Greek God of Knowledge
Edge and Christian never main evented a PPV and had far greater interest and investment put into them as a team. Matt and Jeff never main evented a PPV against one another. Hell, even Shawn Michaels and Triple H, for all of the times they've feuded and had matches together, only main evented five PPV's against each other (and this is counting two triple threat matches where they weren't even the main focus, so three if we want to be technical). Two main events between Taker and Kane is actually pretty impressive all things considered. People who start out as tag team partners generally don't main event against one another, because there's always that one who ends up being the lesser known of the group and/or just doesn't generate the same type of success.So from 1997 to 2019, they only main-evented a PPV twice....from a creative standpoint they been stuck together since Kane's debut, and yet only 2 main-events. It's funny that you mentioned the breakdown match, they had add Austin into the mix just to generate interest, and the fact that the fans popped with AUstin both of them down and counted to three, which is one of the worst finishes I've ever seen, just prove that people didn't really give a crap about those two facing each other, they just wanted to see Austin.
Now you're just choosing to change the narrative for your own sake. This simply wasn't the case.It's not about who close out the show. The main storyline leading up to that PPV was Kane/Austin, it's not even debatable.
Okay? And? Where in that statement am I saying that the majority of people thought that? I said a lot of people, and that's true. That's different than majority. But most of the people who were around watching that PPV were much more invested in HBK/Austin. I was never denying this.You said for a lot of people Kane/Taker was the biggest match of the show,...not even the biggest Kane/Taker fans believe this.
And yet it wasn't the main event.Main event = the main storyline
Rock/Hogan was the true main-event of WM 18 because leading up to that event it was a primary focus from a creative standpoint.
Lmao what? Hogan had absolutely nothing to do with Austin's rise in popularity. What he did in the 80s was irrelevant. WWF was on a massive downward spiral before Austin took the reigns. It was nowhere close to what it once was from a popularity standpoint. Austin brought it back to that level. This is just an incredibly bad argument.Here we go again.
The same can be said about Austin, he benefited from the nWo's rise in popularity. They literally brought the wrestling industry from death to life. Actually, if it wasn't for Hulk Hogan turning the WWE into a global brand in the 80s, Austin wouldn't be nearly as popular.
If you were to try to apply that to someone like Goldberg, then you'd absolutely have a point. Goldberg benefited greatly from the NWO and a combination of smart booking and great presentation on WCW's part allowed Goldberg to become a huge star at one point. But Austin benefited very little from the NWO.
Who the hell said it was that easy? All I'm saying is that The Rock benefited greatly from Austin's rise to stardom. He rode the wave of momentum that the WWF had going for them at the time, just like Goldberg did in WCW with the NWO. This can't be argued against.If getting big in the AE was this easy, then why didn't the other wrestlers rode the "Austin wave", and become as popular as Rock was/is?
Andre didn't wrestle nearly as many matches on a yearly basis as the Rock did in 2000. This is just a laughably bad argument.Now you're saying Andre was bigger than Rock...lol. No one sold out more house shows than Rock did in 2000. Seriously, just stop.
Andre was a well known international star who didn't become famous through competing under a global brand like the WWE. He didn't need it. Again, no matter where he went and no matter who he worked with, he sold out arenas. All people needed to know was Andre would be there and they'd show up in masses. Compare this with the Rock who was working under a global brand that was already insanely popular and had loads of well known wrestlers to work with. Not to mention, Andre had already become a well known pop culture sensation while he was still in wrestling. The Rock wouldn't be able to pull off his level of popularity until AFTER he completely left WWE and transitioned fully to Hollywood. No one is taking away what The Rock did. But it's not possible to compare him to what Andre was able to do, because very few people can say they were able to draw crowds the way he did. Anyone who disagrees has no idea how popular Andre the Giant was.
First off this is factually wrong. Second, I don't care what the Rock did. Andre the Giant was still able to climb to pop culture icon status without even needing to be part of a global brand and STILL achieved heights that the Rock never managed to reach until he became a full time hollywood actor.No one past, present or future ever reached the peak popularity of The Rock 1999-2000. All the f**** drawing records from PPV buys to Arena sellouts to cable ratings to merchandise sales point out to that.
Yeah, now tell me what kind of wrestlers the Rock got to work with, and now compare that with what Andre was working with when he was selling out arenas with independent territories working against unknown names. Now tell me if the Rock would have been able to do that? I rest my case.And LOL to the guy saying that The Rock wont draw as big internationally as Andre did. Rock sold out every single arena in Japan way back in 2002 and sold out 60k strong in Australia in the very same year.