View Full Version : Whose Side Are You On, Anyway? #1: Michaels/Hogan
Nark Order
03-01-2009, 04:13 PM
Alright, this is a new bi-monthly deal I'm starting up here. It's simple. I wil point out a past shoot argument between wrestlers, managers, officials, or wrestling executives, etc... you guys examine both sides of the arguement and tell me who YOU think was in the right. What side are you on?
The Scenario: Today we go back to Summerslam 2005 where a match between Hulk Hogan and Shawn Michaels was the talk of the night. Nobody can say for sure what happened behind the scenes but many feel that Michaels did the job to Hogan upon the request of Hogan, who allegedly refused to job to Michaels. During the match, Michaels attempted to make a mockery of Hogan by overselling all of his moves and performing goofy "I'm dying" like gestures. Hogan won the match but was noticably displeased with how Michaels conducted himself. The next night on Raw, Michaels cut a somewhat shoot promo on Hogan, mocking him even moreso.
Here is the match:
<div><object width="480" height="381"><param name="movie" value="http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/k4IhkFxGGrgzP59UYI&related=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/k4IhkFxGGrgzP59UYI&related=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="381" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always"></embed></object><br /><b><a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1eo24_summerslam-2005-hogan-vs-micheals-1_fun">Summerslam 2005: Hogan vs Micheals (1)</a></b><br /><i>Uploaded by <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/jeffmartin48">jeffmartin48</a></i></div>
<div><object width="480" height="381"><param name="movie" value="http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/k2VbQ3zZ1gmT2w9V17&related=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.dailymotion.com/swf/k2VbQ3zZ1gmT2w9V17&related=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="480" height="381" allowFullScreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always"></embed></object><br /><b><a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1eo69_summerslam-2005-hogan-vs-micheals-2_fun">Summerslam 2005: Hogan vs Micheals (2)</a></b><br /><i>Uploaded by <a href="http://www.dailymotion.com/jeffmartin48">jeffmartin48</a></i></div>
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/O1KcjaCLp1w&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/O1KcjaCLp1w&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
Things to Consider:
-Hogan has a past reputation for being a political wrestling giant and has refused to lose to many high profile opponents
-Many feel that Hogan has nothing to lose at this point by losing to anybody
-Shawn Michaels has also had a political past when it comes to the WWF/WWE and has allegedly refused to lose also.
-Michaels is notorious for throwing tantrums when he doesn't get what he wants. ie: Losing his smile.
-Since Shawn had 'found Jesus' in the early 2000s, his reputation for conflict was squeaky clean.
-Hogan said on a radio show after the incident that if WWE had asked him to job to Michaels that he would've had no problem doing so.
Whose side are YOU on:
Was this just another instance in which Hulk was flexing his power?
Did HBK over react and act unprofessional in his actions/words towards Hogan?
Who had a better arguement?
DECIDE
Nark Order
03-01-2009, 04:21 PM
Promo now included.
Mooияakeя™
03-01-2009, 04:22 PM
I WILL NOW JURYISE!!!!
Thanks, much <3
I remember the match, but never saw the RAW after it. But I think Michaels. Hogan is a ledge, but ffs, last time I looked up legend in a thesaurus. Cocky, arrogant, selfish and up your own arse didn't come up.
When Michael does bitch, usually there is a genuine work out on it in the end, and it isn't as noticed. But I'm tired I could be wrong.
Either way Michaels is no way the shit Hogan is
BigDaddyCool
03-01-2009, 04:29 PM
I always take the side of Shawn Micheals.
HeartBreakMan2k
03-01-2009, 04:44 PM
I always take the side of Shawn Micheals.
:y:
Michaels. His antics were hilarious, especially when condensed into a sped up 2 minute video set to Benny Hill
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/m0BYSLdthvQ&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/m0BYSLdthvQ&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
Nark Order
03-01-2009, 04:59 PM
BTW, as I am the creator of the arguement, my vote will always be neutral.
Krimzon7
03-01-2009, 05:14 PM
Michaels
PERIOD
Jeritron
03-01-2009, 05:31 PM
Michaels by a mile.
But I do love this whole fued/saga. It was the closest to classic Shawn Michaels we've gotten (out of the ring), in years and years.
His promos and antics were amazing. Michaels circa 97 would be proud
Tazz Dan
03-01-2009, 05:31 PM
Michaels.
Jeritron
03-01-2009, 05:33 PM
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/B7DOcHRgQMo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/B7DOcHRgQMo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
LOL, that Bret angle was classic.
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vAJ4dfco37U&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vAJ4dfco37U&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
Jeritron
03-01-2009, 05:45 PM
The heat Michaels generates in that MTL promo is immense
Nark Order
03-01-2009, 05:48 PM
Michaels heel promos are out of control most the time. LOL @ that Montreal bit he did. But didn't Edge do te same tease for Matt Hardy around the same time? Like a month befor or so?
Ruien
03-01-2009, 06:29 PM
Whow, looks like I voted wrong..........
Triple Naitch
03-01-2009, 06:34 PM
Alright, this is a new bi-monthly deal I'm starting up here.
Way to show some commitment there, Narc. :y:
FourFifty
03-01-2009, 06:39 PM
As far as I see things with this issue- Hogan doesn't sell, so HBK had to sell twice as much.
I side with HBK.
Nicky Fives
03-01-2009, 06:45 PM
Michaels by far.... you could blame his actions in the past to drugs/alcohol.... Hogan was just a prick who's ego got too big....
Nicky Fives
03-01-2009, 06:54 PM
and that HBK segment was the 2nd to last time I remember marking out hardcore.... the latest was Edge cashing in MITB for the first time
Innovator
03-01-2009, 07:11 PM
Shawn wanted to do two matches, first HBK won then 2nd Hogan won. Hogan wanted to do two with Hogan winning both times. Shawn said fuck that, hence the one match.
Siding with HBK, not much for Hogan's side here.
Supreme Olajuwon
03-01-2009, 07:19 PM
Even if Michaels was to blame for this, I don't really care because Hulk Hogan sucks.
thedamndest
03-01-2009, 07:31 PM
I would have loved to see Hogan win and then both of them do a classic Hogan posedown.
Nark Order
03-01-2009, 07:33 PM
Way to show some commitment there, Narc. :y:
Tri-monthly? Give me a god damned break here.
thedamndest
03-01-2009, 07:37 PM
Daily.
Nark Order
03-01-2009, 07:37 PM
Also, now it looks like we get to burn Ruien alive! I forgot to include that part in the official rules.
ClockShot
03-01-2009, 07:49 PM
There was Michaels and after that there was Orton. Why both agreed to roll with the Hogan storylines is a pretty interesting question. I'll bet Orton/Hogan will be Narc's next discussion.
But I back HBM.
There was Michaels and after that there was Orton. Why both agreed to roll with the Hogan storylines is a pretty interesting question. I'll bet Orton/Hogan will be Narc's next discussion.
But I back HBM.
$$$$
There was Michaels and after that there was Orton. Why both agreed to roll with the Hogan storylines is a pretty interesting question. I'll bet Orton/Hogan will be Narc's next discussion.
But I back HBM.
Bret/Vince should be next. Heck, should have been first. Go at least 19 pages
Bret/Vince should be next. Heck, should have been first. Go at least 19 pages
Please no
FourFifty
03-01-2009, 08:21 PM
Bret/Vince should be next. Heck, should have been first. Go at least 19 pages
We do not need that fire re-lit here on tpww.net.
Gerard
03-01-2009, 08:24 PM
Meh fuck Michaels, ever since he "found god" (apparently god was on the missing list at some point) people seem to have forgotton about all his bullshit in the past. Faking injuries to avoid dropping belts etc. Say what you want about hogan but i don't recall him faking an injury to avoid dropping a belt anywhere along the line.
Yes Hogan may have refused to job but he was granted that right in his contract (creative control), unlike Michaels who just allegedly just threw a hissy fit and "lost his smile" when he didn't want to lose. If anyones to blame for Hogans Creative control its whoever granted him it in his contract.
Secondly people paid to see that ppv mainly for that match and Michaels made a total mockery out of it with his overacting. Im more suprised Hogan didn't pop him one in the face for real and leave the arena after watching that bullshit.
Hogan.
He had the creative control, and honestly, neither man had anything to lose by losing that match. Both of them are legends and can pretty much do anything now and that will never change. HBK's actions were immature and unfair to the people who paid to see the match. I mean, if it had gone the other way would we have gotten a better, more epic contest out of the two because Michaels had his heart in it? How is it fair that we were robbed of that because HBK, of all people, was bitching about having to job?
James Steele
03-01-2009, 11:45 PM
Anybody who supports Hogan is a delusional self-righteous smark-ass bitch.
HBK made the match entertaining, and the people were having fun in the match. Anybody who thinks if HBK would have "worked with" Hogan and had a classic match is an idiot. Remember when Undertaker had to give the shittiest chokeslam ever?
Nark Order
03-02-2009, 12:10 AM
Bret/Vince should be next. Heck, should have been first. Go at least 19 pages
I'm saving that one for a rainy day. Don't think I don't know what a shitstorm that's going to be though.
Nark Order
03-02-2009, 12:13 AM
I like that this wasn't a complete blowout here. I want debatable topics here. Continue.
Also, PM me your ideas for future installments of this.
BobBitchen
03-02-2009, 12:21 AM
I always take the side of Shawn Micheals.
:y:
Anybody who supports Hogan is a delusional self-righteous smark-ass bitch.
:roll:
Rammsteinmad
03-02-2009, 12:53 AM
Easily Shawn Michaels. Although he did do his bit in the 90's, as said in the original thread Michaels reputation has completely cleaned up since he returned in 2002. But the main thing to keep in mind is that during the 90's, Hogan was politicking and doing fuck all, Michaels was politicking and constantly putting on five star matches.
Plus, looking at when this match took place, Hogan doesn't need to win any matches, yet as others have said, his head is so far up his own ass he can see the bottom of his chin.
The Optimist
03-02-2009, 12:58 AM
Shawn's conflict resolution was hilarious. And Hogan's a bigger diva than Shawn, so it both works.
Kane Knight
03-02-2009, 01:13 AM
Normally, I'd side with Michaels, but he was an idiot for trying to outpolitic Hogan and a bitch because he lost.
BigDaddyCool
03-02-2009, 09:35 AM
I'm still siding with HBK because that was hilarious. Plus after that match on VH1's Hogan knows best, Brooke and Linda were watching the match at home wincing every time Hogan took a hit and what ever. They sold 5 times as much as HBM did during the match, so that means they were selling 10 times more than Hogan. Which means Hogan at least didn't pass the gene to Brooke. Hopefully that means he didn't pass the gene to Nick and Nick might actaully sell if he gets into the squared cirlce.
Kane Knight
03-02-2009, 09:48 AM
I'm still siding with HBK because that was hilarious. Plus after that match on VH1's Hogan knows best, Brooke and Linda were watching the match at home wincing every time Hogan took a hit and what ever. They sold 5 times as much as HBM did during the match, so that means they were selling 10 times more than Hogan. Which means Hogan at least didn't pass the gene to Brooke. Hopefully that means he didn't pass the gene to Nick and Nick might actaully sell if he gets into the squared cirlce.
You need a new filter.
SuperSlim
03-02-2009, 10:42 AM
Meh fuck Michaels, ever since he "found god" (apparently god was on the missing list at some point) people seem to have forgotton about all his bullshit in the past. Faking injuries to avoid dropping belts etc. Say what you want about hogan but i don't recall him faking an injury to avoid dropping a belt anywhere along the line.
Yes Hogan may have refused to job but he was granted that right in his contract (creative control), unlike Michaels who just allegedly just threw a hissy fit and "lost his smile" when he didn't want to lose. If anyones to blame for Hogans Creative control its whoever granted him it in his contract.
Secondly people paid to see that ppv mainly for that match and Michaels made a total mockery out of it with his overacting. Im more suprised Hogan didn't pop him one in the face for real and leave the arena after watching that bullshit.
Read the Death of WCW
Gerard
03-02-2009, 11:22 AM
Read the Death of WCW
Ive not read it but i would assume the same thing applies, granting creative control as part of contracts.
ron the dial
03-02-2009, 12:00 PM
i love shawn michaels
Nark Order
03-02-2009, 12:01 PM
The problem is Gerard, in WCW everybody who was anybody had creative control in their contracts which lead to the inevitable clash of egos that helped kill WCW. While it's true that all these guys having so much creative freedom was a terrible idea, the wrestlers themselves didn't have much of a problem trying to step on each others toes. From a contractual point of view, how do you decide whose creative control is more powerful than anothers? Probably by who plays the system the best and who kisses the most ass.
Nark Order
03-02-2009, 12:09 PM
Actually in WCW, amongst the top 20% of the roster there might as well have been no creative control because it would've operated the same.
Theo Dious
03-02-2009, 07:28 PM
This thread should actually be titled "Let's draw out the people who will say Hogan."
Theo Dious
03-02-2009, 07:29 PM
And then pee on them.
McLegend
03-02-2009, 11:08 PM
That's a hell of a fuckin promo.
Mercury Bullet
03-02-2009, 11:11 PM
Michaels because Hogan is a jackass.
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.