|
Austin's heel turn was the pits to start with (his feud with the Undertaker in April/May 2001 produced some awful matches) but when he turned to more of a comical character, it made for some of the greatest skits and interviews of all time.
It was supposed to be character development... Austin has been so beaten down over the years and is so consumed with potentially losing his number one guy position, that he has lost his mind, signed a pact with the guy who has been trying to push him off his pedestal for all these years. Basically, Austin of 2001 was supposed to be loopy, mental, a paranoid, insecure madman. So what if they took a comedy route? That is as much due to Angle's involvement as anything else.
As Bazooka says, does it really matter if he failed as a heel (in the traditional sense) at this time? All that mattered was, did it entertain you as a viewer? To me, the "heel" Steve Austin of 2001 was a more layered, three dimensional character than the Stone Cold who had the most successful face run of all time between 1998 -1999. He also produced some great moments and segments, and laid the foundation for a fresh face run down the line, rather than simply resorting back to "the old Stone Cold".
That, to me, is a success.
|