[Crazy Jim Films]

KOTR 94 was due to Jim Neidhardt turning heel and so the tournament winner went after the title match which was a DQ featuring Diesel in his first match of any significance in WWF. Summerslam 94 was because it was Taker's first return and appearance since the 94 Rumble, although Bret vs Owen should have closed the show. SS 94 was because he dropped the title to Backlund and Vince wanted the fans to go home happy.

KOTR 94 was arguably a Bret main event but just booked early because of how the events of the evening were to play out. In the case of both Summer Slam and Survivor Series, The Undertaker match was more prominently featured.

 

[Crazy Jim Films]

A big factor is Vince always has been and will be a body guy. Bret was small in comparison to the beefcakes before him and Vince was always looking for the next Hulkster. That just continued on and on.

He's also been more for over-the-top characters and charisma. Bret was a solid worker but a little limited as a star player.

 

[Crazy Jim Films]

Bret vs. Shawn was the main event of the 1992 Survivor Series.

There have been other WWF Champions not get main events of PPV events as well. Below are a few examples before the creation of multiple World Championships (where one of them would not be in the main event). Throughout the early-to-late 90s the company would try to have a feel-good moment at the end of the show, oftentimes putting the WWF Championship match earlier on the card. This format seemed to end in the early 2000s.

This new revisionist history of "last match is the main event" is completely false. The main event is the top promoted match, regardless of where it was on the card. You can see older home videos and WWF event programs listing specific matches as main events that were not necessarily last on the card. The Savage/Flair tag match was literally announced as the "main event" on WWF programming, weeks before the fact.

SummerSlam 1992 was Savage vs. Warrior.

Ditto for the 1989/1991 Survivor Series show. The main event matches on each are clearly the Hogan ones.

 

[Crazy Jim Films]

Oh, and there's no revisionist history going on. Back in the 80s, the last match was always the main event. Whether it was Wrestlemania, a house show or even a TV show like Prime Time Wrestling, the last match was always the main event. I don't remember the events you posted very well, but everything I do remember had the main event as the last match.

What are you basing this on? There are numerous examples (some I cited, some I haven't) were the match advertised as the "main event" does not close the show. Most TV tapings end with about an hour of jobber matches because everybody went home. For example, are you going to tell me that the summer 1994 RAW where Bret defended the title against 1-2-3 Kid was actually main evented by IRS vs. Ray Hudson? Hell, pick pretty much any show from that time period and the most important match usually opens the show and the last match is usually a jobber match.

 

[Crazy Jim Films]

It is accurate that in the early 90s the audience's appetite for Hulkamania was waning. Hogan was still over but that could lead to Hogan's opponents getting some cheers. It is not indicative of that opponent being as over as Hogan. An obvious example is Sid. Sid got cheers in his standoff with Hogan at the Royal Rumble in 1992, a mere 2 months after Survivor Series 1991. Does that mean Sid was as over as Hogan? No.

I don't dispute that Undertaker would go on to have great popularity. I don't think he was rivalling Hogan in 1991.

I'd call that a pretty accurate assessment. I feel people way overplay the meaning behind these crowd cheer moments. Hogan had been hot for close to eight years at this point. This was an unbelievable run. It was to be expected that people would have gotten tired of his act at this point and that fresher, newer characters might start getting some crowd reactions but that is far different from being able to take the ball and run with it. None of them had it like that.

 

[Crazy Jim Films]

Hogan only won the title once after losing it to Taker in 1991. Taking the ball and run with it in comparison to Hogan was not going to happen with all the decline and bad press that affected the business since the summer of 91.

I count twice. He beat Taker to get it back and then got the belt from Yoko in 1993. Unless you are specifically narrowing it down to his run from 1984-1992, which is still really saying nothing as 1991 was his last full year with the company and we're at the end of November when he loses the belt to Taker.

The change was in the air and the first signs were there in 91 and 92 as Bret rose in the ranks too.

I'd call Bret "rising in the ranks" an interesting narrative. It implies a form of meteoric rise occurred at this time where he suddenly surpassed or leveled up with the star players who were there in 1991. He didn't. There was a mass exodus of top talent leaving the company for months and he became the guy they took a chance on. He was considered a dependable talent and was certainly popular amongst the WWF hardcores but he was not super visible in terms of presentation. Nothing that happened in ten out of the twelve months in 1992 suggested some gradual build where Bret had become so red hot in the eyes of the fans and Vince himself that he was the defining choice to lead the company. He closed a major show in England because he was champion and they were putting a belt on the English guy he was working against. He had some excellent matches but the decision to have him run with the title was definitely eleventh hour. His match with Shawn was like fourth or fifth billed on the Survivor Series card before they had him win the title and he was not featured on the advanced poster for the PPV or the home video releases. By comparison, Undertaker and later, Ramon, had a far more organic "rising in the ranks".

Hulk Hogan took a self imposed exile post WM 8 for a reason.

Agreed and given the circumstances, it proved a wise move for all parties involved..