ajsmith_7 Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 Hey guys, much in the same vain as the thread discussing the WWF Title picture heading into Wrestlemania IV I was wondering what the deal was with Hogan dropping the title to Taker at Survivor Series 91 only to win it back a week later at Tuesday In Texas and then be stripped of the title on TV shortly after? Also, what are peoples opinions on the matches themselves? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrickHithouse Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 I believe it was the beginning of Hogan's exit plan so he could take time off after WM 8 to hide out from the steroid stuff and/or make another movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 I think the drop to Taker at SS91 was to give Tuesday in Texas a boost -- just a short-term thing to pop the gate and buyrate. Given that they never ran This Tuesday in Texas again, I'm guessing that didn't work. Also, be careful of starting threads about Hogan AND Taker in these parts, you never know what might happen to them ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrickHithouse Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 Maybe it was just to get Jack Tunney more screen time? That charismatic son of a bitch was in every single segment ruling on the various happenings from this time period. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cm funk Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 I think the drop to Taker at SS91 was to give Tuesday in Texas a boost -- just a short-term thing to pop the gate and buyrate. That, and they wanted to move the belt onto Flair without having Hogan lose to him. At the time the angle happened the plan still would have been Flair defending the belt against Hogan at WM. Tuesday in Texas was just an experiment to see if a PPV like that could work, with the title situation (and Savage-Roberts) as the hook. I'm not sure when Hogan decided he was leaving after WM, but that's the big thing that would have nixed Hogan-Flair (along with the "disappointing" house show numbers which I've always found suspect as the reason). The steroid cloud was full blown by late 91-early 92 (Vince institutes drug testing in Nov 91), along with the sex scandal, so it's probably right around this time that he decides to go on hiatus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsmith_7 Posted November 6, 2013 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 Although I'm sure Flair/Hogan at WM would have been a fantastic spectacle worthy of the big stage I'm kind of glad it didn't pan out as it led to one of my personal favourite matches of all time (no, not Hogan vs Sid) but Ric Flair vs Randy Savage, what a match, it had everything, its a travesty that it wasn't in the main event spot! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeCampbell Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 The Liz angle, that they used as the backdrop for Savage vs. Flair, would never have seen the light of day for Hogan vs. Flair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 Although I'm sure Flair/Hogan at WM would have been a fantastic spectacle worthy of the big stage I'm kind of glad it didn't pan out as it led to one of my personal favourite matches of all time (no, not Hogan vs Sid) but Ric Flair vs Randy Savage, what a match, it had everything, its a travesty that it wasn't in the main event spot! All through 92 until Hogan leaving in 93 they ran "co-main events" and I always remember the VHS tapes had "double main event" on the front of them. WM8: Savage vs. Flair / Hogan vs. Sid SS92: Savage vs. Warrior / Bret vs. Bulldog Survior Series 92: Savage and Warrior vs. Flair and Ramon / Bret vs. Shawn WM9: Money Inc. vs. Mega Maniancs / Bret vs. Yokozuna KotR: Hogan vs. Yokozuna / Tournament final Coming from it from one end we always think of the last match on the card as the "real main event". But this looks like Vince returning to old-school WWF booking. Watching the 1980 stuff, they'd often run MSG or the Spectrum with Bruno vs. Zbysko in the middle of the card with Backlund vs. a challenger at the end. And announce them as "co-main events". A lot of the time it's obviously the Bruno match drawing the gate. I think this set of cards are similar. Savage was a big star for WWF and Flair was the champ - obvious main event type match. Hogan was Hogan. I don't think we can say that Hogan vs. Sid is categorically the main event of that show. Some fans would have bought tickets to see that match, some the championship match. Likewise, look at Wrestlemania 9. Hogan coming back was built us as a big deal and that match is billed as a "co-main event". Plenty of fans there in Vegas would have been going to see the Hogan vs. Money Inc match over the Bret vs. Yoko one. Looking at Survior Series 92, that tag match with Warrior, Savage and Flair is also quite stacked and look at this poster: You can be sure not every fan in the crowd would have bought tickets to see Bret vs. Shawn Michaels in 1992. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 Just thought I'd share some VHS covers and posters to bear this out: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajsmith_7 Posted November 6, 2013 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 I know it was a "double main event" but even so, why not put the Hogan/Sid match in the middle of the card and the world title on last? Is this just Vince openly admitting that Hogan is bigger than the title? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dooley Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 I know it was a "double main event" but even so, why not put the Hogan/Sid match in the middle of the card and the world title on last? Is this just Vince openly admitting that Hogan is bigger than the title? Yup. Other than WM9, the world title match isn't the "real" main event for any of the cards JVK listed. And Hogan wound up being in the impromptu main event for that anyway. Although Summerslam 92 is a bit of an anomaly as happening live in England Bret-Bulldog would have been considered the main event but for the North American audience it was Savage-Warrior. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 I know it was a "double main event" but even so, why not put the Hogan/Sid match in the middle of the card and the world title on last? Is this just Vince openly admitting that Hogan is bigger than the title? Yup. Other than WM9, the world title match isn't the "real" main event for any of the cards JVK listed. And Hogan wound up being in the impromptu main event for that anyway. Although Summerslam 92 is a bit of an anomaly as happening live in England Bret-Bulldog would have been considered the main event but for the North American audience it was Savage-Warrior. Right, and? The point is that it doesn't matter what was on last or what the title was doing. They put Bret vs. Shawn on last at Survivor Series and that was a title match, but the pushed main event is Savage and Warrior vs. Flair and Ramon (ended up being Savage and Perfect). My point here is that they were running double main events similar to what the WWF had been doing for years in the 70s and early 80s. Middle of the card or end of the card, doesn't matter. If it's Bruno or Hogan in the middle of the card, you say something like "oh he's upstaging the title match -- which is now in the graveyard slot", if it's Bruno or Hogan on last you say "oh they are burying the world title by not putting it on last". The problem is not with co-main events or ordering, it's with a big marquee star who is a bigger star than everyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradhindsight Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 Man I love custom SilverVision DVD art. Shame they left the business. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dooley Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 I know it was a "double main event" but even so, why not put the Hogan/Sid match in the middle of the card and the world title on last? Is this just Vince openly admitting that Hogan is bigger than the title? Yup. Other than WM9, the world title match isn't the "real" main event for any of the cards JVK listed. And Hogan wound up being in the impromptu main event for that anyway. Although Summerslam 92 is a bit of an anomaly as happening live in England Bret-Bulldog would have been considered the main event but for the North American audience it was Savage-Warrior. Right, and? The point is that it doesn't matter what was on last or what the title was doing. They put Bret vs. Shawn on last at Survivor Series and that was a title match, but the pushed main event is Savage and Warrior vs. Flair and Ramon (ended up being Savage and Perfect). My point here is that they were running double main events similar to what the WWF had been doing for years in the 70s and early 80s. Middle of the card or end of the card, doesn't matter. If it's Bruno or Hogan in the middle of the card, you say something like "oh he's upstaging the title match -- which is now in the graveyard slot", if it's Bruno or Hogan on last you say "oh they are burying the world title by not putting it on last". The problem is not with co-main events or ordering, it's with a big marquee star who is a bigger star than everyone else. I agree it's not about match sequencing, but there weren't really two main events on any of those cards. There was a clear main and co-main for all of them (although again, Summerslam 92 is a bit trickier). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerryvonKramer Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 What's the clear main in each case? Just interested if we'd all pick the same matches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dooley Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 What's the clear main in each case? Just interested if we'd all pick the same matches. WM8- Hogan-Sid Summerslam 92- Macho-Warrior (again, Bret-Bulldog was a big crutch for the live gate) Survivor Series 92 - Macho/Perfect-Flair/Razor WM9 - Bret-Yoko; Hogan was a special attraction in a lukewarm angle but of course wound up stealing the main anyway Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrickHithouse Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 The real question I have is how Bill Murray and John Hughes fit into this particular discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artDDP Posted November 7, 2013 Report Share Posted November 7, 2013 I think the idea of "co-main events" were because Vince wasn't quite sure he could move away from his established stars and give someone else top billing. As for the Tuesday in Texas card I've read in several places it was Vince's first attempt at running PPV cards more regularly since live attendance was dropping. I don't remember if the Tuesday in Texas event was a trial run for weekly or monthly cards. I know the original plan for Shotgun Saturday Night was to be a weekly PPV show. What I find interesting is that Vince seems to have a hard time letting go of established talent, even when they aren't drawing anymore, yet on the Rock's latest DVD he has a quote about there being a time when you have to "let the kids grow up and move out". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artDDP Posted November 7, 2013 Report Share Posted November 7, 2013 Oh, and as for the Undertaker's involvement? My guess is Vince wanted to feed another monster to Hogan and get the belt off Hogan in a screwy way. He wasn't ready to obliterate Undertaker by having Hogan demolish him and it freed up the belt so Flair could win it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ohtani's jacket Posted November 7, 2013 Report Share Posted November 7, 2013 The real question I have is how Bill Murray and John Hughes fit into this particular discussion. That Survivor Series poster is begging to be photo shopped. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeCampbell Posted November 12, 2013 Report Share Posted November 12, 2013 Is there anything in the WON's from the time frame about the idea behind running the show? I've always heard that it was a test run to see if a weekly PPV would fly, which it obvioulsy didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteF3 Posted November 12, 2013 Report Share Posted November 12, 2013 It was made in response to rapidly shrinking revenues--between the WBF, the failure of WrestleMania, and a weak summer house show season. At the same time, they added a dollar to show tickets and uprooted the road schedule to regionalize tours in order to cut back on travel expenses. It may have been a test run but there was no reported indication of such at the time. Meltzer even specifically said that these steps were "a temporary thing." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
artDDP Posted November 18, 2013 Report Share Posted November 18, 2013 Whatever it was it pissed my parents off because they thought four PPVs a year was bad enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdw Posted November 18, 2013 Report Share Posted November 18, 2013 What's the clear main in each case? Just interested if we'd all pick the same matches. WM8- Hogan-Sid Summerslam 92- Macho-Warrior (again, Bret-Bulldog was a big crutch for the live gate) Survivor Series 92 - Macho/Perfect-Flair/Razor True. You can't go by the CHV - those were produced after the events. The posters reflect what they were attempting to sell to get people to watch the PPV. They also were in the can well in advance of the events to get in cable guides and other advertising. Look at the Survivor series: it doesn't even reflect the title change, nor of course Warrior getting fired. In turn, the Mania CHV elevates Savage-Flair to "double main event" status because Hogan is gone and Savage-Flair is (poorly) trying to carry the company. Locally, Bret-Bulldog was a big thing in helping sell Wembley tickets. In the US... Macho-Warrior got push more. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebrainfollower Posted November 18, 2013 Report Share Posted November 18, 2013 JDW While I completely agree with you about what the main events were, I think you will find that CHV's of PPV's came out VERY fast back in the day. I got Royal Rumble 92 less than a month after it came out on PPV. Now taking that into account the cover had to be designed before the event. And the buildup to WM 8 was VERY much 50/50 Hogan/Sid vs Savage/Flair. I've got all the February and March Superstars, Challenges and Prime Times and can attest to that. I'd agree Hogan/Sid was the main but it was VERY close, much much more so than Summerslam or Survivor Series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.