this is the funniest damn thing I have ever read on this forum. Not funny ha-ha, but hilarious to me because MMK is SPOT ON with his calling out of The Brain. That guy talks down to people and pisses on any differing opinion. The last three reps I have in my inbox are two green reps from people who are also sick of his nonsense and thanked me for calling him on it and one red rep from The Brain himself (along with a message sent to me privately that I deleted without reading). If there is an "IWC", not everyone who posts on this forum or another wrestling forum is part of it. There are different kinds of fans/writers. MMK and myself have been watching wrestling since 1985 and are fans. Personally, I look at this forum for nostalgic reasons. I post when a topic interests me. The "IWC", in my opinion, are people like The Brain and others who are here all day everyday. They write an opinion, they argue, they condescend, they repeat. It's the same opinion on the same match or the same gimmick written over and over again every few weeks or months.

Most of this forum is made up of puppets who can't think for themselves. It is LAUGHABLE how often I see a blatantly incorrect "fact" posted by The Brain or another moderator repeated and repeated on this forum as fact by others. Why? Because most of these guys with stubborn (and usually ill-conceived) opinions weren't around back then and take some stranger's word for it instead of reading or asking legitimate sources.

Anyway, shame we didn't see Hogan vs. Flair when it mattered. BUT, I wouldn't trade the great storyline, match and entire angle of Flair/Savage to see Hogan/Flair at WMVIII. Hogan/Sid/Shango/Warrior was a weird moment--very cool and very lame at the same time. Not a bad premise...but terrible execution. Warrior didn't look the way we remembered him, Shango missed his cue, DQ finish....all these things done correctly or differently (Warrior looking like Warrior and not planting the seed of "Is that THE Warrior?" in the fans' heads) could have made the WMVIII ending better. Unfortunately, WMVIII and WMIX ended in chaos and nonsense.

 

[MMK]

These have to be some of the stupidest "reasons" to change a card I have ever seen. Ugh, how awkward you are..

"Welcome everyone to WrestleMania VII, where tonight we have a tag team match where the combatants on both sides have the same initials. We realize we blew it not having Red Rooster fight Rick Rude at WMV and we have finally thought of a way to make it up to the fans.

Speaking of tag team action, we have two teams composed of one blonde and one brunette squaring off against each other. There's no telling how the hair colors will play a role here.

Finally, we have a King that won the Royal Rumble. This is clever and will in no way make every other Rumble winner ever seem less significant, given his lack of crown.

Let's go to Howard Finkel to kick off the nonsense!"

Yep...WWF missed one there.

None of the things you listed were MY REASONS. They were just interesting tidbits for those potential matches. You deliberately edited out all of my actual reasons.

But now let's put you on the defense....

Are you saying that The Rockers were better off not ever being tag champs? Would they not have been better off against the Nasty Boys then the slapped together team of Haku and Barbarian? I'm guessing Shawn and Marty would disagree with you.

Second. Tenryu and Kitao. Would it make more or less sense for them to have faced Tananka and Kato than Demolition? Would Demolition have not made for a better LOD opponent than Power And Glory?

Remember, fans are entitled to their own opinions on what they feel would have made for better booking. You don't just have to automatically like what the bookers decide. They're human just like you and I.

I feel Demolition vs LOD would have been better than LOD vs Power and Glory.
I feel The Orient Express vs Tenryu and Kitao would have made more sense than Demolition vs Tenryu and Kitao.
I feel The Rockers deserved a title run and a defense against The Nasty Boys at Wrestlemania instead of facing Haku and Barbarian.
I feel Mr.Perfect would have been better served facing Bret Hart than Big Bossman.
I feel Macho Man winning the Rumble and advancing to face Warrior in the main event would have been more unpredictable than repeating the Hogan rumble win for a second year in a row, especially when the match between he and Slaughter was already pretty much set in stone the second Slaughter starting verbally attacking the US.

But if you prefer things the way they were, then that's fine. Frankly, I think my card is better.

Be honest, if the ppv had been booked as I envisioned it, and then I suggested they change it back to the way it actually went down would you not think those suggested changes were even worse? Seriously. Demolition vs Tenryu and Kitao? Who's gonna defend that booking. There were several missed opportunities at Wrestlemania 7. I'm not sure what's so wrong with stating what I assumed was pretty obvious to all.

 

[The Brain]

I believe ending the night with Savage and Elizabeth taking one final bow would have been a much better ending. That was unpredictable. Whereas Hulk the American beating up the Iraqi sympathizer was more than a little expected. If you know anything about drama or storytelling, the unpredictable is always a better ending than the predictable.

Fair enough but I think unpredictability is overrated. People say they don't like predictability but I think people are happy when they get what they expect. This is like saying Demolition vs. The Colossal Connection should have closed WM6. Similar set up. Popular team beats hated team. Legendary bad guy who used to be good goes good again and takes a final bow. Andre was a bigger name than Savage but I'm guessing you never considered his moment closing WM6, and you shouldn't have. Hogan vs. Warrior was built as the clear main event just as Hogan vs. Slaughter was built as the clear main event for WM7.

Another thing to consider is you have Warrior walking out of mania as champion. When does he lose it? Who does he lose it to? Warrior's reign wasn't going very well and you're extending it by several months for no reason.

Hogan could have simply kicked his a$$ for the good ol usa. As I said, if Hogan had nothing to gain in the match his gesture would have been MORE patriotic. If you're truly standing up for something, you shouldn't need a reward to be at stake to peak your interest. It devalues the gesture.

I see where you're coming from but I disagree. This was more about Hogan taking the title back more for his country than himself. A hated turncoat had wrestling's most coveted prize and we needed an American hero to get it back.

And no I am not basing the "Hogan ego" argument on IWC hate. IWC is a lame trendy term guys like yourself love to throw around. We're all just fans. No need to come up with a condescending label. For the record, I base it off the evidence. MOST career ending matches end the night. Especially if it's a guy like Savage. I also believe the only reason Hogan never fought Flair at Wrestlemania 8 was once again due to Hogan's ego. Flair was cheered at the Rumble, while Hogan was starting to hear the boos. My best guess is the reason that match was scrapped was because Hogan, or possibly Vince, didn't want to risk having the majority of the crowd booing Hogan so he was instead given a safer opponent in Sid. Just MY OPINION.

Yeah, we're all just fans that don't know what really goes on behind the scenes. You said the only reason Hogan main evented WM7 was because of his ego but you have nothing to base that on. It doesn't sound logical to me. You say most career ending matches end the night. You're going to have to remind me. Besides this match that didn't close the night there was HBK vs. Flair that also did not close the night and HBK vs. Taker which did. That's two that didn't and one that did so in that small sample we see that most do not close the night.

And finally, I am so TIRED of you constantly telling everyone "I'm not sure you were watching in...." etc. You say that to at least one person on EVERY forum I've read. Please get some new material. For the record, YES I was watching in 1991. Been watching since 85. Maybe even longer than you. Imagine that. In fact, maybe you were the one who wasn't watching in 1991? Maybe you're just reading stuff off wikipedia. Just because you're a moderator doesn't give you the right to condescend to others who comment. Play nice Brain.

I thought we were having a good discussion. I simply disagree with your opinion. Why are you taking it personal? I complimented you about WM5 and WM8 but you get upset because I don't agree with your opinion on WM7? Me saying I'm not sure if you were watching in 1991 is not an insult. I don't know how you could possibly interpret it that way. By asking that I'm trying to get to know the person I'm conversing with a little more to better understand his point of view. A lot of members of this forum are too young to remember 1991. Now I know you've been watching since 1985. I've been watching since 1986. This is not a badge of honor. It tells me you're making your argument based on actual memory instead of watching the DVD for the first time 15 years after the event and not knowing the actual build of the show. When I get more involved in a discussion I just like to know where the other guy is coming from. Does that sound so bad?

I base my opinion and comments solely on the same things you base yours on. You don't know anymore than I do. Just because you're a moderator doesn't mean you have more knowledge about wrestling than I do. It just means you have more time on your hands.

Who's being condescending now?

 

[HeenanGorilla]

None of the things you listed were MY REASONS. They were just interesting tidbits for those potential matches. You deliberately edited out all of my actual reasons.

But now let's put you on the defense....

Are you saying that The Rockers were better off not ever being tag champs? Would they not have been better off against the Nasty Boys then the slapped together team of Haku and Barbarian? I'm guessing Shawn and Marty would disagree with you.

Second. Tenryu and Kitao. Would it make more or less sense for them to have faced Tananka and Kato than Demolition? Would Demolition have not made for a better LOD opponent than Power And Glory?

Remember, fans are entitled to their own opinions on what they feel would have made for better booking. You don't just have to automatically like what the bookers decide. They're human just like you and I.

I feel Demolition vs LOD would have been better than LOD vs Power and Glory.
I feel The Orient Express vs Tenryu and Kitao would have made more sense than Demolition vs Tenryu and Kitao.
I feel The Rockers deserved a title run and a defense against The Nasty Boys at Wrestlemania instead of facing Haku and Barbarian.
I feel Mr.Perfect would have been better served facing Bret Hart than Big Bossman.
I feel Macho Man winning the Rumble and advancing to face Warrior in the main event would have been more unpredictable than repeating the Hogan rumble win for a second year in a row, especially when the match between he and Slaughter was already pretty much set in stone the second Slaughter starting verbally attacking the US.

But if you prefer things the way they were, then that's fine. Frankly, I think my card is better.

Be honest, if the ppv had been booked as I envisioned it, and then I suggested they change it back to the way it actually went down would you not think those suggested changes were even worse? Seriously. Demolition vs Tenryu and Kitao? Who's gonna defend that booking. There were several missed opportunities at Wrestlemania 7. I'm not sure what's so wrong with stating what I assumed was pretty obvious to all.

I said the hair color and the initials were dumb points. How you got anything having to do with booking of the Rockers or LOD is baffling.

But to answer your question--that came out of nowhere, I do not think the Rockers should have had a run with the belts. They didn't need them. The moment they would have won the belts would have been nice, sure. But, their reign wouldn't have been good. Still not sure how we got to the Rockers title run from me pointing out how silly it is to book based on hair color...but I will continue regardless.

The Rockers did not need the belts because their matches were interesting and entertaining enough. They, like the Bushwhackers, were a team that had HUGE entertainment value for the fans. The belts were unnecessary. Yes, Michaels and Jannetty were great in the ring. But, having them as openers to get the crowd going and in the right mindset to be a good PPV crowd was fine with me.

The Rockers would not have been believable champions of the tag division in the era of bohemoths that they were in. Twin Towers, Demolition, Powers of Pain, LOD, even the Harts. Sure, the Rockers could get a win every once in a while against these bigger guys. But to have a reign of successful defenses? Silly. I feel Rey Mysterio, to a much more ridiculous extent, is the same nonsense. Yes, having him win the WWF championship once would have been fine. Nothing wrong with giving a little guy a run of momentum that culminates with a title victory. I like the David/Goliath storyline. That would be a fun program. Rey gets a big win, another big win and a title shot and somehow pulls it off---fine by me. But this nonsense of Rey winning over and over again against these much bigger opponents is foolish.

"Suspension of disbelief" is another overused term the puppets here like to use. But, having Rey or the Rockers win once and then lose the belt soon after is fine and believable. Reigns as champs would be (and were in Rey's case) absolutely foolish. IN MY OPINION (something that should go without saying, but I guess doesn't here) the Rockers could have had a quick reign, but didn't need it. So, to answer your question that still came out of nowhere, NO I do not think the Rockers should have won the belts.

Unless they changed their hair color to black. THEN we have a storyline...

 

[jones.ben1977]

I stand to be corrected but the heat that Sgt Slaughter had at the time of this was really the last time a wrestler had legit heat through his character in the WWF? I can't think of any other heels from 91 until 97 when Vince came out and said that wrestling was sports entertainment.

 

[Judah's Lion]

Mania 7 was pretty amazing. it's not my favorite, mainly cuz i was so young when it first aired, but i do still enjoy many matches from this card today, which is a testament to how well done this card really was. but staying true to this thread series and my job description as "arm chair booker" in a perfect world where everything i've imagined turns out super amazing in execution, here is my Mania 7 card...

World Title: Hogan vs. Slaughter. this match was pretty good and the build was very intense. leave it as is. it seems to be an unpopular opinion, or so i've gathered while reading thru the many responses on this thread, but i do like this match for the main event.

Career vs. Career: Warrior vs. Savage. this match was pretty epic, both then and still today. only cuz i tend to be over-analytical would i change a few things about the match itself, but it really was solid and exciting and dynamic and edge-of-your-seat type stuff. the build was kinda odd with Warrior denying Savage a World Title shot, but again, i'm just splitting hairs now. one or two tweaks to the build and actual match, but how can you not love this? super intense and emotional from start to heartfelt finish. classic match with an even more classic moment with the reunion of Macho Man and Miss Elizabeth.

IC Title: here i'd mix it up as a reigning IC Champ Texas Tornado defends against Mr. Perfect in a rematch with Perfect regaining the title. Perfect, for being so great in the ring, sure did have some tough booking to deal with at Mania. give him a solid worker and clean win this year. this still sets up nicely for his feud and match with Bret Hart at SummerSlam.

Tag Team Titles: Hart Foundation vs. Nasty Boys. this was pretty shocking to me as a kid to see such fan favorites lose such an important match on such an important stage. but looking back, i see why it had to happen given what was gonna happen at SummerSlam with both Bret Hart and Legion of Doom. so leave it as is.

speaking of LOD, give them the match against Demolition. yeah, Demolition wasn't what they used to be, and yeah, they had an elimination match at Survivor Series, but still this match should have happened on the biggest stage possible. no clue why Axe was gone, but i'd do whatever it took to make sure he was happy and healthy so this match could take place here and now.

Valentine vs. Honky Tonk Man should have happened, as others have already pointed out. i get that Honky was gone by this point, but surely he could have stayed to do the job for his former tag partner and give the Hammer a much needed win on this night.

Blindfold Match: okay, so the match wasn't a five-star classic or clinic in the sense of technical expertise goes, but the storyline was so good. watch Jake's promo on the Brother Love Show. freaking amazing psychology and passion. i'm a sucker for gimmicks that fit the stories, so this totally works for me.

Warlord vs. Barbarian. whenever a tag team splits up, whether aggressively or not, a match between former partners is a pretty easy story to write. so let that play out.

then Bulldog vs. Haku can happen. not sure what story they would tell, but i've always enjoyed both men inside the ring and both are heavy hitters. just let them brawl for awhile and give Davey Boy a big win on a big stage.

Dibiase vs. Virgil was a great story, but why this match happened the way it did and ended the way it did was just plain silly. they should have had this play out the way it did at SummerSlam at Mania. put the Million Dollar Championship on the line and give Virgil the clean win. this storyline was being told for literal years. it deserved the biggest and best ending possible.

lastly on my fantasy card, Taker's debut at Mania. Superfly was a decent choice as he was and is a legend and Taker destroyed him, making him look semi-impressive. i can't help but wonder if he'd look even more impressive beating a better opponent. maybe a now freed up Boss Man? or Earthquake? my only issue with either man is that Taker, at least in his early Mania contests, was given a "Monster of the Month" type match and that's what these two guys would look like. what about Piper? he can still accompany Virgil in his match. yeah, i like Piper as the opponent. he was about as relevant as Superfly, or maybe even more so, but the promos would have been much better and made Taker's Mania debut a bit more meaningful.

as always, a great thread for a great Mania.

 

[The_Juicer]

Hogan/Slaughter match itself was not great but a great storyline can always trump a weak match. In this case that is exactly what took place.

 

[klunderbunker]

Gah why couldn't the war go on a bit longer? You know Vince was thinking that at least once.

The main event was as perfect of a story as you could have asked for and the characters were perfect for the thing. SLaughter wasn't terrible in the ring but he was long past the peak of his career. However, the real moment here is Savage reuniting with Liz, which is probably the moment that has made more wrestling fans shed a tear than any other in history. The match is great but that's real emotion after it's over, which is so so rare in wrestling.