Hogan interview draws heat from internet marks..

[Guest jackie fargo]

In an upcoming Sly magazine interview Hogan makes some strong comments in regards to Austins Staying power..

 

 

What Hogan says, is true, But really, Austin didn't have a 4 year run, it was more like a two year run.

 

 

Regarding Steve Austin, he said: "Austin has been in the business about 18 years and he was on top for four. I wrestled main events for 25 years. I could pull my dick out and I might be on top for four years - it's called 'cheap heat.' Somebody who stays on top 25 years has to have more than that. It has to be in your spirit."

[JasonX 0]

In an upcoming Sly magazine interview Hogan makes some strong comments in regards to Austins Staying power..

 

 

What Hogan says, is true, But really, Austin didn't have a 4 year run, it was more like a two year run.

 

 

Regarding Steve Austin, he said: "Austin has been in the business about 18 years and he was on top for four. I wrestled main events for 25 years. I could pull my dick out and I might be on top for four years - it's called 'cheap heat.' Somebody who stays on top 25 years has to have more than that. It has to be in your spirit."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I have to slightly agree with that. Austin never recovered heatwise after his late 99 to fall '00 hiatus and was clearly using cheap heat (the imfamous "What?" chant) to keep his heat going when he came back. SO in truth he only had 2 years top draw as a top draw (1997-1999).

[MikeJordan23 0]

And Austin drew more money in his 4 years then Hogan did his entire career. So what's his point exactly?

[Brett Favre 0]

The way Austin gained overness, and the way Hogan gained overness should keep Hogan's mouth shut.

[Guest jackie fargo]

And Austin drew more money in his 4 years then Hogan did his entire career. So what's his point exactly?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

you gotta be kidding-

 

Hogan has made more money bya landside..

[SuperJerk 0]

Two points:

 

-Hulk Hogan didn't have a broken neck cut his career short.

 

-Hogan was "on the top" for about 8 years in WWE, and 5 in WCW. He hasn't really been "on the top" since 2000, except for 1 month in 2002.

That's impressive, but 8+5 does not equal 25.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Normally, I have jackie fargo on ignore, but I figured he would defend Hogan against the money comment, but for WWF/E at least, what MikeJordan23 said is true. Austin on top helped WWF gross more money than they did with Hogan on top.

[EdwardKnoxII 0]

I think it also has to do with wrestling style. Look at the wrestling style when Hogan was on top. Compared to the more fastpace style while Austin was on top.

[AndrewTS 0]

It's very funny to recall Hogan's pathetic attempts to rip off Austin in WCW.

[Downhome 0]

Hogan was on top, in one way or another, before WWF also. He really has been wrestling in main events, no matter what the company, for a very long time. I also don't think he's talking about just being the champ or whatever for that long. It's part that, and then also name value. He may not be champ now, but he really is on top even today just because of who he is.

 

Hogan's name value >>>>>>>>>>>>> Austin's name value

 

While Austin was great, I'm a huge mark for him, his name will not be remembered like Hogan.

 

Don't think I totally take up for Hogan and dismiss Austin though. If it wasn't for Hogan, Flair, and other people, Austin could have been even bigger than he ended up. I'll always wonder what could have been with Austin. He was one of the best used, as well as one of the worst used wrestlers of all time.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I find it hard to believe that Austin drew more than Hogan in terms of _entire career_.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I find it hard to believe that Austin drew more than Hogan in terms of _entire career_.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For entire career, Hogan undoubtedly as Austin beat, due to being on top for so long in more places. But for WWF/E only, Austin drew more and made more for the company than Hogan.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I will say Austins success came in a time of monday night television and 12 ppv's a year - anyone would get over-exposed within a few years - and Hogan didn't have to contend with that until the mid-90's with WCW. And in the mid-90's Hogans drawing period wasn't that long either.

[SuperJerk 0]

Austin outdrew Hogan when they competed head-to-head.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I will say Austins success came in a time of monday night television and 12 ppv's a year - anyone would get over-exposed within a few years - and Hogan didn't have to contend with that until the mid-90's with WCW.  And in the mid-90's Hogans drawing period wasn't that long either.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hogan's last big buy rate as a regular draw was the Superbrawl 9 match with Flair, that drew a comparable buy rate to the Austin v McMahon cage match that month. After that, Hogan only drew big numbers as a nostalgia act.

[Guest jackie fargo]

I find it hard to believe that Austin drew more than Hogan in terms of _entire career_.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Hogan made more money than any othe rwrestler in history-

 

Austin wasn't drawing in his WCW days, ECW, or first couple of years in the WWE-

 

or he hasn't did anything the last 3 or so years.. Injury

 

Theres no debating the drawing power of either men, Hogan wins by a landside-

 

2-4 years, compared to 20-

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I find it hard to believe that Austin drew more than Hogan in terms of _entire career_.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For entire career, Hogan undoubtedly as Austin beat, due to being on top for so long in more places. But for WWF/E only, Austin drew more and made more for the company than Hogan.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yeah, Austin probably did more shows in 2 months than Hogan did in 12, add that in with the number of PPV buys and it's pretty easy to see how that's possible.

 

I think Hogan being on top during 2 hot periods is probably one of the greatest accomplishments of any wrestler, though.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

I find it hard to believe that Austin drew more than Hogan in terms of _entire career_.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For entire career, Hogan undoubtedly as Austin beat, due to being on top for so long in more places. But for WWF/E only, Austin drew more and made more for the company than Hogan.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think Hogan being on top during 2 hot periods is probably one of the greatest accomplishments of any wrestler, though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Given the right circumstances, and if WCW had somehow survived and thrived in some fashion, I have no doubt Austin would have done that too had he ever chosen to go back there.

[MillenniumMan831 0]

Plus, Hogan's name itself drew gates (WMIII and The Big Event) while Austin needed much more of a supporting cast to draw.

[Downhome 0]

Austin outdrew Hogan when they competed head-to-head.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's hard to even compare the two even in this respect. Hogan's really big years in WCW were 96 and 97, and through that period Austin wasn't really on top, he had yet to hit the period where his big years took place. Then once Austin was actually having his biggest years, 98 and 99, Hogan (and WCW as a whole), were in a huge spiral.

 

What would have been interesting would have been to see Hogan and his entire nWo deal go head to head with Austin and his McMahon feud. I have always wished that both angles could have taken place at the exact same time.

 

It's not fair to say Hogan outdrew Austin in 96 and 97, and it's just as unfair to say that Austin outdrew Hogan in 98 and 99. The characters were not on the same level, nor were their respective companies.

 

What is interesting however, is that when either guy was on the very top of their game, so was their company.

 

Had Austin been able to hit it big earlier, and had his career been able to last longer, he could have had one hell of an amazing career.

[SuperJerk 0]

I find it hard to believe that Austin drew more than Hogan in terms of _entire career_.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Hogan made more money than any othe rwrestler in history-

 

Austin wasn't drawing in his WCW days, ECW, or first couple of years in the WWE-

 

or he hasn't did anything the last 3 or so years.. Injury

 

Theres no debating the drawing power of either men, Hogan wins by a landside-

 

2-4 years, compared to 20-

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Someone's going to have to prove he was actually a draw for 20 years. See my first post on this thread.

[Downhome 0]

How is it even a question if Hogan was a draw for so many years? The guy has been insanely over since the very early 80's.

[SuperJerk 0]

How is it even a question if Hogan was a draw for so many years? The guy has been insanely over since the very early 80's.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Being over isn't the same thing as being a draw or being on top.

 

 

Hogan was "on the top" for about 8 years in WWE, and 5 in WCW. He hasn't really been "on the top" since 2000, except for 1 month in 2002.

That's impressive, but 8+5 does not equal 25.

[Just John 0]

Austin outdrew Hogan when they competed head-to-head.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's more of a cause-effect thing. Hogan was so over-exposed by 98 that fans drifted towards the fresh Austin character. It's pretty unfair to Hogan to make that claim, since his drawing prime was in the late 80's.

 

As for Hogan's comments, I agree in the sense that he was on top longer than Austin, but he definitely sells Austin way short. The era Austin was drawing money in was completely different from the era Hogan drew in.

[Downhome 0]

This is just blatant Hogan hate coming through. There is no question that he has been on top, in one way or another, since 1979.

[cabbageboy 0]

I actually have to say I agree with Hogan on this one. Yes Hogan has had some ups and downs in his career but I find his act a lot more timeless than I do Austin's.

 

Austin's schtick is very, very dated and of its time nowdays. It seriously could only work at the exact time it worked. I'd also have to say that Hogan also adapted when it was clear he needed to (his heel NWO run in WCW) and his heel run actually was a bit success.

 

This isn't really to compare in ring skills, where Austin is certainly superior. But Hogan has been headlining in some form forever, whereas Austin had a peak drawing period from roughly WM 14 till SummerSlam 99. Before then guys like Bret and Shawn were still on top and after SS 99 the whole HHH push of doom began.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Yeah, Austin probably did more shows in 2 months than Hogan did in 12, add that in with the number of PPV buys and it's pretty easy to see how that's possible.

 

That and there was more merchandising. Back in the 80s there were shirts and toys and not much else, whereas during the Attitude era the WWF logo was on everything.

 

Also, many industries had grown considerably in the 10 years, especially the video game and home video markets. There were more areas that Austin could make money in than there was for Hogan.

 

I think Hogan being on top during 2 hot periods is probably one of the greatest accomplishments of any wrestler, though.

 

I think it is probably the greatest.

[RedJed 0]

There are alot of things to consider when comparing Hogan v. Austin in these terms. I feel like alot of you are just scratching the surface on some things but the hell if I'm going to go into it in great detail.

 

All I know is this - either Hogan is way out there more than ever or he's just trying to build heat for a Mania match. To discredit Austin to the level he was mentioning there is ridiculous.

[Brett Favre 0]

Headlining and drawing are two different things. If Austin were healthy, he'd probably be headlining, but not drawing.

[jester 0]

Later in the interview, Hogan explains how No Holds Barred technically outgrossed Titanic once you factor in the inflation, the Fingerpoke of Doom match had more viewers than Foley's title win and the MASH final episode combined, and how that orange skin of his is the result of the sun shining out of his ass.