Top 50 WWWF/WWF/WWE headliners

[Placebo Effect 0]

I'm an idiot.

That was random.

The original post was "Some people have too much time on their hands."

 

I can only assume a mod edited it.

[LessonInMachismo 0]

I'm an idiot.

That was random.

The original post was "Some people have too much time on their hands."

 

I can only assume a mod edited it.

Probably HTQ, as he may have taken your comment as a jab at his interest in the Meltzer article.

 

I took your comment as a jab at me for what I posted. Not a big deal, that's just what I took it as.

[Guest krazykat72]

He main evented 10 WWE pay per views(not counting rumbles obviously)

 

SummerSlam 1992-Bret Hart I.C Title Match

 

IYH 9.24.95-Tagged with Yokozuna against Nash and HBK-Triple Title Match(all three belts, WWF, IC and tag on the line)

 

IYH 10.22.95-Diesel-WWF Title Match

 

IYH 12.17.95-Bret Hart(better match then 'Slam 1992 but less remembered)

 

Beware of Dog IYH 1996-HBK-WWF Title Match(double pin finish)

 

King of the Ring 1996-HBK-WWF Title Match

 

International Incident 1996-w/ Vader and Owen Vs HBK, Sid and Ahmed Johnson

 

Canadian Stampede 1997-Hart Foundation Vs Austin, Goldust, LOD and Shamrock

 

One Night Only-European title match-HBK (never specificed that european ppvs werent counted)

 

Unforgiven 1999-Six Pac Challenge-WWF Title Match-HHH, Rock, Foley, TBS and Kane

 

I'm also going to take a guess and assumed he headlined a few shows @ MSG from 1995-1996 and maybe even a couple in 1997 as well.

The main draw for the SummerSlam '92 card was Warrior/Savage, at least in terms of PPV buys. The stadium was going to sell out, but I could see giving Smith credit for drawing some of the house.

 

The triple header tag match was advertised as Owen and Yoko the entire time, and Smith wasn't announced as being in there until the end of the show.

 

-Paul Jacobi-

[iggymcfly 0]

I have to agree with whoever else posted it that Brock Lesnar being even with Randy Orton is the most utterly irrational thing on the list.

 

Brock main evented Wrestlemania, and was a successful draw for close to two years. Orton was tried as a draw for a few months and then brought back to the midcard when he failed miserably. Big difference if you ask me.

[Guest LooneyTune]

Brock wasn't THAT successful, it's just that he didn't bomb either. One can argue the same case for people like Kane and Chris Jericho. Neither did anything for buyrates, but they've been main eventing enough times to be high on the list.

[Guest krazykat72]

I have to agree with whoever else posted it that Brock Lesnar being even with Randy Orton is the most utterly irrational thing on the list.

 

Brock main evented Wrestlemania, and was a successful draw for close to two years. Orton was tried as a draw for a few months and then brought back to the midcard when he failed miserably. Big difference if you ask me.

 

The Hogan/Vince Mania? It can be argued that and Rock/Austin 3 were promoted more than Angle/Lesnar (especially Hogan/Vince). Also, that Mania was the one relatively unsuccesful one of the last few years (it did something like 575,000 buys, compared to over a million for x-7, over 800,000 for X-8, and 885,000 for last year), so I'm not sure you'd even want to give Brock all that much credit for it.

 

Orton's still young to be called a total failure and he's definately been elevated fro Mania of last year. His move back to heel should help his character a lot.

 

 

-Paul Jacobi-

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

WM XIX got 560,000, which was horrible for a WM, which can be put down to Hogan v Vince getting the lions share of the hype, when it wasn't a match that a lot of people clearly wanted to pay for.

 

Orton isn't a total failiure as such, but he is a failiure in the sense that he didn't get over anywhere near the level expected of him.

[LessonInMachismo 0]

WM XIX got 560,000, which was horrible for a WM, which can be put down to Hogan v Vince getting the lions share of the hype, when it wasn't a match that a lot of people clearly wanted to pay for.

 

Orton isn't a total failiure as such, but he is a failiure in the sense that he didn't get over anywhere near the level expected of him.

Hell, they are on the cover of the DVD. I really can't remember that far back, but maybe if Angle/Lesnar had been pushed harder -- to the point of eventually being on the cover of the DVD -- then the buyrate may have been jacked up a bit.

 

I am of the opinion that no matter the people involved in a novelty match, wrestling fans would rather see two wrestlers go.

 

As for your trivia win...what a joke that guy is. I happened to log on right after the first one several weeks back and I sent my e-mail within ten minutes (all correct answers). Strangely enough, the three winners the next week were all WO.com regulars.

[Guest LooneyTune]

DVD covers mean jack shit. SABLE was on the Summerslam 2003 cover, and was on camera a grand total of 2 minutes.

[LessonInMachismo 0]

DVD covers mean jack shit. SABLE was on the Summerslam 2003 cover, and was on camera a grand total of 2 minutes.

*Summerslam covers mean jack shit.

 

Austin/Tyson/HBK were on the cover of XIV. The four ME players and their representatives were on the cover of 2000. Austin/Rock were on the cover of X7. Hogan/Rock on X8. And then...Hogan/Vince on XIX.

 

Besides, the point was that apparently someone thought that pushing Vince and Hogan was more important than the WWE title match...to the point of putting them on the DVD cover.

[Guest LooneyTune]

Or because it was one of the many posters for Wrestlemania, and thats what they used.

 

(looks at Survivor Series 2003 cover with SHANE MCMAHON)

[LessonInMachismo 0]

Or because it was one of the many posters for Wrestlemania, and thats what they used.

 

(looks at Survivor Series 2003 cover with SHANE MCMAHON)

DVD covers, posters, whatever...it was THE Wrestlemania graphic. The point still stands. Again, that is SuSe, not WM.

[Guest Tjhe CyNick]

This is pretty messed up.

 

I agree with whoever said the weighing is off. I believe its much harder to do 400,000 buys on PPV than it is to draw in an Arena that has so many years of pro wrestling history.

 

If he credited Lesnar for "headlining" Mania then he's out of his mind, because I dont remember any ads pushing the Angle-Lesnar match, it was all Hogan-McMahon and Austin-Rock.

 

Same goes for giving HHH credit for Mania 20.

[Guest wolverine1007]

In Lesnar's defense at WM XIX though, they weren't sure that Kurt Angle was going to be able to walk to the ring for the match, let alone wrestle in it. Plus, Hogan, McMahon, Austin and Rock are all above Lesnar on the all-time draw list as it is, so why not focus on the show's main draws?

[Guest Shadow]

Kurt's neck injury wasn't discovered until early march, a good 3 weeks before WMXIX. WWE was already shoving Hogan/McMahon and Rock/Austin 3 and basically not selling the two title matches at all.

[Guest wolverine1007]

Well Angle/Lesnar was the definitive Smackdown main-event, and it did get plenty of TV time as I remember. But I had a couple friends show up to watch Wrestlemania solely for Hogan/McMahon, and who even left before the PPV was over. Different people are drawn to different things, and the Angle/Lesnar feud was supposed to be about who was the best wrestler, not who was responsible for Wrestlemania (Hogan/McMahon) or about who was the bigger draw. (Rock/Austin)