No, the reason why Hogan won those matches, and follow me now, because here's where it might get tricky for you to understand...THE ONLY REASON Hogan won either of those matches is because he knew he could demand complete creative control in them from Vince McMahon and family, and Vince would give it to him because they had such a long work relationship together. So once that was in the bag for those matches, it was easy street for Hogan. He knew all he had to do was let Orton or Michaels carry him 99.9% of the way before all he had to do was play to the crowd with his “I’m so deaf and retarded I need to hold my hand up to my ears 37,895 times before I go ahead and hit the leg drop”, hit the damn leg drop and effectively piss off everyone in the crowd at him for winning with such a wimpish-looking move, which, tbh it is, and at his opponent for agreeing to lose to such a stupid maneuver, just because Hogan wouldn't have it any other way without crying to Vince McMahon if he lost that the other guy “cheated”. Get THAT, now “BROTHER”?

If Hogan's book is totally legit, then read Ric Flair's book and read Eric Bichoff's book.

DAMN iNATOR...I mean...uh...Farooq...:roll: ...I'm not gonna repeat myself...go back and read what I said about heels and how they are always suppose to lose in the end.

I just finished Stone Cold's book yesterday and Bischoff's book is next on the list.

My point exactly. Anybody can write a book for someone else as far as WWE goes, and put over the contents as much as they want as fact, but most of the time it’s kayfabe information for the most part, just based on the author’s point of view of how they claim things were different from what other wrestlers, websites, &c., &c., ad nauseam, have to say on a given event in wrestling.

Oh, right. I forgot that heels are always supposed to lose no matter what. They should never win because it might help get them over as an even more important heel character, which no good heel character EVER wants:roll: . Excuse me for actually having brains, unlike yourself.

You also didn't mention HHH. Constantly wins as a heel. JBL took numerous victories as a heel. The idea that "heels lose" is extremely flawed. It isn't even a given that a heel always wins dirty anymore.

Well, as of the last year or two, all heels are now jobbers, hence no long term heel champions.

since the HHH and JBL title reigns, as the pidgit mentioned

Yeah, that's been a current trend, but it's hardly a solid standard.

Somebody needs to ban this motherfucker. He's just being a fucking troll.

Uh, gee, YA THINK MAYBE?!

THEN WHYYYYY IS HE STIIIIIILL MOTHERFUCKIN' HEEEERE

Cuz I’m not a mod and therefore I can’t hand out bans...:( Sorry, dude. Would if I could.

Michaels turned heel pretty much for that one match. After that he was face 30 seconds later.

Hogan winning did nothing for wrestling. Michaels winning would have, though not as much as if he wasn't a legend already.

I'll go so far as to say this angle probably hurt more than it helped. Michaels had to turn heel, ha dto lose some momentum, just to play to the ego of a guy who didn't stick around. Did it devastate the wrestling world? No. Just saying it probably did more harm than good.

Part timers winning does little to nothing for the company in general. Foley, at least, tends to make his opponents look good. And even Flair and Taker, who I'm not fond of winning, are doing more as regular workers (Even if Taker's is less frequent than Flair's). Even then, they often kill heat.

Yes, heels do win big matches but the babyface or another babyface who was friends with the other babyface always gets payback at the end.

And since Hogan was not going to work a long feud with HBK or Orton, it made sense for Hogan to win since they were only wrestling one time.

Maybe if you guys would actually read what I type you'd get it.

Read the book "Death of WCW".

WCW didn't begin negotiations with Hart until late 1996 way past the point of the nWo introduction. It was never going to be him.

I didn't dispute that. The heel turn was a great idea. The nWo was a great idea. The problem was it was WCW's ONE great idea that got old fast and stopped bringing in the ratings and money.

Again, no dispute there. But again, it did die out because it got boring.

I'm agreeing with you.

He's entertained SOME fans. That's their perrogative. That's their call. As far as people not getting hurt, his presence prevents other talent from being showcased. His refusal to put people over puts a damper on the progress of other talent. You can't just keep going back to someone over an over again because guess what? That person isn't going to be around forever. It'd be one thing if he's on the roster regularly helping out future main eventers or being fed big fat heels who have no upside but being there and making him the center of attention does affect other people.

They can't always lose though otherwise no one is going to buy them as a credible threat. HBK despite his age is still younger and more mobile and agile than Hogan so what sense is there in having him getting beaten up by a slower and aged retired guy who not in top condition. How is that believable? If you want to use the 'send the fans home happy' argument here I'm sure it'll fit considering it was the main event. But his match with Randy Orton was the third match on the card and he had an injured knee. What's so wrong about using the match to put over someone younger who has a chance to do what Hogan used to do? Maybe Orton is a heel now but does he have to stay that way?

But he doesn't 'move on'. He always comes back. Maybe not now considering his rocky relationship with WWE but in the past that was the excuse. Just one match. And one more. And just one more. And maybe just one more. And it's mainly just to get something done for him. And no, he doesn't deserve it just because of who he is. Yes, he does wrestle like once a year but that's the problem. It helps no one and having him on full-time would be ridiculous. So the solution? Keep him off entirely.

Actually, the Hell getting his commupance wouldn't have to come from Hogan, and the heel rub from beating Hogan would make the eventual downfall all the sweeter, thus making it better all around.

If you typed things that didn't come off like an obssessed girl who just hit puberty, you might be able to pull the "if you read what I type..." As it is, we read it. We got it. It was stupid. We disregarded it.

Let this thread die already.

Anyone remember Zeeboe?

The Death of WCW is on the list of books I plan to read. Will probably read it after I read Bischoff's book.

Remember him?.......I am him...

That would be so surprising.

Well, except no-one cares. There's only two kinds of retards on TPWW these days. Your kind, generic retarded n00b, and the creepy stalker CC type.

Yeah, and I don't care what you have to say either Kane Knight.

Anyway, as much as I am looking forward to reading RD's book, he was not around in WCW at the time so everything he says is still an opinion.

I'm glad you don't care. You can return to your magical land of Oz where Hogan has never contradicted himself, and everything out of a wrestler's mouth is true.

Gimmick Infringement

Odd considering there are no opinions in that book.

And extremely helpful references and sources are there as well. You know, since you want those so badly.

But are those references and sources HOGAN? If it's not HOGAN, it's nothing, broither! HOGAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!

Priest: A reading from the Holy Gospel according to Saint Hulk.
Congregation: Glory to you Lord Hogan.

And His Hulkness doth spoke upon His foes, "What shalt thou do whenest these Holy serpentine limbs runneth amok on thee?"

Well, I've never read it so as of right now, I'm gonna have to take your word for it. I just know RD is not a Hogan fan...infact, I don't think he ever was a WCW fan...now I am NOT stating that as a fact or an opinion...it's been years since I've been to Wrestlecrap.com. I'm more of a fan of the old-school Wrestlecrap.com....anyway, it's been a long time and I THINK I recall reading that RD never liked WCW...I know he was never a Hogan fan....but anyway, that book will be read by me after Easy E's book.

I do. Thank you. I look forward to reading it.

Where did I ever say that I only believe Hogan? All I said was give me sources that say otherwise about Hulk Hogan's idea to turn heel.

I think the reason why you all seem to think I am a blind Hogan mark is because all of you act the same way about wrestlers you are entertained by so you naturally assume everyone is like that when it comes to their favorite wrestler but that is not the case with me. Like I said, no human is perfect.

There's plenty of things Hogan did in his career that I thought were very egoistical and thought he should have done otherwise.

Examples:

1. Wrestlemania IV - Instead of having some tournament, Hogan should have just dropped the belt to Savage in the main event. And then Savage could return the favor to Hulk at Wrestlemania V.

2. Wrestlemania VII - The final match should have been between Savage and Flair and it should have ended with Savage with the title.

(....LOL...I bet all of you are gonna think I'm a Savage mark now huh? Trust me, I'm not.)

3. WrestleMania IX - Yes, I agree with the smarks on this one. Hulk Hogan was very selfish that day and took the spotlight away from Bret Hart and Yokozuna. He was wrong and should not have done that. In my opinion, Bret Hart should have won the match and then taken Hogan on at the King of the Ring and Hogan should have lost to Bret in a clean win. (Since Bret Hart did carry the torch after Hulk left and became a huge star in the WWF, Hulk should have passed the torch to him and it's a shame that match never happened. Even at age 10, I wanted to see those two wrestle and was disappointed when it did not happen.) Then Yokozuna should have won the King of the Ring and beat Bret at Summerslam and then Bret would get the belt back at Wrestlemania X.

4. Summerslam 2006 - I honestly thought Hulk would have done the job for Orton since Orton was the legend killer and it would make sense that Orton get the win. And I was surprised and even a little disappointed in Hulk for not jobbing.

5. Hulk Hogan's book - I read his book, then I read Stone Cold's book. All in a matter of a few weeks recently and I must say, Hulk's book is more entertaining and fun to read....but Steve Austin's book is more real in my opinion. It's kind of like the movies. You can either watch a movie that has some realism to it but is still very whacky and out of this world or a straight up realistic, "it could happen and has happened in this world" movie.

He also seemed like the only thing he was interested in was making money and it was all about money with him whereas Austin seemed to have a true passion for the business. I have no doubt Hogan does too but it seemed like it was about making money first, wrestling second. With Austin it was the only way around. He talked about making money too but not nearly as much as Hogan did and with Austin it was his passions first, money second.

While I don't believe everything Hulk wrote, I do believe he did write the book and that some of what he said was true and not all of it was false. Again, shades of gray.

Many of you guys seem to have a very black and white view point of the world.

The whole "shades of gray" argument is usually nothing but a cop-out used by people to bolster the credibility of an argument that has none. I'm sick of this whole "wisdom" that black-and-white viewpoints are somehow invalid.

Hogan is a greedy, selfish dickweed that has nothing left to offer the wrestling world except his continued absence from it. Call it black, call it white, that's my viewpoint, and fuck off if you don't like it.

Can't I just do ya Momma instead? I'll leave the jerking off to you.

I stand in awe of your amazing mental capacities.

You've basically discounted everything anyone's said in rebuttal. Hence, I mocked you by taking it to the extreme. See, I'm not debating you, I made a coment joking with DT.

Fuck that. I like Scotty 3 Hotty. Anyone think I'm going to Alienoid him around? Naw. Never have.

The reason I think that you're a blind Hogan Mark is that you eschew reason and sense to fellate Hogan.

Yep. That's me.

I believe in black and white. Logic and non. Proof and non. You have provided proof only in the sense that Hogan claimed it. But my attention span and memory tell me Hogan's said the opposite on TV. This casts dispersions on his story. Logic also disctates that since he's been full of shit in the past, taking his word on the matter doesn't make any sense. It's unreasonable.

There may be a reasonable argument in defense of Hogan, but you have not demonstrated it. On the other hand, several people have demonstrated that there IS a reasonable, a well thought out rebuttal to your statements.

You've hidden behind arghuments about how great the NWO was, which I don't remember anyone contesting. And his ingluence in the past being justification for him hurting the business in the present. These are markish arguments. And pretty blind. And hence, you fall into the "unreasonable" colour scheme. Reason has trumped you. And I'm not saying myself, because I'd rather mock you than continue to argue with you over something you're so clearly oblivious to, but there have been many good arguments. And none of them, NONE of them...Were yours.

Remember the fanboy wars a few weeks back? I think we've become embroiled in the "retard wars."

You boys are demonstrating your immaturity and your lack of real life experience since you have no respect for other people's opinions, you think your opinions are facts and you think life is all black and white.

You fellas spend too much time on this message board and don't tell me I'm wrong. You guys have thousands and thousands of posts. That's pretty sad. :lol:

Ah yes, when wrong, just derail the subject.

So Venis, tell us about your real life experince. Tell us why we should respect your views. Tell us why we should give a damn about what you say. Tell us why just because you read a book that you are alpha, you are omega, you are the one who is, the one who was, and the one that has yet to come.

How did I do that? I stated my opinions, you guys stated yours. And clearly no one is going to change the others mind and perhaps you fellas like to waste your life and repeat the same stuff you've already said but I don't.

I never said any of that stuff. Those are your words, not mine.

I just want to know why I should give a damn about what you say. It seems you've used Wikipedia and autobiographys as your only sources.
You wanted to talk about our "lack of real life experience" so I just want to know about your background and who the hell do you think you are bring that up.