The W
Views: 98969015
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
17.9.14 1049
The W - Pro Wrestling - Austin The Crybaby? (Page 2)
This thread has 13 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Pages: Prev 1 2(13478 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (31 total)
A Fan
Liverwurst








Since: 3.1.02

Since last post: 3521 days
Last activity: 3521 days
#21 Posted on
Ok, I find something puzzling about this. The first time we hear Austin is throwing his weight around this year and not the last year or so he has been back is when he thought the NWO should have given him a more brutal attack during the Raw when half the talent is away. Vince wanted it to be a mild attack, Austin wanted it to be bloody and realistic. He talked it over with Hall and Nash and they agreed. So, he is trying to get the NWO over as heels which makes sense since Vince and the bookers weren't doing it the right way.

Now, we hear Austin vetoed the plan for Vince's screwjob outcome of the Wrestlemania match with Hall which would have lead to the split. The screw job would have made perfect sense in the storyline department. Given if the first one is correct, what caused Austin to suddenly decided the logical and realistical approach is not the best option? It really does not make sense.

I don't know what to believe, but if Austin is having problems with the storylines, he ain't the only one. I think this was leaked by someone to justify why the company split angle is really weird. The WWF wrote themselves in a corner when no one brought up Vince's masterplans since 1998. Jesus Christ, Linda is right there and all she had to do is stand up and say "At this time last year, I was drugged and put in a mental home by that man." Is it that hard to that one line for the WWF writers. Austin's win, now justifies Hogan's turn and why the NWO looked weak at Wrestlemania. If anything the WWF should be happy Austin did it his way, because now they have some logic in two storylines when there was none. If Austin is using his politics to make the WWF writers work harder to explain things, good.

I will also agree that Austin was right about Jarrett, to bad the WCW didn't figure that out when he jumped. Not jobbing the belt to HHH was wrong, but its not like HHH never saw it again.

A Fan- I did miss Austin, because he like a handful of others make the show watchable even when it sucks.
BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#22 Posted on
I do think an Austin/Jarrett feud would have been pretty good. Jarrett was the last real IC Champ. He dominated the ranks and was ready to the next step. Whether it would have been successful or not we will never know.

I will say that Austin should be careful right now. Although an Austinless WWF might seem weird at first, it really wouldn't be crippling. There are plenty of people that are capable of taking a top spot on the card.

On a side note, if Austin is having problems with the current *direction* of the company, that's fine. I know I have a problem with the most of the storylines these days. But he is going to have to realize that putting people over, in most cases, will help the company. I really admire The Rock and Angle for losing matches cleanly to further storylines.
Big Bad
Scrapple








Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 22 hours
Last activity: 22 hours
#23 Posted on

    He basically led to Jeff Jarrett leaving the WWF for WCW in 98 or 99 or whenever. Austin didn't want to work with him, as he didn't feel that Jarrett was over enough. Right around that same time, he refused to drop the belt to HHH, instead dropping it to Mankind at Summerslam 99(?, who then dropped it to HHH the next night. He may have been right about Jarrett, but the fact remains that he can throw tantrums backstage in an effort to get his way, so none of this, if true, is out of the question.


I thought the plan back in 1999 was that Austin needed time off for his knees, and thus was originally booked to lose to HHH at Summerslam. Since Jesse Ventura was guest reffing, however, the WWF wanted to have him raise the hand of a face. So, Foley won the title at Summerslam, and then HHH beat him the next night on RAW.




I was born in a manger, like that other guy. You know, he wore a hat?
cfgb
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Ottawa, Ontario

Since last post: 15 hours
Last activity: 19 min.
#24 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.87
On a side note, if Austin is having problems with the current *direction* of the company, that's fine.

I remember another star that had a problem with the direction of the WWF...

Steve Austin really should take a look at Kurt Angle and see what being demoted on the biggest card of the year is all about. Kurt took it in stride. Considering Austin received the longer World Title reign and biggest push I've seen in years this past summer, a part time demotion to let others have the spotlight really shouldn't bother him.

Yet it does.

Tell me - who's really causing tension backstage? The guys going along with everything their told to do, or the guy pulling the powerplay and demanding his match at Wrestlemania be changed, completely f-ing up future storylines?




Contact cfgb
Visit my homepage
DrOp
Frankfurter








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 2199 days
Last activity: 1065 days
#25 Posted on
You know, cfgb, I wrote a little something about this last night... ;)



Two hot dogs, a six pack and a PPV or Wrestling tape. What more could a guy possibly need?!?!

...And Marking Out
Slashwrestling.com
The Shooters.net
cfgb
Lap cheong








Since: 2.1.02
From: Ottawa, Ontario

Since last post: 15 hours
Last activity: 19 min.
#26 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.87
EDIT: Nevermind.

(edited by cfgb on 20.3.02 1247)
Contact cfgb Visit my homepage
shea
Bockwurst








Since: 1.2.02
From: Brooklyn NY

Since last post: 3964 days
Last activity: 3850 days
#27 Posted on

    Originally posted by Busyman14
    without (Austin) the WWF would never of had that boom from 1998-2001


Granted, Austin kept the company competitive around '98, but it's easy to stay the center of attention when you pick and choose who you will or won't work with -- and when you're always putting yourself over.

As for the '98-2000 "boom" -- my memory's not what it once was, but I seem to remember Rock, HHH and Foley taking off during that time. I could be wrong, but in my mind, Austin wasn't the sun around which the WWF universe revolved back then.

I just think that Austin's character has become totally one-dimensional and tired, and he's got himself to blame for that. Like someone said upthread, he wasn't there Monday night and I didn't miss him.
SKLOKAZOID
Bratwurst








Since: 20.3.02
From: California

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 11 min.
AIM:  
#28 Posted on
I, for one, am glad Austin vetoed Vince's screwy finish at WrestleMania. Vince needed to make an impact in a main event anyway for Linda's announcement to have any real reason. Instead, Vince would have just interfered in an undercard match that didn't really accomplish anything.

I'm not always for wrestlers using their position for leverage (especially Hogan), but it happens all the time and in Austin's case at least the guy has a sense of what comes across better on TV. Sure, he's sticking up for only himself, but at least he has his image in check. And it's an image people pay to see on a regular basis. Vince's ending sucked plain and simple and Austin called him on it.

People are bringing up references to Austin "refusing to job to HHH at SummerSlam '99". It's nearly impossible to believe this when you go back and watch the actual PPV.

Considering that Jesse Ventura was the guest ref in his homestate, it wasn't really possible for him to be raising the hand of a heel at the end of the show. Also, above all of that, if you actually watch the match, you'll see that Austin took a Pedigree, then Mankind's DDT, and LOST CLEAN AS A SHEET. No outside interference, no foreign objects. Austin lost clean as a face when he didn't even have to.

I don't know about the Jarrett thing and don't really care. Jarrett wasn't anything until "SLAPNUTS!" anyway. Austin was taking time off after SummerSlam and was feuding with HHH at the time anyway, so there really was no way a program between the two would have made any real impact for either man.

Austin also lost cleanly to Kurt Angle last year and "allowed" Chris Benoit look good in their matches against each other.

Angle & Austin both got the shaft at WrestleMania this year, but when you consider how important Austin is to the WWF (He's STILL the #1 guy on average!), it's really a shame that he was 5th match from the top.

I don't think Austin is taking time off from TV to show Vince "how much it hurts when he's not on." Austin must surely realize that there's The Rock, HHH (ugh), Angle, and all sorts of other guys to pick up the ball when he's not there. I think Austin's taking himself off of TV, because he doesn't want to be a part of the load of crap they're currently showing.

That behavior would be consistent with the Austin I've been following for the past few years. Austin's not the kind of guy that wants to be on TV for the sake of being on TV. If he's going to be put on TV, it's going to be for a good reason and it's going to be in something meaninful.
oldschoolhero
Knackwurst








Since: 2.1.02
From: nWo Country

Since last post: 1951 days
Last activity: 1885 days
#29 Posted on
Uh, have you never heard of a referee DECKING the heel that just won? It's pretty much 100% certain that Austin was due to dump the belt to Trips on that night. Now if he needed a third man to take the pressure off of his knees, then fine. But that doesn't mean the finish should be changed. Yeah, he laid down for Mankind-after TWO people's finishing manouvres. And let's look at his other title losses prior to that, shall we?

KOTR '98: Totaly contrived ending whereby Austin had no chance of busting Kane open anyway.

Breakdown '98: Two 300 pounders sitting on him was the only thing capable of keeping him down.

Over The Edge '99: A lightning-quick three count on a screwy rollup-while his shoulders were STILL UP.

Wow, what a giver.



Hey Yo.....................I'm DRUNK.
UAsnake2002
Cotechino








Since: 27.2.02
From: Tuscaloosa, AL, USA

Since last post: 4431 days
Last activity: 4431 days
#30 Posted on
I can see why Austin is so bitter. I mean two months ago you could have penciled in Triple H vs Austin at Wrestlemania X-8. Then the nWo angle starts and has fizzled (they're not poison if they keep losing, plus just bad storylines to go with it) and Austin is thrust into an angle with a guy who may not make it to the end.

But you also have to keep in mind, you're getting paid to do a job. Wrestling is your job and Steve Austin's employer is Vince McMahon. So Austin needs to keep everything in stride. Trust me, the wrestling audience isn't going to not care about him if he stuck in a lousy storyline. He's Stone Cold for crying out loud, the man is almost infalliable in the ring (i.e. The Rock, Hogan, HHH, Jericho could be there if he drops his two boobs and Steph too..).

The attention span of the normal WWF fan is so short, they are going to forget any crappy things you did pretty quickly. But fans will forget you even quicker if you're not on television. More importantly they won't care. I know Hogan goes against everything I said, but he is an exception to the rule.



____________________ is Walking!

A)The Rock
B)CRZ
C)Everyone, away from this crap.
SKLOKAZOID
Bratwurst








Since: 20.3.02
From: California

Since last post: 12 hours
Last activity: 11 min.
AIM:  
#31 Posted on
    Originally posted by oldschoolhero
    Uh, have you never heard of a referee DECKING the heel that just won? It's pretty much 100% certain that Austin was due to dump the belt to Trips on that night. Now if he needed a third man to take the pressure off of his knees, then fine. But that doesn't mean the finish should be changed. Yeah, he laid down for Mankind-after TWO people's finishing manouvres. And let's look at his other title losses prior to that, shall we?

    KOTR '98: Totaly contrived ending whereby Austin had no chance of busting Kane open anyway.

    Breakdown '98: Two 300 pounders sitting on him was the only thing capable of keeping him down.

    Over The Edge '99: A lightning-quick three count on a screwy rollup-while his shoulders were STILL UP.

    Wow, what a giver.



Yeah, they could have had Jesse hit HHH, but it still wouldn't have done anything for the crowd. At WM2K, after they established HHH as the Second Coming, Rock Rock-Bottomed Stephanie, but it didn't change the fact that WrestleMania was ruined for many.

The examples you give are all at times when Austin was a babyface. They're all taken out of context of the storylines that were going on at the time. The storylines dictate the finishes of the matches.

Kane beat Austin that way, because Austin was going to win the belt back the next night, so they maintainted the integrity of Austin's reign by having him not "really" lose it (ala Hogan never really losing to Andre). Kane & UT both beat Austin to a bloody pulp, because Mr. McMahon put Austin in a situation nobody could win, subsequently causing the title to go vacant. Shane fast-counted Austin, because UT was being portrayed as Shane's evil henchman and Shane/Vince/UT conspired to get the belt off Austin. The finishes were designed to protect Austin, because the intended story was that Austin was getting screwed.

Faces rarely, if ever, lose clean. It's one of the laws of wrestling. It has nothing to do with anything Austin ever did backstage, it's just the way the WWF has always operated... well, always used to operate.

It doesn't matter if it took two guys' finishers, it was clean. Austin jobbed clean at Breakdown '98, too, and got his ass kicked in that match.

Back to SummerSlam: If Austin refused to let HHH win, why did he lose clean in the first place? Why didn't he just take Mankind's finisher, then HHH's, then get pinned by HHH? It would have been the same thing. Simple, Vince didn't want to put over HHH that night and wanted to have Ventura "maintain law and order," which was the gimmick of the match. Why would Austin say "Mankind? You're okay, but not you, HHH, you dumb son of a bitch!" Mankind looked less credible than HHH during this time. Austin let Foley pin him, but not HHH? I don't think that's the case.

Austin was too injured to even work SummerSlam, which is why they added a third man. If he wasn't, Austin would have won that match. They gave the duke to Mankind as a result.

Vince wanted to give the belt to HHH around that time, but I don't think the intention was to have HHH win at SummerSlam. Vince seemed to want to start a slower build with HHH. He appeared as a weak champion for the first few months of his "reign of terror," because they really didn't know what to do with him to begin with. Until December '99... when the dark times began.

(edited by SKLOKAZOID on 20.3.02 1623)
Pages: Prev 1 2
Pages: Prev 1 2Thread ahead: Austin? What?
Next thread: Does NWO even need Hogan?
Previous thread: House Shows
(13478 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
Hm. Still not a big fan of Curry part 3 yet. I DID just watch a tape of Wild Bull Curry managing Prof. Tanaka in Killer Kowalski's Boston-area WWL from the mid-seventies. PENMANSHIP? Peeyew what an awful dropkick.
The W - Pro Wrestling - Austin The Crybaby? (Page 2)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.425 seconds.