Austin3164life

I believe the Austin heel turn was needed. It was a fresh character turn for the guy and it resulted in a compelling persona and great matches. It wasn't Austin's heel turn that caused the ratings downfall so much as it was Triple H's refusal to be the big babyface to take him on (remember when the Texas crowd exploded for him when he came out?). Austin couldn't continue to be a huge babyface because he had just defeated one, and it would've been great to see a fresh face going against a fresh heel Austin. Since Triple H didn't play the main babyface to go after Austin, we got to see a nonsensical pairing which resulted in plodding feuds with Taker and Kane (who weren't hot at that time). It would've been fresh, new, and exciting had Triple H gone against Austin as a face, and I'm sure the crowd would've liked it at least. Now, you could argue that Austin wasn't really perceived as a hated wrestler because he still got big pops most of the time, but the Austin/HHH feud (not sure if this is accurate, idk the numbers) was proven as a good draw in Jan-Feb and it still would've been good.

Pat Patterson once said in a short speech about Wrestlemania (specifically about Bret/Austin II) that it takes the "right two wrestlers" to have that type of (great) match, and that "not anybody" can do it, so I don't think it'd work.

Ever since the HHH/Angle/Stephanie love triangle resolution and the "Who Ran Over Austin?" conclusion (which were both supreme dissapointments), things began to take a different turn, slowly, but surely. But like Dangerous A has quoted, the real ground zero of the WWE at least was the purchase of WCW (and a little something called "XFL").

Royal Rumble- No No Way Out- No Wrestlemania XIX- Yes Backlash- Yes Judgement Day- No Badd Blood- No Vengeance- Yes Summerslam- No Unforgiven- No No Mercy- ? (Hooter's perhaps)

I think most wrestling fans are people who began watching over again in 98, and started watching the Hogan-era first.

The most obvious problem is that they didn't go through with the Triple H/Austin feud right after Wrestlemania, when they just came off their hottest show ever. If they kept the momentum going with the Austin/HHH feud, they could've had better ratings. Another problem people overlook is the fact that the main opponents for Austin and Triple H were Kane and the Undertaker (when both Kane and Undertaker were stale and couldn't work a good match). Had Jericho and Benoit been the main threats from April until the summer, things could've been different, but we won't know unless we build a time machine, slaughter the writing team of 2001, and try things.

Half the roster is about as green as RVD's pot. No way they can create the match as it goes along by calling spots during the match. Only the best workers really do that well without blowing spots (Bret, Austin, Benoit, Eddy, etc.).

I think Austin's personal problems have been discussed to death and we don't need to revisit them. But, anyway, I think that the Raw creative team is absolutely pathetic and I think that Austin should've left after his job to The Rock. The fact that Steve Austin is an authority figure is a contradiction in itself. All we're seeing is a mundane, unmotivated non-wrestler basically go over everyone he's "feuding" with. The Austin/Jericho feud can be made into something good if they slowly build the double turn. Personally, I don't see why Austin should go to Smackdown.

So far, the feud between them looks lame and neither man is looking strong. It's rediculous and confusing booking that the WWE is accustomed to giving us, and I agree with Anglesault that this is a waste of Angle and Cena. Cena hasn't even resolved his feud with Eddy and didn't win the U.S. Title, and Angle is a World Title contender. There's a whole level for Cena to cross in order to face Angle. The Cena/Eddy feud was going well until they killed it. I did have high hopes for this feud around 5 months ago (I was thinking up good scenarios), and I thought it could be a good mini-feud, but Cena and Angle are on two different levels, and Cena practically came out of no where to feud with Angle. A horribly booked feud, at the wrong time = waste of time. Oh, and I agree with MH, the Austin/Bret comparisons are crazy. Angle isn't close to Bret Hart's level and Cena can't even smell (let alone touch) Austin. There are some minor similarities to their personas, but that's it.

If you put the letter 's' in front of "Hitman", you'll have my exact opinion o' Bret Hart!--Austin, Raw 1996 As far as Gorilla Monsoon is concerned, I got a big bunch a' bannanas, an' I can figure out where to stick each an' every one o' them!--Austin, Feb. Raw 97 Look at 'im. YOUUUU SUCK BRET!--Austin, "Cause Stone Cold Said So" video, RR 97 commentary Don't worry. Don't worry about puttin' on yer little black 'n pink tights, 'cause they look like crap anyway!--Austin, Raw after Revenge of Taker IYH in April 97

Summerslam, by far. Excellent selling by Angle and just a mind-blowing performance by Austin.

Just to point out something that I think is weird in the already craptacular Angle/Cena feud, Angle has been getting the better of him lately. Does this mean a Cena win? Sometimes angles are booked so bad that you can't even make sense of anything about it.

This week, Undertaker and Brock Lesnar try to tie each other up in chains.

The problem with Angle and Cena is the booking committee. Like Anglesault said in another thread, it's a waste of both participants in this feud. The feud does have potential of being Austin/Bret (not like it but a modern version) but of course with WWE's over-the-top rediculous booking, it won't. That's why I'm scared of the match results at No Mercy.

NFL- Indianapolis vs. Tampa Bay Shows why no NFL QB is on Manning's level

Brock/Taker: **3/4 Vince/Stephanie: DUD y/Big Show: **1/4 Angle/Cena: *** Benoit/A-Train: ** Hardy/Gowen: 1/4* Tajiri vs. Mysterio: ***3/4

In no ranking order..... Brock Lesnar Jamie Knoble Ultimo Dragon Rey Mysterio Chris Jericho Eddy Guerrero Matt Hardy John Cena Kurt Angle Shelton Benjamin

I still have high expectations because the WWE's talent pool is very rich and there should be no excuse for the kind of crap we are seeing lately. I'm not saying every section on each show has to be perfect, but they should be able to create excellent Main Event scenes and mid-card scenes. How did they do it in 97, 98, 00, and early 01, when they didn't have as many talents as they do today?

Because I'm sure if all of these guys stayed in ECW, they would've made as much money and done as many great things as they've done in the EEEEVIL "big two".

I like Mike Chioda and Tim White (the pale fat guy) as referees. They're usually impartial and fast-paced.

I guess Raw is invading Smackdown.......or Gewirtz is invading the writing crew.

Do that many workers get injured by simple moves? It's funny because when most moves that are banned were allowed, you didn't see too many injuries, but now, with the bland WWE style, more workers get hurt.

I'm just a bit curious as to why Cena would even be in the match. Oh, and lame two-minute main events do not a crowd draw.

Flair/Steamboat Austin/Bret Austin/Rock Benoit/Angle Benoit/Booker Jericho/Benoit

I guess another thing that greatly affected Austin's dramatic turn in terms of workrate are his neck injuries after the Owendriver in 97. Before it, Austin was a great technical wrestler and wrestled soundly with a lot of psychology. After it, he changed his style to more of a brawler with some technique, because of his limited physical state. I think Ray said it before that brawling is a type of wrestling, and, imo, I think that the all-time-greats list shouldn't be open to strictly technical wrestlers. Sometimes triangle-chokes, arm-wrenches, and front-facelocks aren't the most important thing in a match. It's really hard to determine where certain wrestlers fall because it basically comes down to what type of wrestler you like. Personally, I have the disadvantage of not seeing a lot of Puroresu, but some names in my list of all-time-greats are Flair, Benoit, Austin, Bret, Sasuke, and Steamboat. Each wrestler has a different unique quality that makes them stand out (imo), but they all can adapt to other styles if needed. In that sense, Austin can (or could, at least) work a great technical match if needed, and he can also tell a great story within a match, but his strength showed with his great brawling style which had a technical edge to it somewhat.