Concerning Rock, Brock and Hogan

[Guest edotherocket]

I know that with wrestling dirt sheets people never really know the whole truth but I'm curious if people accept the followings as absolute facts leading in to Wrestlemania.

 

1. The Rock will quit wrestling.

2. Brock Lesnar will win the WWE Heavyweight title.

3. Hogan will retire.

 

Personally, I'm starting to question whether Brock will win. It's depressing to think The Rock will quit considering the form he is in and Hogan is a bad smell that I swear will never ever go away.

[Guest HartFan86]

I don't think Rock will quit...but he won't be back for a while. I think this new heel version of the Rock is gunna motivate him more to stay in the WWE.

[Guest oldschoolwrestling]

Vince knows Hogan's value is low. That's why he let him sit out doing nothing until it was time to start thinking about Wrestlemania. Other than maybe a match against SCSA, Vince knows Hogan's last match that anyone might care about would be against him. And if he can make it some type of retirement match or something to make himself look like a Hogan-killer, he'll do it. He thinks he created Hulkamania, he'd love to be the one to retire him.

[Guest The Fett]

I don't think Rock is really quiting for good either. It's probably more of a semi-retirement thing just to make it official that he'll never be a full-time wrestler again so the WWE can move on to the post-Rock era. He'll be back a few months a year and if he's as entertaining as he has been lately those few months will be great.

[Guest El Satanico]

Rock will remain employed with the WWE and will pop up from time to time while still making movies.

[Guest Downhome]

I don't care how entertaining he is "for a few months". I'd let him go if he can't be around to really help the company. I wouldn't think like this if WWE was stable right now, but as is, they need people who will be around long term to help create interesting storylines and the such.

 

If he'd put Hollywood on hold for just a while, long enough to really factor into WWE, and help it get stable, then I wouldn't care if he came and went.

 

A feud with Austin isn't going to do anything but pop up ratings and a buyrate for 1-2 months, and that's all. If they don't get stable, then all of this will mean nothing, and we'll be right back where we are. Sure, Austin is a huge help, but if I was Vince, I'd be thinking that I want as many draws on my show as possible to help it get stable.

[Guest Brian]

Rock's signed, so quitting isn't really an option. Long-term sabbatical, yeah.

 

Hogan and retirment are two words that make up one of the biggest running jokes in wrestling. Right up there with Flair and retirement.

 

I see no other option right now other than having Brock when. Angle's looked far too weak lately and it'd drag down Brock and not do anything for Angle.

[Guest El Satanico]

Oh please as long as Rock makes him money Vince will always keep him around. You know Vince is getting money from his movies or Vince wouldn't be allowing it.

 

Also the fact that Vince will use a "proven draw" until he's squeezed everything out of him will guarantee Rock stays employed.

[Guest edotherocket]

Downhome, what's your definition of stable? While the WWE isnt doing so hot storyline wise, its somewhat improving and more to the point, they would actually be making a profit if it wasnt for The World debacle.

[Guest teke184]

The financial earnings for the entire past year have been screwy.

 

In one quarter, they'd have only made a $200,000 profit if not for a multi-million dollar settlement by the PTC.

 

In two others, they would have made a few million dollars if not for unexpected expenses (writing off The World, the WWF case).

 

 

As a sidenote, someone has run the numbers at Other Arena and noticed that they've run 30% more house shows, with higher ticket prices, and still only made 5% more in live gate revenue. If that isn't an idea of how screwed things are, I don't know what is.

[Guest Retro Rob]

I agree, if the Rock is going to come and go as he likes, he may as well not come back. The company needs him now for more than two months and he cannot work that long, then the hell with him. I could give a damn if he is kept under contract, but don't parade him out on TV for a month inbetween his movies. Not only does it make wrestling look inferior to other forms of entertainment, but it also makes it seem like the Rock is more important than everyone else who bust their ass four times a week, 52 weeks a year.

[Guest Downhome]

Downhome, what's your definition of stable?

What do you mean? Like a group of wrestlers, like Evolution. I think we'll see another "freak" group.

[Guest iamsherm]

I don't care how entertaining he is "for a few months". I'd let him go if he can't be around to really help the company. I wouldn't think like this if WWE was stable right now, but as is, they need people who will be around long term to help create interesting storylines and the such.

I think this is what edo was referring to, Downhome.

 

And I have to agree with him. Just based purely on ratings, I would have to say the WWE is pretty stable at this point. Sure they aren't all that high, but they also haven't dipped into the 2's yet. It's been in this mid 3 range for a good while now, hasn't it?

 

Of course I have no idea if PPV buyrates and attendance and other things are stable. Linda McMahon says they are turning around, but with all the spin, I find it hard to take her word seriously.

[Guest Brian]

Well, it is the WrestleMania quarter so they should be turning things around. Rumble, Mania, plus all the crap their throwing against the wall, and overseas touring is going to be big in the quarter afterwards. It should end up really good. Now if they can find a way to put in some long-term booking...