WrestleMania VII Main Event

[The Brain]

It’s time for me to defend another mania match that is often criticized. I think I’ve done a thread on this before, but it was a long time ago and there are many new forum members that may want to weigh in. In 1991 the WrestleMania main event saw Sgt. Slaughter defend the WWF title against Hulk Hogan. A lot of people think this was the wrong way to go. I’ve heard people say the main event should have been Hogan vs. Warrior, Hogan vs. Rude, or Warrior vs. Savage. I think all those people are wrong. There was nothing wrong with Hogan vs. Slaughter as the WrestleMania VII main event.

I really don’t know why people have a problem with this match. It wasn’t a technical masterpiece by any stretch of the imagination, but it wasn’t meant to be. When it comes to WrestleMania a main event storyline is what’s important and as long as the match isn’t bad it will come off as good. Hogan vs. Slaughter was a main event storyline.

Before Hulkamania was born Sgt. Slaughter was the most popular wrestler in the WWF. Slaughter left the WWF in 1984 just as the company was taking off. Slaughter returned six years later and turned his back on the United States siding with the enemy as the US was about to enter the Gulf War. It was an unthinkable betrayal. I think the reason that some people don’t appreciate this storyline is because they don’t remember Slaughter from before 1990. He was not just some random guy brought in for this storyline. He was someone that could rival Hulk Hogan in terms of popularity in 1984 and was the ultimate wrestling patriot. Imagine Hulk Hogan returning to the WWF in 2001 (pretend the WCW run didn’t happen) and publically supporting Osama Bin Laden. Can you imagine how betrayed the fans would have felt and how hated Hogan would have been? That’s the kind of heat Slaughter had in 1990/1991. He regularly received death threats during the angle as the people were really buying into it. There was no better option than to have the American hero, Hulk Hogan, conquer the Iraqi sympathizer and win back the title for the US at WrestleMania.

Since this is the IWC many people will say Rick Rude should have gone into WM7 as champion and defended against Hulk Hogan. I never saw the appeal of that match, at least for WrestleMania. There’s no way a match between Hogan and Rude could have captured the emotion that Hogan and Slaughter did. Hogan vs. Slaughter was definitely the way to go for WM7.

 

[AhSpicyDrop]

I'm honestly not sure why anyone could have any arguments toward that match... It's one of my most memorable Hogan matches. As you said it wasn't a technical masterpiece by any means, but what Hogan match was? Rude vs. Hogan wouldn't have made much sense, and wouldn't have sold anywhere near as much.

Slaughter was in a full-blown Anti-American gimmick, and there was nobody in the company at that point that embodied the American values like Hogan with his prayers and vitamins spiels. The build up to it was awesome, the match itself was memorable.. I remember Hogan bleeding like a stuck pig which didn't happen very often. I remember him being choked to near unconsciousness with the ring side mic cable. Hogan looked a lot more vulnerable than he had in years. The bloody hulk up was awesome... Hogan no-selling and shaking his head and blood flying off his skullet haircut. Fucking awesome. Hogan topped it off by covering Slaughter in the American flag and sending the crowd home happy... And honestly it probably saved Slaughter from getting a bullet in his face.

One of the best WM Main Events if you ask me, and honestly it was one of the best Wrestlemania events ever.

 

[Killercam]

Two reasons why I would argue it should have been Warrior-Hogan II. A...I believe had they gone for the rematch they wouldn't have had the awful ticket sales and could have had the event outdoors and probably sold an additional 15-20k tickets at minimum because most people wanted the rematch and they could have booked it 4-5 months ahead of time to boost ticket sales. B....The War was over, they could have and should have had the Hogan/Slaughter storyline be the main-event for SummerSlam 90. The plan was to
obviously put the title back on Hogan and since in hindsight we never got Hogan-Warrior II (in WWF) then they should have gone that route. Hell, I don't see why Piper couldn't have taken Hogans place in that feud and it have been just as successful. The only good thing about getting Hogan-Slaughter is that we at least got Warrior-Savage out of it. IMHO Hogan-Slaughter was the worst main-event at any Mania 1-9

 

[HBsam31]

Well Brain, I think this is the easiest one so far. The build up to this was fantastic. Slaughter's promos felt real, and to add to it he burned Hogan's trademark yellow shirt. Slaughter had a lot of hatred geared at him. Real hatred. He had death threats aimed at him for God's sake. That rarely if ever happened by that time. The match itself was no masterpiece, but like was mentioned, Hogan looked beatable. He was bleeding like a stuck pig, and that made it even sweeter when he Hulked up. Blooding flying everywhere as he began to take over, and led to an awesome moment in him pinning Slaughter with the American flag for the title win. If all of that isn't convincing enough just think of it this way. If we had gotten Hogan/Warrior 2 then we would not have gotten the epic Savage/Warrior match. Hogan/Slaughter was definitely the way to go for the main event of Mania VII.

 

[Seanjburkey]

I didn't realize that many people still believe the BS lie that WWE has made about Wrestlemania 7 and the Hogan/Slaughter feud. The WWE didn't have to move WM7 to a smaller arena because of any Slaughter death threats.They had to change the venue because this feud didn't draw! Slaughter's anti-american character didn't make people hate him and want to see Hogan beat him. It made them want to change the channel. Plus Slaughter's build up to winning the title was laughable. As far as what the main event should of been, hell Hogan and Earthquake's feud from that year is very underrated. Have Quake beat Warrior for the title at the 91 Rumble and set up Hogan vs Quake at WM7. Some might look at that and say its just Hogan vs A fat guy again. But Earthquake was really underrated as a performer if you ask me. He was quick for his size and had great charisma. He could've carried that feud where he was the first man to legit put Hogan on the shelf for that whole year.

 

[justtxyank]

The idea that Wrestlemania VII didn't draw because the main event was weak is bogus.

Wrestlemania VII did 400,000 buys. While that was certainly down from VI (500), VI was actually down from V (767). 8 fell to 360 despite a "stronger" main event of Savage/Flair, XI did 430, and X did 420. XI fell to 340 and XII was down to 290.

The truth is that wrestling was falling from it's peak. The economy was in recession, tv was expanding and wrestling was not as popular as it had been in years prior. The business was contracting basically at this point and would continue to contract for nearly the entire decade. WCW would nearly die here, and wrestling promotions around country would be dying throughout 91. Even a longtime wrestling stronghold in the Northwest, PNW, would die within 12 months or so.

Anyway, as for me, I absolutely love this match and find this to be one of the MOST compelling Wrestlemania Main Events of all time.

 

[The Death Rattle]

I have no actual problem with the match being booked, or how it played out in the ring. My only issue with the match was where it was on the card. I think that Warrior-Savage should have closed the show.

The Warrior and Savage match was bigger then one match or the title, it was billed as the final fight in their war. Savage had cost Warrior the title, which gave it that deeply personal edge. With the stipulation of career vs. career, it was a truly unique event between two major stars. I feel those factors outweigh what was essentially another Hogan overcomes evil storyline. I don't mean that as a shot either, more so that it was something that was already presented multiple times.

Hindsight does strenghten my argument when you factor in overall match quality, but you would likely need a slightly stronger finish. I love that match. I love the idea of putting over Warrior as strong as they did. I just don't feel that Savage crawling into the ring was a truly appropriate finish. That would be even more pressing if this closed the show.

 

[AJ1981]

I didn't realize that many people still believe the BS lie that WWE has made about Wrestlemania 7 and the Hogan/Slaughter feud. The WWE didn't have to move WM7 to a smaller arena because of any Slaughter death threats.They had to change the venue because this feud didn't draw! .

Funny I was recently re-reading an old copy of Powerslam Magazine which had a story about this. They moved the event from the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum (which could hold over 100,000 people) to the Los Angeles Memorial Sports Arena about 3 weeks before the show as the WWF had only sold 16,000 tickets and this was confirmed by the GM of the Coliseum after WWF put out a press release blaming "security threats". From what I remember at the time there was a general distaste for this storyline as it played out while the the first Gulf War was happening in Iraq and American soldiers were really fighting and dying out there. It was one of those occasions where McMahon mistook the public mood and didn't realise that times were changing

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

Yeah no way it was due to security issues since the most obvious question wasn't addressed. Since the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum could feasibly hold almost 100,000 what happened to the other 85,000 people who bought the ticket?

 

[theBusiness]

If the country never got involved in the Gulf War, then I would think Warrior-Savage could have main evented. But this move to turn Slaughter into a heel was genius by Vince. That being said, this should have been the main event and it really was not a bad match for Hogan's standards. This was actually a very underrated WrestleMania.

 

[GameOver]

Hogan wanted the match with Slaughter and not the Warrior so it's irrelevant what match woulda been better, it was all part of milking the Gulf War which ended in Slaughter getting death threats and the reason WrestleMania 7 was moved from the LA Stadium to an enclosed arena. Personally i didn't like WrestleMania 7 period with the exception of Warrior vs Savage which was a wrestling classic and Warrior's best match period. Hogan vs Slaughter leadup was pretty good considering how brief it was and the opening video to the show was great but the match was meh, so many Botchamania moments and the ending looked rushed and the rest of the card bar the Savage match was mediocre at best. Considering for all but one of the previous 6 WrestleMania's Hogan was the star, this certainly wasn't the case that year and it started the ball rolling for Hogan to step down permanently as the face of the company

Savage cost Warrior the title 2 months earlier so they had to have the fued ender
hmm never new Rude was even a consideration for the title. IC title yeah but not the world title then again we only got PPV's months behind back then not every show.
Can't see that woulda worked anyway, Roode was a jobber to Warrior who barely beat Hogan.

 

[The Fabulous Rougeau's]

No problem with the match. Just the fact that they put the title on Slaughter and the match was the main event. The stroy was enough to sell the fued and didn't need the title. However, the other top story at the time was between Warrior and Macho. Macho wanted a title shot and Warrior would not give it to him. Warriror should have retained the title at the Rumble (against someone other than Slaughter) or not have a title match at all and just be in the Rumble itself. Either way you can still build the Warrior/Macho match with Macho putting his career on the line for a shot at the title. Warrior was supposed to be the WWF's next big star and taking the title away from him 9 months into his reign was not a good choice. Remember this is before he had any disagreements with Vince. Mania VII should have been the place where Warrior continued his title reign and heighten his popularity.

 

[rokuma]

I hated the match. It was easily the one of the worst in-ring main event of a Wrestlemania that I have ever seen. Think about it: WM I had Hogan/Mr. T vs Piper/Orndorff, WM 2 had Hogan/Bundy in a cage for the title, WM 3 had Hogan/Andre, WM 4 had Savage/Dibiase, WM 5 had Hogan/Savage, WM 6 had Hogan/Warrior, WM 7 was Hogan/Slaughter obviously, WM 8 had Hogan/Justice+Savage/Flair I guess, WM 9 & 10 had Hart/Yokozuna, WM 11 had HBK/Diesel, WM 12 had HBK/Hart (classic), WM 13 had Taker/Sid, WM 14 had HBK/Austin, Wm 15 had Rock/Austin, WM 2000 had the four corners match, WM 17 was Rock/Austin, WM 18 was HHH/Jericho, WM 19 was Angle/Brock, WM 20 was HBK/HHH/Benoit, WM 21 was HHH/Batista, WM 22 was Cena/HHH, WM 23 was Cena/HBK, WM 24 was Edge/Undertaker, WM 25 & 26 was HBK/Undertaker, WM 27 was Miz/Cena, WM 28 was Rock/Cena.

Out of all of those, Hogan/Slaughter, Miz/Cena, HHH/Batista, and the Four Corners match could be considered worse. Add to the general apathy of the buildup, it's safe to say that WWF should've probably tried something else.

 

[AhSpicyDrop]

Out of all of those, Hogan/Slaughter, Miz/Cena, HHH/Batista, and the Four Corners match could be considered worse. Add to the general apathy of the buildup, it's safe to say that WWF should've probably tried something else.

Have you ever actually watched the Hogan/Slaughter match? If you had there's no way you would rank it below WM 1, WM 2, and ESPECIALLY WM 8 in terms of match quality. Wrestlemania 8 is one of the biggest turd main events in the history. Not only did Sid and Hogan have zero chemistry in the ring, but botched interferences and a non-finish ending completely ruined it.

The funniest part about your reply is you didn't even consider WM 8's main event to be one of the worst when everyone else would probably have it as their #1.

People can say whatever they want about Wrestlemania 7, because it's their opinion... The matches may not have been very technically appealing, but almost all of them have had solid buildups.

 

[rokuma]

Have you ever actually watched the Hogan/Slaughter match?

The funniest part about your reply is you didn't even consider WM 8's main event to be one of the worst when everyone else would probably have it as their #1.

Yes, I've watched all of those matches and yes, I totally slipped up with Justice/Hogan. My mistake.

The WM 1 and 2 Main events weren't THAT bad to me. Are they on the short list of bad main events? Sure. But Hogan/Slaughter...I really hated the match itself. Couldn't stand it. Was bored to death. If I recall, Slaughter put Hogan in a reverse chinlock like 4 times for like half the match. There was little drama (yes, Hogan bled) and the crowd just felt flat for it. If they weren't excited to see Hogan beat up Slaughter, why should I be watching at home? I wasn't. Maybe the crowd was just worn out from Savage/Warrior, I don't know. That match was certainly the one of the night. Hogan/Slaughter just didn't sit well with me. I'm not sure there was a better alternative out there, but I hated the match.

 

[jrush1978]

VII and VIII were both pretty bad, I think what made VIII worse was the ending. And some valid points about it not drawing and having to be moved to the LA Sports Arena. I figure Slaughter did probably get some death threats, but if WWF/E had over 100,000 tickets sold there's no way they would have moved it. If you watch WM VI when they come on and tout WM VII for the first time they went out of their way to pitch it being outdoors and the largest WM crowd ever etc. and then it ended up being sub 20,000. While people did want Hogan-Warrior II in hindsight its difficult to pull the trigger on that because of how good the Savage-Warrior match was. IMO Slaughter looked so weak against Warrior (what Savage had to do to Warrior for him to lose) that he never seemed like a threat to Hogan, and everything thats been said about the actual match and how dead the crowd is is true. So if you keep Savage-Warrior what do you do with Hogan? I know Hogan-Rude was mentioned but I don't see that one as drawing. I don't think you could really have Warrior lose to Rude at SummerSlam in his first defense after beating Hogan. While im certainly in the camp that Rick Rude was deserving of a World Title its difficult to find when the right time for that would have been. I guess they could have had Warrior-Savage as the main event for the championship and Hogan-Slaughter non title (like a loser leaves WWE since the war was over anyways) as the co-main event. Then perhaps have Hogan-Warrior II at SummerSlam and make it a huge event.

 

[THTRobtaylor]

The biggest mistake of the 90's was putting the belt on Slaughter - people just didn't want to go that route, the Iraqi angle was dodgy at best but by that stage we were bored of Hogan AND Warrior to an extent, that he had bombed as champion said more about how be was booked and promoted (the Phil Collins video) than his own ego or abilities. But Warrior too had a hand in his own demise. Rude was the classic case of the right guy being denied the opportunity cos of politics. It was a natuaral match for he and Warrior to face at WM7 for the big belt, Rude didn't actually have to win it till maybe the cage match at Summerslam but a Wrestlemania rematch, where both men had moved up the card would have excited the fans more than the USA crap that Hogan was espousing.

It made so little sense that Warrior didn't even just get the rematch - I get they wanted Randy off screen for a few months and face, but ultimately all it did was put the final nail in Warrior's career and give Slaughter an accolade he never actually deserved and cost them Rick Rude as he knew he was never gonna be used as he should have been, that WCW gave him such runs later was telling and one of the few times WCW actually picked up a fumble from WWF and made it work.

Yes, Savage v Warrior was Warrior's almost best match but his matches with Rude were better, so why not use that - even if Rude is gonna lose. Slaughter v Hogan didn't justify or need the title it was war for christs sake...

Would Hogan/Warrior 2 have worked - only with one of them heel and there was no way Hogan was going heel at that time - a heel Warrior, managed by Heenan might have worked but made little sense as they had been enemies for so long. The Jake Roberts thing was a little late IMO, had they gone there earlier, while Warrior was champ and avoided the ridiculous blindfold match then he could have manipulated Warrior heel and managed him at Mania/faced him at Summerslam. Jake could also have brought a great feud out of Warrior, maybe not enough to headline Mania, but defo a Summerslam/Survivor Series run.

WM7 was good in many ways, the sheer amount of talent on that show was pretty mindblowing when you look at it. It's just a shame so much of it was throwaway.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

Brain, your posts speak for themselves, you always have solid points and offer an objective and solid viewpoint without being influenced by what the dirt sheets say. It's mind numbing how people wants to always cite politics affecting incidents and outcomes of the WWF's creative direction, that they weren't there to actually witness. That's not to say I don't agree with fans that have those opinions because I do believe politics exist in practically all walks of life. But seriously, let's just stick to what happened on the air and not behind the scenes, because there is so much conjecture and speculation.

Would I have liked Rude and Hogan at WM VII? You damn bet. But do I still think Hogan and Slaughter was a memorable angle? Absolutely. Bottom line is this, Rick Rude had left the WWF, and Warrior was on his way out that same year that Mania VII happened. Hogan for all that people say about him was willing to keep running with the ball, and he met his contractual obligations from what it seemed. As opposed to Warrior, who maybe was telling the truth about his business dealings with Vince. However, considering that after 1991, all of his runs were very brief and amounted to nothing.

The smart and safe bet was on Hogan, and we can use hindsight all we want, but it doesn't make a damn bit of difference. Wrestling itself was not at its best in a commercial sense, but things worked out and the company evolved. No harm, no foul.

 

[willross]

It was announced on-air by Gorilla Monsoon that WM7 had the largest PPV audience of all time (at that point). This was the last feud where Hogan got an absolutely perfect reaction from the live crowds because people legitimately hated Slaughter.

It wasn't a 5 star match like an HBK vs Hart but its purpose was for the AMERICAN HERO to conquer the IRAQI SYMPATHIZER.

There wasn't much TV back then so the comment of "he made people want to change the channel" is greatly inaccurate.

Slaughter is easily the most hated wrestler of the last 30 years. No one got heat like that and did it with such ease to boot. The crowd reaction when he destroyed Duggan with Shiek and Adnan was unbelievable.

This was GI JOE!!!!! turning on AMERICA!!!! It was amazing. It was perfect and was the first real shocking HEEL turn. This was at almost the same level as Hogan joining the Outsiders in 1996, people reacted to it that well.

 

[willross]

I hated the match. It was easily the one of the worst in-ring main event of a Wrestlemania that I have ever seen. Think about it: WM I had Hogan/Mr. T vs Piper/Orndorff, WM 2 had Hogan/Bundy in a cage for the title, WM 3 had Hogan/Andre, WM 4 had Savage/Dibiase, WM 5 had Hogan/Savage, WM 6 had Hogan/Warrior, WM 7 was Hogan/Slaughter obviously, WM 8 had Hogan/Justice+Savage/Flair I guess, WM 9 & 10 had Hart/Yokozuna, WM 11 had HBK/Diesel, WM 12 had HBK/Hart (classic), WM 13 had Taker/Sid, WM 14 had HBK/Austin, Wm 15 had Rock/Austin, WM 2000 had the four corners match, WM 17 was Rock/Austin, WM 18 was HHH/Jericho, WM 19 was Angle/Brock, WM 20 was HBK/HHH/Benoit, WM 21 was HHH/Batista, WM 22 was Cena/HHH, WM 23 was Cena/HBK, WM 24 was Edge/Undertaker, WM 25 & 26 was HBK/Undertaker, WM 27 was Miz/Cena, WM 28 was Rock/Cena.

Out of all of those, Hogan/Slaughter, Miz/Cena, HHH/Batista, and the Four Corners match could be considered worse. Add to the general apathy of the buildup, it's safe to say that WWF should've probably tried something else.

All I have to say is FACEPALM to saying HHH/Batista and 4 Corners main events were bad!!

You are a joke. Notice you didn't shit on Taker/Sid, Hogan/Sid. In fact, considering you are not really basing the actual story of the feud around the in-ring work, how did you not throw-up watching Hogan/Andre. Take away the build and the hype and that is the worst piece of shit of all time.

Add in the build and it is one of the best, most monumental moments ever.

See where you went wrong here?

 

[THTRobtaylor]

Brain, your posts speak for themselves, you always have solid points and offer an objective and solid viewpoint without being influenced by what the dirt sheets say. It's mind numbing how people wants to always cite politics affecting incidents and outcomes of the WWF's creative direction, that they weren't there to actually witness. That's not to say I don't agree with fans that have those opinions because I do believe politics exist in practically all walks of life. But seriously, let's just stick to what happened on the air and not behind the scenes, because there is so much conjecture and speculation.

Would I have liked Rude and Hogan at WM VII? You damn bet. But do I still think Hogan and Slaughter was a memorable angle? Absolutely. Bottom line is this, Rick Rude had left the WWF, and Warrior was on his way out that same year that Mania VII happened. Hogan for all that people say about him was willing to keep running with the ball, and he met his contractual obligations from what it seemed. As opposed to Warrior, who maybe was telling the truth about his business dealings with Vince. However, considering that after 1991, all of his runs were very brief and amounted to nothing.

The smart and safe bet was on Hogan, and we can use hindsight all we want, but it doesn't make a damn bit of difference. Wrestling itself was not at its best in a commercial sense, but things worked out and the company evolved. No harm, no foul.

Make no mistake Rude left cos of the politics and he wasn't going to be pushed as both Hogan and then Warrior nixed it. Rude talked at length about it later on and used the opportunity in WCW to "stick it to Vince". The irony was had he stuck it out in WWE a little longer then he would have been there once the Roid scandal hit and Hogan and Warrior became damaged goods. Bret would still have been the top guy but you could guarantee he'd have been working Rude and/or Flair.

I can see why you'd want to "stick to what's on screen"... but I watched it all as it happened as an eager fan of 14... by 90/91 I was into the sheets, the Apter mags, videos anything I could as I knew there was more than just the show. The knowledge was out there for fans who were interested enough to find it, just as Trekkies knew every backstage issue George Takei and Shatner had or why a certain costume was chosen.

We weren't in the room, but it has since been borne out that the info that was coming out via Meltzer and even the Apter mags in subtle work/shoot format was pretty accurate to what people call "the truth" of most of that era. There will always be tall tales, but on the whole the backstage stuff stopped being "secret" in the 80's.

These kind of threads and responses inherently have to be based on the poster's knowledge and experience. In some cases that'll be just "I saw this...I think this...", someone like me "I saw this, read this, heard this and this has been said by those concerned..."

It's not really right to say "stick to the facts" cos what was presented was not "the facts" but Vince's version of them... I was influenced by sheets the moment I read one at 14 and worked out that politics happened. Now, 22 years later having seen more, wrestled myself and been a featured writer on the main site here I'm not gonna "suspend" that side of my opinion or "stick to anything", I'll use all my sources, opinion, knowledge, rumors I heard and yes sometimes speculate on what might have been or happened. After all, I'm a reasonable guy, enough is out there about so many wrestlers that it is possible to "put yourself in their shoes", you might make the same call or a different one but ultimately that's what forums like this are for... we're all here cos we wanted to be in that room/ring/bar/hotel with them or be making the decisions that affected them... anyone who says they don't is lying.

 

[The Eighties]

The angle wouldn't work now because fans are way too cynical (Myself included) to get into it IMO, but at the time I seem to recall it being pretty hot and fans being into what happened, they must have been for Vince to draw it out until Summerslam that year instead of booking Hogan in a title defense against Warrior in MSG.

Not much has been said about the actual match but I thought it was a solid brawl with Slaughter working some of the dirtiest heel tactics I'd seen at the time, the spot where Slaughter lays the US flag over a bloody Hogan, leading to his comeback was cheesy but effective.

Looking back now it's strange to think Vince didn't book the Hogan vs Warrior rematch as it seemed a license to print money even if Warrior's run had not been the best and he had become increasingly difficult.

I don't think Savage vs Warrior would have worked as the main event under the career match stip and I'm not sure Rude winning the title at Summerslam 90 and defending against Warrior at WrestleMania VII would have done great business, even though it would have been a great match and I personally would have loved to see Rude as WWF champion.

 

[The Brain]

I don’t know why anyone has a problem with Hogan and Slaughter going on last with the title on the line. Slaughter already had a lot of heat going into 1991 but he had nuclear heat when he became champion. It was bad enough having a wrestler support the enemy during the war but to have it be the WWF champion put the angle on a whole other level. A level worthy of a WrestleMania main event.

Warrior and Savage were the ones that didn’t need the title. That match was epic as it was, without the title. Every part of Warrior vs. Savage was perfect. It is fondly remembered as one of WrestleMania’s all time biggest matches. The title was completely unnecessary. Hogan and Slaughter needed the title a lot more than Warrior and Savage did.

 

[Judah's Lion]

I don’t know why anyone has a problem with Hogan and Slaughter going on last with the title on the line. Slaughter already had a lot of heat going into 1991 but he had nuclear heat when he became champion. It was bad enough having a wrestler support the enemy during the war but to have it be the WWF champion put the angle on a whole other level. A level worthy of a WrestleMania main event.

Warrior and Savage were the ones that didn’t need the title. That match was epic as it was, without the title. Every part of Warrior vs. Savage was perfect. It is fondly remembered as one of WrestleMania’s all time biggest matches. The title was completely unnecessary. Hogan and Slaughter needed the title a lot more than Warrior and Savage did.

totally agree here. like, totally. Warrior/Savage already had the career vs. career stipulation going in. plus, the feud was born around the title as Savage wanted the shot, Warrior refused and then Savage cost Warrior the title. so it kinda centered on the world title to begin with. then the careers were put on the line.

add into this match the fact that it ended with the Savage/Elizabeth reunion and this match was stacked as it was. plenty of action, story, etc. EPIC is definitely the right way to describe this one.

on the other hand, Slaughter/Hogan would have been a good story and still a decent match without the title, but the world title just gave it the icing on the cake. to be honest, i'm a bit surprised this main event gets as much debate as it does. i found it super satisfying and enjoyable as a kid and recently revisted the tapes and still found the storyline and match to be a story well-told with a logical payoff that i wanted to see. wrestling 101.

 

[spaldoni]

In my opnion, the only main event that had a chance at drawing 100,000 fans was Hogan/Warrior 2. Hacksaw Duggan could of fought Slaughter at Mania in a bootcamp match. That would of been an epic old school brawl. Duggan was a blue collar die hard patriot. The match would of had tremendous heat. I don't think Hogan/Slaughter was bad but in terms of drawing a bigger gate they should of went with Hogan/Warrior 2.