Is Austin any better than HBK?

[Guest Redhawk]

Everyone knows about Shawn Michaels' history of refusing to job to so-and-so and pretty much acting like a bitch backstage. And it seems like a lot of people don't like HBK for that. But how come Steve Austin never gets the same disdain?

 

Think back to 1998-1999, just as Austin became a megastar. After winning the title from HBK at Wrestlemania 14, Austin didn't lose it until Kane beat him at KOTR. But Austin never jobbed to Kane, he jobbed to Undertaker's chair. In fact, he jobbed to his own chair that Taker hit with his chair. Kane won the title while KO'd and on his back. I thought that kind of put a dent in making Kane out to be a monster.

 

Then after winning the title back the next night, Austin doesn't lose it again until Breakdown, when it took TWO 7-foot, 300-pounders to pin him. And neither Taker or Kane got to hoist the belt, as there was the whole "double pin" controversy.

 

The next title holder after Austin was Rock, and Austin wasn't even in the room when Rock won the title, even though Rock's heel status could have made that possible.

 

When Rock lost the title to Mankind, who had to come down and help? Austin.

 

Then after beating Rock on two PPVs in a row, Austin didn't lose the title until Mankind beat him at SummerSlam. But as the story goes, Austin had refused to job to Triple H and they had to hotshot the title to HHH the next night.

 

When Austin and HHH finally met for the title at No Mercy, Austin jobbed to Rock's sledgehammer. Why couldn't he have just taken a Pedigree?

 

Later in 1999, Austin was scheduled to work a program with Jeff Jarrett, but refused. Now, Jarrett is a good wrestler and isn't known for busting people open or being sloppy, so why would Austin refuse? Seems like an HBK complex.

 

Finally, the next month he gets hit by a car and put out for almost a year.

 

So to sum it up, from 1998-1999, Austin's only losses in big matches came at the hands of Taker with 2 chairs, Kane and Taker at the same time, a sledgehammer and a car.

 

What's up with that?

[Guest 1000 Faces]

It's less glaring because I don't think that Austin out-and-out refused to job to anybody, while Michaels did so quite frequently.  Austin also never threw tantrums mid-ring when a spot was blown, and, most importantly, consistently drew money, while Shawn's drawing power was questionable, to say the least.  The thought process, logically, is "as long as he's drawing money, keep him strong."  Shawn didn't draw (though really, it was more a matter of the company as a whole being dominated by WCW), while Austin led the WWF through its most prosperous period post-Hogan.  As such, Shawn wasn't necessarily always booked to look strong, while Austin was.  Thus, Austin was likely asked to do fewer jobs, leading to fewer opportunities to veto said jobs, unlike Shawn.

 

Later on ...

[Guest phoenixrising]

Didn't Austin also give up the IC Title to Rock instead of jobbing it?

 

As for SummerSlam, Jesse Ventura was the guest ref, and for some reason the WWF didn't want him raising the hand of a heel (in that match, HHH) so they hotshotted it onto Mankind, then had HHH beat him on RAW the next night.  Foley covers it briefly in Foley Is Good.

[Guest RicFlairGlory]

Yeah, so now foley is covering for Austin too.  Its all propoganda and bullshit. Fuck Steve Austin

[Guest Ihatesmarksandmarks]

austin was a big prick in 1999 before his injury....it is well documented by not working with jarett, refusing to job to HHH etc. He was also bullshit about having to turn heel and half assed it till about mid summer. Then he got sick of it and whined to JR that he wanted to be a face again, so once he again stevie gets his wish and gets to drink 100 beers and start the most annoying catch phrase in wrestling hitsory. yeah, go steve

[Guest RicFlairGlory]

In 1998 wrestling needed Austin cause HBK was out.  I still wish the Undertaker was the one with the Back injury, because with all this whining about work ethic and being able to wrestle a match, HBK would before, and still would now, out-do the undertaker.  Once HHH and Rock got pushed, Austins usefulness went away.  But to sell a few t shirts they come up with some other stupid catchphrase, which ruins EVERYONE ELSES INTERVIEWS, fucks up every other segment, and we have to sit through more cripple austin matches.  Why wasnt it Undertaker and Austin who went through all this shit, and not HBK and Owen Hart?

[Guest RicFlairGlory]

Two hours later, and Austin STILL sucks.  Kinda like at RAW

[Guest blackjack4x]

He was also bullshit about having to turn heel and half assed it till about mid summer.

I assume this half-assed period you're referring to is early 2001 then?

[Guest blackjack4x]

But to sell a few t shirts they come up with some other stupid catchphrase, which ruins EVERYONE ELSES INTERVIEWS, fucks up every other segment, and we have to sit through more cripple austin matches.  Why wasnt it Undertaker and Austin who went through all this shit, and not HBK and Owen Hart?

I can see why you'd be frustrated with the WHAT thing, because it does fuck a lot of segments up. As for in-ring work, though, Austin is easily one of the top workers in the company.

 

What are you implying with the Owen Hart reference?

[Guest Choken One]

Austin never outright refused to job as often as Shawn did, and besides Austin had more reason to refuse to job to HHH and Jarrett then Bret had to refuse to job to Bret. Bret Hart was one of the only big names in the mid 90's and would not have hurt Shawn in credibility as much as Austin, the biggest star since Hulk Hogan losing to a EVIL Country singer and A pretty boy self serving lackey.

[Guest Juvydriver]

Austin is THE top worker in the company right now, bar none.  He's the only guy that has 4 star matches with EVERYBODY.

 

I think the big difference between Michaels and Austin is the Michaels gave up the title without even bothering with the formality of a match.  

 

Besides, nobody (the big stars) jobs clean anymore.  When was the last time Rock or HHH or HBK (when he was an active good guy) jobbed without some interference??  It doesn't happen.

 

And HBK had AT LEAST as much to do with backstage politics as the Undertaker and MUCH more than Austin.  

 

Juvy

[Guest Choken One]

I know Rock Jobbed Clean a few times like at No Mercy, although It was not Squeaky Clean but close enough.

[Guest Austin3164life]

I've also heard about his refusal to work a program with Jeff Jarrett in 1999.  Austin isn't that much different than your average "#1 man".  Besides Bret Hart, mostly every top man hasn't jobbed cleanly too much in their careers.  Hogan was even a bigger pull down guy, holding down Henning, Bret Hart, and Austin (in WCW).  Honestly, if you became the most popular wrestler of all time and you were getting millions from merchandising and media sales, would you want to job cleanly to half of your opponents and start looking weaker each job?

[Guest Juvydriver]

Why do people expect the biggest star in the company to lose all the time anyway?  If he is a babyface champ, should he lose the title every other week?

 

They tried that in WCW and, well everybody knows how that turned out.  That's one of the reasons that Jeff Jarrett was never looked at as a main eventer.  That, and the fact that he has never, EVER, been over with the crowd.

 

A babyface champ (which Austin was for most of the time discussed) needs to be dominant.  A heel champ needs to cheat like a motherf*cker to win, otherwise, the fans start cheering for him.

 

Juvy

[Guest chechsa987]

I do not feel that Austin's attitude is any better then HBK's attitude.  However I do feel HBK was a better wrestler.

[Guest Tony149]

HBK was worse at refusing to job than Austin. Like it's been pointed out. Austin has his share of not wanting to job/work with a wrestler.

 

Didn't Austin also block a feud with Mr. Ass (Billy Gunn) in 1999?

[Guest Brian]

Austin was a far superior wrestler. Much stronger on the mat, conveyed a deeper psychology.

[Guest Justin T]

Austin was a far superior wrestler. Much stronger on the mat, conveyed a deeper psychology.

What? Austin is not only superior but *far* superior? Thats... thats crazy. Michaels didn't rely on rest spots, he did different moves constantly, he was fast, he had the mat game when he needed it as proved in Bulldog or Bret matches, he could brawl as proved by UT matches, he could carry as proved by just about all his matches where he gave wrestlers the best matches of their carrer (Foley, Jarrett, Sid, Nash, Hall, the list goes on...), he had charisma and everythign else.

 

Austin is great on the mic and has the benefiot of arguably the greatest character ever that every fan relates to and thus turns the heat factor in his matches up to "extra high" every time and heat can change your perception, easily.

 

He's solid on the mat, and is a tremendous brawler... but FAR SUPERIOR to HBK in the ring? No f'n way.

[Guest Brian]

HBK's matches were generally generic in pace and HBK didn't have that extra ability to pull the small things out in the matches. Maybe I went a little far, but Stunning Steve was a better mat guy. His "rest spots" have their place in a match.

[Guest Brian]

His match with Foley was just as much Mic helping him lay it out.

 

Jarrett's best match was in USWA, and I know this sounds crazy, but against Brian Christopher. His best work was there too.

 

In Hall's case, they were given a ladder, and the second match is the only time I'll give Michaels props for what he did because he wnet above and beyond what he normally does it terms of psychology.

 

Ugh...Sid and Nash.

 

Austin's character is not a benefit on him as a wrestler. It's a detriment. It changes his whole style.

[Guest mastermind]

Okay, what's with all this Austin bashing here. I still don't understand why some don't see that the top guys are suppose to be dominant and not job to everyone and their momma. It's the hypocrisy really. When Austin was a pussy foot champ early in his reign last year people complained and said that wasn't the real Austin. Well, what was the real Austin? The ass-kicker who took names. Honestly, Austin shouldn't be jobbing to people like Jarrett or Billy Gunn. I do got a problem if he REFUSES to do programs with them though.

 

He is just hurting the roster by making the talent not have the chance to get the celebrity rub from his character. Yes, Austin may very well have the best character of all-time because he can do heel things and still be cheered because he is anti-authority and people in general have problems with the establishment rich or poor. People said Hogan got stale in the red and yellow, but his character had shelf life. The Rock's character is also below Austin's in term of shelf life. Austin is just like the average man.

 

Anyways, as long as Austin faces the talent and actually sells somewhat for them there shouldn't be a problem and job when the storyline calls for it like last night. Speaking of HBK(1 of my all-time faves) I think his refusing to job at some points were warranted.

 

I mean jobbing to Mick Foley 5-6 months upon his arrival in the wwf when he was a wcw midcarder? Refusing to job to Shane Douglas is hardly a crime as the guy kind of sucks to be honest. Hell, he put over Sid when I don't really see other top guys putting him over. Can you really say Hogan, Flair, Savage, Bret Hart put Sid(unless you call that win he got for the title on RAW which really made Sid a transitional champ for Taker anyways) over? Shawn losing to Austin made storyline sense and meant something.

[Guest Brian]

And mastermind, that's exactly how the Undertaker thing is headed. One big job.

[Guest J*ingus]

Bret lost to Sid in three separate televised matches.  Yeah, there was interference in all of them, but it was still three losses.  Shawn only lost to Sid once, on the other hand.  

 

Shawn's main problem seemed to be that he'd get a championship, and then never actually job it to anyone.  He forfeited both the IC and Tag belts two times each, and the World belt in the infamous "lost my smile" interview.  That's five title losses without actually losing.  A bit excessive, don't you think?  Austin on the other hand only did it once, and there was an actual storyline reason for doing it.

[Guest Redhawk]

I know that top babyfaces (Rock, Austin, HHH) only lose after interference, but Austin never seems to even be willing to take the heels' finisher.

 

For example, Rock will get beat up by Vince or Big Show or whatever, but he lets HHH hit the Pedigree and then pin him. HHH lost because of interference last night, but Angle got the pin after the Olympic Slam.

 

When Austin jobs, he gets pinned because of the sledghammer (No Mercy 1999), Taker's chair (KOTR) or something else.

 

Something else I forgot to mention was the Unforgiven match with Angle. What was the point of the whole "hand under the rope" thing? Couldn't Angle have gone over completely clean?

[Guest Tony149]

Something else I forgot to mention was the Unforgiven match with Angle. What was the point of the whole "hand under the rope" thing? Couldn't Angle have gone over completely clean?

Did the WWF ever bring that up on WWF TV? I can't even remember.

[Guest Redhawk]

Shane bitched to Hebner about it the next night, but it was really a moot point considering that Austin didn't show up for 2 weeks afterwards and didn't complain about it. I think they may have also brought it up during the "Fax Machine" epidsode.

[Guest mastermind]

Jingus you're point is very valid about Shawn losing titles and not even jobbing them. About UT if he does face Flair at WM I don't think he should lose. His streak should be broken by a newer star who can get long term heat from the win. Flair is already above UT in terms of respect, character(well this BA gimmick anyways as old Takes was unique), and ringwork. Bret losing to Sid three times proves my point. Who really remembers those losses in the long run? More people will remember Shawn losing to Sid at MSG because he hardly lost and it was only one loss. Bret always losing to Sid (3 times you say) was no big deal as historically it's insignificant.

[Guest J Boutier]

It's impressive that people manage to vilify Austin for cruelly inventing a catchword that would get over, and making the crowd use it under the pain of death.

 

It's not Austin who needs a good talking to. It's the crowd. Oh, and as for Trips circa 1999, it's not Austin that wouldn't put over him, it was those damn marks. Who do they think they are, watching wrestling?

[Guest Mole]

"austin was a big prick in 1999 before his injury....it is well documented by not working with jarett, refusing to job to HHH etc. He was also bullshit about having to turn heel and half assed it till about mid summer. Then he got sick of it and whined to JR that he wanted to be a face again, so once he again stevie gets his wish and gets to drink 100 beers and start the most annoying catch phrase in wrestling hitsory. yeah, go steve"

 

First off, this is documented? Where does it say, in a well documented footage or writing that Austin did this? No where. There is no proof to this matter, only "internet speculation."

 

Secondly, I am at a lost with half of the people at this board. Is there any wrestler out there that is your favorite? I swear, people always have to complain about SOMETHING. Austin is stale/annoying, the Rock is annoying/over-seller/superman, HHH has pull backstage/slow wrestler/bad on the mic, Jericho looks like a weak champion, Angle isn't over enough with the crowd/he is boring, and RVD sucks as a wrestler/is just a spot machine.

 

Do I agree with any of those statements? Just one, HHH is slower now.

 

My point is that we should just sit back and relax. Try not too look sooo deep into wrestling, it really isn't all that deep. Granted, I know the product hasn't been the greatest of the late, but is it really THAT bad? I watch wrestling because it is entertaining, just like why I watch a movie, to be entertained. If the WWF is going down the shitter that bad, then just change the channel or go watch something else. I'll call you when wrestling is better.

[Guest bps "The Truth" 21]

On Austin:

 

He carried the company in 98.

 

Having him lose clean as a face makes no sense.

 

Until someone in the know tells me otherwise...I assume that Vince and crew booked it that way.