Thread: The WWF in 1991
View Single Post
Old 11-29-2020, 07:24 AM   #12
Mr. Nerfect
 
Posts: 60,919
Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Mr. Nerfect makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
You had the right star and cultural zeitgeist when Austin was there in 1998 to really capitalize with Attitude. It wasn’t so much the content as it was the star vehicle.

By 1991, Hogan had just been around so much. It’s not that believable to see a guy remain on top for such a long time (it’s one of my big arguments against Undertaker and the streak).

This occurred to me during the 1990 series, but I do wonder just how important the shift in decade was to people’s perceptions and what Vince was thinking. The difference between 1989 and 1990 might be an arbitrary distance of one year, but people do tend to think in terms of time clusters. It’s satisfying to try and categorize “90’s culture,” even though 1998 is as close to 2006 as it is 1990. And that’s a reality promoters might have to wrestle with, even if they don’t go in for it. How fans were looking at the WWF and Hulk Hogan through the prism of the 90’s could have been a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Mr. Nerfect is offline   Reply With Quote