The W
Views: 178997505
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
28.3.17 0711
The 7 - Pro Wrestling - Austin done with WWE...again?
This thread has 1 referral leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 Next(7599 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (54 total)
asteroidboy
Andouille
Level: 98

Posts: 1828/2241
EXP: 9548224
For next: 106163

Since: 22.1.02
From: Texas

Since last post: 4873 days
Last activity: 439 days
#21 Posted on 7.4.04 1301.09
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1304.13
    Originally posted by Phantom
    And from Vince’s mindset, on the one hand you’ve got a guy who always did the job when asked to put a new guy over, always tried to do what was good for business, and even came back early and did everything he could to help the company keep going after one of the other main-eventers decided to walk out. On the other, you have the aforementioned guy who completely walked out after being told he was going to be used to put over a guy the company believed would be a cornerstone in their future main event scene, and has been turning into a PR nightmare for the last couple of years due to incessant domestic abuse rumors. When you look at it that way, it’s easy to see why he would be willing to reward one for his hard work and dedication, and not be so quick to do the same for the other.


You hit the nail on the head. Austin was the bigger draw, but he has almost never put anyone over. Even when he tapped to Angle at Unforgiven '02 (?) in the culmination of a long feud in which Austin was playing heel, his hand was outside the ring. That made it somewhat of a tainted victory, even though there was NO reason for it. In his farewell job, who did Austin put over? Rock, after beating him upteen million times, instead of someone who could have used the rub.

Rock has been the exact opposite. Not saying that one's better than the other, but Austin seems to have a history of refusing to job, and leaving when he doesn't get his way. Personal issues aside, he'd probably built up some resentment with management.
evilwaldo
Lap cheong
Level: 85

Posts: 1448/1597
EXP: 5738473
For next: 160091

Since: 7.2.02
From: New York, NY

Since last post: 6851 days
Last activity: 6632 days
#22 Posted on 7.4.04 1311.23
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1317.39
Good riddance if he leaves. We have enough commissioners that take time away from the real talent trying to get over.

I don't blame Vince for playing hardball. The domestic abuse problems should be addressed somewhere in negotiations. It appears they were but the pattern of abuse is continuing.
Aldo D 2112
Goetta
Level: 41

Posts: 162/302
EXP: 469771
For next: 10378

Since: 21.4.02
From: West Palm Beach, FL

Since last post: 6010 days
Last activity: 5839 days
Y!:
#23 Posted on 7.4.04 1322.21
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1323.13
    Originally posted by StaggerLee
      Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastard
      He sells merchandise. Aside from that, and loyalty from Austin's huge contribution to the sucess of the Attitude era (and how often has loyalty really mattered to Vince).


    I suppose you dont watch Smackdown, or you would note the Loyal Bob Holly and JBL Pushes of late.


    The thing I cant figure out is why he would offer he 54,000 to move out. Just kick the bitch out! Its his house I assume, so why not just put her out on the street and change the locks?


Maybe he's trying to lowball her on the hush money? *shrug*
Jay
Bauerwurst
Level: 25

Posts: 6/96
EXP: 80396
For next: 9225

Since: 27.3.04
From: St. Louis, Missouri

Since last post: 6795 days
Last activity: 6582 days
#24 Posted on 7.4.04 1610.23
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1612.45
Even when he tapped to Angle at Unforgiven '02 (?)...

It was 2001, actually. It occured just a few weeks after 9/11 which is why many believe Angle got the belt since he was the American hero face at the time. He lost the belt back a few weeks later leading into No Mercy anyway.
JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator
Level: 145

Posts: 479/5537
EXP: 37175750
For next: 428422

Since: 12.12.01

Since last post: 1764 days
Last activity: 1416 days
#25 Posted on 7.4.04 1614.44
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1615.40
"On the other, you have the aforementioned guy who completely walked out after being told he was going to be used to put over a guy the company believed would be a cornerstone in their future main event scene"

That's a really oversimplified version and you'd think two years later people would have better perspective on it. It had way more to do with being burnt out and his neck problems. Furthermore, just doing a job to Lesnar was not his issue, it was doing it on TV with no buildup when Lesnar's biggest win to date was over Jeff Hardy. As he's said in numerous interviews, he would've been more than happy to do business if it makes sense, but that didn't make sense at all. Giving away Lesnar/Austin on TV unpromoted makes the match and the job mean next to nothing.

"In his farewell job, who did Austin put over? Rock, after beating him upteen million times, instead of someone who could have used the rub."

When Austin came back at the beginning of 2003, it was to return to as a full-time wrestler, not to do one match. He didn't know that Wrestlemania was going to be his last match until days before the show, so what was he supposed to do? Then, against doctor's orders, he still worked Mania, had a great match, and put over Rock clean as it gets to reciprocate Rock's jobs and make Rock as strong as possible for the Bill Goldberg match.

"Not saying that one's better than the other, but Austin seems to have a history of refusing to job,"

He refused to work programs with Billy Gunn and Jeff Jarrett. What a loss for the fans and look at how they've proved him wrong by setting the world on fire.

"and leaving when he doesn't get his way."

Again, this had far more to do with frustration with his deteriorating health. There was so much more behind his departure than just being asked to lose a match.

(edited by JMShapiro on 7.4.04 1418)
Jay
Bauerwurst
Level: 25

Posts: 7/96
EXP: 80396
For next: 9225

Since: 27.3.04
From: St. Louis, Missouri

Since last post: 6795 days
Last activity: 6582 days
#26 Posted on 7.4.04 1617.55
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1618.07
Again, this had far more to do with frustration with his deteriorating health. There was so much more behind his departure than just being asked to lose a match.

But he still just left with no prior notice. Even when he was ordered to return he refused. That's not professional business etiquette.
JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator
Level: 145

Posts: 480/5537
EXP: 37175750
For next: 428422

Since: 12.12.01

Since last post: 1764 days
Last activity: 1416 days
#27 Posted on 7.4.04 1627.11
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1627.33
My point is not that it was model behavior, but that it was far from a situation of taking his ball and going home, and painting it way really oversimplifies the situation in the same way that saying Brock Lesnar quit simply because he didn't want to lose to Undertaker does.

(Also, human peoples have emotions that can, on occassion, interfere with Professional Business Etiquette. Especially when you're looking at, say, your career being over because the neck problems that put you on the shelf for a year have resurfaced.)


"It was 2001, actually. It occured just a few weeks after 9/11 which is why many believe Angle got the belt since he was the American hero face at the time. He lost the belt back a few weeks later leading into No Mercy anyway."

Yup. The original finish was Regal turning on Angle and costing him the match. Because of 9/11 they decided they'd better do a happy ending and quickie title switch, using the Regal turn 2 weeks later.

(edited by JMShapiro on 7.4.04 1428)
dMr
Andouille
Level: 97

Posts: 1209/2229
EXP: 9304202
For next: 13156

Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 2852 days
Last activity: 1198 days
#28 Posted on 7.4.04 1633.40
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1633.51
    Originally posted by JMShapiro
    Just doing a job to Lesnar was not his issue, it was doing it on TV with no buildup when Lesnar's biggest win to date was over Jeff Hardy. As he's said in numerous interviews, he would've been more than happy to do business if it makes sense, but that didn't make sense at all. Giving away Lesnar/Austin on TV unpromoted makes the match and the job mean next to nothing.


Wouldn't that have been a very similar situation to HHH/Shelton Benjamin? If thats played out correctly over the next few weeks they'll have made a star out of Benjamin in little over a month off the back of a big TV win with little build up.

Obviously they made a star of Lesnar anyway but maybe he wouldn't have needed quite such a long win streak to get there if Austin had been willing to do the job. That bits pretty academic though given what happened with Lesnar.
ekedolphin
Scrapple
Level: 147

Posts: 1834/5747
EXP: 39237725
For next: 200470

Since: 12.1.02
From: Indianapolis, IN; now residing in Suffolk, VA

Since last post: 490 days
Last activity: 14 days
#29 Posted on 7.4.04 1635.33
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1636.05
Eh... Austin's given us plenty of memorable moments over the years. If he wants to leave WWE, he has every right to. It's the domestic disturbance issue (for the second time) that's most upsetting in my opinion. You'd think he'd have learned from the Debra incident, but why would he? He got off scot-free that time, so there's no disincentive for repeating the behavior.

I wonder if Steve Austin drank as much and got as disorderly in real life before he became drunk and disorderly from a storyline standpoint in the WWF. If not, it's interesting how portraying the same character in pro wrestling for a few years affects people's real-life personalities. Remember when Scott Hall returned to the WWF in 2002, completely sober and ready to start anew? He got beer dumped all over him by Steve Austin, and WWE wondered why Hall fell off the wagon.

So that segment, in addition to making the nWo look like complete fuckin' wussies, also contributed to Hall getting drunk again-- and WWE damn well knew he had problems. Well, at least the segment gave me a funny quote that I like to say every now and then: “I'm tired of kickin' your ass, let's have a beer!”

Kinda makes you wonder what kinda wacky headlines we'd be seeing if more people acted the same way in real-life as they do in wrestling storylines. We'd certainly never be bored by Val Venis and The Godfather anymore, that's for certain.



(edited by ekedolphin on 7.4.04 1736)
JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator
Level: 145

Posts: 481/5537
EXP: 37175750
For next: 428422

Since: 12.12.01

Since last post: 1764 days
Last activity: 1416 days
#30 Posted on 7.4.04 1646.27
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1647.23
"Wouldn't that have been a very similar situation to HHH/Shelton Benjamin?"

Well, the psychology behind it is different. Shelton over HHH is "Upset of the Century! Upstart Babyface beats Dominant Heel!" and makes a new star with a surprise win. With Lesnar/Austin, it's the monster heel they're grooming getting a tainted win over the biggest babyface in the company (finish was Eddie Guerrero interfering). So Austin losing doesn't mean as much because it wasn't built up, Lesnar winning doesn't mean as much because it wasn't clean, and you waste the fresh match on throwaway TV instead of building to it so it can draw money. Austin said he shouldn't be the first guy on the ladder, he should be the last guy, like Rock was at SummerSlam -- a culminating match you build towards.


If you want to make the Hogan/Austin ironic comparison, Hogan's job to Lesnar was something he offered to do because he was taking time off. His idea was he'd get his win back against Brock at Survivor Series, the company's idea was that he'd lose again at Survivor Series. So he refused to come back to lose again and they turned to Big Show instead.



"Remember when Scott Hall returned to the WWF in 2002, completely sober and ready to start anew? He got beer dumped all over him by Steve Austin, and WWE wondered why Hall fell off the wagon."

Dumping beer all over Hall probably wasn't the greatest idea in the world, but it didn't make him fall off the wagon. He had already showed up drunk at Smackdown in LA the first week that they were signed.

(edited by JMShapiro on 7.4.04 1453)
dMr
Andouille
Level: 97

Posts: 1211/2229
EXP: 9304202
For next: 13156

Since: 2.11.02
From: Edinburgh, Scotland

Since last post: 2852 days
Last activity: 1198 days
#31 Posted on 7.4.04 1658.49
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1659.01
    Originally posted by JMShapiro
    Well, Shelton over HHH is "Upset of the Century! Upstart Babyface beats Dominant Heel!" and makes a new star with a surprise win. With Lesnar/Austin, it's the monster heel they're grooming getting a tainted win over the biggest babyface in the company (finish was Eddie Guerrero interfering). So Austin losing doesn't mean as much because it wasn't built up, Lesnar winning doesn't mean as much because it wasn't clean, and you waste the fresh match on throwaway TV instead of building to it so it can draw money.


Ah, that I did not know. It still could have given a different direction to Lesnar's character and gotten him more heat by having him brag about his victory over the fan favourite. It also would have shown him to have some degree of weakness, something they never really did until he turned back heel, save for maybe his matches with RVD.

It would also have started off the Eddie/Austin feud and gotten Eddie much farther much faster, but for the most part all that would have been better coming on PPV so, um.... you're right. And I'm coughwrongcough.
CRZ
Big Brother
Administrator
Level: 239

Posts: 4391/17695
EXP: 212426600
For next: 1734199

Since: 9.12.01
From: ミãƒã‚¢ãƒãƒªã‚¹

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 3 days
ICQ:  
Y!:
#32 Posted on 7.4.04 1802.10
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1808.12
    Originally posted by ekedolphin
    It's the domestic disturbance issue (for the second time) that's most upsetting in my opinion. You'd think he'd have learned from the Debra incident, but why would he? He got off scot-free that time, so there's no disincentive for repeating the behavior.
He hardly got off "scot-free."
SEADAWG
Boudin rouge
Moderator
Level: 51

Posts: 79/501
EXP: 975771
For next: 38174

Since: 5.7.03

Since last post: 4076 days
Last activity: 3157 days
#33 Posted on 7.4.04 1815.38
Reposted on: 7.4.11 1817.57
    Originally posted by JMShapiro
    Austin said he shouldn't be the first guy on the ladder, he should be the last guy, like Rock was at SummerSlam -- a culminating match you build towards.


But if we're gonna talk about having better perspective on things a few years afterwards, then you gotta acknowledge the fact that a scenerio like that was never going to happen. And that Austin, knowing how bad his health was, probably knew that it might not happen.

That's not to say that Austin knew he'd only have one more match left in him at that point, but he was certainly aware of how bad his neck was getting since it stressed him out so badly that he left. At the bare minimum, he would have had to know that his status for some down-the-road program with Brock would be questionable.

So while the notion of Austin being saved until the end for a big program with Brock is a good point to make in theory, it seems less likely now that Austin was thinking about the future when the idea of losing to Brock came up.
fuelinjected
Banger
Level: 106

Posts: 2077/2679
EXP: 12276371
For next: 395613

Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 6706 days
Last activity: 6706 days
#34 Posted on 7.4.04 2059.05
Reposted on: 7.4.11 2059.29
And for more perspective, Brock f'n bailed so it really wouldn't have made a difference anyways.

Austin was protected and protected himself so that a win over Austin or even a heel getting heat on him MEANT SOMETHING. Rock jobbed so much that it didn't mean a damn thing when anyone beat him. Two different types of political strategies - still politics. Don't let Rock off the hook just because he played a different brand of not helping the other guy.
redsoxnation
Scrapple
Level: 165

Posts: 3629/7534
EXP: 58189237
For next: 746568

Since: 24.7.02

Since last post: 3923 days
Last activity: 3923 days
#35 Posted on 7.4.04 2131.29
Reposted on: 7.4.11 2131.38
Back to the contract issue: Is it safe to pre-suppose Austin has been working off the remainder of the contract he walked out on in late spring/early summer '02? If so, that means the contract that is expiring was based upon the inflated numbers of the late 90's, and doesn't reflect the economic situation of the company as they enter the mid 00's. Thus, its probably safe to presume Vince would be looking for Austin to re-sign at a significanly lower figure, as he no longer is an active wrestler, they've nearly dried up any merchandising reservoirs they had, and the fan base is about 50-60% of what it was at Austin's peak.
While Vince would be looking for perhaps a low downside with incentives to potentially allow Austin to get around what he's made the past few years, its safe to guess Austin would still want close to, if not more, than he previously made. Throw in the potential legal difficulties, and this could become a protracted negotiation, that could lead to the end of the Austin era. Austin is entering into the time period near the top of the card where Vince has dumped previous guys he believed had peaked and were falling (Hogan, Hart).
cfgb
Bierwurst
Level: 92

Posts: 1084/1930
EXP: 7640793
For next: 116174

Since: 2.1.02
From: Ottawa, Ontario

Since last post: 571 days
Last activity: 31 days
#36 Posted on 7.4.04 2137.34
Reposted on: 7.4.11 2137.37
Rock jobbed so much that it didn't mean a damn thing when anyone beat him. Two different types of political strategies - still politics. Don't let Rock off the hook just because he played a different brand of not helping the other guy.

I think my head hurts......

I don't even want to get into the idea how losing to Al Snow in a brahma bullrope match, or how losing to Chris Jericho 7 times in a row in an effort to get him over, or how agreeing to win the title and go on your first dominant run comes from pinning a 56-year old non-wrestler who's not the champion, or how not complaining about a damn bit of instruction given to him throughout his career is a POLITICAL GAME.

Yes, perhaps your boss might like you alot at the end of the day for putting people over when you could outright refuse based on your status - but I would hardly call it not helping the other guy. Using an example I took earlier, he was the ONLY person who went out of his way in his feud with Jericho to get him over. He lost SEVEN TIMES IN A ROW to Jericho, while Austin's losses needed a ton of interfence, while Triple H didn't lose and made him a sideshow to the REAL feud involving his wife, and her hand lotion, and her car sawed in half, and her dog Lucy, and her dog Lucy's poop.... He went out and lost to Brock 100% clean in the middle of the ring, no questions asked while Undertaker was unable to do the same thing just a month later.

Through it all, he's always carried himself with great professionalism - and never once did it feel like anything short of a big deal when Rocky got pinned, ESPECIALLY since early 2000, no matter how many times he has lost. It all depends on how the match is promoted, and Rocky can promote it as well as anyone.
XManiac24
Bauerwurst
Level: 25

Posts: 85/100
EXP: 85622
For next: 3999

Since: 2.3.04

Since last post: 7273 days
Last activity: 7265 days
#37 Posted on 7.4.04 2145.10
Reposted on: 7.4.11 2145.13
In terms of jobbing. It really doesn't matter who does the job. All that matters is...

1. You have good, well-rept. wrestlers
2. The feud is built upon and is carried well for a decent amount of time.
3. When the match happens, both wrestlers are able to come off looking strong.

Steamboat and Savage, wieners. Steamboat and Savage. Savage may have lost the match, but by no means did he look weak.
Joe E. Nitro
Salami
Level: 35

Posts: 130/214
EXP: 268533
For next: 11405

Since: 4.2.04

Since last post: 7074 days
Last activity: 4555 days
#38 Posted on 7.4.04 2158.41
Reposted on: 7.4.11 2159.01

    He refused to work programs with Billy Gunn and Jeff Jarrett. What a loss for the fans and look at how they've proved him wrong by setting the world on fire.


As much as I hate Jarrett now, I still think that a Jarrett/Austin feud would have been refreshing for that time period, entertaining and it would have actually done some good business. Jarrett was pretty hot at the time and I don't think the IC belt has looked as good since his reign.
SEADAWG
Boudin rouge
Moderator
Level: 51

Posts: 81/501
EXP: 975771
For next: 38174

Since: 5.7.03

Since last post: 4076 days
Last activity: 3157 days
#39 Posted on 7.4.04 2159.27
Reposted on: 7.4.11 2201.11
    Originally posted by cfgb
    He lost SEVEN TIMES IN A ROW to Jericho, while Austin's losses needed a ton of interfence

When were those 7 times in a row? And I don't remember Rock ever losing cleanly to Jericho. Not that I think it reflects negatively on Rock, but I wouldn't pat him on the back while dissing Austin for the same thing.
fuelinjected
Banger
Level: 106

Posts: 2078/2679
EXP: 12276371
For next: 395613

Since: 12.10.02
From: Canada

Since last post: 6706 days
Last activity: 6706 days
#40 Posted on 7.4.04 2323.08
Reposted on: 7.4.11 2323.29
    Originally posted by cfgb
    Through it all, he's always carried himself with great professionalism - and never once did it feel like anything short of a big deal when Rocky got pinned, ESPECIALLY since early 2000, no matter how many times he has lost. It all depends on how the match is promoted, and Rocky can promote it as well as anyone.


We could start with a few of the recent examples like how he completely BURIED Goldberg. He went out of his way to be the extremely funny and cool heel in the build up which made Goldberg look like a tool. Then at Backlash he cuts a FACE promo before his match. In the match he pulls the old Scott Hall masterpiece in being so entertaining that the fans turned on Goldberg. Doing things the professional way would have actually playing a heel instead of trying to salvage his wrestling image.

How about this year at WrestleMania? This hated blood feud between Foley and Orton turned into comedy hour starring The Rock. Extremely entertaining but completely out of context. They're supposed to hate Evolution and Rock's doing comedy spots with Ric Flair.

How about that time The Rock put over The Hurricane? How about when he made Booker T look like a complete incompetent moron during the Invasion? Or the dancing midget crap with Lance Storm? Or the many times, as a face, he verbally humiliated his opponent and then beat them?

Don't get me wrong, I love The Rock, I'm a big fan of his but he just plays a different brand of politics then Austin. I'm not saying he never does the right thing because he has (tapping to Benoit, jobbing to Brock, losing to Jericho at Rumble 02) but he's hardly been above burying people.
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 NextThread ahead: Raw Rating!
Next thread: Tag Team Breakups
Previous thread: WORLD-1 Revisited Tour
(7599 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Pro Wrestling - Austin done with WWE...again?Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2024 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.322 seconds.