Is Rock/Austin rivalry over-rated??

[ATKOOL]

I know some people will go...no claiming I'm a moron, but hear me out.

Rock/Austin rivalry happened during Austin/McMahon and it virtually ended the fued between McMahon/Austin. That is virtually the only time they really faced which last about 3 months. They had like 2 matches in the main event of each ppv. One of course was Mania and the other was Backlash. Austin was hurt from his neck around August 99-late 2000. He put the belt on Foley because he deserved it and didn't want to give the belt to HHH. When he returned he fueded with Rikishi and HHH. Than battled The Rock at Wrestlemania 17 and faced him the next night on Raw inside of a steel cage. Rock than left to do Mummy returns or something like that. Didn't watch the movie series....so forgive me. Rock returned in the Summer of 2001 during the invasion fued. Austin fueded with Angle while Rock fueded with Booker T and Jericho til traditional Survivor Series match between Alliance and WWF. Rock beat Austin for the first time so "WWF" will survive. Crowned Undisputed Champion....Austin faced Angle and won to face the winner of Rock/Jericho. Jericho won and faced Rock through Rumble 01. Rock was the replacement for Austin in the Hogan fued to Wrestlemania 18. After that Austin took his ball and went home. Didn't return til 2003 when they faced the final time at Wrestlemania 19 where Rock defeated Austin. Austin hasn't wrestled since.

So I ask, is the rivalry over-rated? These two faced like 6 or 7x including the Survivor Series 5 on 5 match excluding the times when they battled for the IC title. They had a ton of great promos, but is it really at the top as one of the best rivalries of all-time? Is it over-rated like I think it is? HHH vs Rock I thought was better and of course Vince vs Austin. The two fueded for like a month or 2, but never really had long fueds like other great rivalries or even series of matches. That is why I believe it is quite over-rated.

 

[SAIYANS]

A little as Rock and Austin were not even one another's biggest rival. They both had a bigger rivalry with Trips than with one another. Better matches too

 

[PHX]

Interesting topic and can see your point. I think their feud gets looked at as big as it does because they were in the forefront of the attitude era so logically a feud with them is just huge. That said I thought as you said Triple H/Rock was a better feud than Austin/Rock and Austin/Vince was better as well. They did have a great feud together but it wasn't their best feuds respectively and could even say the feud could have been better. If it's looked at as the feud of the attitude era then yeah it's overrated. If it is viewed as a top 10 feud of the attitude era then it's rated just fine.

 

[TheOneKnownAsFetter]

No. That feud was as monumental to the business as Rock/Hogan among many others. It was part of the attitude era and was a contributing factor to WWF/WWE finally beating out WCW in the ratings. Add that with everything else in the Attitude Era and that's how that company survived.

 

[Cwalker]

Truth be told, I think it's more about who they were as opposed to the content of the feud. These were the two biggest guys at the time, and arguably two of the biggest stars of all time. So when they hook up, it's going to be a big deal. Were the feuds enojyable? Honestly, not really. Their feud in 2001 was basicially a sub-plot in the Austin/Vince Mcmahon feud leading into Wrestlemania 17. I barely remember the feud heading into Wrestlemania 15, or the payoff to be honest. The build for Wrestlemania 19, and the subsequent match stood out for me though. That brief fued was probably the highlight of anything the two did together.

It's weird to see the top two guys not work together that much like these two. Hogan was the top guy in the 80s, and he worked frequently with guys like Warrior and Savage who I considered the #2s of that time, and even the last few years Cena and Orton worked together alot. Not so much Austin and Rock.

 

[TheOneKnownAsFetter]

Austin/Rock was kind of like what the Elimination Chamber was before it became a two every year sort of match. They were a PPV seller. I agree with CWalker. Yes they didn't have the best feuds and maybe the payoff wasn't that rememberable but they were two of the biggest guys and they were what was selling. I honestly don't know why Austin/Rock didn't happen that much back before and during the Attitude Era and the times after. I mean when The Rock hosted Mania last year and the segment with Rocky and Austin was shown both guys got a big pop.

 

[The New F'n Show]

Personally I thought there IC feud was great and I liked the buildup to Wrestlemania 15 also. After that not so much, I would agree it is slightly overrated but it was a very important feud and as Fetter said it sold.

 

[We Are Legion]

I don't think it was overrated the slightest.

However, I do think the importance of their rivalry in the ratings war going head to head against one another is slightly overrated. Austin v. Vince sold the seats, as did Rock/Nation v. DX. The two were monumentally effective on their own rivaling anyone. Their first two Mania matches were definitely necessary, but those two never feuded much outside of Mania season for good reason. Why have 1 great rivalry when you can have 2?

 

[The Cork]

As already said, their rivalries with Trips were way better, but I'm not really a fan of Austin in general.

Their Wrestlemania matches were brilliant though.

 

[Dod Draper]

I loved their WM17 feud. Thought it was a worthy main event of WWF/E's greatest PPV (in my opinion).

Two of the two biggest stars of all time, fighting for the title at Wrestlemania, in WWE's finest era and at a time when being world champion mattered. What more can you want?

 

[Deezy]

Rock and Austin were like how Austin and Bret were not the major rivalry. Just two guys you could throw a feud together and make magic.

Austins ultimate rival was McMahon.

 

[Zen]

Not necessarily. There two were essentially the faces of the Attitude Era, two of the biggest stars ever, and they had a rivalry -- that alone makes their rivalry unique.

Were they each other's biggest rivals? I think a very convincing could be made. Even if they had really fantastic feuds with other people, they faced 3 times at Mania(somewhat of an unheard feat) -- Austin's last match was with Rocky -- and essentially were foils to each other in critical moments of the Attitude Era and feuded quite often.

As for their matches, their match at WM 17 is arguably one of the greatest North American matches ever. Their other matches weren't nearly as good, but that one really was. It was not only the peak of the Attitude Era, was one of the first matches post WM-3 that had a big out of this world -- Andre/Hogan type feel -- which is what the Mania event should be by definition: the two biggest and most over stars taking you on a wild trip -- so it had certainly had the hype but it was also a very good match storyline wise, in ring action -- it had all the components necessary.

Essentially, the whole match told an excellent story: they basically had all sorts of allusions to various parts of Austin's career -- it was the perfect anthology of Austin's career up to that point (they alluded with various moves )-- it wrapped up everything up until that point where Austin(as a kayfabe character) completely disregarded his past, somewhat "betrayed" it, all to move into a completely new direction to team up with his arch-nemesis McMahon. Now that is storytelling! It had good pacing, Rocky sold really well, and Austin's brawling was good as usual.

I find it quite underrated and Austin's general heel run(which was a blockbuster failure-- sort of) but it was pure creative genius, and Austin delivered essentially the best in ring work of his career in 2001(the whole whole year). So yeah, the people didn't like the fan favourite turning heel -- so they really hated the heel turn and really have ignored the work surrounding that heel turn. That would explain why it is somewhat forgotten/underrated.