View Full Version : Flair v Hogan
Take a poll Beltmark. If you got the balls. :devilI can't be arsed reading your bullsh*t over and over. So here you go, money where your mouth is kind of a deal.
Now this poll isn't about who is the best technical wrestler out of the two, as that is a no-brainer. But technical wrestling does not a champion make (otherwise Charlie Hass, The Pug, Dean Malenko and countless others would be former World Champions), which Franchise seems to not understand.
No, this poll is to determine who the TWO forum members feel was the better CHAMPION in regards to big-time matches and situations, worldwide exposure and recognition DURING THE TIME THEY WERE IN THEIR PRIME AS CHAMPIONS of the WWF for Hogan and the NWA/WCW for Flair.
Flair, IMO, was overrated in his matches, but knew how to get along with a limited moveset. Hogan also had a limited moveset (in the US anyway), but his larger-than-life persona more than made up for it.
When Flair was NWA champion, it always (to me) seemed a distant second to the WWF champion. It seemed small-time and dour, with the WWF being vibrant and exciting.
IMO, Hulkamania walks all over an arena going "WOOOOOO!".
But what about you, who do you think was the better CHAMPION in promoting their company and themselves WORLDWIDE?
I hope this doesn't end up locked straight away, as I feel some good debate can come out of it.
Al Stevens
01-10-2007, 10:23 PM
I think personally if there wasn't the Hogan boom in the late 80's early 90's then hell Wrestling would never have been as mainstream as it is today.
Prototype
01-10-2007, 10:31 PM
For me, that fact that Hogan wrestles when he wants to and Flair still has to wrestle to make ends meet, speaks volumes about who was more successful in promoting themselves and their company.
I preferred Flair over Hogan but you cannot doubt the Hulkster's market-ability.
Yeah Hogan is/was 10 times the star Flair ever was and could ever wish to be.
For every great match Flair had in a PPV main event, Hogan had half the match but twice the buyrate.
I mean even now if you ask anyone on the street to name a wrestler, the majority would answer Hulk Hogan. Its that universal appeal, that he's the guy who put wrestling on the mainstream map. There could be no Ric Flair in history and we'd be robbed of a brilliant wrestler, speaker and overall embodiment of a great wrestling performer. But we could have no Hulk Hogan in history and we probably wouldn't have this website, amongst no WWE, WCW or major worldwide wrestling in the manner it is today.
Just chalk and cheese really.
Joey Asbo
02-10-2007, 12:51 AM
I dont really think i can vote in this thing because if we're judging it on the things the thread opener wants us to judge it on then whats the point because its actually fact that Hulk Hogan did more to put his company on the map worldwide and was a bigger star.
Having said that, i prefer Flair as a champion heel or face, not just in ring but i prefer his charachter to the hero character of Hogan.
But having also said that, i dont want to get dragged into the argument because i disagree with the way Franchise has gone on and on .. and i understand belty getting p*ssed off.
I believe im a fence sitter until further argument sways my judgement! Hope thats not too unpopular a choice.
Al Stevens
02-10-2007, 01:04 AM
Hey there is nothing wrong with sitting on the fence Joey. To be honest i would have been the same however i hated how Franchise would go bring Hogan into the topic when there was no need to get a rise out of Beltmark and then the very second he knows he is wrong he dances around the subject. I say Franchise for that ball room dancing show on BBC1 :lol
Anyway if i can get back on topic I will say this while you can understand what Hogan has done (weather you like the guy or not) and you can respect what Flair did for the NWA and the WCW as well in the past. Are they as good as each other yes, however while flair had the more titles and earned a bit but not enough to retire and only do spot shows. While Flair broke his back for the industry Hogan did enough to become a house hold name.
Fidel Cashflow
02-10-2007, 01:06 AM
You made a mistake. It's spelled "Franchise v Beltmark"
Jimmy Redman
02-10-2007, 04:59 AM
Dont be ridiculous, not even Rey Mysterio would get booked in something as grossly mismatched as that.
I dont really think i can vote in this thing because if we're judging it on the things the thread opener wants us to judge it on then whats the point because its actually fact that Hulk Hogan did more to put his company on the map worldwide and was a bigger star.
Having said that, i prefer Flair as a champion heel or face, not just in ring but i prefer his charachter to the hero character of Hogan.
But having also said that, i dont want to get dragged into the argument because i disagree with the way Franchise has gone on and on .. and i understand belty getting p*ssed off.
I believe im a fence sitter until further argument sways my judgement! Hope thats not too unpopular a choice.Because no-one was arguing about their technical ability (as much as Franchise was commenting otherwise), the criteria set out in the first post is what Franchise was making a point about highlighting, so that's the criteria the voting involved.
Apparently I'm the only one to vote Flair. You see, I look at Hogan's main streamification of wrestling as champion being quite detrimental to the whole of wrestling, what with all the smirking at the fans with your guy in a headlock becoming more important than actually wrestling... but I think a lot differently since taking vast psychedelic journeys.
I can't be arsed reading your bullsh*t over and over. So here you go, money where your mouth is kind of a deal.
Now this poll isn't about who is the best technical wrestler out of the two, as that is a no-brainer. But technical wrestling does not a champion make (otherwise Charlie Hass, The Pug, Dean Malenko and countless others would be former World Champions), which Franchise seems to not understand.
No, this poll is to determine who the TWO forum members feel was the better CHAMPION in regards to big-time matches and situations, worldwide exposure and recognition DURING THE TIME THEY WERE IN THEIR PRIME AS CHAMPIONS of the WWF for Hogan and the NWA/WCW for Flair.
Flair, IMO, was overrated in his matches, but knew how to get along with a limited moveset. Hogan also had a limited moveset (in the US anyway), but his larger-than-life persona more than made up for it.
When Flair was NWA champion, it always (to me) seemed a distant second to the WWF champion. It seemed small-time and dour, with the WWF being vibrant and exciting.
IMO, Hulkamania walks all over an arena going "WOOOOOO!".
But what about you, who do you think was the better CHAMPION in promoting their company and themselves WORLDWIDE?
I hope this doesn't end up locked straight away, as I feel some good debate can come out of it.
Phrasing it like that, Hogan has to win. And, as I understand it, Flair's money problems aren't as a result of not making a huge amount of money, because he did. His problem is that he blew the whole lot.
lafdugga
02-10-2007, 09:21 AM
I voted Flair as without him I would not be watching wresting today. Back in the late 70's early 80's Flair and Piper were the men. Flair was a great champion and most times put the local men over. To be honest I hated Hogan and did not watch his matches but Flairs I made a point of watching!
I liked Hogan in 2002 when he made his return but that was because I love the response he gets from the fans and love Real American rather than his wrestling prowess.
Hogan may have made more money and has more money but much of that is due to the fact that he has not got divorced or spent a small fortune. Flair would be fine if his three ex wives had not screwed him over!
I voted Flair as without him I would not be watching wresting today. Back in the late 70's early 80's Flair and Piper were the men. Flair was a great champion and most times put the local men over. To be honest I hated Hogan and did not watch his matches but Flairs I made a point of watching!
I liked Hogan in 2002 when he made his return but that was because I love the response he gets from the fans and love Real American rather than his wrestling prowess.
Hogan may have made more money and has more money but much of that is due to the fact that he has not got divorced or spent a small fortune. Flair would be fine if his three ex wives had not screwed him over!
To be honest though even if Flair hadn't been divorced once, Hogan would still have 10 times the fortune Flair has.
I'm going to go with Hogan. Flair has never actually entertained me.
Darkstar
02-10-2007, 09:31 AM
I prefered Flair, but as Champion Hogan was obviously FAR better.
In my opinion without Hulk Hogan the wrestling industry would still be stuck in the territorial system and there'd be no worldwide tv deals or merchandising.
Hogan put butts in seats and gave fans someone to believe in with his vitamins,prayers and never say die spirit,he was the closest thing to a superhero. (maybe I'm talking about when I was a Hulkamaniac as a kid)
Flair will always be considered the greatest pure wrestler to lace up his boots but as far as being the total package goes he lags behind the Hulkster.
Joey Asbo
02-10-2007, 12:15 PM
In my opinion without Hulk Hogan the wrestling industry would still be stuck in the territorial system and there'd be no worldwide tv deals or merchandiside.
I think with or without the Hulkster the territorial system would have been wiped out mate, im not taking away what he did, and to carry it for so long was amazing but it wasnt all down to Hogan in that department.
The Franchise
02-10-2007, 01:09 PM
LMAO!
Well, Of course I am going with Ric Flair. Considering that most of the best matches Flair had happened back before half of VGR was still in diapers. But for me I prefer Flair as a better champion than Hogan because of alot of reasons:
One:Respect as a champion:Flair traveled to different federations defending the NWA title on a daily basis. When he traveled everyone acknowledged him as the NWA World champion. Not only did he defend it against the best in the sport but against their champions as well.
Two:Title defenses:Light heavyweights, super heavyweights,brawlers,technicians;etc. There is hardly anyone that Ric Flair hasnt faced in his career. Every top superstar that at one point in time over the last 20 years thats been a household name Flair has faced. Flair faced them all. The NWA was defended on a daily basis. Against all types of oppenents. Faces and Heels. Great American Bash Flair defended the title in every city the NWA was in. Not just on PPV's but on regular telecasts too.
Three:Wrestling: When you want to watch a great wrestling match you watch Ric Flair. Flair matched up with anybody. Nobody hardly outwrestled the Nature Boy.
Anybody under the age of 25 9 times out of 10 will go for Hogan because the WWE is what most of them knew. Most over the age of 30 thats seen Flair back in the Mid-Atlantic/Georgia Championship wrestling/NWA days will see Flair as the best. Its as simple as that. Commercially Hogan kills Flair. But on every other level Flair is above Hogan. But once again I find if funny that Hulk Hogan put the WWE on the map but yet the WWE proclaims Ric Flair as the greatest of all time. Imagine that.
This is one of those debates that will never end but I'd say it would have been easier to break it down into categories than see who wins overall.
LMAO!
Well, Of course I am going with Ric Flair. Considering that most of the best matches Flair had happened back before half of VGR was still in diapers. But for me I prefer Flair as a better champion than Hogan because of alot of reasons:
One:Respect as a champion:Flair traveled to different federations defending the NWA title on a daily basis. When he traveled everyone acknowledged him as the NWA World champion. Not only did he defend it against the best in the sport but against their champions as well.
Two:Title defenses:Light heavyweights, super heavyweights,brawlers,technicians;etc. There is hardly anyone that Ric Flair hasnt faced in his career. Every top superstar that at one point in time over the last 20 years thats been a household name Flair has faced. Flair faced them all. The NWA was defended on a daily basis. Against all types of oppenents. Faces and Heels. Great American Bash Flair defended the title in every city the NWA was in. Not just on PPV's but on regular telecasts too.
Three:Wrestling: When you want to watch a great wrestling match you watch Ric Flair. Flair matched up with anybody. Nobody hardly outwrestled the Nature Boy.
Anybody under the age of 25 9 times out of 10 will go for Hogan because the WWE is what most of them knew. Most over the age of 30 thats seen Flair back in the Mid-Atlantic/Georgia Championship wrestling/NWA days will see Flair as the best. Its as simple as that. Commercially Hogan kills Flair. But on every other level Flair is above Hogan. But once again I find if funny that Hulk Hogan put the WWE on the map but yet the WWE proclaims Ric Flair as the greatest of all time. Imagine that.
But most people over 30 won't see Flair as a better champion, simply because he wasn't.
Your right commercially Hogan kills Flair. So isn't that what being a great champion is about? Making money, putting bums on seats, being a figurehead?
Flair had loads of great matches. Big deal so did Barry Windham but nobody says he's a great champion.
And your argument on title defences means absolutely nothing. Hogan faced a lot of guys too, brawlers, technical guys, big men, roided up muscleheads etc. Except Hogan did it in much bigger arenas in front of much bigger TV and PPV audiences.
And WWE say Flair is the greatest wrestler of all time.....which has absolutely nothing to do with this thread. Again you've totally bypassed the point.
You say Hogan batters Flair commercially, so how does that make Flair a better or more successful champion? It doesn't. Your champion, people pay to see you. If more people pay to see Hogan as champ, what does that tell you?
The Beltster
02-10-2007, 02:35 PM
Hogan was the better champion. Flair isnt even close. Flair isnt even 2nd on the list as there have been other wrestlers who were superior titlist's to Flair.
Ric is an overrated worker and an overrated talker, IMO. His title runs didnt draw barring for the occasional blowoff matches, and most of the time he was performing TV in front of 100 people on a sound stage who got in for free.
I dont give a sh*t if he fought heels, faces or monkeys, he wasnt a good draw, his matches were overrated cookie cutters and his so-called "amazing" promos were simply him having an eppy. Load of crap.
Beltmark,I agree that Hogan is and will always be by far the best draw in wrestling history and it's most charismatic performer but to diminish Flair's contributions by calling him overrated in every way is ridiculous,the nature boy was a good draw in the NWA and I think most wrestling insiders and journalists would agree with that.
The Beltster
02-10-2007, 02:48 PM
Beltmark,I agree that Hogan is and will always be by far the best draw in wrestling history and it's most charismatic performer but to diminish Flair's contributions by calling him overrated in every way is ridiculous,the nature boy was a good draw in the NWA and I think most wrestling insiders and journalists would agree with that.I am saying to me, he is overrated. His accomplishments can speak for themselves in other peoples eyes, and one person having the opinion that he is overrated isnt going to tarnish Flair's legacy, believe me. He is doing a good enough job of that on his own.
He was a sufficient draw, he wasnt a great draw. TV was in front of a tiny audience who got in for nothing. He drew on the road in smaller buildings and drew big buildings when it came to his blow off's.
And the reason I called him overrated is because, quite frankly, he is. Here is a guy who had the same match every single night, a guy who didnt work to other peoples styles, they had to work to his and around his limitations (ask Bret Hart and Randy Savage, they will tell you). A guy who's stupid comedy selling and face flop were promoted as serious wrestling...come on.
I dont rate Flair as a worker. He always had top talent to work with when he had great matches. I dont recall seeing him carry clueless workers to good matches. Lex Luger, for example. If Flair was the amazing worker people claim he was, why were all his matches with Luger so pathetic?
Also, there is this HUGE misconception that Flair worked 60 minute matches regularly, when he actually probably worked about 7-8 in his entire 648 year career! 60 minute man my ass, it was a rarity.
As for his promos, I thought they were good when he wanted them to be, but it was usually screaming and yelling, Vince gave him a bollocking for it in 1991 if I recall, asking what all the fuss was about Flair after he finally came to work for him. Flairs promos were more incoherant than the Ultimate Warriors!
Kanenite
02-10-2007, 03:16 PM
I preferred Flair as a general all round Wrestler but Hulk Hogan was the man back in the day, there's no doubting that Wrestling was big when Hogan was Champ, he was a great draw and really played the part of the face brilliantly.
I am saying to me, he is overrated. His accomplishments can speak for themselves in other peoples eyes, and one person having the opinion that he is overrated isnt going to tarnish Flair's legacy, believe me. He is doing a good enough job of that on his own.
He was a sufficient draw, he wasnt a great draw. TV was in front of a tiny audience who got in for nothing. He drew on the road in smaller buildings and drew big buildings when it came to his blow off's.
And the reason I called him overrated is because, quite frankly, he is. Here is a guy who had the same match every single night, a guy who didnt work to other peoples styles, they had to work to his and around his limitations (ask Bret Hart and Randy Savage, they will tell you). A guy who's stupid comedy selling and face flop were promoted as serious wrestling...come on.
I dont rate Flair as a worker. He always had top talent to work with when he had great matches. I dont recall seeing him carry clueless workers to good matches. Lex Luger, for example. If Flair was the amazing worker people claim he was, why were all his matches with Luger so pathetic?
Also, there is this HUGE misconception that Flair worked 60 minute matches regularly, when he actually probably worked about 7-8 in his entire 648 year career! 60 minute man my ass, it was a rarity.
As for his promos, I thought they were good when he wanted them to be, but it was usually screaming and yelling, Vince gave him a bollocking for it in 1991 if I recall, asking what all the fuss was about Flair after he finally came to work for him. Flairs promos were more incoherant than the Ultimate Warriors!
Too true! :lol
As much as I like Flair,Hogan wins this hands down.
Ask any normal Joe Soap to name a wrestler and they will name Hulk Hogan more often than not.
Naitch
02-10-2007, 04:32 PM
Yes because this hasn't been done before.
Franchise is a troll poster and a lot of you are as much to blame as him for feeding the troll and taking the bait.
The Beltster
02-10-2007, 05:14 PM
Yes because this hasn't been done before.
Franchise is a troll poster and a lot of you are as much to blame as him for feeding the troll and taking the bait.Bullsh*t, the idiot isnt clever enough to be a troll poster, its blatantly obvious that he believes in that he posts, which is fair enough if it wasnt such utter nonsense :lol
Naitch
02-10-2007, 05:18 PM
Oh I agree that he's a few bananas short of a picnic but I think a lot of what he does is the very definition of baiting someone into another pointless argument that we've seen a million times before. There'll be some random thread and he'll go 'Ha, Hogan smells, Flair doesn't eh, Beltmark? LOL' obviously meant to antagonise. He knows people will get drawn into it and therefore he does it over and over and over and over and over.
The Beltster
02-10-2007, 05:22 PM
Wouldnt it be something if it turned out to be my split personality...you couldnt book such gold!
Danny Styles
02-10-2007, 06:30 PM
I prefer Flair to Hogan, but you have to be blind if you think Hogan was the weaker champion
The Franchise
02-10-2007, 07:00 PM
Yes because this hasn't been done before.
Franchise is a troll poster and a lot of you are as much to blame as him for feeding the troll and taking the bait.
Gee thanks for the compliment. Why am I called a Troll poster? Because I speak the truth? Because unlike most of you I watched more than JUST the WWE over the last say 20-25 years? Oh well. :roll
Once again most people that only watched the WWE would consider Hogan the best. I religously watched all wrestling promotions. Thats where I'm basing alot of what I'm saying from. So yes it is okay for most of you to say these things because the WWE is about the only federation you watched. Makes perfect sense. Overall Flair is the wrestling king and Hogan is the commericial king of pro wrestling.Both legends and both idols in my book.
Hogan was the better champion. Flair isnt even close. Flair isnt even 2nd on the list as there have been other wrestlers who were superior titlist's to Flair.
Ric is an overrated worker and an overrated talker, IMO. His title runs didnt draw barring for the occasional blowoff matches, and most of the time he was performing TV in front of 100 people on a sound stage who got in for free.
I dont give a sh*t if he fought heels, faces or monkeys, he wasnt a good draw, his matches were overrated cookie cutters and his so-called "amazing" promos were simply him having an eppy. Load of crap.
Spoken like a true wrestling fan that watched the WWE 98% of the time. And it shows.:sleep_1:
I prefer Flair to Hogan, but you have to be blind if you think Hogan was the weaker champion
I guess I'm Stevie Wonder then. Say your prayers and eat your vitamins brother! :body
Hogan was the weaker champion. But thanks to the spotlight it covered that flaw extremely well.:xyx
I guess I'm Stevie Wonder then. Say your prayers and eat your vitamins brother! :body
Hogan was the weaker champion. But thanks to the spotlight it covered that flaw extremely well.:xyx
How do you categorise being a successful champion?
Because if its not by who puts the most bums in seats, you know nothing about wrestling.
With this whole debate being about flair and hogan, I naturally considered Hogan from his WWF champion days, but I now remember that he ruled during (possibly and debatably) the greatest storyline is wrestling history, the nWo. My bad. Hogan does win.
Good job Franch, that'll be sure to convince us you're not a troller, by baiting and trolling people into arguing with you when they call you out on doing just that.
SuperKick Kid
02-10-2007, 07:23 PM
Flair is a 16 Time World Champion, he is a bazillion times a better champion than Hogan.
Prototype
02-10-2007, 07:29 PM
Flair is a 16 Time World Champion, he is a bazillion times a better champion than Hogan.
It also means he lost the strap 16 times, doesn't make him a better champion. Hogan was "the man" in the day and during the early 80's, I was crying out for Hogan vs Flair for the unified champ. Hogan made more money, is the bigger star and had better commercial appeal than Flair. Early-Mid 80's, Hogan's face was almost everywhere. That, in itself tells a story.
And I'm no Hogan fan, by any means. I can just see past the end of my own nose.
SuperKick Kid
02-10-2007, 07:32 PM
It also means he lost the strap 16 times, doesn't make him a better champion. Hogan was "the man" in the day and during the early 80's, I was crying out for Hogan vs Flair for the unified champ. Hogan made more money, is the bigger star and had better commercial appeal than Flair. Early-Mid 80's, Hogan face was almost everywhere. That, in itself tells a story.
But he still is a 16 Time Champion, I mean come on that statistic has to mean something.
It means as much as Taker's 15-0 streak at Wrestlemania.
Slim Jim
02-10-2007, 07:34 PM
He may have won (AND LOST) the belt 16 times, but Hogan held the WWE title for a combined 2,185 days. That's impressive.
Flair is a 16 Time World Champion, he is a bazillion times a better champion than Hogan.
Thing is though in all those 16 defences that shows that the company he was working for never had full confidence in him being the main draw, thus were constantly trying to find someone new (Steamboat, Sting etc.)
The fact WWF kept the strap on Hogan for so long just shows how much faith they had in him as a figurehead and how much demand there was for Hogan.
Flair's ability meant that when Sting didn't do as great as expected or Steamboat didn't etc etc, that they could ship it back to Flair as he'd do a good job.
In the WWE you can compare it to Cena and HHH. Cena will get the title for longer and longer because he's the guy who will draw your best numbers, but HHH will always get a reign next cause he's the guy they can always guarantee on keeping the ship settled. Heck HHH has always been that guy throughout his time as Champ.
The Beltster
02-10-2007, 08:40 PM
Flair is a 16 Time World Champion, he is a bazillion times a better champion than Hogan.And Hogan is a 12 time World champion, and if you include his IWGP run that makes him a 13 time World champion...
The thing is, Hogans first WWF title run ALONE meant more than all of Flairs 16 combined. The guy held it for over 4 freakin' years and put pro wrestling on the map whilst doing it.
The amount of title runs really means very little, its the importance of the title runs and the success you have as champion personally, for the company and for the business in general that rates where you stand in terms of a great champion, IMO.
The Franchise
02-10-2007, 10:00 PM
How do you categorise being a successful champion?
Because if its not by who puts the most bums in seats, you know nothing about wrestling.
Oh and you know more than me? Put your money where your mouth is Jung.:)
And Hogan is a 12 time World champion, and if you include his IWGP run that makes him a 13 time World champion...
The thing is, Hogans first WWF title run ALONE meant more than all of Flairs 16 combined. The guy held it for over 4 freakin' years and put pro wrestling on the map whilst doing it.
The amount of title runs really means very little, its the importance of the title runs and the success you have as champion personally, for the company and for the business in general that rates where you stand in terms of a great champion, IMO.
Flair indeed is 16 time World champion. Not even counting the OTHER titles hes won in his career too. Let us not forget those too Beltmark.
:devil
He may have won (AND LOST) the belt 16 times, but Hogan held the WWE title for a combined 2,185 days. That's impressive.
Just imagine if he would've given Ricky Steamboat, Jake Roberts, JYD, Tito Santana,Tony Atlas,and Billy Jack Haynes title shots along with all those rulebreakers.Hmm...Oh thats right Hogan only fought Rulebreakers not faces. I must've been thinking about Flair. My bad.:roll
Slim Jim
02-10-2007, 10:11 PM
Oh yeah, damn that Hogan for mostly facing people who'll he'll make money by facing.
Prototype
02-10-2007, 10:20 PM
Just imagine if he would've given Ricky Steamboat, Jake Roberts, JYD, Tito Santana,Tony Atlas,and Billy Jack Haynes title shots along with all those rulebreakers.Hmm...Oh thats right Hogan only fought Rulebreakers not faces. I must've been thinking about Flair. My bad.:roll
Franch, you keep harping on about Hogan not defending the title against the guys you mention, but do you honestly believe that Hogan vs ****** (insert name here) would have been big money headline matches? Because that's what Hogan's defences were. Big guys, built up to be devastating for Hogan to beat in a blow-off match at the end of the fued. Guys like Bundy, Taker, Andre, Warrior, Savage. All big guys with big build ups.
Oh and by the way, Warrior was a face when they met for the title, even if Vince wanted him to be heel. It didn't happen. So Hogan didn't only fight heels.
Franch, you keep harping on about Hogan not defending the title against the guys you mention, but do you honestly believe that Hogan vs ****** (insert name here) would have been big money headline matches? Because that's what Hogan's defences were. Big guys, built up to be devastating for Hogan to beat in a blow-off match at the end of the fued. Guys like Bundy, Taker, Andre, Warrior, Savage. All big guys with big build ups.
Oh and by the way, Warrior was a face when they met for the title, even if Vince wanted him to be heel. It didn't happen. So Hogan didn't only fight heels.
Yeah, he knows... he's been told that already, but he just chooses to ignore it... possibly cuz he's a douche bag... possibly
It'd be interesting to know the total number of days Hogan held a world title vs Flair, if anyone knows where to find this info.
Could you count the NWA, WCW and WWE Top titles in working this out, please.
Joey Asbo
03-10-2007, 12:21 AM
Flair indeed is 16 time World champion. Not even counting the OTHER titles hes won in his career too. Let us not forget those too Beltmark.
:devil
Which of those other titles were World titles mate?
Oh and you know more than me? Put your money where your mouth is Jung.:)
Well if you think making lots of money for your company and selling out huge arenas isn't THE most important aspect of being a champion, then you know less about wrestling than most people on this site.
Honestly Frenchfries I couldn't give a damn if you go read PWI issues from 19 tickety too about when Flair faced Alexander The Great on a house show in front of 7 people. Any doofus with access to wikipedia or google can probably find crap like that out.
The simple fact is you don't seem to GET the business. You harp on about people being better wrestlers with kayfabe facts, not realising wrestling is a business, not a sport. Who cares if Flair faced zillions of guys around the world? Is that thanks to Flair? No its the bookers idea who made him do it.
The only way you can fairly analyse Hogan and Flair as champions is how much money they made for the company. The reason Flair probably did more territories is because if they wanted a big show at MSG nobody would touch them. "Oh your a wrestling promotion? You got Hulk Hogan? phone down.
You don't seem to understand that, yet keep coming back with comments of a 9 year old boy "well Flair faced these guys so nerr" who cares who Flair faced, if all of the people he faced in main events STILL didn't equal the buyrates and TV ratings Hogan got in 3 matches against Andre?
Thus if you cannot recognise Hogan was a better champion than Flair, then you do know nothing about wrestling.
The Beltster
03-10-2007, 09:36 AM
Flair indeed is 16 time World champion. Not even counting the OTHER titles hes won in his career too. Let us not forget those too Beltmark.
:devilThey were all so meaningless, I'd already forgotten them, sorry. So Flair was Mid Atlantic US champion, big deal? It meant zero.
Like I've said, Hogans first WWF title run of 4 years means more than all of Flairs 16 world title runs combined.
It'd be interesting to know the total number of days Hogan held a world title vs Flair, if anyone knows where to find this info.
Could you count the NWA, WCW and WWE Top titles in working this out, please.WWF/WWE Title:
Hogan - 2,185
Flair - 118
WCW/NWA Title:
Hogan - 1,177
Flair - 3,626 -
Overall:
Hogan - 3362 - 12 titles
Flair - 3744 - 16 titles
Pretty even.
Also, I didnt know this, but Hogan is the 1st and 2nd longest reigning WCW champion ever. Pretty cool.
The Franchise
03-10-2007, 01:06 PM
It'd be interesting to know the total number of days Hogan held a world title vs Flair, if anyone knows where to find this info.
Could you count the NWA, WCW and WWE Top titles in working this out, please.
Yes Hogan was champ during his first run from May of 1984 until right before Wrestlemania 4 when the screw job happened with Andre and the Millon Dollar Man/Hebner twin situation. Very true. Just think how many guys were left out of the title loop in between that time. You guys talk about there was no money to be made if he fought certain people. I say you dont know for sure unless you try. But that was the sad thing about the WWE: You dont get Hogan unless you become a heel first. Sad but true.
Yes Hogan held the title longer than Flair at times.But then again who defended the title even more? Flair.
They were all so meaningless, I'd already forgotten them, sorry. So Flair was Mid Atlantic US champion, big deal? It meant zero.
Like I've said, Hogans first WWF title run of 4 years means more than all of Flairs 16 world title runs combined.
WWF/WWE Title:
Hogan - 2,185
Flair - 118
WCW/NWA Title:
Hogan - 1,177
Flair - 3,626 -
Overall:
Hogan - 3362 - 12 titles
Flair - 3744 - 16 titles
Pretty even.
Also, I didnt know this, but Hogan is the 1st and 2nd longest reigning WCW champion ever. Pretty cool.
Once again that validates what I've said all along. When all you've watched is the WWE you basically dont know nothing else from first hand experience about Ric Flair or anything outside of the WWE. Thanks for proving that once again Beltmark. Flair vs. Steamboat had more wrestling quality in one of their matches than five of Hogan's best matches. How about that?:devil
Well if you think making lots of money for your company and selling out huge arenas isn't THE most important aspect of being a champion, then you know less about wrestling than most people on this site.
Honestly Frenchfries I couldn't give a damn if you go read PWI issues from 19 tickety too about when Flair faced Alexander The Great on a house show in front of 7 people. Any doofus with access to wikipedia or google can probably find crap like that out.
The simple fact is you don't seem to GET the business. You harp on about people being better wrestlers with kayfabe facts, not realising wrestling is a business, not a sport. Who cares if Flair faced zillions of guys around the world? Is that thanks to Flair? No its the bookers idea who made him do it.
The only way you can fairly analyse Hogan and Flair as champions is how much money they made for the company. The reason Flair probably did more territories is because if they wanted a big show at MSG nobody would touch them. "Oh your a wrestling promotion? You got Hulk Hogan? phone down.
You don't seem to understand that, yet keep coming back with comments of a 9 year old boy "well Flair faced these guys so nerr" who cares who Flair faced, if all of the people he faced in main events STILL didn't equal the buyrates and TV ratings Hogan got in 3 matches against Andre?
Thus if you cannot recognise Hogan was a better champion than Flair, then you do know nothing about wrestling.
Oh I get the business. You are going about it from the business perspective. I'm going about it from a wrestling fan perspective. Hogan was the commercial champion. Always in the spotlight. Ric Flair was the wrestling champion that fought ALL comers and went to different wrestling promotions and faced their best as well as faced the best inside his own wrestling promotion. Something Hogan NEVER did as champion. Fact.
You see numbers I see quality. Enough said.
Flair:Greatest of all time:worship
Hogan best commercial champ:tdown
The Beltster
03-10-2007, 01:11 PM
Yes Hogan was champ during his first run from May of 1984 until right before Wrestlemania 4 when the screw job happened with Andre and the Millon Dollar Man/Hebner twin situation. Very true. Just think how many guys were left out of the title loop in between that time. You guys talk about there was no money to be made if he fought certain people. I say you dont know for sure unless you try. But that was the sad thing about the WWE: You dont get Hogan unless you become a heel first. Sad but true.What dont you understand? Taking the title off of Hogan during his prime run when he was the biggest drawing star in the history of wrestling, with TV and PPV companies agreeing to carry the WWF as long as Hogan was the centerpiece and basically with anything Hogan touching turning to gold would have been STUPID!!!!
So Jake, Savage, DiBiase, Orton, Piper, Orndorff were never WWF champion, AND?! Do you think they would have garnered the ratings Hogan did, and pulled in the money and buyrates Hogan did if they were on top and Hogan was in the midcard? Dont be so f*cking wet!
Hogan's popularity was alot to do with the fact he never lost. You job him out a few times and he isnt so special anymore. And for what? So Piper could headline vs Chicko Santana?! Give me a f'n break!
And its so sad that you had to become a heel to get Hogan. Such a shame Randy Savage, Andre the Giant and Paul Orndorf all turned heel in some of the best moments in wrestling, resulting in some of the greatest angles ever. What a shame. :roll
You know, you claim to be so smart and savvy when it comes to wrestling, but you are as clueless as Vince Russo, I'd hate for you to ever book a show.
Yes Hogan held the title longer than Flair at times.But then again who defended the title even more? Flair.Bret defended more than Flair, so he is obviously a better champion than both of them, right?
Once again that validates what I've said all along. When all you've watched is the WWE you basically dont know nothing else from first hand experience about Ric Flair or anything outside of the WWE. Thanks for proving that once again Beltmark. Flair vs. Steamboat had more wrestling quality in one of their matches than five of Hogan's best matches. How about that?:devilI've told you over and over again, I've followed the WWF, NWA, WCW, AWA, WCCW etc, yet you continue to believe that all I've ever watched in the WWF. Are you retarded or cant you read? I PREFER the WWF, I've FOLLOWED them all.
As for Flair vs Steamboat, I'll not deny. Just as I never have. Once AGAIN you argue a point nobody is disputing. What does that prove? It proves that chain wrestling wasnt Hogans gimmick...how about that?
You see numbers I see quality. Enough said.I preferred Hogans matches over Flairs, I'm sure some people preferred King Kong Bundy's matches over Bret Harts, and?
Its nothing to do with quality vs numbers, because everybody has their own preference. Hogans matches were better quality for my money because I got more enjoyment and satisfaction out of them than I did watching Flairs.
Again, I can see why people consider Flair a more sound in-ring WRESTLER, nobody here has said any different, so I cant see what you are arguing about.
Al Stevens
03-10-2007, 01:32 PM
Honestly Frenchfries I couldn't give a damn if you go
read PWI issues from 19 tickety too about when Flair faced Alexander The Great on a house show in front of 7 people. Any doofus with access to wikipedia or google can probably find crap like that out.
Holy crap i knew Ric flair was old but i didnt think he was THAT old :lol
Also Frechfries put it like this. You had to start a promotion and your aim was to make a profit then you would clearly need someone who can draw money to the company. Look at WCW back in the late 1980's early 1990's it never really made any money however the second which Hogan came into the company then it started to make money. The fact is you can say Hogan never fought faces or whatever however the the fact that he helped made Vince from being a Millionaire to a Billionaire shows that Vince saw something and made it.
Dont get me wrong Flair is an ok Wrestler a great character and gimmick. However the key thing in the industry is making money and there is a reason why Hogan can only do a show a year or so and flair is still active
lafdugga
03-10-2007, 02:11 PM
I love Flair as stated before in these threads and am not a big fan of Hogan!
I love the following matches
The Rock WM 18
Vince WM 19
Randy Savage
WWE, 3/24/91: Sgt. Slaughter vs. Hulk Hogan
HBK Summer slam 05
Tag match with Edge
AWA, 4/24/83: Nick Bockwinkel
2/18/95 "Rowdy" Roddy Piper (WWE Championship, War to Settle the Score)
WWE, 8/28/86: Hulk Hogan vs. "Mr. Wonderful" Paul Orndorff
XWF, 11/14/01: Hulk Hogan vs. Curt Hennig
WWE, 4/21/02: Triple H vs. Hulk Hogan (WWE Undisputed Championship, Backlash)
WWE, 4/1/90: Hulk Hogan vs. Ultimate Warrior
Ric Flair: He is a god to me I have the ultimate collection lots of youtube matches and early videos.
HHH vs Flair every one is gold
Yes Ricky the dragon Steam boat
Flair v Harley Race
Flair vs. Terry Funk in a non-title I Quit match
92 royal rumble
Dusty Rhodes
Barry Windham
I can go on and on and on but this should sum it up. Flair had a great reception at WM Hall of Fame and will when he is finally inducted but nothing and I repeat nothing will beat the ovation and reception that Hogan Received at the Hall of Fame it was awesome every time I watch it the hairs in the back of my neck stand up and I am engrossed. Flair is great and out of the two he is my hero but Hogan will be better in terms of popularity and draw because he has something else that transends the ring.
Yes I think Flair is the better wrestler, Hogan is the better entertainer. I defy you defy you not to get drawn into the Real American, not to want to see Hogan Hulk up, not to want to see the big boot followed by the leg drop followed by the biggest posing session going to man kind at the end with the ear cupping and the stance and the actions top Real American. But that is Hogan and always will be.
Oh I get the business. You are going about it from the business perspective. I'm going about it from a wrestling fan perspective. Hogan was the commercial champion. Always in the spotlight. Ric Flair was the wrestling champion that fought ALL comers and went to different wrestling promotions and faced their best as well as faced the best inside his own wrestling promotion. Something Hogan NEVER did as champion. Fact.
You see numbers I see quality. Enough said.
Flair:Greatest of all time:worship
Hogan best commercial champ:tdown
But what does that matter in a non-kayfabe world?
Tatanka was unbeaten for a year, should he be known as one of the greatest superstars ever in WWE History?
Who cares if Ric Flair fought everybody if it made sod all money?
Flair CANNOT be considered the greatest CHAMPION of all time if his title matches didn't make huge money.
You keep arguing about Flair being the better wrestler and having better matches, which is down to opinion and I'd agree with you. But that means nothing in terms of being a great champion.
And you can't say Flair defending it across the globe against all comers makes him a great champion either, because thats just whatt he bookers told him to do. Nothing to do with Flair. The only reason they did it was because they couldn't get anywhere near the major arenas.
jeez,this thread's turned into the greatest feud in history between Beltmark and Franchise!
The Beltster
03-10-2007, 02:24 PM
jeez,this thread's turned into the greatest feud in history between Beltmark and Franchise!He is grossly overmatched therefor I wouldnt class it as a feud. More like a slaughter :lol
He is grossly overmatched therefor I wouldnt class it as a feud. More like a slaughter :lol
Or a DX styled burial of the rest??? :lol
Tatanka was unbeaten for a year, should he be known as one of the greatest superstars ever in WWE History?Tatanka was unbeaten for two years....until he crossed paths with the God's Wrath made flesh, the Finnish Finisher, Ludvig Borga.
Was it really that long?
Ah yeah I suppose it was as he joined what early 1992? and then finally lost to Borga in like late 93?
Either way Tatanka>Ric Flair clearly...:xyx
Was it really that long?
Ah yeah I suppose it was as he joined what early 1992? and then finally lost to Borga in like late 93?
Either way Tatanka>Ric Flair clearly...:xyxIn that two year run he also beat Ric Flair more than once, so he obviously owns Flair's saggy-titted career.:lol
SimonJamesJones
03-10-2007, 03:20 PM
he actually wasn't at all, he lost some matches to Martel early in his WWF run, I think mostly untelevisied, but I'm sure one or two actually were televised.
in true WWF fashion back then though, if it doesn't happen on tv, it doesn't happen. so they just said he was undefeated
He lost a few (televised) tag matches (in the same way Joe and Christian have), but because he didn't lose the fall, he was still classed as undefeated. House show results rarely matter, except when it's a title change.
SimonJamesJones
03-10-2007, 03:23 PM
he still wasn't undefeated though, and he did lose singles matches.
but much like sting's WCW world title reign when he won the belt from Vader on a European tour, and lost it back to him a couple of shows later, if it didn't happen on tv, it didn't happen.
he still wasn't undefeated though, and he did lose singles matches.
but much like sting's WCW world title reign when he won the belt from Vader on a European tour, and lost it back to him a couple of shows later, if it didn't happen on tv, it didn't happen.If you're using that criteria, then neither was Goldberg.
SimonJamesJones
03-10-2007, 03:38 PM
I was about to mention Goldberg with a "I can't imagine they were jobbing Goldberg at house shows", but apparently they did?
and, yeah, the criteria I'd use as to whether a wrestler was undefeated or not would be whether or not he'd lost a wrestling match. There may have been more, but I know Tatanka lost matches to Martel in their feud, and I'm sure one of them was even televised, even the wrestling mags at the time made fun of Tatanka's false undefeated streak for that very reason
The Franchise
03-10-2007, 05:55 PM
Which of those other titles were World titles mate?
As far as other World titles go Flair also was a 3 time WWE tag team champion as well.( 2 with Batista & 1 with Roddy Piper) :)
As far as other World titles go Flair also was a 3 time WWE tag team champion as well.( 2 with Batista & 1 with Roddy Piper) :)
And they were clearly massive memorable reigns.
As far as other World titles go Flair also was a 3 time WWE tag team champion as well.( 2 with Batista & 1 with Roddy Piper) :)Hogan was a champion with Edge.
Al Stevens
03-10-2007, 06:07 PM
As far as other World titles go Flair also was a 3 time WWE tag team champion as well.( 2 with Batista & 1 with Roddy Piper) :)
Since when did that happen i cant remember the two with Bastista :lol
The Franchise
03-10-2007, 06:12 PM
What dont you understand? Taking the title off of Hogan during his prime run when he was the biggest drawing star in the history of wrestling, with TV and PPV companies agreeing to carry the WWF as long as Hogan was the centerpiece and basically with anything Hogan touching turning to gold would have been STUPID!!!!
So Jake, Savage, DiBiase, Orton, Piper, Orndorff were never WWF champion, AND?! Do you think they would have garnered the ratings Hogan did, and pulled in the money and buyrates Hogan did if they were on top and Hogan was in the midcard? Dont be so f*cking wet!
Hogan's popularity was alot to do with the fact he never lost. You job him out a few times and he isnt so special anymore. And for what? So Piper could headline vs Chicko Santana?! Give me a f'n break!
And its so sad that you had to become a heel to get Hogan. Such a shame Randy Savage, Andre the Giant and Paul Orndorf all turned heel in some of the best moments in wrestling, resulting in some of the greatest angles ever. What a shame. :roll
You know, you claim to be so smart and savvy when it comes to wrestling, but you are as clueless as Vince Russo, I'd hate for you to ever book a show.
Bret defended more than Flair, so he is obviously a better champion than both of them, right?
I've told you over and over again, I've followed the WWF, NWA, WCW, AWA, WCCW etc, yet you continue to believe that all I've ever watched in the WWF. Are you retarded or cant you read? I PREFER the WWF, I've FOLLOWED them all.
As for Flair vs Steamboat, I'll not deny. Just as I never have. Once AGAIN you argue a point nobody is disputing. What does that prove? It proves that chain wrestling wasnt Hogans gimmick...how about that?
I preferred Hogans matches over Flairs, I'm sure some people preferred King Kong Bundy's matches over Bret Harts, and?
Its nothing to do with quality vs numbers, because everybody has their own preference. Hogans matches were better quality for my money because I got more enjoyment and satisfaction out of them than I did watching Flairs.
Again, I can see why people consider Flair a more sound in-ring WRESTLER, nobody here has said any different, so I cant see what you are arguing about.
Where did you get that I said Savage was never the WWE champion? Everybody knows Savage was a two time WWE champion. And the REAL 1st undisputed WWE champion not Chris Jericho. Savage went through Butch Reed,Greg Valentine, The One Man Gang,and Ted Dibiase to become the man all in one night. Jericho had help to beat The Rock and Stone cold to become a champion with two titles. Not the same. You call yourself a WWE fan and didnt remember Savage being the champ? Alrighty then. Lets move on.
Whether it was the best angles or not it was a shame that guys had to become a heel in order to fight Hogan. Because there were so many other great wrestlers that could've given Hogan a run for his money. Unfortunately they were held back from doing that.
Bret defended more than Flair so that makes Bret better? As far as being a better WWE champion? Yes he was. I have no problems saying that. Flair's run as the WWE champ wasnt even that long compared to Bret's many runs as champion.
You claim you've watched more than the WWE but yet what do you talk about the most around here? The WWE. If you have followed more than the WWE lets talk about the NWA then? Or the AWA? Or the UWF? Feel free to start the conversation and I'll jump right in Beltmark. Anytime you're ready.
Either way you cut it if most of those in question only watched the WWE the most its only natural to assume the world evolved around the WWE when it came to pro wrestling. I'm only stating that there was so much outside of the WWE that alot of people dont know.
Yes the major things about a superstar can be looked up on the internet. But the little things that only a chosen few can get from watching those shows week after week is something you cant simply look up. That only comes from first hand experience watching those shows. Thats where I base my opinions from.:celb8:
Since when did that happen i cant remember the two with Bastista :lol
The Evolution days. At one point in time Randy Orton was the IC champ, HHH was the WWE champ,and Batista and Flair were the World Tag team champs all at the same time.
Where did you get that I said Savage was never the WWE champion? Everybody knows Savage was a two time WWE champion. And the REAL 1st undisputed WWE champion not Chris Jericho. Savage went through Butch Reed,Greg Valentine, The One Man Gang,and Ted Dibiase to become the man all in one night. Jericho had help to beat The Rock and Stone cold to become a champion with two titles. Not the same. You call yourself a WWE fan and didnt remember Savage being the champ? Alrighty then. Lets move on.
Whether it was the best angles or not it was a shame that guys had to become a heel in order to fight Hogan. Because there were so many other great wrestlers that could've given Hogan a run for his money. Unfortunately they were held back from doing that.
Yes the major things about a superstar can be looked up on the internet. But the little things that only a chosen few can get from watching those shows week after week is something you cant simply look up. That only comes from first hand experience watching those shows. Thats where I base my opinions from.:celb8:
A chosen few? Lol don't have an ego at all there Frenchfries. Honestly you display less aptitude on the understanding of wrestling than the majority on this site. Yes you know a lot of facts, but who cares about facts? You don't seem to be able separate real from fiction.
I mean Savage real Undisputer champion? How? he won 1 title in a kayfabe 1 night tournament?
And from memory I believe Savage had help to beat Dibiase no?
You call yourself a WWE fan and don't remember that? Alrighty then. Lets move on.
The Franchise
03-10-2007, 06:14 PM
Hogan was a champion with Edge.
Yes he was. They even did a double leg drop finisher to win the belts on Smackdown. Edge was geeked like a little kid when they won too. Good stuff.:lol
Either way you cut it if most of those in question only watched the WWE the most its only natural to assume the world evolved around the WWE when it came to pro wrestling. I'm only stating that there was so much outside of the WWE that alot of people dont know.The thing is though, the wrestling world DID (and to some extent still does) revolve around the WWF/WWE. To most wrestling fans, the WWE is professional wrestling.
The Franchise
03-10-2007, 06:21 PM
A chosen few? Lol don't have an ego at all there Frenchfries. Honestly you display less aptitude on the understanding of wrestling than the majority on this site. Yes you know a lot of facts, but who cares about facts? You don't seem to be able separate real from fiction.
I mean Savage real Undisputer champion? How? he won 1 title in a kayfabe 1 night tournament?
And from memory I believe Savage had help to beat Dibiase no?
You call yourself a WWE fan and don't remember that? Alrighty then. Lets move on.
You dont care about facts because you know very little of them. But you cover that up quite well Jung. Good job. (I saw through it though) Plus you're saying that the one night tournament at Wrestlemania 4 was booty? Please slap yourself. All of the talent that was inside that tournament will never be seen on a PPV ever again. You call beating 4 men in ONE night in four seperate matches nothing? What you smoking?
Plus yes Savage did get help in his last match of that night. But Butch Reed, Valentine,and Gang he beat on his own. And yes he got a little assist from Hogan since Dibiase had Andre assisting him outside the ring the sides were even. Your point is Jung? Dont try to play a game of 1up Jung. You'll only get embarrassed. Dont believe it? Go for it.:devil
The thing is though, the wrestling world DID (and to some extent still does) revolve around the WWF/WWE. To most wrestling fans, the WWE is professional wrestling.
And most of those fans were those that watched the WWE only too. The WWE was indeed in the spotlight big time. Cant deny that. The WWE was always the biggest fish. Doesnt mean it was the best tasting fish though.At least for some.:)
You dont care about facts because you know very little of them. But you cover that up quite well Jung. Good job. (I saw through it though) Plus you're saying that the one night tournament at Wrestlemania 4 was booty? Please slap yourself. All of the talent that was inside that tournament will never be seen on a PPV ever again. You call beating 4 men in ONE night in four seperate matches nothing? What you smoking?
Plus yes Savage did get help in his last match of that night. But Butch Reed, Valentine,and Gang he beat on his own. And yes he got a little assist from Hogan since Dibiase had Andre assisting him outside the ring the sides were even. Your point is Jung? Dont try to play a game of 1up Jung. You'll only get embarrassed. Dont believe it? Go for it.:devil
Lol you are a joke, honestly you can't be for real, you're just simply embarassing.
I know lots of facts thankyou, but when it boils down to stuff like this, what the hell does it matter? I've already beaten you on the facts front with the Savage thing thanks, so 1-0.
And yes a one night tourney means nothing, you know why? CAUSE ITS A WORK!!!!!
All the talent? Greg Valentine? One Man Gang? Butch Reed? Andre? What are you on about?
Beating 4 men in one night. I could do that easily. You wanna know how? IF I WAS BOOKED TO DO SO.
My point is you prune, you're wrong and you can't admit it. I proved you wrong when you argued Jericho needed help to win the tourney by saying Savage did too. You seemed to forget that.
But please go back and read my previous post about how you can't seem to understand that wrestling isn't real.....then go read your argument telling me I know nothing "CAUSE SAVAGE WON 4 MATCHES IN 1 NIGHT? HOW AMAZING IS THAT?"
Then realise how unbelievably worthless your argument is. Please cut the gimmick, nobody is as stupid or annoying as you attempt (albeit quite successfully)
The Franchise
03-10-2007, 06:35 PM
Lol you are a joke, honestly you can't be for real, you're just simply embarassing.
I know lots of facts thankyou, but when it boils down to stuff like this, what the hell does it matter? I've already beaten you on the facts front with the Savage thing thanks, so 1-0.
And yes a one night tourney means nothing, you know why? CAUSE ITS A WORK!!!!!
All the talent? Greg Valentine? One Man Gang? Butch Reed? Andre? What are you on about?
Beating 4 men in one night. I could do that easily. You wanna know how? IF I WAS BOOKED TO DO SO.
My point is you prune, you're wrong and you can't admit it. I proved you wrong when you argued Jericho needed help to win the tourney by saying Savage did too. You seemed to forget that.
But please go back and read my previous post about how you can't seem to understand that wrestling isn't real.....then go read your argument telling me I know nothing "CAUSE SAVAGE WON 4 MATCHES IN 1 NIGHT? HOW AMAZING IS THAT?"
Then realise how unbelievably worthless your argument is. Please cut the gimmick, nobody is as stupid or annoying as you attempt (albeit quite successfully)
We all know wrestling isnt real Jung. You are looking at things from a business perspective. I'm looking at it as a pro wrestling fan's perspective. Something you obviously have no clue about. Thats why you change this into an argument instead of sticking to talking about the wrestling events themselves.:xyx
We all know wrestling isnt real Jung. You are looking at things from a business perspective. I'm looking at it as a pro wrestling fan's perspective. Something you obviously have no clue about. Thats why you change this into an argument instead of sticking to talking about the wrestling events themselves.:xyx
Lol so why the hell are you telling me beating 4 people in 1 night means something?
You can only say that if you think its real.
From a fans perspective 3 of those 4 matches were dreadful and the only memorable part was the ending of the main event.
So seriously what the heck are you on about?
You're the one who keeps changing the argument, because as soon as somebody proves you wrong you ignore them completely and move on.
I'm not looking at things from a business perspective with this Frenchfries, I am looking at it from a logical, wrestling fan perspective. If we know its fake like you say why should we care that Savage won 4 matches in 1 night?
If the matches were memorable and so forth I might agree with you, but they were mostly crap. Thus on every possible level you're talking cobblers and making no sense at all.
Craig
03-10-2007, 06:41 PM
"Jung, why do you try to accomplish the impossible? You cant outwit me."
I think the argument should just be stopped and we should all discuss this quote because it made me laugh for a good 2 minutes.
I'm starting to think that Frenchfries was the scriptwriter for Sid's promos.
OMAR DAYS
03-10-2007, 06:55 PM
I'm starting to think that Frenchfries was the scriptwriter for Sid's promos.
"He has half the brain you do"
Citizen Kane
03-10-2007, 06:59 PM
Hogan, because unless someone tells me otherwise, I thought the point of being champion (or it was then, prior to there being about 10 world titles) was to make money and spearhead the company.
Hogan did this better than Flair (as far as I can tell), therefore he was the better champion.
Naitch
03-10-2007, 07:02 PM
''The Four Horsemen - former 16 time World Champion Nature Boy Ric Flair, former US Champion Tully Blanchard, former TV Champion The Enforcer Arn Anderson and multi time tag Champion Ole Anderson - were the original stable in professional wrestling.''
''No they weren't.''
''Well if they weren't then who was, eh? EH?? I've watched wrestling since Abe Lincoln was World Champion and managed to see AWA, Mid Atlantic, Georgia, World Class, Mid South and Partridge on a Pear Tree Championship Wrestling.''
''The Freebirds, Rat Pack, Heenan Family, First Family, Legion of Doom, Paul Jones Army and others all preceded the Horsemen.''
''The Horsemen were maybe not the first but they were the most impactful.''
Man is freakin' adorable. Keep up the good fight, daddy.
The Beltster
03-10-2007, 07:08 PM
Where did you get that I said Savage was never the WWE champion? Everybody knows Savage was a two time WWE champion. And the REAL 1st undisputed WWE champion not Chris Jericho. Savage went through Butch Reed,Greg Valentine, The One Man Gang,and Ted Dibiase to become the man all in one night. Jericho had help to beat The Rock and Stone cold to become a champion with two titles. Not the same. You call yourself a WWE fan and didnt remember Savage being the champ? Alrighty then. Lets move on.I didnt say you said Savage wasnt WWF champion, my point is they didnt make him WWF champion during Hogans 4 year run when you seem to think the best business decision at the time would have been to take the belt off of Hogan and give it to everybody else.
And how exactly was Savage the first Undisputed champion? Because the Fink called him that after he won the title at WMIV?! THATS what your going on?! LMAO!
As for the rest of your nonsense above, I'll ignore it, it doesnt deserve a reply, its a work you prat.
Whether it was the best angles or not it was a shame that guys had to become a heel in order to fight Hogan. Because there were so many other great wrestlers that could've given Hogan a run for his money. Unfortunately they were held back from doing that.I'm sure there were alot of good matches to be had if Hogan also fought faces, I'll agree with you, but it didnt happen and it didnt happen for a reason, and the fact he was making huge money and involved in successful angles simply fighting mainly heels is fine with me. Really makes no difference.
Bret defended more than Flair so that makes Bret better? As far as being a better WWE champion? Yes he was. I have no problems saying that. Flair's run as the WWE champ wasnt even that long compared to Bret's many runs as champion.EXACTLY!!!! THATS MY POINT! Just because a guy defends more often, doesnt mean jack sh*t whether he was a better champion or not.
You claim you've watched more than the WWE but yet what do you talk about the most around here? The WWE. If you have followed more than the WWE lets talk about the NWA then? Or the AWA? Or the UWF? Feel free to start the conversation and I'll jump right in Beltmark. Anytime you're ready.So hold up...because I talk mainly about WWE (like everybody else incase you havent noticed, seeing as WWE is the only promotion left that people really talk about!), that means that I havent followed the others? That is your logic?
I'll happily talk about any promotion or organisation being discussed if the debate is interesting, and if you need to be schooled on the NWA, AWA, GWF, UWF, WCCW or anything else, I'll do that for you aswell.
Either way you cut it if most of those in question only watched the WWE the most its only natural to assume the world evolved around the WWE when it came to pro wrestling. I'm only stating that there was so much outside of the WWE that alot of people dont know.I'm sure to alot of people the WWF was the be-all and end-all of pro wrestling. Sure. But it wasnt to me, so stop continually saying it when I've told you numerous times that you are wrong.
Yes the major things about a superstar can be looked up on the internet. But the little things that only a chosen few can get from watching those shows week after week is something you cant simply look up. That only comes from first hand experience watching those shows. Thats where I base my opinions from.:celb8:That is what alot of people base their opinions on. Including me. There are alot of people here who have followed all promotions over the years, and there are some who have only followed WWE and who only WANT to follow WWE, so what? I've got a buddy called John, he is a huge mark for the NWA and when Crockett was bought out by Turner, he competely stopped watching wrestling, thats his choice, I dont crap all over him for it unlike you who seems to take issue with people who only watch WWE.
The Franchise
03-10-2007, 09:58 PM
I didnt say you said Savage wasnt WWF champion, my point is they didnt make him WWF champion during Hogans 4 year run when you seem to think the best business decision at the time would have been to take the belt off of Hogan and give it to everybody else.
And how exactly was Savage the first Undisputed champion? Because the Fink called him that after he won the title at WMIV?! THATS what your going on?! LMAO!
As for the rest of your nonsense above, I'll ignore it, it doesnt deserve a reply, its a work you prat.
I'm sure there were alot of good matches to be had if Hogan also fought faces, I'll agree with you, but it didnt happen and it didnt happen for a reason, and the fact he was making huge money and involved in successful angles simply fighting mainly heels is fine with me. Really makes no difference.
EXACTLY!!!! THATS MY POINT! Just because a guy defends more often, doesnt mean jack sh*t whether he was a better champion or not.
So hold up...because I talk mainly about WWE (like everybody else incase you havent noticed, seeing as WWE is the only promotion left that people really talk about!), that means that I havent followed the others? That is your logic?
I'll happily talk about any promotion or organisation being discussed if the debate is interesting, and if you need to be schooled on the NWA, AWA, GWF, UWF, WCCW or anything else, I'll do that for you aswell.
I'm sure to alot of people the WWF was the be-all and end-all of pro wrestling. Sure. But it wasnt to me, so stop continually saying it when I've told you numerous times that you are wrong.
That is what alot of people base their opinions on. Including me. There are alot of people here who have followed all promotions over the years, and there are some who have only followed WWE and who only WANT to follow WWE, so what? I've got a buddy called John, he is a huge mark for the NWA and when Crockett was bought out by Turner, he competely stopped watching wrestling, thats his choice, I dont crap all over him for it unlike you who seems to take issue with people who only watch WWE.
I'm all ears. Balls in your court Beltmark. I'm waiting for ya.:lol
The Franchise
03-10-2007, 09:59 PM
''The Four Horsemen - former 16 time World Champion Nature Boy Ric Flair, former US Champion Tully Blanchard, former TV Champion The Enforcer Arn Anderson and multi time tag Champion Ole Anderson - were the original stable in professional wrestling.''
''No they weren't.''
''Well if they weren't then who was, eh? EH?? I've watched wrestling since Abe Lincoln was World Champion and managed to see AWA, Mid Atlantic, Georgia, World Class, Mid South and Partridge on a Pear Tree Championship Wrestling.''
''The Freebirds, Rat Pack, Heenan Family, First Family, Legion of Doom, Paul Jones Army and others all preceded the Horsemen.''
''The Horsemen were maybe not the first but they were the most impactful.''
Man is freakin' adorable. Keep up the good fight, daddy.
The Freebirds was the first successful TRIO. The Horsemen was the 1st successful GROUP. Dont get it twisted boys and girls. They were the 1st.:doh32:
Al Stevens
03-10-2007, 10:00 PM
Oh i cant wait to see frenchy be shot down by someone who knows pretty much anything and everything about this industry
Slim Jim
03-10-2007, 10:03 PM
The Freebirds was the first successful TRIO. The Horsemen was the 1st successful GROUP. Dont get it twisted boys and girls. They were the 1st.:doh32:
Of course. You're right. The FOUR Horsemen where the first successful group of FOUR.
BUT. The NWO were the first successful group of 243 (and their mothers) and they had HOGAN. HOGAN WINS!
Stable numbers are like titles. THE MORE THE BETTER. So Hogan wins!
Craig
03-10-2007, 10:04 PM
http://img67.imageshack.us/img67/9809/45ee00f19fd423bce6eecc1vg3.gif
Al Stevens
03-10-2007, 10:05 PM
Holy hell Craig thats just made me choke on some Cola :lol
SimonJamesJones
03-10-2007, 10:35 PM
''The Freebirds, Rat Pack, Heenan Family, First Family, Legion of Doom, Paul Jones Army and others all preceded the Horsemen.''
The Freebirds was the first successful TRIO. The Horsemen was the 1st successful GROUP. Dont get it twisted boys and girls. They were the 1st. and Rat Pack, Heenan Family, First Family, Paul Jones Army?
Darkstar
03-10-2007, 10:36 PM
Franchise:
STOP MULTI POSTING!!!!
Learn to use either the edit or multi quote buttons.
edit: a trio is a group of 3.
Franchise you're clutching at straws here, while simultaneouse continuing to ignore everything that destroys your arguments. Please, quit while you're sucking.
They were all so meaningless, I'd already forgotten them, sorry. So Flair was Mid Atlantic US champion, big deal? It meant zero.
Like I've said, Hogans first WWF title run of 4 years means more than all of Flairs 16 world title runs combined.
WWF/WWE Title:
Hogan - 2,185
Flair - 118
WCW/NWA Title:
Hogan - 1,177
Flair - 3,626 -
Overall:
Hogan - 3362 - 12 titles
Flair - 3744 - 16 titles
Pretty even.
Also, I didnt know this, but Hogan is the 1st and 2nd longest reigning WCW champion ever. Pretty cool.
Thanks, Beltmark :xyx
Wow, that's much closer than I would have guessed on numbers. Also, I didn't realise Hogan was a 12 time champ.
As a better "wrestler", I'd pick Flair
As a better "talent", I'd pick Hogan
Personally, I preferred Flair as a champion. At one point there was no one who could even come close to being the total package he was. But, at the end of the day, wrestling needs talent, not just wrestlers. As total a package as Flair was, Hogan was only slightly less for much longer.
No doubt, Flair was better technically and on the stick (only my opinion) but Hogan could create a big match feel like no one before or since, with the only possible exception being Stone Cold. It's all about who put the most butts in seats, ppv buys and merch. Hogan was, and still is, better for business that Flair.
edit: a trio is a group of 3.
lol DS, that was quality, right there :)
Jimmy Redman
04-10-2007, 03:52 AM
SAVAGE WENT THROUGH BUTCH REED, GREG VALENTINE, THE ONE MAN GANG, AND TED DIBIASE ALL IN THE ONE NIGHT!
In case you're not familiar with the history of the KOTR Mr Factfries, its not such an amazingly unique accomplishment. Don Muraco, Ted DiBiase himself (arguably), and Tito Santana all did the exact same thing, went through 4 guys in one night. And thats just from the KOTR.
And another thing, you can claim to know every territory and promotion in existence, I dont think anyone really cares. Stop "challenging" Belty or Jung or whoever to a big talk about "other promotions", its got absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic at hand. And besides, neither Belty or Jung need to prove a single thing to you, because they actually are respected and knowledgable when it comes to wrestling, and you are a stupid dips***.
Al Stevens
04-10-2007, 10:53 AM
Come on people lets leave the gimmick poster alone now, when ever he posts just pretend he is isnt there.
From reading most of his posts he dances around the subject because he knows he is beaten. He proclaimes that he is talking from a pro wrestling fan's pov, but come on i know special needs people who dont at as (Censored) as him.
SimonJamesJones
04-10-2007, 11:09 AM
I think it's possible to put people on block or ignore or something isn't it? I might give that a go.
Ball's in your court, what do you think of that hey, come and have a go Frenchy, lets discuss the life and times of Wild Wally Wonnacott and his great 1920's feud with Old Captain Redbeard in the Wisconsin based WISPOO territory, if you think you're up to the challenge, I'm waiting for ya. Don't try to play a game of 1up with me. You'll only get embarrassed. Dont believe it? Go for it. :devil
*seeks the block button to rid himself of these hideous posts before Frenchy can reply*
Even today Hogan can put butts in seats as the main event but can Ric Flair? :lol
One picks and chooses his appearances and draws big money every time and the other leeches onto the younger and more popular talent such as Batista.
Nobody can deny they've both contributed greatly to the business but Hogan's the undisputed greatest of all time.
The Franchise
04-10-2007, 12:59 PM
In case you're not familiar with the history of the KOTR Mr Factfries, its not such an amazingly unique accomplishment. Don Muraco, Ted DiBiase himself (arguably), and Tito Santana all did the exact same thing, went through 4 guys in one night. And thats just from the KOTR.
And another thing, you can claim to know every territory and promotion in existence, I dont think anyone really cares. Stop "challenging" Belty or Jung or whoever to a big talk about "other promotions", its got absolutely NOTHING to do with the topic at hand. And besides, neither Belty or Jung need to prove a single thing to you, because they actually are respected and knowledgable when it comes to wrestling, and you are a stupid dips***.
That wasnt King Of The Ring that this happened at either. This was Wrestlemania.Plus the undisputed title was on the line as well. Big difference.
Plus it was guys like Beltmark that was saying that they watched other wrestling promotions over the years other than the WWE. SO I challeged him to talk about those times. And I have yet to hear from him on those things. People like you call it stupid because you cant pitch in and comment on things of pro wrestlings past outside of the WWE. All I hear from you is insults but instead of insulting me prove me wrong. Appearently you along with Jung and Beltmark cannot. So the war continues.:)
Come on people lets leave the gimmick poster alone now, when ever he posts just pretend he is isnt there.
From reading most of his posts he dances around the subject because he knows he is beaten. He proclaimes that he is talking from a pro wrestling fan's pov, but come on i know special needs people who dont at as (Censored) as him.
I dont dance around anything. You ask me a question I'll answer it honestly. Can most of the Pro-WWE crowd around here do the same? Of course not. Practice what you preach Al Stevens.:)
That wasnt King Of The Ring that this happened at either. This was Wrestlemania.Plus the undisputed title was on the line as well. Big difference.It wasn't the undisputed title, it was the plain old WWF title that Savage "won" at WMIV.
The Franchise
04-10-2007, 01:03 PM
Even today Hogan can put butts in seats as the main event but can Ric Flair? :lol
One picks and chooses his appearances and draws big money every time and the other leeches onto the younger and more popular talent such as Batista.
Nobody can deny they've both contributed greatly to the business but Hogan's the undisputed greatest of all time.
For someone thats only 22 years old and watched the WWE practically most of his life I would expect this type of answer from you.:greets4:
Franchise you're clutching at straws here, while simultaneouse continuing to ignore everything that destroys your arguments. Please, quit while you're sucking.
Name one thing I didnt answer? :?
That wasnt King Of The Ring that this happened at either. This was Wrestlemania.Plus the undisputed title was on the line as well. Big difference.
Plus it was guys like Beltmark that was saying that they watched other wrestling promotions over the years other than the WWE. SO I challeged him to talk about those times. And I have yet to hear from him on those things. People like you call it stupid because you cant pitch in and comment on things of pro wrestlings past outside of the WWE. All I hear from you is insults but instead of insulting me prove me wrong. Appearently you along with Jung and Beltmark cannot. So the war continues.:)
Why was it Undisputed?
And all of us can comment on other promotions and other periods. But why the hell bring them up when they have nothing to do with the subject?
We are talking about Flair/Hogan's run and then Savage winning the title. So why should I talk about Akira Maeda kicking Choshu in the face? Or Brian Pillman's WCW Lightheavyweight title run? Or the Dangerous Alliance? Or the first Champion Carnival?
That proved you wrong?. Honestly you talk rubbish.
And there was no Undisputed title. It was only called that after the dodgy finish with Andre/Hogan and Dibiase buying the title. The title was exactly the same as it was before and after.
And there is still no difference between KOTR and Mania tournament. You know why? CAUSE IT'S A WORK!
The Franchise
04-10-2007, 01:06 PM
Of course. You're right. The FOUR Horsemen where the first successful group of FOUR.
BUT. The NWO were the first successful group of 243 (and their mothers) and they had HOGAN. HOGAN WINS!
Stable numbers are like titles. THE MORE THE BETTER. So Hogan wins!
Actually the Horsemen consisted of Tully Blanchard, Baby Doll, J.J. Dillion, Flair, Ole, & Arn Anderson. Four men that held all the important titles that kept their egos intact. If it wasnt for the Four Horsemen DX nor the NWO would've existed. Thats basically the bottom line. Nice try youngster.:P
Fidel Cashflow
04-10-2007, 01:14 PM
Actually the Horsemen consisted of Tully Blanchard, Baby Doll, J.J. Dillion, Flair, Ole, & Arn Anderson. Four men that held all the important titles that kept their egos intact. If it wasnt for the Four Horsemen DX nor the NWO would've existed. Thats basically the bottom line. Nice try youngster.:P
And there is no Horsemen without the Freebirds, by that same rhetoric.
The Beltster
04-10-2007, 01:47 PM
Plus it was guys like Beltmark that was saying that they watched other wrestling promotions over the years other than the WWE. SO I challeged him to talk about those times. And I have yet to hear from him on those things.You challenge me to talk about those times in the middle of a thread it has nothing to do with. Where do you want me to start? What specific subject? You dont give any info on what you want me to talk about!
Start a new thread specifically about something you dont think I know anything about, and we can discuss it. But dont just say "Ok, talk about the NWA!" when there is no rhyme nor reason, thats retarded!
Why was it Undisputed?Apparently because thats what the Fink labelled Savage after he won the title...once :lol
If it wasnt for the Four Horsemen DX nor the NWO would've existed. Thats basically the bottom line. Nice try youngster.:PIf you believe that, your a fool...obviously, you believe it.
You know what, Frenchfries, I'd like to see a picture of you. I already have an idea in my head of what you look like. Why dont you go ahead and post one in the members pics forum...
The Franchise
04-10-2007, 02:15 PM
And there is no Horsemen without the Freebirds, by that same rhetoric.
Yes the Freebirds were among being the 1st of successful groups. Nobody is denying that. That goes hand and hand. The Freebirds was the first successful Trio in wrestling. The Horsemen was the first successful mega-group in wrestling. Hand in hand.:)
SimonJamesJones
04-10-2007, 02:18 PM
Yes the Freebirds were among being the 1st of successful groups Yes the Freebirds were one of the 1st successful groups
That goes hand and hand That goes hand IN hand
The Freebirds was the first successful Trio in wrestling The Freebirds WERE the first successful trio in wrestling
The Horsemen was the first successful mega-group in wrestling The Horsemen WERE the first successful mega-group in wrestling
The Franchise
04-10-2007, 02:20 PM
You challenge me to talk about those times in the middle of a thread it has nothing to do with. Where do you want me to start? What specific subject? You dont give any info on what you want me to talk about!
Start a new thread specifically about something you dont think I know anything about, and we can discuss it. But dont just say "Ok, talk about the NWA!" when there is no rhyme nor reason, thats retarded!
Apparently because thats what the Fink labelled Savage after he won the title...once :lol
If you believe that, your a fool...obviously, you believe it.
You know what, Frenchfries, I'd like to see a picture of you. I already have an idea in my head of what you look like. Why dont you go ahead and post one in the members pics forum...
Just like I thought. When I put up you go in another direction. Franchise:info31: Beltmark:dumb
SimonJamesJones
04-10-2007, 02:21 PM
Just like I thought. When I put up you go in another direction. Pot! Kettle! Black! :devil
Just like I thought. When I put up you go in another direction. Franchise:info31: Beltmark:dumb
Lol what have you put up?
You haven't put up anything.
And I can't believe your accusing someone else of stealing your tactic of ignoring when you're wrong and changing the subject?
Stop with the gimmick posting, its getting tired really quick and at this rate you'll get banned soon.
Oh and thanks for completely ignoring me talking about "non WWE stuff" just for you. Just when I put up you go in another direction. Typical!
The Beltster
04-10-2007, 03:36 PM
Just like I thought. When I put up you go in another direction. Franchise:info31: Beltmark:dumbLike I said, start a thread about something specific to do with a promotion other than the WWF, and I'll talk about it.
Craig
04-10-2007, 03:51 PM
Franchise:info31: Beltmark:dumb
Franchise, you keep on keeping on man.
Naitch
04-10-2007, 03:53 PM
I like how he tries to settle an argument by using more and more SMILIES~~! Nixon should have used those in the presidential race with JFK, he'd have kicked that little punk's ass.
Craig
04-10-2007, 04:06 PM
My favourite part is where everyone keeps arguing with him as if they'll ever change his mind, but when this thread is eventually closed, nothing will have changed and we'll still have to read the same argument over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.
EDIT - And over.
I like how he tries to settle an argument by using more and more SMILIES~~! Nixon should have used those in the presidential race with JFK, he'd have kicked that little punk's ass.Watergate would have been a little misunderstanding if Nixon had access to these...:lol:greets4::good222::P
The Franchise
04-10-2007, 04:55 PM
Lol what have you put up?
You haven't put up anything.
And I can't believe your accusing someone else of stealing your tactic of ignoring when you're wrong and changing the subject?
Stop with the gimmick posting, its getting tired really quick and at this rate you'll get banned soon.
Oh and thanks for completely ignoring me talking about "non WWE stuff" just for you. Just when I put up you go in another direction. Typical!
What am I wrong about?
Gimmick posting? No, I dont do that. Do I like to hit a nerve or two? Sure. But I dont do gimmick posting. And when did I ignore you on a non WWE stuff? When did that happen? Any question anyone asks I answer. You guys do not.:P
The Franchise
04-10-2007, 04:57 PM
Like I said, start a thread about something specific to do with a promotion other than the WWF, and I'll talk about it.
I am the one that challenged you to talk outside the WWE box. Ball is in your court.:xyx
What am I wrong about?
Gimmick posting? No, I dont do that. Do I like to hit a nerve or two? Sure. But I dont do gimmick posting. And when did I ignore you on a non WWE stuff? When did that happen? Any question anyone asks I answer. You guys do not.:P
So the bit where I asked you about Akira Maeda, Brian Pillman was me not answering then?
But why are we talking about this in a thread about Flair/Hogan anyway?
If you want to talk about non-WWE stuff, make your own thread for goodness sake.
The Franchise
04-10-2007, 05:02 PM
So the bit where I asked you about Akira Maeda, Brian Pillman was me not answering then?
But why are we talking about this in a thread about Flair/Hogan anyway?
If you want to talk about non-WWE stuff, make your own thread for goodness sake.
What was the question again? :doh32:
What was the question again? :doh32:
You said none of us talk about anything other than WWE because apparantly we know nothing of anything else. I mentioned some stuff which you completely bypassed.
But as I said if you want to talk about WCW, NWA, Mid-South, Smokey Mountain, ECW, TNA, ROH, UWF, Japanese promotions etc then go and make a thread about it.
But don't go on your high horse proclaiming we don't know anything about wrestling just because we haven't discussed the merit of Nick Bockwinkel's AWA Title run, in a thread about Hogan and Flair. It would be about as relevant as me saying I like chicken.
So if you want to prove a point make a thread about whatever you like, and we'll see what debate we get.
The Franchise
04-10-2007, 05:12 PM
So the bit where I asked you about Akira Maeda, Brian Pillman was me not answering then?
But why are we talking about this in a thread about Flair/Hogan anyway?
If you want to talk about non-WWE stuff, make your own thread for goodness sake.
You said none of us talk about anything other than WWE because apparantly we know nothing of anything else. I mentioned some stuff which you completely bypassed.
But as I said if you want to talk about WCW, NWA, Mid-South, Smokey Mountain, ECW, TNA, ROH, UWF, Japanese promotions etc then go and make a thread about it.
But don't go on your high horse proclaiming we don't know anything about wrestling just because we haven't discussed the merit of Nick Bockwinkel's AWA Title run, in a thread about Hogan and Flair. It would be about as relevant as me saying I like chicken.
So if you want to prove a point make a thread about whatever you like, and we'll see what debate we get.
Careful what you wish for. Besides Nick Bockwinkel was a joke. Thank goodness Kurt Hennig ended his reign as champ. (Even though he had a little help from Larry Zybsko and a foreign object.)
Craig
04-10-2007, 05:13 PM
So if you want to prove a point make a thread about whatever you like, and we'll see what debate we get.
Yes, because that's just what we need. More threads like this one.
And HA Franchise, you know nothing. It's Curt Hennig
Careful what you wish for
Good ignoring job there Franchise, well done.
Naitch
04-10-2007, 05:21 PM
Yes, because that's just what we need. More threads like this one.
Thank you Mr. Craig for saying what needed to be said.
It isn't often I go the pompous 'mummy, can I be a forum mod when I grow up?' route and call for a thread to be banished to the depths of the TWO archive but to quote a smarter man than I: 'Oh, this thread, this ****ing thread.'
Darkstar
04-10-2007, 05:31 PM
Your wish is granted Naitch.
Does this make me your mummy?
vBulletin® v3.7.2, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.