That imo was the biggest problem along with not giving him fresh opponents.
Compare Warrior's 10 month reign to Hogan's first 10 months as champion.
Hogan got Sheik, Orndorff, Dr.D, Big John Studd, some Samoans, Greg Valentine, Bob Orton, Kamala, Jesse Ventura, Mr. Fuji, Piper and Nikolai, along with various strays. And among that bunch, Piper was without a doubt the freshest and a perfect challenger, Studd was the first taste of Hogan's constant working with bigger guys and you had Sheik for the returns.
Now, look at Warrior. All he truly got was Perfect, Rude & Savage. Rude wasn't really fresh, as he and Warrior began feuding a year prior BUT Rude did score a "pinfall" over Warrior, which made him look credible going against Warrior for the World Title. Perfect wasn't really fresh, as he had began working Warrior back in '89 and was frequently involved with Hogan. Savage, despite being anything fresh, was the perfect program for Warrior but the program lasted for 8 months (6 months of Warrior's title reign) and didn't result in a TV/PPV match until after Warrior had dropped the title.
So, when you book a guy against the same 3 guys for 10 months on house shows (with a handful of randoms thrown in), is business going to really be good, considering these are all guys (with the exception of Rude) that Hogan just ran through within the past 18 months in the same markets?
Whether people want to admit it or not, Hogan had the best quality of opponents of the past 30 years, in his 4 year title reign. They would sign new talent just to feed Hogan, which brings the potential of increasing the gate, as a new face is in that market, ready to take on the champ. All Warrior got was the guys Hogan already crushed in those same markets. So if business is down, don't blame Warrior or his "poor ability", blame WWE and their poor ability to protect Warrior, to feed him and to make him stronger. They booked him better before he got the title, at least he got a variety of talent to work with in those 2-3 years. But, while he got to work with, arguably, 3 of the top workers in the business in '90-'91, it was far from fresh. The feud with Savage had all the potential in the world and still was beyond great but what that feud was born out of (Savage's chase for the title) is the exact opposite of where it ended.
In closing, Warrior wasn't a flop. Warrior's programs were flops, because of circumstances I just mentioned, along with Hogan still remaining in the spotlight and the fact that Warrior had a perceived ego and was difficult to work with. Him being a poor worker is the last thing that should be said because if is that poor of a worker, why did he get the title? BECAUSE HE DREW MONEY.
And drawing money > being a great worker. And I dare anybody to say Warrior didn't draw money. Fuck ratings, attendance & buyrates, as that entails group effort. Let's talk about the popularity and connection with the kids. Let's look at a crowd full of children wearing Warrior merchandise and painted faces. Let's talk about all the public appearances in the media. Let's talk about the Slim Jim endorsement BEFORE he even became champion.
But you can't expect people to come to MSG, watch SNME or order a PPV to see Warrior work a guy that Hogan just ran through 8-12 months prior. And regardless of what spin on it, that puts a damper on business. Warrior didn't kill business, WWE did and it remained that way for over 6 years AFTER Warrior dropped the title. I mean, if he was so bad, why didn't things get better when he left?
Something to think about...