Re: Would any of you had replaced Rock with Austin at WM X8?
In hindsight, I don't mind either option. I'm good with Rock/Hogan. If Austin/Hogan happened instead, I'd be good with that too.
At the time though, I wanted Austin/Hogan more cause that was THE dream match that was talked about during the Monday Night Wars. The guy that ushered in The Golden Era and the top guy of WCW vs. the guy that ushered in the Attitude Era and the top guy of the WWF. Rock/Hogan was never talked about except maybe as a second best option and that's how I viewed the match between Rock and Hogan at Wrestlemania X8, as the second best option after Austin/Hogan.
Honestly, I still have those feelings today that it was the second best option after Austin/Hogan and maybe I do lean a bit more towards replacing Rock in the match with Austin because again that was THE dream match in the Monday Night Wars but again I was good with Rock/Hogan too.
As far as the whole ring styles not meshing, I'm sure something could've been worked out. If The Rock was a showman and he worked plenty of great matches with Austin, who's to say Austin couldn't have had a great match with Hogan too who was also a showman. It wouldn't have been a technical 5 star masterpiece but neither was Rock/Hogan. That match was made because of the hype, energy, atmosphere and the crowd which would've been the same for Austin/Hogan.
And if Austin were booed against Hogan in Canada like Rock, I think Austin could've transitioned his role and put on another great heel performance in Canada like he did at In Your House: Canadian Stampede during a time where he was the babyface everywhere else in the world except in Canada.
Nah.
Rock/Hogan is the better match up personality wise, wrestling style wise, character wise... pretty much every way you look at it really besides the idea of "Battle for the GOAT Spot" which is debatable.
Honestly I don't think an Austin/Hogan match would have been very good. It would have had the same face to face stand off that Hogan/Rock had with the flash bulbs and all that, but apart from that I think their conflicting styles wouldn't have been as exciting as Rock and Hogan's styes which REALLY complimented each other and REALLY worked with the crowd and match psycology. A perfect example of that is the stunner. It's such a quick move, where as the leg drop and the people's elbow can be milked for time as well as theatrics and showmanship, which where all key components to the Rock/Hogan match.
For me the number one reason why I was never interested in seeing the Austin/Hogan match is Hulk doing the classic Hulk Up punch punch big boot leg drop on Austin while Austin gawks and acts stunned and amazed just doesn't look or feel right when I picture it in my head. I always thought Austin wouldn't go for the first punch, he'd just kick him in the gut and give him the stunner.
It might be a shame that we never got an Austin/Hogan match, if only for the "historical significance", but as far as WM18, Rock/Hogan was definitely the way to go.
edit: this post ended up being A LOT longer than I thought it would
I could picture it, I just think back to the 1997 Royal Rumble match when Bret's music hits and Austin gave this great reaction.
But even if your scenario of what you think would happen did play out, isn't that the appeal of an Austin/Hogan match and what makes it interesting? The two different personalities and styles. I mean you wouldn't have somebody giving the same ole classic reaction to the Hulk Up Of Doom that we've seen millions of times already, you'd be seeing something new here for the first time ever, you'd be finally seeing a badass with no fear actually standing up to Hogan and fighting back rather than being afraid like everybody else has in the past, giving us a "Woah shit, did I just see that?" moment. The Hulk Up sequence is actually absurd when you think about it, if a wrestler is afraid, why don't they just leave the ring or try something different instead of just stand there looking afraid and try punch him? Surely they would've learned from the same mistake made millions of times before in the past. The only person who has done this is Shawn Michaels at Summerslam 2005 when Hogan hulked up and Shawn responded by slapping Hogan, stopping his hulk out, which was awesome and hilarious. That Austin/Hogan Hulk Up scenario is more realistic than the same old one that you've always seen. But I've always imagined it like Austin takes the sequence, Hogan goes for the Legdrop but Austin moves out of the way and Hogan misses just like Warrior at Wrestlemania 6 and then as soon as they get up, Austin stuns Hogan for the win. Imagine Hogan pointing at Austin though and Austin responds back by flipping him off to his face, lol.
No, for the following reasons:
1). Austin in 2002 was like Mickey Mantle in the 1960s; he was fading fast. His body was giving out, and his popularity was still hurting after the botched heel turn.
2). In contrast to #1, The Rock in 2002 was still white-hot; he was every bit as popular as he was a year before.
3). Austin's DTA personality would hinder Hogan's inevitable face turn at the end.
4). Austin's age means they couldn't do a passing of the torch moment, as they did with Rock.
5). Rock had already lost Wrestlemanias 14, 15, 16, and 17. This needed to be his night.
Not true. Austin in his tell-all 2003 book, "The Stone Cold Truth" says absolutely nothing about this being the plan.
If it were true, then he would have said something to get publicity in his book. He said nothing because there was no such plan.
Just a couple of things I wanna address.
1) Austin's popularity wasn't hurting if you go back and watch the 2002 Royal Rumble. He was the most over guy on the PPV and the PPV was centered around Triple H's return, the crowd were absolutely WHAT?-crazy for Austin and on the Raw's leading up to the Royal Rumble. Those promos with Michael Cole were crazy. Austin had the crowd in the palm of his hands and the way he controlled and worked those crazy bastards on the mic was amazing.
3) Austin didn't need to shake his hand and hug him like Rock did. All he could've done was just save him from a Hall and Nash beatdown like Rock did and then share a beer with Hogan like he has done with him on a post-Raw dark show. Austin had a DTA personality but he wasn't some heartless monster. This was a guy who saved Stephanie from The Undertaker's black wedding afterall.
4) There was no true "passing of the torch" moment, that's just a banner to sell the match. And it's arguable there never truly is a "passing of the torch" in wrestling. Austin and Rock were already popular and had taken over the WWF in Hogan's absence, they didn't need a "passing of the torch" as they had "taken the torch" from Hogan already. Plus Rock was on his way out and would go on to film a movie within the next couple of weeks and to say it was a "passing of the torch" is totally dismissing Austin in the first half of the Attitude Era who "took Hogan's torch". So if there was a "passing of the torch" to Rock, Austin needed to be in the match and you could say Austin vs. Rock at Wrestlemania XIX was that "passing of the torch" moment. Even though Cena defeated Rock at Wrestlemania 29, nobody considers that a "passing of the torch".
5) Rock won at Wrestlemania 14. He was beat and tapped out to Ken Shamrock but then the decision was reversed when Shamrock refused to let go. But this really isn't relevant at all as Rock had taken plenty of losses even to guys like Al Snow and still remained just as over as he did coming into the match. If Rock had lost to Hogan, it wouldn't have hurt him at all, he still would've been just as big and popular as before.