The General Wrestling Thread

[Warner2BruceTD]

wait...but wasnt there a period during that time where Austin was hurt and was out from survivor series until the summer... they put the belt on Bigshow and then Triple H until backlash... did business dip during that period?

Yes, Austin was injured for like 8 or 12 months or whatever and things held up with Rock on top. But larry's argument is this:

You have nothing to quantify it by...there is nothing substantial outside of t-shirt sales that really claim Austin to being the reason for the biggest boom in wrestling. Business boomed for EVERYONE during the same era Austin had the ball.

When Austin came back, they immediately went back to him as the top guy (which is telling) and he kept drawing huge until they turned him heel and gave the ball the Rock. That heel turn was the end of the boom. They tried to turn Austin back but it was too late. The damage was done.

The entire build of that match, the writing was on the wall. Austin was getting bigger reactions, people were booing Rock, and they were taking anti Rock crowd signs away from fans. But Austin & Vince were convinced the heel turn would work. They were wrong.

In Torch #634 from Dec 30th 2000, Wade Keller wrote about the year that both Rock and Triple H had in 2000 - "Both had awesome years, although neither accomplished what Steve Austin did a couple of years ago. Austin led the rise of the WWF past WCW in the ratings race, then the revenue race, and eventually every category that existed..Triple H and Rock have Austin to thank for setting the stage."

In Torch #648 from April 7th 2001, discussing the build to Mania 17, Wade Keller said that Stone Cold was more popular than Rock leading to Mania 17 "Austin, despite a relatively uninspired series of babyface promos leading up to WrestleMania, seemed to have more babyface appeal than Rock. In their pre-WM staredowns and confrontations, Austin has been getting more cheers."

In the March 26th 2001 Observer Dave pointed out the negative reaction Rock was receiving in his confrontations with Austin "Rock was booed both nights at TV this week when confronting Austin." and also "Rock hit Regal with the belt and cleaned house on Benoit before giving Austin the rock bottom...Fans pretty much booed Rock for doing so, which was not the desired reaction."

In the same issue, he also gave further evidence of the fans choosing Austin over Rock in the lead up to Mania 17- "Other notes from Albany.. They were confiscating signs like crazy at the show.... (tons of negative Rock signs because he's doing a program with Austin all over the building, all of which were attempted to be confiscated but even so, many made the air......Rock was booed when confronting Austin, which is not the reaction expected.since they started teasing the Austin turn already.......Crowd chanted for Rock and Austin when they squared off, but the Austin chants totally overpowered the Rock chants.. All the "Rocky sucks" signs were being confiscated again..

In Torch #663 from July 28th 2001 Wade Keller described Austin as "the most popular wrestler of all time."

In the September 2nd 2002 Observer, Dave once again put Stone Cold above The Rock as the real star of the Attitude Era when he said - "Steve Austin (biggest star during wrestling's most financially successful era and best merchandise seller ever)"

Also in the September 2nd 2002 Observer, Dave again discussed the crowd reaction to Austin and Rock leading up to Mania 17, not only Rock getting booed at the event, but also specifically stating that the WWF fans in general were more in favour of Austin than the Rock in the build up to the PPV aswell. He also described Austin's popularity as "Unique" and something that transcended usual or traditional wrestling rules -"in the build-up angles around the country it was clear the fans had gone in choosing Austin,who WWE had decided ahead of time would be turning heel (the idea the crowd would want the younger guy to finally take the top spot, which usually is the right way of thinking, but Austin's popularity was something unique)"

In the 14th February 2005 Observer Dave restated the fact that fans chose Austin over Rock in 2001 in the build to Mania 17: "It was clear in their confrontations before the show that fans wanted Austin as the face and Rock as the heel. The company had its plans however. Austin thought he'd gone as far as a face as he could and needed to be refreshed...The idea of Austin and McMahon joining after their years of feuding sounded like a fresh approach, but was a giant miscalculation…."

In the February 27th 2012 Observer, Meltzer penned an article on the biggest draws in history and while he conceded that Austin's longevity on top did not match several others like Hogan, Flair, Bruno or Londos amongst others, Meltzer once again stated "Steve Austin at his peak was the biggest drawing card in pro wrestling history."

I can accept an argument for Hogan, and if you want to go way back to pre TV we can talk about some other guys, but as far as the modern era there is Hogan and there is Austin. Rock would probably be third, a shade ahead of Cena. (EDIT- i'm talking Hogan era until today, obviously. Bruno obviously blows away Rock or Cena, and depending what measures you want to use, challenges Hogan and even Austin)

There is no doubt that Austin was the spark that set it off, the fact the boom started with his push and ended when his babyface run ended is clear and obvious evidence, and that's without digging up the numbers that I can't dig up at the moment because im busy, but that that m'fer larry is going to troll me into doing anyway lol. Fuckin larry.

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

The biggest boom in the history of wrestling started when Austin beat HBK at WM with Tyson as the ref. The Austin led WWF blew past WCW and broke all sorts of records and drew more money than any other period of any other promotion ever. The biggest boom in the history of wrestling effectively ended at WrestleMania 2001 when Austin turned heel and the crowd took a shit on it.

What more do you need to "quantify" it? Where is the disconnect? Austin drew more money than anybody in the history of the business over his five year run on top. An he was the catalyst, end of story, not even debate worthy, because things got hot when he was put on top, and didn't cool off until they turned him heel and gave The Rock the ball as the top face, a move that backfired badly and that the company tried to rectify but was unable to recover from.

Of course those other guys contributed, but wrestling was a hot as it was because of Austin. What did Foley ever draw before the Austin boom? The Rock got the ball in 2001 and things dipped, until they panicked and reversed the Austin turn. Triple H? Lol please. Who else? Michaels? Just stop. Undertaker? Again, his biggest drawing years were as an Austin foil.

Austin drew the most money, drew the biggest buyrates (until the "collective era" WM shows of today), and sold out the most house shows. What more do you want, lol.

You have some real quirks in your argument and it almost sounds like a WWE DVD. You give Austin a lot of credit for an era of wrestling that had the most stars and biggest business...the biggest buyrates and ratings in in 1999 and 2000 was a build of momentum, not simple the emergence of a star.

-Wrestling's biggest boom started at WrestleMania XIV? Hogan and Sting popped a HUGE buyrate four months prior at Starrcade. The nWo angle already started the boom period two years prior. WCW was seeing a ratings and buyrates boom and the total market share of the product reached a boom with the culmination of WrestleMania XIV. But LOL @ WrestleMania XIV being the start of the boom...you are better than that. I know you didn't watch the Attitude Era, but, you got some revisionist history.

-The WWF didn't "blow past" WCW when Austin was given the ball...Rock/Mankind were headlining RAW and Rock/HHH were at the top when WWF finally overtook WCW, and even then, WCW was still pulling in near-high ratings consistently until the middle of 1999.

-The problem with saying Austin drew more money than anyone during his five year run at the top is just an un-quantifiable statement. You know it. Stop. Its something people like to say in a revisionist format. The entire industry drew more money than any other era during that five year run...Austin was a catalyst, but so was the nWo, so was The Rock, so was Sting...fuck, even Triple H was popping buyrates and bringing in monster ratings at the top.

- The Rock got the ball long before 2001. Triple H, you can hate on as much as you want, but he was popping high buyrates and ratings as champ. Foley moving the needle winning the title on RAW was the turning point for the WWE in the ratings war (not WrestleMania XIV). Second highest RAW rating to date at the time was the day after Undertaker won the title from Austin.

...

In summary, I know you weren't really into the Attitude Era and didn't watch it, so, most of the shit you are spewing is just revisionist history.

 

[SuperKevin]

Team Foley vs Team Punk. I like

 

[EmpireWF]

The night WWE finally beat Nitro: tease of Austin vs. McMahon.

 

[IamMedellin]

Ryback's theme always reminds me of the Terrible Thunder Lizards

 

[ThomasTomasz]

Team Foley vs Team Punk. I like

Except my guess is it will get fucked up. You'll set up a team of Foley, Cena and Ryback against the rumored stable of Punk, Lesnar and Cesaro, and then trough heel tactics, they will take out Foley. H's will come back to be the third person to continue his feud with Lesnar.

 

[JimLeavy59]

LOL WWE Piping in chants already?

 

[JayDizzle]

Start of the show could have been a LOT better.

Now we get Team Foley vs. Team Punk at Survivor Series.

And...

 

[SuperKevin]

We've already seen Ryback destroy JTG. Something new please

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

You have some real quirks in your argument and it almost sounds like a WWE DVD. You give Austin a lot of credit for an era of wrestling that had the most stars and biggest business...the biggest buyrates and ratings in in 1999 and 2000 was a build of momentum, not simple the emergence of a star.

-Wrestling's biggest boom started at WrestleMania XIV? Hogan and Sting popped a HUGE buyrate four months prior at Starrcade. The nWo angle already started the boom period two years prior. WCW was seeing a ratings and buyrates boom and the total market share of the product reached a boom with the culmination of WrestleMania XIV. But LOL @ WrestleMania XIV being the start of the boom...you are better than that. I know you didn't watch the Attitude Era, but, you got some revisionist history.

-The WWF didn't "blow past" WCW when Austin was given the ball...Rock/Mankind were headlining RAW and Rock/HHH were at the top when WWF finally overtook WCW, and even then, WCW was still pulling in near-high ratings consistently until the middle of 1999.

-The problem with saying Austin drew more money than anyone during his five year run at the top is just an un-quantifiable statement. You know it. Stop. Its something people like to say in a revisionist format. The entire industry drew more money than any other era during that five year run...Austin was a catalyst, but so was the nWo, so was The Rock, so was Sting...fuck, even Triple H was popping buyrates and bringing in monster ratings at the top.

- The Rock got the ball long before 2001. Triple H, you can hate on as much as you want, but he was popping high buyrates and ratings as champ. Foley moving the needle winning the title on RAW was the turning point for the WWE in the ratings war (not WrestleMania XIV). Second highest RAW rating to date at the time was the day after Undertaker won the title from Austin.

...

In summary, I know you weren't really into the Attitude Era and didn't watch it, so, most of the shit you are spewing is just revisionist history.

larry, you sound really foolish when you keep saying Austin as a draw is "unquantifiable". If that is truly your stance, I can't do this anymore.

Without Austin, there is no Attitude Era. There just isn't.

 

[JimLeavy59]

That promo was god awful, just like how he wrestles.

 

[Warner2BruceTD]

- The Rock got the ball long before 2001. Triple H, you can hate on as much as you want, but he was popping high buyrates and ratings as champ. Foley moving the needle winning the title on RAW was the turning point for the WWE in the ratings war (not WrestleMania XIV). Second highest RAW rating to date at the time was the day after Undertaker won the title from Austin.

Yeah, The Rock was given the ball when Austin was injured, and drew very well (thanks to Austin laying the groundwork). And it is very telling, that as soon as Austin came back, he was put right back in the role of top babyface.

Then, when they decided to pass the torch, it backfired badly and they panicked right back to Austin, but it was too late. They should have rode that Austin horse for at least another six months to a year, if not longer. The biggest knock on Austin as a draw is that he thought he was finished before he actually was and pushed for The Rock to take his spot.

And larry, don't mistake my displeasure for the IN RING of the Attitude Era into thinking I wasn't following the business. I don't really watch the WWE now either, but I still, as always, follow the business side.

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

larry, you sound really foolish when you keep saying Austin as a draw is "unquantifiable". If that is truly your stance, I can't do this anymore.

Without Austin, there is no Attitude Era. There just isn't.

Methinks you totally don't understand that era of wrestling, and it is understandable considering you didn't watch it...hence, bringing up Dave and Wade's old quips about Austin during the era...mostly, the end of that era.

The Monday Night Wars era of wrestling (not just the "Attitude Era") was a boom in the overall market share of the business. It was a "slow build", to use a wrestling term. It was a snowball effect. It started with the actual inception of RAW v. Nitro...but from there, grew...week to week, PPV to PPV, business was slowly building up. The first big peak was the introduction of the nWo...the next was Sting/Hogan at Starrcade 97 (an event very underrated in the entire history of the business...it popped a monster rating before the big WM buyrate)...then comes WrestleMania XIV...it wasn't some bomb in a birdcage effect like Austin was some man on fire and put the entire business on his back...

I mean, that is what the revisionist history of the WWE would like you to believe, but it just isn't true. The WWF had set the table for their future stars with the "Jim Ross guys"...and they all got the ball rolling right around the same time. It is why you see so much turnover at the top, yet the ratings were still through the roof, even when Austin was out for many months during a huge period for the WWE.

As for there not being no "Attitude Era"...the Attitude Era began before WrestleMania XIV. The emergence of Mr. McMahon had plenty to do with that as well.

As for the decline in business after Austin's heel turn...WCW being purchased by the WWF and the subsequent massive decrease of the market bubble is the main reason behind business going down the shitter post WrestleMania X-7.

Austin was the most popular guy in an era full of popular guys...so he's given credit for basically throwing the entire industry on his back and that just simply isn't true.

 

[JayDizzle]

So we still get to see AJ skip around the ring for a little bit on RAW.

I'm okay with this decision.

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

Yeah, The Rock was given the ball when Austin was injured, and drew very well (thanks to Austin laying the groundwork). And it is very telling, that as soon as Austin came back, he was put right back in the role of top babyface.

Then, when they decided to pass the torch, it backfired badly and they panicked right back to Austin, but it was too late. They should have rode that Austin horse for at least another six months to a year, if not longer. The biggest knock on Austin as a draw is that he thought he was finished before he actually was and pushed for The Rock to take his spot.

And larry, don't mistake my displeasure for the IN RING of the Attitude Era into thinking I wasn't following the business. I don't really watch the WWE now either, but I still, as always, follow the business side.

"thanks to Austin laying the groundwork" is exactly why your argument falls short, and is exactly my point...the groundwork was being laid long before Steve Austin was shot to the moo

 

[IamMedellin]

Starrcade 97 was the Peak of WCW, I believe it was their highest buyrate ever..overshadowed by the awful booking in the main event..it was all down hill for wcw from there

 

[IamMedellin]

So we still get to see AJ skip around the ring for a little bit on RAW.

I'm okay with this decision.

 

[BigBiss]

Man I'm glad they got orton that win back I almost stopped giving a shit he exist

 

[LiquidLarry2GhostWF]

Starrcade 97 was the Peak of WCW, I believe it was their highest buyrate ever..overshadowed by the awful booking in the main event..it was all down hill for wcw from there

People say that, but WCW was still pulling high weekly ratings...and they didn't start to tank until 1999...over a year and a half later. Early in 1997, Nitro was pulling high 3s...the build up to Starrcade and the subsequent fallout popped ratings up to high 4s...they floated their mid-high 4 ratings for another year. It wasn't until the middle of 1999 (April or June IIRC) that they dipped below 4 and never returned. They dipped back into the 2s a year later (lowest since 1995-ish) and they were dead in 6 months.

 

[SuperKevin]

In my opinion the worst the the WWE has done was WWE Films. It seems like they are more interested in creating movie stars than wrestling stars. That's why we're getting these generic bland gimmicks so that when they go to do a movie it's not a huge damage to their character.