Hi I'm new. Nice to meet you!
Join Date: Jul 2018
Re: Hulk Hogan Shoots on Smarks and Claims He Only Used Creative Control Once In His Career
I like to crap on Hogan as much as the next guy, but to be fair, he's not the only wrestler to exercise creative control and decide who he's willing to work with and when he does a job.
The guy closest to Hogan in terms of drawing power is Steve Austin. It's on the record that he refused flat out to work with guys like Jeff Jarrett and Billy Gunn when he was on top. He walked out on the company when he was asked to put over Brock Lesnar. Whenever he jobbed, apart from HHH, and Rock in his last match, it was in the screwiest circumstances possible. Yet he doesn't catch get nearly as much heat as Hogan. Why is that? Look at the Alliance era. Undertaker got crucified for the way he buried Page and Kanyon, yet nobody talks about Austin making Booker-T look like a complete jobber during the same timeframe - someone who came into the company as WCW champion and was way younger and had more upside than Page.
Shawn Michaels never even drew, unlike Hogan, and flat out said he wasn't going to do any jobs in 1997. He changed the finish to the Summerslam 1996 main event, killing Vader's push dead on arrival in the process, changed booking plans so he'd work with Sid, and then faked an injury to get out of jobbing to Bret at Wrestlemania. According to common lore he had to be THREATENED into doing the job to Austin at the following years Wrestlemania. Just imagine how much it would have fucked up WWE's booking plans if he didn't play ball and put Austin over. Even when he came back in 2002 (a new man apparently) he still had his moments. He went into business for himself in the Summerslam 2005 main event and the following month he refused to put over Chris Masters. All this and he was the only wrestler in the entire company who basically had carte blanche to decide whether he worked as heel or face.
And perhaps my favorite example of all, Roddy Piper. Someone who escapes any kind of criticism despite never doing any clean jobs (even Hogan did more) despite being way less important to the business. Hogan was actually arguably a victim of Piper's politics, seeing as Piper decided he didn't want to put over the guy WWE was strapping a rocket to at Wrestlemania and then went over HIM clean at WCW's biggest event in 96. This isn't even the most egregious thing Piper is on record as doing. He changed the finish at Slamboree 1997 with CREATIVE CONTROL so his team would go over the NWO - something Kevin Nash graciously agreed to. As if this shithousery wasn't enough, Piper then went into business for himself on a following episode of Nitro, changed the booking of a tag match he was in involving Nash, leading to their infamous backstage fight.
Hogan deserves a lot of the ire he attracts just for his shenanigans at Starrcade 1997 but it's not right that he gets more flak than guys like Austin, HBK and Piper when they pull the same shit.
Who is to say Austin's reasons for not working with Lesnar are any more justifiable for Hogan's reasons for not putting Sting over in the correct fashion?