Stone Cold Steve Austin - The Most Selfish Wrestler Of All Time

[The Cork]

You might know a guy called Hulk Hogan.

He gets an extremely bad rep from the IWC for being a selfish, self-promoting jackass who ruined wrestling. This also applies to one Hunter Hearst Helmsley too.

But why not Stone Cold?

Consider the following:

Hogan (clean jobs done after becoming a mega-star).
-Ultimate Warrior -Bill Goldberg -The Rock -Triple H -Kurt Angle -Undertaker -Brock Lesnar (a complete shit kicking).


Steve Austin (clean jobs done after becoming a mega-star...so this doesn't include his losses to Bret Hart).
-Mankind (Summerslam 99'....triple threat match) -Triple H (2001 No Way Out) -Kurt Angle (2001 No Mercy) -The Rock (Wrestlemania 19).



-Hulk Hogan has never walked out on a company while under contract....Austin has (due to unhappiness over the direction of his character)

-Just as Hulk Hogan has politick'd backstage, so has SCSA. Austin refused to job to HHH at Summerslam 99' (and as result, Foley was thrown in there to make it a triple threat...and Austin jobbed to him).

-Austin's job to HHH (at No Mercy 2001) was done in such a way that both men simultaneously knocked each other out (and HHH's arm just so happened to be over Austin's body). During that match, Austin also dominated for the most part....and scored the 1st pinfall victory.

-Austin's job to Angle was explained by the fact that HE DIDNT KNOW IT WAS ILLEGAL TO TAP OUT WITH HIS LEFT HAND. Austin defeated Angle two weeks later on RAW.

-Austin's job to The Rock at WM-19 was explained by the fact that Austin's neck and knees were severely injured (and that he had stayed up the night before in the hospital getting pain medication. As result, Austin was fired by Bischoff).



Hogan may not have been anywhere near the "team player" that guys like Kane, Foley, and Eddie Guerrero were, but how was Steve Austin any different? (and if not....WORSE?!).

Both Austin and Hogan were extremely selective as to who they jobbed to.

In fact - Austin's final job to The Rock was done to a guy that wasn't going to be in the business any longer....

Granted - Austin was a far better wrestler and worker than Hogan, but does this have much to do with being a team player?

In fact - guys like Undertaker and Triple H (two people that have been criticisized heavily in yester-year....and at present), have done more CLEAN and "relevant" jobs than Austin.

DO NOT GET ME WRONG. Austin is a decent wrestler and one of the biggest superstar of all-time. But he has got away w/ murder tbh.













*hes also a wife beater.

 

[SAL]

All but one of Hogan's jobs came after he turned 45. He had pretty much 12 years of just beating everybody, then a turn as a dominant heel character for another 3 years. Austin had a very short run on top. He was a midcarder for the first 7 years of his career, whereas Hogan was a top star pretty much immediately. Austin missed all of his age 36 year due to injury. He did walk out in 2002 and came back to wrestle one more match, and that was it. Comparing Hogan at age 50 to Austin isn't really fair. Hogan, during his "Austin" phase in WWF, jobbed to nobody except Warrior, and he never had a reason to walk out because he had "creative control" over storylines. Who's to say that Austin wouldn't be jobbing to everyone if he was still wrestling at Hogan's age? Given his neck issues, I don't particularly blame Austin for trying to keep his spot.

 

[John McHenry]

-Austin's job to The Rock at WM-19 was explained by the fact that Austin's neck and knees were severely injured (and that he had stayed up the night before in the hospital getting pain medication. As result, Austin was fired by Bischoff).

Saying he was fired by Bischoff makes you sound like a complete mark.

In addition to the valid point SAL has already made most of the gripes that you've listed him involve him not wanting to job to one man in particular HHH. The rest is speculation because you don't know the true events nor do I.


Also your little swipe at the end with him being a wife beater. Stone Cold himself has said "I won't go into details but I will say that nobody can understand or judge a situation like that unless they've been there" now I'm not going to defend the man I don't believe I could do that kind of thing but exactly how does this come into his ability as a wrestler or the comparison your making between him and Hogan.

 

[Crippler]

Hogan never put Shawn over @ SS05 hell he wouldn't even let Orton go over @ SS06.

 

[PHX]

They both are notorious for putting guys over but compare the situations you named of them putting guys over Austin was still in his prime in all the instances you brought up while Hogan was still only in his prime in really one of them just still had great meaning to have a win over him when Goldberg beat him. Yeah Austin did the walking out on WWE which was horrible but Hogan is no better like you're making him out to be when there was a story that he threaten to no show wrestle fucking mania if he didn't win the world title.

 

[The Cork]

All but one of Hogan's jobs came after he turned 45. He had pretty much 12 years of just beating everybody, then a turn as a dominant heel character for another 3 years. Austin had a very short run on top. He was a midcarder for the first 7 years of his career, whereas Hogan was a top star pretty much immediately. Austin missed all of his age 36 year due to injury. He did walk out in 2002 and came back to wrestle one more match, and that was it. Comparing Hogan at age 50 to Austin isn't really fair. Hogan, during his "Austin" phase in WWF, jobbed to nobody except Warrior, and he never had a reason to walk out because he had "creative control" over storylines. Who's to say that Austin wouldn't be jobbing to everyone if he was still wrestling at Hogan's age? Given his neck issues, I don't particularly blame Austin for trying to keep his spot.

Lets put into context the differences here though.

Hogan was in an era of larger than life characters, and one predominantly protecting kayfabe. As the biggest star in the business, it wouldn't particularly make sense for the 'superman' like mega star to be losing a lot of matches. Consider the fans perspective, wins and losses meant a heck of a lot more back then. Hogan could of been ruined had he lost just a few times. Like you said, most of his jobs came later in his career. I see that as him being level headed and clear in the direction of his character. Adapting to the times, if you will.

Austin, however, is a totally different case. He shot to stardom in a period where wrestling was red-hot, but also where losses werent as meaningful, titles were being handed around willy nilly, and the internet (in particular, wrestling dirtsheets) were growing at a rapid rate. This information that wasnt present before, such as spoilers and rumours, blew open kayfabe. Thus, the more realistic characters were prevalent, as was Austin's. He was a normal, beer drinking non-superhero, which is even more strange why he didnt look more vulnerable at times.

I'm not telling you anything you don't already know, just outlining some minor details, apologies if it sounds condescending.

Hogan put over Billy Kidman three consecutive matches.
He tapped to Angle.
He lost to The Rock in probably the biggest match of all time.

And Austin? Not only did he go over the whole roster, he buried guys needlessly on the mic too. Remember Taz, once credible badass from ECW? Treated like a whipping boy bitch during the Invasion. Also, coming out during Lance Storm matches and yelling "BORRRRING" down the mic isnt helping anyone.

Hogan isnt entirely blame free himself (letting him beat Randy Orton at Summerslam is one of the all time worst booking decisions), but compared to Austin hes pretty much a saint.

Saying he was fired by Bischoff makes you sound like a complete mark.

Yes, I totally believe professional wrestling is real.

Thanks for reminding me otherwise.

In addition to the valid point SAL has already made most of the gripes that you've listed him involve him not wanting to job to one man in particular HHH. The rest is speculation because you don't know the true events nor do I.

No, my claims involve quite a few instances, notably the Brock Lesnar one where Austin refused to take a loss and flew home. WWE has acknowledged this as true many times in DVD releases and such.

Also, obviously we dont know the full story, but forums run on speculation. If you want to outlaw that, then there would be no threads to post in.

They both are notorious for putting guys over but compare the situations you named of them putting guys over Austin was still in his prime in all the instances you brought up while Hogan was still only in his prime in really one of them just still had great meaning to have a win over him when Goldberg beat him. Yeah Austin did the walking out on WWE which was horrible but Hogan is no better like you're making him out to be when there was a story that he threaten to no show wrestle fucking mania if he didn't win the world title.

Well I guess I'll have to ask you to define 'prime', because a name like his is always relevant. You say he was only in his prime for the Goldberg match, yet he put The Rock over in arguably the biggest match in wrestling history nearly 4 years later.

Hogan never put Shawn over @ SS05 hell he wouldn't even let Orton go over @ SS06.

I wont defend the indefensible, beating a guy on a hot streak with a 'Legend Killer' gimmick was a totally stupid move. Orton would've been set up for life off that win. All I'll say for Michaels is that what benefit would anyone get from a HBK win opposed to a Hogan one, and if Michaels had any problem with the result its a pot kettle black scenario considering the things he's done himself.

 

[John McHenry]

I'm not telling you anything you don't already know, just outlining some minor details, apologies if it sounds condescending.

One of my favorite gimmicks that never occured

No, my claims involve quite a few instances, notably the Brock Lesnar one where Austin refused to take a loss and flew home. WWE has acknowledged this as true many times in DVD releases and such.

I believe Austins two major issues with that were. A. It was on Raw not a build up to anything as it should have been a PPV match (I'd agree with Austin) and B. That they were pushing the shit out of him to fast and Austin thought he'd burn out (so Austin right on both counts)

Is he allowed to walk out on his job. Why the hell not I've quit jobs when things weren't going my way. As pointed out Hogan was in a position where he could do whatever he wanted almost anywhere he went.

 

[BadBooking]

-Hulk Hogan has never walked out on a company while under contract....Austin has (due to unhappiness over the direction of his character)

-Just as Hulk Hogan has politick'd backstage, so has SCSA. Austin refused to job to HHH at Summerslam 99' (and as result, Foley was thrown in there to make it a triple threat...and Austin jobbed to him).

Hogan may not have been anywhere near the "team player" that guys like Kane, Foley, and Eddie Guerrero were, but how was Steve Austin any different? (and if not....WORSE?!).

Both Austin and Hogan were extremely selective as to who they jobbed to.

I had to re-read this post many times as to see what main points do I disagree with. Here it goes:

1. Steve Austin walked out of WWE in 2002 because yes he was unhappy about the creative direction of his character, but also, THEY WANTED TO JOB AUSTIN IN TWO MINUTES TO BROCK LESNAR ON RAW. Seriously, think of that for a second. Austin wouldn't have minded doing the job if it made money and/or was right for the business. Making Lesnar beat Austin on PPV with buildup has much more foundation than jobbing Austin clean as a sheet in a short time with no buildup on RAW. Hell, even the Hardy Boys would have looked better than Austin at that point.
2. Austin didn't politic Summerslam 1999. Major misconception here. It was actually Jesse Ventura who said he didn't want to raise the hand of a heel, and the WWE officials were going to put the belt on Hunter at that point. Add in Mankind returning from injury due to a Triple H attack, and surprisingly, it made sense in storyline. The only person Austin publically buried in WWE was Jeff Jarrett because of how Jeff's dad Jerry treated him in Memphis.
3. When it comes to team player, let me ask you this: if Stone Cold didn't appear AT ALL on RAW after he was injured at Summerslam 1997, where would the business be? I'm not saying Austin was the singular piece of the puzzle, but he was indeed a large part of it. If anything, Austin is a bigger team player for not only getting RAW over that hump while he was injured, but for also making the highest-earning year WWE has ever had in 2001.
4. Of course Austin was going to have a little ego, but EVERY SINGLE CHAMPION IN THE HISTORY OF THIS BUSINESS has that same accusation. Every one. From Flair to Sammartino to Cena to Miz, WWE Champions have to politic because not only do they have to somewhat dictate their programs, they have to do so for the sake of business. Geez, Austin jobbed to Kane at King of the Ring 1998 when he didn't have to, mainly because creative put themselves in a hole, but it also proved WWE PPVs are as unpredictable as any event ever. Austin didn't win the 1999 Royal Rumble for the same reason. Just because people politic doesn't mean there's bad intentions behind it. Think of politicking as a bargaining chip, and Austin hasn't played it anywhere near as horrifically as Hogan did.

*Yeah Austin did beat up his wife, but heck, I'm surprised there's been no official records of Hogan yet.

 

[The Cork]

I had to re-read this post many times as to see what main points do I disagree with. Here it goes:

1. Steve Austin walked out of WWE in 2002 because yes he was unhappy about the creative direction of his character, but also, THEY WANTED TO JOB AUSTIN IN TWO MINUTES TO BROCK LESNAR ON RAW. Seriously, think of that for a second. Austin wouldn't have minded doing the job if it made money and/or was right for the business. Making Lesnar beat Austin on PPV with buildup has much more foundation than jobbing Austin clean as a sheet in a short time with no buildup on RAW. Hell, even the Hardy Boys would have looked better than Austin at that point.

Hogan didn't have a problem with losing a short squash to Lesnar on Smackdown. Whether its a good creative decision isn't for him to decide anyway, he wasn't on the booking committee and was on the way out as a full-time wrestler. At that point he wasn't in any meaningful program on TV either, sort of half feuding with the nWo, Eddie Guerrero and Ric Flair. Losing the match wouldn't of been harmful at all.

2. The only person Austin publically buried in WWE was Jeff Jarrett because of how Jeff's dad Jerry treated him in Memphis.

Conveniently forgetting the whole Invasion angle there, it seems.

3. When it comes to team player, let me ask you this: if Stone Cold didn't appear AT ALL on RAW after he was injured at Summerslam 1997, where would the business be? I'm not saying Austin was the singular piece of the puzzle, but he was indeed a large part of it. If anything, Austin is a bigger team player for not only getting RAW over that hump while he was injured, but for also making the highest-earning year WWE has ever had in 2001.

He's getting credit for showing up to work now? Wow.

4. Of course Austin was going to have a little ego, but EVERY SINGLE CHAMPION IN THE HISTORY OF THIS BUSINESS has that same accusation. Every one. From Flair to Sammartino to Cena to Miz, WWE Champions have to politic because not only do they have to somewhat dictate their programs, they have to do so for the sake of business. Geez, Austin jobbed to Kane at King of the Ring 1998 when he didn't have to, mainly because creative put themselves in a hole, but it also proved WWE PPVs are as unpredictable as any event ever. Austin didn't win the 1999 Royal Rumble for the same reason. Just because people politic doesn't mean thre's bad intentions behind it. Think of politicking as a bargaining chip, and Austin hasn't played it anywhere near as horrifically as Hogan did.

Those two examples you gave.

- he won the belt straight back the very next night on Raw.
- he won the right to main event Mania the month after.

Come on.

 

[BadBooking]

Those two examples you gave.

- he won the belt straight back the very next night on Raw.
- he won the right to main event Mania the month after.

Come on.

Let's be frank here:
1. Kane vs. Austin at Fully Loaded would have been a better option yes, hell, a F4W would have been best at that point in time. All four guys were banged up one way or another, so who was champion during this point could have been easily interchangeable, save for Foley and a 'BAH GAWD SLOBBERKNOCKER FIRST TITLE WIN!'
2. No one in their right mind would want to see Vince wrestle for a title at Wrestlemania in the main event. That's just crazy talk. I don't want droopy-faced JR saying, 'WHAT A MANEUVER!" on Vince.

Let's just say this: we disagree on Austin, and while it's still peaceful, let's shake hands and call it a day.

 

[Slim]

Looking at this... and trying not to fire back, despite really really wanting to... you have got to be the most completely unreasonable and insane person I've seen post. Your examples about Hogan are... asinine at best. Then you give the excuse... oh well it was during an era when he needed to win and couldn't lose so he had to keep winning but Austin was in an era where even though he is THE TOP DRAW he should lose more and blah blah blah.

Plus your examples of Hogan losing cleanly... even at Mania against Warrior... if you watch it... yeah he jobbed but he made sure he didn't look weak at all cause he "kicked out" right after the 3 count. He couldn't just lay there. Mania XI... Yokozuna's moment... ruined by Hogan who already wrestled earlier in the night because he felt the fans would hate a heel winning in the Mania main event for the first time had to squash Yoko in under a couple minutes to claim the world title again. He jobbed to Taker in Survivor Series 92... TWO DAYS LATER he wins the belt back from Taker. And his jobs to Kidman? Really you are bringing that up? As valid points? Really? His job to Goldberg... that was the only time he was truly at the top when he jobbed and that was for ratings and there were company men in attendance and he wanted to show he was a team player.

His job to Rock... Hogan wasn't at the top anymore. This is Mania X-8. This is not the 90's... this is after 2000. So him jobbing to Rock at Mania isn't as big as you wanna make it because he wasn't at the top anymore. Then his other jobs... even less relevant. The only one that meant anything was Lesnar cause of the way he jobbed. Other than that nothing.

Austin is no saint either but to say Hogan was so much better and did so much more and all that crap... is asinine.

And this is only a blip of the response I want to give.

 

[The Cork]

And his jobs to Kidman? Really you are bringing that up? As valid points? Really?

He lost consecutive matches to him and put him over. I don't see why I wouldn't mention that in a discussion about Hogan putting people over. When did Austin ever put over a mid-carder? Good luck finding examples, there aren't any. The guy flat out refused to lose to Jarrett and Lesnar.

His job to Rock... Hogan wasn't at the top anymore. This is Mania X-8. This is not the 90's... this is after 2000. So him jobbing to Rock at Mania isn't as big as you wanna make it because he wasn't at the top anymore.

I'm actually lost for words here.

Doing the job in the biggest match in wrestling history doesn't count, apparently.

 

[John McHenry]

Asinine I'd agree with that word.

 

[The Cork]

That's a solid counter argument you've provided there McHenry.

Shitttt, with posts like that I rescind my OP, you've totally convinced me Austin isnt selfish at all.

 

[John McHenry]

Bout time.

And I've already provided a counter argument. I'll agree Austin may have been selfish at times but to claim he's the most selfish and more so than a Guy like hogan? Also your basing everything on one small portion of both mens careers.