Wrestling Forum banner

What do you think of Austin's face turn in late 2001?

12K views 23 replies 23 participants last post by  The People's H2O 
I would rather have seen them continue with Austin being a heel going into Wrestlemania. Instead of Austin/Hall or Triple H/Jericho, they should have built toward Triple H/Austin at Wrestlemania XVIII, with Triple H as the returning avenging babyface winning The Royal Rumble (as he did) and Austin as still the evil heel champion who'd do anything to stay at the top, delaying the ostensible inevitable of Rock and, in a certain way, Triple H, surpassing his status at the very top of WWF/E.

Instead, we got two underwhelming feuds and matches for Wrestlemania instead of the one big potential mega match that could have stood almost alongside The Rock vs. Hogan.

After Wrestlemania, Austin could/should have taken the time off he needed after effectively carrying the company on his back for over a year and returned with a huge babyface turn. His natural new enemy would be the new big bad heel Brock Lesnar. And they could have built toward a pay-per-view money match between them instead of the fiasco with creative/Austin/Vince that happened backstage and helped to derail the entire product at the time.

As it stands, Austin's babyface turn in late November 2001 is one of the most anti-climactic, rote, pedestrian and boring turns for a true megastar that has ever happened. Woefully forgettable and completely undeserving of him. Sure, his heel run was nowhere near ideal or even altogether good for business at all but they could have at least written a third and final conclusive act for it rather than rushing him back to being a face just like that.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top