wrestling / Columns
Ask 411 Wrestling 11.16.11: Hogan 2.0, Larry Z’s Insane, Punishing Boyfriends, More!
Hey there, welcome to Ask 411 Wrestlng! I am your writer, Mathew Sforcina, and… I have to level with you, my good readers. See, sometimes real life tosses curve balls at me. A change in work shifts, some sort of family issue, massive transport woes… I have had to do sub-par columns before based on somewhat justifiable reasons.
This week… I’ve spent all day playing Saints Row: The Third. Including a chunk of the usual “write this column” time. So that explains this being another in the long line of Total Opinion Weeks since apparently now they’ve happened so often that people no longer care and thus have stopped complaining. Which is good… I think…
Anyway, go listen to The Tom Tom Club and 411mania’s podcasts and Wrestling PodClash.
Then look at banner.
411 on Twitter!
Me On Twitter~!
http://www.twitter.com/411mania
http://www.twitter.com/411wrestling
http://www.twitter.com/411moviestv
http://www.twitter.com/411music
http://www.twitter.com/411games
http://www.twitter.com/411mma
Backtalking
Backtalking: Stephen asked that I try and give some context with backtalking for those people who can’t or choose not to read the comments. I’ll see what I can do.
Building title defences during a Brand Extension: Someone questioned how, in my “Rebuilding the Brand Extension” fantasy booking, how you build a feud without SD guys being on Raw. Well that is a fair question, but you can do it mostly with promos. The Diva and Tag champs can appear on Raw, they just refuse to wrestle there. So they can do run ins, attacks, promos and the like, just not wrestle. And guys can cut promos about how they’ll bring the titles back onto Raw, how they’ll fight on both shows, etc. You want to give both sides a legit stance, either “I’m a SD guy, I only wrestle there” or “I just wanna wrestle” so that the fans of either show treat their guy as the face.
Biggest title change pop: The question didn’t technically specify that the crowd losing it’s shit had to be BECAUSE of the title change, so I defend my list. Although many more options presented themselves, like APinOz suggesting
Eddie Guerrero beats Brock Lesnat at No Way Out 2004
Shawn Michaels wins first Elimination Chamber and WWE Title Survivor Series 2002
Chris Benoit wins World Title at Wrestlemania XX
Ric Flair wins WCW title from Vader Starrcade ’93
But I just went with the biggest pops involving title wins I recalled off hand. The fact I had to think about those sort of removes them from contention, in my mind.
Triple H at Vengeance 2001: According to Adam via a Triple H interview, he was actually meant to make an appearance but his rehab went slow. Which makes sense, although my point (the ads might have sold a few extra PPVs to see HHH) still holds regardless.
Trish V Morrison: I’m really sick of this argument, especially as it’s totally irrelevant. If Morrison had given Snooki the cold shoulder it still wouldn’t excuse it, the dude acted like a douche, and totally against how you do business as a wrestler. And Morrison has had one DVD, and a couple of shirts. Yes, they were all “Look at my body” PG Porn stuff mostly, but Trish still sold a hell of a lot of that PG Porn. That’s not to say she should be worshiped, just that if you want to work on that one, irrelevant comparison, she’s almost certainly helped the bottom line more than Morrison.
And besides, she’s been far more useful as a spokesperson than Morrison ever could.
Questions: Since people may be new to the column, I’ll say this since it’s been a while: I don’t answer questions in the comments section. Only via email.
Your Turn, Smart Guy…
Who am I? I was a member of one or more versions of the nWo. My biggest title win isn’t really recognized by the company it was in. I’ve been replaced by a woman twice. I was once signed by The Powers That Be. My last PPV singles match was against a guy more known for tag team wrestling. I turned face at a big 4 WWF PPV, while I was pretty much a heel for my entire run in WCW. I debuted in the 80’s but have been on WWE TV in the 00’s, I am who?
Mark is the right answer I choose at random.
Who am I?
You are Virgil…
I was a member of one or more versions of the nWo.
nWo and nWo Hollywood…
My biggest title win isn’t really recognized by the company it was in.
His Million $ Title reign in the WWF…
I’ve been replaced by a woman twice.
Sherri & Ms. Jones…
I was once signed by The Powers That Be.
He became Shane…
My last PPV singles match was against a guy more known for tag team wrestling.
probably against Stevie Ray…
I turned face at a big 4 WWF PPV,
Royal Rumble ’91…
while I was pretty much a heel for my entire run in WCW.
nWo, West Texas Rednecks and The Powers That Be…
I debuted in the 80’s but have been on WWE TV in the 00’s, I am who?
bodyguarded for Ted, Jr. in 2010…
Who am I? I share a link with William Regal, Shawn Michaels and The Ultimate Warrior. I’ve had a WWE DVD made about me. I’ve never beaten The Undertaker one on one. I unveiled a new partner on the Barber Shop. My wife got used in an angle once. Having worked in WWE, WCW and ECW, I am who?
Questions, Questions, Who’s Got The Questions?/My Damn Opinion
Tarek starts us off.
Hi 411 and Mathew,
I hope all is well.
I have 2 questions I cannot seem to get my head around.
1. Why does talent get punished for their partners wrongdoings? I mean why punish Morrison for Melina’s actions or McIntyre for his wife Tiffany’s actions? I don’t want to sound like a naïve kid but that is not fair and why would the locker room stand for it?
Because the locker room is for it. I mean, it’s not that Melina being a bitch is the reason Morrison is being punished, he’s being punished because he isn’t standing up to her, he’s going along with it. Morrison is being punished because he has heat, and he has heat because he, in the view of the majority of the locker room, it seems, is going along and letting Melina tell him what to do. If Morrison, publicly, told Melina to shut the hell up, that would probably go a fair way to resolving the issue.
Wrestlers are a weird bunch, and the wrestler code is even odder. It’s about respect and trust, since you need that in the ring, but it can manifest itself in odd ways. But basically it’s not so much what you do, but how you react, and how you control it. You slip up and drop a guy on his head in the ring? If you’re contrite, apologize, look after him, you’ll be forgiven. Blame them on sandbagging and blow them off? Then you’re in for a world of trouble. It’s how you play the game, not so much how you hit the ball.
…
Yeah, that doesn’t quite work, huh? Anyway, point is, the locker room is the reason for the punishment, and it’s because of how Morrison is reacting to Melina, not so much Melina…
Alledigadly.
McIntyre’s issue is similar, it’s not that Tiffany’s got heat, it’s more he won’t stand up to her on it.
2. When WWE finally started taking over WCW in the ratings war was it due to WWE programming being really good or just that WCW were screwing up big time ala Finger Poke of Doom and Halloween Havoc going off the air and things like that?
If you could give me your thoughts on these questions I would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks
Both. WCW had momentum, the nWo angle was RED hot, they had kickass wrestling every week, the biggest stars, and this new guy called Bill Goldberg who seemed to be catching on well. But they squandered their lead, first by botching Starrcade 97 and then by compounding the error with over-reliance on Hogan/Savage/Piper etc, the lack of a push, Nash’s ego etcetc.
But while WCW was failing, WWF was on the rise. WWF was putting on a much better show, arguably, for months. Depends on how much you can stand Russo. WWF TV was good, and most of the time better than WCW. But they needed that kick, that spark, that boost.
Montreal gave them that. The Screwjob made a bunch of people tune in to find out what the hell was going on. And they found a compelling show, and some great characters in Austin, Rock, Foley and then McMahon.
With that traction, WWF had some ground to tell the Austin story and the rise of Mr McMahon, so that with their consistent good shows, they built and built until Dude Love returned and caused the switch.
But if WCW had been going well, WWF probably wouldn’t have had the chance. And if WWF was putting out equally bad TV, they’d be sunk. It’s both, coupled with Montreal.
Jar Jar Binks takes some time out of his busy schedual to ask some questions.
Hi Dawg. I’ve emailed you two times before and you answered both times, so that’s why ‘Your column is the best.’
*hopeful that you’ll answer this time too*
Onto the questions
It’ll take time usually, but I do answer everything, eventually. Even if it’s a ‘LOL I Dunno’.
1. I never understood the ‘Crippler Crossface’. When it is locked in, what part of the wrestler is in most pain ? I get that the move doesn’t hurt that much, but clearly they are showing us that the wrestler is in pain. I just never understood what part ? Is it the arm that is locked in b/w legs ? Is it the temple region ? Or is the Nose ?
It’s the neck dude. The arm between the legs is to prevent it from being used to escape, while you grab their head and wrench back, pulling back towards the neck. You’re basically pushing their head back as far it can go… And then pulling back. The pain is in the back of the neck, as you are forcing it up and back. In wrestling logic.
2. My friend and i got into a argument that women can’t have good matches. So i told him about two of my favorite matches, Micki vs Trish and Kong, Hamada vs Wilde, Sarita. But he still wasn’t convinced. So my question is, Do you think that two best women wrestler like Trish, Del Ray etc can have a match AS GOOD as two best male wrestlers ?? And if so, then give me you top 5 women matches. You can include only two indy matches.
Why only two?
But ok, can the two best women wrestlers (Trish and Victoria, say) have as good a match as the two best men (Steamboat and Flair, say).
No.
At least, so far it appears not. We’ve yet to see a Flair/Steamboat quality match from two women, supposedly. See, the problem is that women are as talented as men in all the important, intangible stuff that is what wrestling is supposed to be about. Storytelling, psychology, selling, pacing, working. A woman can be just as talented as a man. But women are, of course, slightly limited in the boring, regular stuff. Strength, speed, power, and the like. The average man is superior than the average woman. So, logically, the best male wrestler is stronger, faster, more powerful than the best female wrestler. So they tend to use flashier moves, for longer. And that is what people want, it seems. It’s how they judge it.
It’s a very tough issue to discuss, since there’s never going to be agreement between people who refuse to believe a woman is capable of telling a story and those who think Manami Toyota is the single greatest athlete of all time. The middle ground is rather lonely. Most people seem to hate or love it.
There is a certain self fulfilling prophecy here, as women get very little time to show their craft, so it appears they suck, so they don’t get time and so on and so forth. And when women do get time, in SHIMMER, or in Japan, it’s discarded as Indy.
Which makes picking 5 great women’s matches with only 2 Indy matches hard. Most of the truly great women’s wrestling matches aren’t in the major leagues since they don’t get the time there. But, that said, I can give you a list, sure.
The best ‘Divas’ match I’ve ever seen was Trish V Steph at No Way Out.
Then you have to go back to 1988, Jumping Bomb Angels V The Glamour Girls.
Then for the third ‘big league’ match, pick any of the Gail V Kong TNA matches.
As for Indy? SHIMMER 28, Del Rey V Hamada.
And from Japan, Manami Toyota (she IS in the running after all) V Aja Kong, Nov 20, 1994.
I’m sure the readers will disagree, both in terms of my match choices and the idea that they matches are any good…
3. Third question isn’t much of a question. I never actually saw the attitude era, i started watching after 2002. So i was just curious is there a website or place where i can Watch or even read the whole era, Raw by Raw. If you can’t post website in the column, would you PLEEEASE email me.
Thanks Mathew. You’re the best.
Watch? Youtube. Read? History of WWE. Or there’s plenty of reviewers out there who are working through old Raws, some even on this very website!
*cheap pop*
Dangerous Dave wants to talk Nash.
Hi Massive, love your work on the site. Fellow aussie here!
My question is what do you think about having Kevin Nash as a prominent player on RAW at the moment? I admit I have liked Big Kev’s work in the past in WWF and WCW (obviously the guy is/was limited but he’s got a good personality), but I can’t get on board with having him on WWE programming in 2011.
Besides his physical limitations, it’s a bit weird to me that WWE is primarily marketing to kids who probably don’t even know who Kevin Nash is. I know he’s HHHs best buddy, but why bring him in now and not 5 years ago?
I just think it’s going to end up being a waste of time, with terrible matches and no long or even mid term benefit. What do you reckon?
Regards
Well first of all, the WWE.com video they made should have been on Raw from the get go.
Anyway, they did bring him in 8 years ago and it didn’t work out too well. But the fact is, when he’s allowed to talk, Nash can talk. Very, very well. Yes, his in ring ability right now is pretty low, but the thing is, you can’t intro him cold. You have to have him, sigh, work if you’re going to use him. If you’re going to make him a talker/manager/bodyguard/mentor, you have to have him work at least one match, to give the fans a reason why he’s now helping Awesome Truth or whoever they stick him with. Assuming they do so.
And I don’t know if ‘prominent player’ is valid. It’s one match with Triple H. If he ends up as #1 contender to the WWE title or something then yes, there’s a problem, but a one shot to transition him into a leader/manager role? I got no problem with that.
Schroeder has 3 questions.
Hey Mat, I’ve got 3 new ones I hope you can help me with-
1)”Number one on my list would be the WWE cage matches having escape as a means to victory.
So essentially we are rooting for a guy to escape from a cage, thereby being a chickenshit, coward, running away from a fight…and that’s how he wins?
Now I grew up on Jim Crockett’s NWA and cage matches were used in feuds in order to keep the heels from cheating with outside interference or to keep them from running away.
Apparently WWE does not need logic for their cage matches…because what exactly is the point of a cage match if the goal is to climb out.
Vince McMahon trained Vince Russo well on the philosophy of gimmick matches for gimmick matches sake.
Posted By: Ronnie (Guest) on June 26, 2011 at 11:59 PM”
This was posted in the comments section from the 6/26 edition of The Contentious Ten- Wrestling Pet Peeves by Nick Bazar. I thought this was an extremely good argument against the WWE-style cage match. I’d never thought about it like this before…but I now agree 100%. Do you agree/disagree?
Both. Today it’s become that, but there was logic prior, honest. See, back in the old days, namely Bob Backlund’s first run as champ, he was a master of the Cage Match blow off. And back then, WWF Cage Matches were escape rules, and the logic was that you’d beat your opponent so badly, you’d be able to walk out easily. Backlund would do it often.
But then they started getting cute, and having guys in races, getting more and more creative in the finishes, so that now it’s very much a “Yay, that guy’s a chicken…” as opposed to the original intent, which was “Man, that guy’s dead!”. WWF used it as blow offs to put over the face cleanly and strongly. NWA had a different goal in mind, different mindset. But WWF did at one point have logic. They’ve just forgotten it recently.
2) In a shoot interview, Larry Zbyszko makes some pretty outlandish claims. He thinks he was responsible for WCW’s highest buyrates in the 90’s. He says that Verne Gagne would’ve put the AWA title on him long before he did…but everybody expected him to become champion, so it couldn’t happen. He says he’s the only guy who ever sold out Shea Stadium and the Tokyo Dome.
Anyway, Larry also says that when he came back to WCW in 1990, the plan was for him to come in as AWA champ and feud with Sting…that is until WCW realized that Larry could shoot on Sting and take him out at anytime. Suffice it to say Larry seems to think pretty highly of himself and quite honestly I doubt that was WCW’s plan…but I figured I’d ask if you had ever heard this or if it was corroborated by anybody else?
First I’ve heard of it. Although I found the relevant section, from a 2004 interview, with a little extra tossed in.
Near the end of the AWA days, Gagne approached WCW with the idea of an “AWA invading WCW” angle. Jim Barnett, who was consulting for WCW was against the idea because Zbyszko (the AWA champion) could “eat Sting up” (then WCW champion).” Basically, Barnett nixed the idea feeling the AWA champion could outshine WCW’s champion in the ring. After that the AWA invasion angle was nixed, Jim Herd finally brought Zbyskzo to WCW. Zbyszko credited the idea of the “invasion angle” to Gagne, not Bischoff who later used it to create the New World Order.
Zbyszko stated one professional regret during the interview. In hindsight, Zbyszko regrets not getting himself more involved in WCW office politics, thinking he could have saved the company, since they could have used the help.
That said, this falls into the “Yes Prime Minster Law Of Shoot Interview”.
Any statement in a wrestler’s shoot interview can represent one of six different levels of reality:
a. What happened.
b. What he believed happened.
c. What he would have liked to have happened.
d. What he wants to believe happened.
e. What he wants other people to believe happened.
f. What he wants other people to believe he believed happened.
This is clearly near the end of that list rather than the start. I am 99% certain it’s crap.
3) I just finished Pain and Passion: The History of Stampede Wrestling (really good read by the way) and in it Heath McCoy writes that WWE produced a DVD called Screwed. Apparently it was a Bret Hart burial in the same vein as The Self Destruction of the Ultimate Warrior. So Vince sent Bret a copy and asked him to participate. Bret watched and objected, but agreed to participate if they did a career retrospective, which became the Bret Hart DVD.
I’m a little confused by this. If Vince wanted to bury Bret, why ask him to participate? If Vince wanted Bret to participate, why go to the lengths of producing the Screwed DVD, when Vince would have to know Bret would hate it and refuse to be a part of it? Is this yet another example of Vince working Bret to get what he really wanted, which was the DVD WWE ended up releasing? Has any of the footage of the Screwed DVD ever leaked or been reported on by anybody? Bret is quoted in the book as saying Hogan, Flair, and Lawler all say Bret was selfish, hard to work with, and wrong about Montreal on the original DVD.
He asked him to participate on the basis that it cost him nothing and if he had Bret in it then he’d sell many more copies. Vince wants to make money. Clearly there was, in his mind, money in Bret Hart and the screwjob. I don’t think Vince always wanted to do the DVD that did come out, he just wanted a DVD that could sell.
Now a mock up wouldn’t be that hard, actually. You have all the guys under contract, and they’re always being interviewed about someone. It would have been very easy to cut together a sample of the “Screwed” DVD program and send it to Bret. Vince then calls Bret, and Bret then doesn’t immediately tell him to screw himself, but makes it clear he doesn’t want to do this. So the two then hash out the DVD we got, which did include Montreal, but only as a small fragment.
But sadly video of the original hack job has never been seen online. But it all follows on. Vince loves money, and if he can get it from a Hart hack job, fine. If he can get it from a Hart anthology, fine too.
Jamille asks about some Oscar winners.
I Stumbled Upon This Video By Three 6 Mafia as u can see it has ECW clips in it my Questions are Was this some sort of Deal ECW had with them where if they included ECW clips that ECW would Promote they’re album? and was it shown on ECW Tv??
I sadly can’t find any info on there being a cross promotional deal. I doubt it’s anywhere near that official. It’s more that Three 6 Mafia are big wrestling fans, so if ECW were to come calling and/or if they attended an ECW show, they’d both think it’d be cool for them to use ECW clips. It was shown on ECW TV, but it also led to a few fans finding ECW. So win win!
A Movie Fan (Sorry, I lost your name… Unless it’s Back I guess…) asks about movie characters that could make the jump.
Hey Mathew,
Back again.
I was watching The Big Lebowski tonight and it got me thinking. I recall Chris Jericho saying that his latest character was inspired by Javier Bardem in No Country for Old Men and I wonder why more wrestlers don’t try to pick an interesting character from film to use as inspiration for the creation of a wrestling character. I’m apathetic to Sting’s Joker in part because it’s too recognizable and seems more rip-offish. On the other hand if he had slowly changed his character (minus the make-up change) I think it would be more effective. It is not easy to create a compelling character and it seems like a no-brainer to take any shortcut available. The goal should be homage rather than imitation.
Off the top of my head, I think “The Dude” and “Walter Subchak” would make a great basis for a wrestling character, as would The Hanson Brothers (Slapshot), Tyler Durden (Fight Club), Ethen Edward (The Searchers), Mr. Blonde (Reservoir Dogs), Jack Torrance (The Shining), Snake Plisken (Escape from NY), Luke (Cool Hand Luke) and Patrick Bateman (American Psycho) would make great models from which to develop a wrestling persona.
What do you think? And even if you hate the idea, give me a list of your top 10 movie characters that could form the basis for a wrestler?
To be fair, it has been done before. Problem is that if you try and make it an homage, Vince won’t know it and it’ll get shot down.
But if you flat out steal it? Then Vince loves it, probably because he thinks your making it up yourself.
And The Dudleyz = The Hansons.
That said, I think that you do have to be careful, but it’s certainly a rich vein to mine. You need to adjust it and change it slightly, just enough to not make it obvious (Sting doesn’t really do this). You might get lucky and your own delivery issues will do that for you, but still, it shouldn’t be a direct rip off, but it can be close.
That said, 10 movie characters might be pushing it, let’s see if I can get 10 without resorting to TV shows…
The Man With No Name: Clint Eastwood’s character in the Dollars Trilogy (or Yojimbo if you’re a Puro fan). Mostly the first one. Hired Gun comes into company, where two stables are at war, plays both off each other, ends up destroying both and walking out as Champion.
Porter/Walker: Payback/Point Blank. Small time heel helps another heel (junior member of a stable) to cash in on a bounty, but when it comes time to get paid, the small heel gets attacked and left for dead. He then tries to get his money back, ending up ruining the entire huge stable in his quest to get his half of the cash.
Predator: From Predator. A wrestler who doesn’t care for titles, merely wins. He wants to make every man on the roster tap out to his hold. This culminates in the World Champ… (and then when he makes HIM tap and then goes to leave, he has to fight off the company which is, I suppose, beyond the scope of the movies but go with me here.)
Seymour Krelborn: Little Shop Of Horrors. Jobber face suddenly gains the loyalty of huge bodyguard heel (Audrey II). Uses him, at first, to beat up heels. But slowly he gets corrupted in his pursuit of the main female face…
Bonnie & Clyde: Slightly weird female and simple heel male hook up and go from mild threats to insanely dangerous.
Gordon Gekko: Wall Street. A heel authority figure who openly encourages the wrestlers to be self motivated, who doesn’t favour the heels so much as he feels that the best wrestling comes from greed, so he encourages it.
Maximus Decimus Meridius: Gladiator. Top flight wrestler gets shafted, starts from bottom rung as he works his way back up to gain revenge.
Fletch: Fast talking improviser who manages to keep one step ahead of everyone thanks to his glib nature.
Jerry Maguire: Manager of champions snaps and realises he’s been a heel, tries to make amends, has to work back up from the bottom rung.
Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels: 4 young babyfaces pool their cash to give their best a shot at the World Title, the champ says he’ll give it for X cash. Champ makes it double or nothing and cheats, 4 guys have to try and win the cash by any means necessary…
But that’s just off the top of my head. I’m sure the readers will have other ideas.
Frankiemon wants to talk name ownership (he asked about Hulk Hogan and Marvel, but we covered that.
Thanks for your always entertaining weekly insights and your twitter banter and there always welcome distractions from working life.
I have a couple of questions on ownership of wrestlers names.
Firstly is there any rhyme or reason behind which of the ex-ECW guys WWE will let use their classic ECW names? In one corner you have guys like RVD, Raven, Jerry Lynn, Sandman and Tommy who has always used their ECW monikers with impunity and in the other you have the Dudleys, Simon Diamond / Pat Kenny, Justin Credible / PJ Pulaco and Balls Mahoney / Kahoneys who are forced to used sound a like names or their real names.
I know some of them like RVD have precedent for using their names prior to being in ECW but I still can’t see any consistency in who the WWE will or won’t litigate against for trademark infringement.
Thanks always
It’s a simple case of who’s names were owned by ECW and whose weren’t. As a rule, the early ECW entrants, those who began with the company early on when they were still a small indy company, they’re likely to have come up with their name and/or they weren’t in a position to sign the rights over. But after a certain point, wrestlers names began to be owned by ECW, as ECW grew and became a big company. So while Paul wouldn’t mind/care, technically, legally, ECW would own the copyrights.
So then, when WWE ended up buying ECW, they ended up in control and ownership of those trademarks. And so they can defend them. Same with WCW, although that’s less of an issue as there’s fewer guys it affects (Billy Kidman being the sole one I believe that’s well known about).
Basically if ECW owned the name, then WWE owns it and they will sue. If ECW never officially owned it, then it’s fair game.
Derek misses the crazy.
I enjoy your opinion, so what are some moves that you miss seeing no matter how ridiculous. I miss the “ropes are so strong that when I tug on them you flip over” spot. Any moves that used to be more common, yet ridiculous, that you miss?
Let’s see… The Airplane spin I’ve always found cute. Plus you can end it with a DVD if you must. Anything involving the crowd counting to 10, be it punches or slamming the head into the turnbuckle I love. Always get crowd interaction if you can.
Everyone talks about his flops, but I always found Flair’s flips just that stupidly entertaining. Especially if he gets clotheslined out of it.
Same as HBK/HHH and their flips.
But the all time stupidest thing I’ve always loved is the arrogant cover. The one foot on the chest. I do it, but really the master of it is Chris Jericho’s “Come On Baby!” cover.
Skip to 6:00 to see it in it’s full glory.
Brian asks about 1993.
Excellent column just the right mix of facts, opinions, humor and randomness!
The video you posted last week made me think about WWF around 1993. What was the story behind the hotshot Hogan title run? At KOTR 93 the announcers made a point of how Hogan won the title and hadn’t wrestled since Wrestlemania. So was the Hogan run for the “happy ending” at WM? Was it a power play byHogan in exchange for the “double main event” at WM, thus his quick defeat as punishment? Or did they really think it would take off and the run failed leading to Hogan’s exit (replaced by Luger for Summerslam).
It was a case of political games. Hart was a failure as champ, Vince had decided this. So the plan was for always that Yoko would win at WMIX, hold up title, goodnight everyone!
Hogan then told everyone that this was a stupid idea, the face had to win at WM. Which is true, or at least very easily defendable. But since Hart wasn’t going to walk out as champ, why not Zoidberg? Hogan? That would be a nice surprise, and send the fans home happy, and it wouldn’t hurt Yoko too much, they’d work an 8-10 minute match.
Of course it worked out as being maybe 90 seconds because the show as long, but still. Everyone was happy, right?
The fact is that Vince didn’t like the fact that Hogan still went on holiday with the title. If he got the World Title, least he could do was stick around. But no, he still went on holiday. So given that he had the big fat heel still there, when Hogan came back he stuck him in tag matches with Beefcake against Money Inc (which is really what they should have done, give him the tag belts) and then had Yoko squash him. And thus begin the ‘Hogan 2.0′ quest. Which leads us to…
My second question about WWF 1993 is what would have happened if Luger had actually taken off and got the title at Summerslam? There didn’t seem to be a larger number of heel challengers and Bret Hart was still the fan’s choice. Aside from a Yokozuna rematch at Survivor Series, who else could have challenged Luger in an interesting program?
Thanks
See it depends very much on what you mean by ‘taken off’. The whole point was to make Luger Hogan 2.0. Old Hogan loses to Yoko. New Hogan comes along, beats Yoko, wins title, everyone happy, continue. So in the ideal world of Vince McMahon, Luger-mania sweeps the country, and everyone falls in love with him. And if you get to that point, then it doesn’t matter who they toss him in there with. As long as they were foreign, they’d draw. Because they aren’t American, not like Luger! YAY LUGER!
And so on. So you’d run Luger V Borga, Luger V A Jap, Luger V The Rougeaus, so on and so forth. It wouldn’t matter. Hardly be interesting, but he’s Hogan 2.0, it didn’t have to be.
If you want actually interesting programs though, and you assume Luger gets popular enough to win the title but not Hogan levels, then you could do Luger V Yoko, then do Luger V HBK for a bit (I want ALL the Gold!!!) and then do Luger V Yoko with the winner facing winner of Bret V Owen. Yoko cheats to win, Bret beats him, then you build to Summerslam of Luger V Bret.
At least, that’s how I see it. Do you agree? Disagree? Hate me? Love me? Want more videos? Less videos? Let me know below. I should be ok next week… Well… Uh… Steelport is calling…
