If by some quirk of fate.....

If Hogan, Russo and Cena had never existed, what would be the state of wrestling today and who would have been it's top performers - past and present. Would certain events have never happened - even if they had involved one of these 3 but could have been given to somebody else?

Discuss.

people get very defensive about hogan and this type of question

This could well cause an argument.

If Hogan had never existed, half the people on the wrestling forum would have never known about wrestling.

debatable, i think i would, I hate Hogan

Hero - the issue is probably whether McMahon would have been able to make someone else the star that Hogan was or whether he was indispensable to the whole wrestling movement. I think it is fairly clear today that if Vince didn't back Cena he could have backed another individual in his place without losing ratings, popularity etc. After all looking back at Cena's previous character it was hardly clear that he was to become the kiddie favourite.

Personally I think that the business in whatever form it would have taken would have been very different without Hulk Hogan in terms of its mainstream appeal, though it is also fair to say that the business recovered from the demise of Hogan as a mainstream performer and actually, it could be argued that the business today is held back by the legacy that Hogan left!

I am not trying to argue one way or another as I was not around then and do not have enough information on the topic - merely trying to give some options. He left such an indelible impression on the industry that everything since has been shaped by it, from the WWE's reputation to Vince's success and even the WWE's style of booking (strong faces).

In terms of Russo I would say that again my knowledge is limited, though it is likely that the "attitude" of the Attitude Era would have been missing and therefore without Russo WWF(E) would have gone out of business. Equally if Russo hadn't jumped ship then the WCW may still have been around!

In terms of Cena I would say that the industry is so established around a company as opposed to individuals that Cena's impact is barely a footprint. I would say that Vince could have put the machine behind any number of guys and that he hasn't done anything ground breaking to mean that his image (as opposed to the WWE's image of him) will be around after he is retired.

AntLord - I understand that you don't like him - but the point Hero was making was that there may not have been an industry in the form that you would recognise today to follow and like if it had not been for the impact of HH.

I dont agree, sorry

Don't apologise - just try to provide a reason for your opinion.

I think that Austin the Rock, Foley etc would still have carved a highly respectable wrestling world. Hulk never really did anything but massage his own ego

personally i think if you have the look you dont need to talent because creative will push you anyway nowadays. so they would of just made someone else hulk hogan

im not saying cena's a bad wrestler but i name 50+ wrestlers who are better in the ring then him.

fernando wrote:personally i think if you have the look you dont need to talent because creative will push you anyway nowadays. so they would of just made someone else hulk hogan

im not saying cena's a bad wrestler but i name 50+ wrestlers who are better in the ring then him.

I agree with you on Cena though the point on Hogan was that he was already very established by the time that WWF took him. He had a strong background in the territories and in Japan so it may not have been as easy then (when WWF was merely a slightly larger fish in the bowl) to merely make another Hogan.

I've always believed that without Hulk Hogan, Vince could have used Dusty Rhodes in that position, he would probably have needed to lose about 30/40 lbs but in 1984 he could have done that, very likeable and charasmatic, he wasn't cool like Hogan though, you have to remember that Vince McMahon didn't make Hogan, he was huge in America due to the reactions he was getting in the AWA and was wanted in Japan all the time, Hogan even broke into Hollywood before McMahon decided to mould the WWF around him.

While I think the WWF would still have went the way they did, it's impossible to say if it would have been so huge, funnily enough though, I think Rhodes/Piper would have made for better matches due to Rhodes style suiting Piper more

No one back then had the charisma, star power or marketability of Hogan. You can't just throw another guy into that role. Driven, selfish a leader.... McMahon had the vision but Hogan played the ultimate superhero to perfection.

Brady12 wrote:No one back then had the charisma, star power or marketability of Hogan. You can't just throw another guy into that role. Driven, selfish a leader.... McMahon had the vision but Hogan played the ultimate superhero to perfection.

Yes, and the WWE then wasn't a big enough fish to make anyone else into that role either.

JoshSansom wrote:

Brady12 wrote:No one back then had the charisma, star power or marketability of Hogan. You can't just throw another guy into that role. Driven, selfish a leader.... McMahon had the vision but Hogan played the ultimate superhero to perfection.

Yes, and the WWE then wasn't a big enough fish to make anyone else into that role either.

Exactly... Hart & Michaels for all there qualities they couldn't match the feats of Hogan. You can't just put any tom dick or harry in there look at Luger...

Brady12 wrote:

JoshSansom wrote:

Brady12 wrote:No one back then had the charisma, star power or marketability of Hogan. You can't just throw another guy into that role. Driven, selfish a leader.... McMahon had the vision but Hogan played the ultimate superhero to perfection.

Yes, and the WWE then wasn't a big enough fish to make anyone else into that role either.

Exactly... Hart & Michaels for all there qualities they couldn't match the feats of Hogan. You can't just put any tom dick or harry in there look at Luger...

Luger was as bland when it came to charisma though. His voice was an instant insominia cure!

I think you're right though. I don't think just anyone could have stepped in and played 'Hulk Hogan'. It's an opinion I used to have when I was younger and slightly less wise, but I was wrong then.

As for Michaels and Hart, I would argue that we would never know if they could have filled Hogan's boots. They were never given the Hogan/Cena push. Don't get me wrong, Vince did believe in them to some extent, but only because they were the best he had at that time. Both just didn't fit Vince's ideal main star. The 'big men' - Diesel, Sid and Taker went over one or both on many occasions during their heydays. That was an indication to me that Vince was always looking for alternatives to both Bret and Shawn.

This is the thing about wrestling - you can create an illusion that people will believe and it is never challenged. Heyman said it best wrestling is all about exaggerating a person's strengths and hiding their weaknesses. Hogan, Cena, Batista etc were/are not world class wrestlers on the same level as Bret Hart, HBK, Angle etc but they can still be mega successful because of the way they are booked.

I know I've made comparisons with the UFC before but I think they are valid in these debates - take Mark Callaway for example - a massively successful career as the Undertaker who holds the prestigious honour of the 19-0 WM streak. But if he had become a pro fighter would he be ranked as one of the world's greatest P4P fighters along with the likes of GSP, Silva, Aldo, Jones etc? Probably not. Take Lesnar as another example: he made a big impact when he first started fighting in the UFC because he was big, strong and fast, but against a technically more skilful fighter he has come up short - he lost to Mir, who is a former heavyweight champion and black belt in BJJ via submission and he lost to Cain Velasquez who is a two time all american wrestling champion and a far superior kick boxer to Brock.

My point is yes guys like Hogan and Cena have changed the wrestling industry and managed to take it into the mainstream, but that is because they are products of the wrestling industry not because they are world class wrestlers. Hogan had all the tools of his era to make it as a successful babyface that the world adored but it was the WWF that utilised those tools and packaged him as the all american hero. Same with Cena - he was fast tracked through developmental because he had the raw materials to be the next big babyface and now he's a X10 WWE champion. It's the business that creates stars out of people. It's all about the booking. HHH said in an interview that the WWE listens to the fans - as long as the majority of them are sent home happy, guys like Cena will continue to have careers way beyond their actual ability.

Hmm Rhodes instead of Hogan, a real what if?

WM6- Dusty Rhodes V Ultimate Warrior- Don't think so

The Mega Powers - Savage and a fat bloke in polka dots - No thanks

WM7 - Rhodes versus the evil turncoat Sgt Slaughter, during the build up the fans turn on Rhodes as at least they can get the gist of what Col Mustafa and General Adnan are saying.

And of course what is on most fans top 5 "mark out" list:

April 5 1992 WrestleMania 8: Dusty against his former friend Sid Justice. Fast forward to where Justice and Shango have "big Dust" tied up in the ropes and all hope seems lost.....

Heenan: "HE HASN'T GOT A FRIEND LEFT IN THE WORLD" (or words similar)

"AHHHHMERRRRRICAAAAAAAANNNN...."

Monsoon: "WAIT!...."

".......DREEEEAM..."

Monsoon: "THAT'S SWEET SAPPHIRES MUSIC!!!!"

Sweet Sapphire waddles to the ring, and the crowd go nothing....

(If I recall the aisle at WM8 was particularly long so Shango would have needed to stand dumbstruck in the middle of the ring for a lot longer whilst Sapphire ran around the ring twice then shook the ropes before engaging)


The best Wrestler is the one that makes the most money, true today and even more so back then. VKM knows this, and in his hands a Wrestler with charisma will be more successful than a Wrestler with ability. Of course some like CM Punk and Michaels have both.

talkingpoint wrote:This is the thing about wrestling - you can create an illusion that people will believe and it is never challenged. Heyman said it best wrestling is all about exaggerating a person's strengths and hiding their weaknesses. Hogan, Cena, Batista etc were/are not world class wrestlers on the same level as Bret Hart, HBK, Angle etc but they can still be mega successful because of the way they are booked.

I know I've made comparisons with the UFC before but I think they are valid in these debates - take Mark Callaway for example - a massively successful career as the Undertaker who holds the prestigious honour of the 19-0 WM streak. But if he had become a pro fighter would he be ranked as one of the world's greatest P4P fighters along with the likes of GSP, Silva, Aldo, Jones etc? Probably not. Take Lesnar as another example: he made a big impact when he first started fighting in the UFC because he was big, strong and fast, but against a technically more skilful fighter he has come up short - he lost to Mir, who is a former heavyweight champion and black belt in BJJ via submission and he lost to Cain Velasquez who is a two time all american wrestling champion and a far superior kick boxer to Brock.

My point is yes guys like Hogan and Cena have changed the wrestling industry and managed to take it into the mainstream, but that is because they are products of the wrestling industry not because they are world class wrestlers. Hogan had all the tools of his era to make it as a successful babyface that the world adored but it was the WWF that utilised those tools and packaged him as the all american hero. Same with Cena - he was fast tracked through developmental because he had the raw materials to be the next big babyface and now he's a X10 WWE champion. It's the business that creates stars out of people. It's all about the booking. HHH said in an interview that the WWE listens to the fans - as long as the majority of them are sent home happy, guys like Cena will continue to have careers way beyond their actual ability.

Great post mate

thank you

I'm not sure what the point of the post was or it's relevance to the topic, are you suggesting hogan etc didn't matter, or Russo did because of the booking strategy?

The UFC comparison is right out of left field, yes the undertaker may not have been a UFC star but gsp wouldn't be a boxing, wrestling etc star.

Amusingly ufcs biggest success story came from wwe style booking and match ups- lesnar and mike Tyson are the only people to do $100 million ppv buys twice (pbf may have joined them).

I also feel you are unfair to lesnar he made a silly mistake about 4 fights into his mms career and got put in a submissio hold by Mir, he beat the crap out of him in the rematch and was really unwell (with one title defense that lasted 6 minutes) before facing Velasquez who is a beast with 20 odd mms fights under his belt.

It was a good point that in WWE it is possible for you to be successful regardless of how well you can actually wrestle. It is how you are booked that decides how big you can be.

Obviously there is a point that if the person is completely useless he'll be dropped but guys like Cena who aren't particularly outstanding wrestlers can still be the biggest thing in a huge worldwide company like the WWE.

Ent wrote:I'm not sure what the point of the post was or it's relevance to the topic, are you suggesting hogan etc didn't matter, or Russo did because of the booking strategy?

The UFC comparison is right out of left field, yes the undertaker may not have been a UFC star but gsp wouldn't be a boxing, wrestling etc star.

Amusingly ufcs biggest success story came from wwe style booking and match ups- lesnar and mike Tyson are the only people to do $100 million ppv buys twice (pbf may have joined them).

I also feel you are unfair to lesnar he made a silly mistake about 4 fights into his mms career and got put in a submissio hold by Mir, he beat the crap out of him in the rematch and was really unwell (with one title defense that lasted 6 minutes) before facing Velasquez who is a beast with 20 odd mms fights under his belt.

My point was we can hypothesise all we like, playing around with counterfactual history predicting what might have become of the WWF without Hogan or WCW without Russo but at the end of the day wrestlers are booked to either look strong or weak. Hulkamania might have been a phenomenon as he became a popular media icon but he was manufactured. Cena is proof that the wrestling industry will always find the next big babyface that will be a cash cow for the company. Whether it is Hogan, Cena, Orton, Punk, Mysterio or a completely unknown to us the WWE will always produce such a star. My comparison to the UFC is relevant and valid - fighters earn their main event status through skill not match fixing - which is exactly what booking in pro wrestling is all about. No one asks the question what would MMA be like without the likes of Anderson Silva or boxing without Muhammad Ali, because these fighters earnt their reputations and accomplishments through being the greatest fighters in the world.

Wrestling would still be as popular today without Hogan, Cena et al because they would have found other replacements who they could promote and sell to the fans. I'm not saying Hogan and Cena etc aren't talented in what they did/do - of course they are, after all wrestling is a performance art. But at the end of the day many fans grow weary of such babyfaces because they haven't truly earnt their respect - they have been booked to be world champions. People respect fighters like GSP and Silva because you can't argue with their success - it is far more black and white.

Punk would be another good example of someone who has played the game and is now reaping the rewards - he has garnered a lot of his success because he has been the anti-hero, the tweener that many fans have been yearning for in the Cena dominated PG era. But the WWE have managed to suppress his career for long enough and now he's broken through the glass ceiling will completely control his future for their own profit. Now they've seen they can make real money from him they will pull out all the stops to ensure they profit from his popularity. So yes in a way he has earnt his success but only because WWE have allowed it! Vince is still the puppet master that Dana White isn't.

As for Brock all I'm saying is that the WWE made him out to be a monster but in a real combat sport he hasn't been able to duplicate the success. No heavyweight champion has successful defended their championship more than 3 times in the UFC, which just goes to show how tough the division is. It is a lot easier in wrestling to make someone a star as long as they have the right look than in MMA. Brock fitted Vince's blueprint for a world champion, but real champions in MMA make themselves - Velasquez gave away a lot of weight and height in his fight with Brock, more experienced or not. Theoretically Brock should have won as he was bigger and stronger. In the WWE he probably would have. Heck Mysterio is a X2 world champion despite being only 5'4"!

Tbh I think you are quite ignorant about these things, no one is debating That vince could make anyone a big star now- the real discussion is what would the wwf be without hogan, who was a big star and has already had his virtues extolled by others on the thread.

For hogan in UFC read Gracie, fedor or silva - this is a young sport and any old Tom dick or Harry wasn't going to make it mainstream.

Brock has been a huge success in the UFC within 5 fights he was UFC world champion and he and silva are the biggest ppv money makers.

I really don't get what point you are chasing down, at the end of the day wrestling is an entertainment show based on sports where UFC is a combat sport people find entertaining.

The way you are comparing WWE and UFC is completley and utterly redundant. There are comparisons to be made obviously, but not the ones you are making. It is irrelevant how the Undertaker would do in MMA, as it has nothing to do with how he has done in the WWE.

To suggest the wrestling world could have had the same success without Hogan is more akin to suggesting that a film could have been successful no matter who the actor is. I think it's very dodgy territory to go into, but I just can't understand your insistence on the contrast with UFC, which in terms of who's at the top is not similar to WWE at all.

You seem to have a grudge against wrestlers for becoming successful through the way they are booked that is nonsense because it is the ONLY way they can become successful, it's an entertainment business, they're all like that. UFC and Boxing are sports, where you become the best by being the best.

Saying all that though, I think the question is a silly one anyway, it's the same as would there be Christianity if there was no Jesus Christ, it's too big of a What If to be sensibly answered.

xTwisTx wrote:If Hogan, Russo and Cena had never existed, what would be the state of wrestling today and who would have been it's top performers - past and present. Would certain events have never happened - even if they had involved one of these 3 but could have been given to somebody else?Discuss.

This was the original post.

My point was directly related to the original thread - I argued that the state of wrestling would be the same today even without Hogan and Cena because its the nature of the wrestling industry - or at least the WWE to build great babyfaces. In the future there will be another uber babyface in the ilk of Hogan and Cena to take on the batton. Would certain events have happened the same? Not exactly, obviously, because everybody is unique but the fundamentals of the wrestling industry doesn't change - the formula stays the same.

@ Ent - ignorant? Hardly, if you don't agree with me fine, but labelling me ignorant? Yes Hogan had unique qualities as a performer that made people believe in him but it was the WWF that gave him that platform, it was the WWF that marketed him, it was the WWF that pulled the trigger on him. Hogan today thinks he's bigger than wrestling but he's proven that's not the case in TNA as he hasn't totally revolutionised the promotion or boosted ratings through the roof. His initial attempt to create the monday night wars II failed abysmally and impact! was reverted back to its original Thursday night slot which it still keeps. So Hogan is not God's gift to the wrestling industry that he thinks he is. Look at the Montreal Screwjob - everyone is expendable to Vince when they interfere with his vision for the company. If it wasn't Hogan back in the 80s it would have been someone else I truly believe that but it was Hogan and so he has left his mark. You can't change history so in a way this is a totally redundant topic but as we are hypothesising I gave my honest opinion.

@invincibleIleak my comparison was not redundant I was merely highlighting a contrast in the way the two companies work to support my point about the wrestling industry - the WWE make their stars, the UFC is made by their stars. I can't put it more simply than that! I don't have a grudge against wrestlers - I don't know them personally and as you said its only entertainment - but I was making an observation that there is a general consensus that the current top guys like Cena have too many title reigns and the contrast is usually made with world champions of the 90s and attitude era who have far more modest title reigns in comparison such as Bret Hart, HBK and Austin. I understand the booking is the only way wrestlers become successful but how do you measure success? Does success mean having the most title reigns even if that implies you've lost it that many number of times too and also devalues the title when it changes hands on a monthly basis? Or is success measured by how well you tell a story in the ring? If you are a ring general? Or if you can put on a great technical display of submission wrestling? But that is a totally different topic...

There is no shame in being I'll informed on a topcoat which is what ignorance is, it is a very modern trait to takethat as a mortal insult. There is not much more point in continuing the discussion if you think the wwf would exist as it does now if hogan had been with a rival company or in the late 90s Austin or rock.

UFC feed their stars chumps at times, Dana White made $200 million dollars feeding lesnar a smaller couture And mir, they've built jones up similarly in a weakish division.

People like Gracie and fedor made mma, the organisations have to be built first in order to then build their own stars, just look at how many failed pushes their have been for wrestlers.

WWF when Hogan signed up for them was not a very big company, certainly not the global powerhouse it was today, it could not make its own stars because you have to be big already to do that. Hogan was becoming a star within the wrestling world and beyond thanks to his work in territories and Japan as well as his appearences in movies giving him a wider exposure and it was the combination of a vision of McMahon and Hulk Hogan's star power that wrestling grew into what it is today. I fail to see how WWF could have done it without Hogan, nobody had that kind of following behind him.

Talking Point I've read your posts in the past & I think you talk a lot of sense but your wide of the mark on this one.

No one is disputing the fundamental differences between UFC & 'Sports Entertiament'. One is essentially a rehersed dramatics & the other sporting combat. Two completely different animals. Comparing Mark Callaway to any UFC fighter is like comparing Tom Cruise to David Beckham.

To say wrestling would be in the same state today regardless of Hogan is completely laughable. Stars are manufactured that is never in doubt but you need the personality charisma & marketability to begining with. Do you think Virgil could of been as big a star as Hogan? He didn't have any of the attributes neccessary to make it.

silverfox wrote:Hmm Rhodes instead of Hogan, a real what if?

WM6- Dusty Rhodes V Ultimate Warrior- Don't think so

The Mega Powers - Savage and a fat bloke in polka dots - No thanks

WM7 - Rhodes versus the evil turncoat Sgt Slaughter, during the build up the fans turn on Rhodes as at least they can get the gist of what Col Mustafa and General Adnan are saying.

And of course what is on most fans top 5 "mark out" list:

April 5 1992 WrestleMania 8: Dusty against his former friend Sid Justice. Fast forward to where Justice and Shango have "big Dust" tied up in the ropes and all hope seems lost.....

Heenan: "HE HASN'T GOT A FRIEND LEFT IN THE WORLD" (or words similar)

"AHHHHMERRRRRICAAAAAAAANNNN...."

Monsoon: "WAIT!...."

".......DREEEEAM..."

Monsoon: "THAT'S SWEET SAPPHIRES MUSIC!!!!"

Sweet Sapphire waddles to the ring, and the crowd go nothing....

(If I recall the aisle at WM8 was particularly long so Shango would have needed to stand dumbstruck in the middle of the ring for a lot longer whilst Sapphire ran around the ring twice then shook the ropes before engaging)


The best Wrestler is the one that makes the most money, true today and even more so back then. VKM knows this, and in his hands a Wrestler with charisma will be more successful than a Wrestler with ability. Of course some like CM Punk and Michaels have both.

while that was all very cute I don' think you've got a clue about Dusty Rhodes in the early 80s, going on what you've said all you seem to know is the late 80s version whose whole gimmick was a rib, instead of being a smartarse you could trying understanding how over Rhodes was all over America in the late 70s and the 80s and his American Dream gimmick was one of the most popular simply for what it stood for.

Another guy who had the tools and the look for me would be Michael Hayes

The Dusty Rhodes ' hard times' promo is for me up there as one of if not the greatest promo of all time.

To be fair he could cut a decent promo as long as you ignore the fact he looks & sounds like he's coked out of his tree....

Dusty didn't have the look though for me... He just looked like someones dad

Ent wrote:There is no shame in being I'll informed on a topcoat which is what ignorance is, it is a very modern trait to takethat as a mortal insult. There is not much more point in continuing the discussion if you think the wwf would exist as it does now if hogan had been with a rival company or in the late 90s Austin or rock.

UFC feed their stars chumps at times, Dana White made $200 million dollars feeding lesnar a smaller couture And mir, they've built jones up similarly in a weakish division.

People like Gracie and fedor made mma, the organisations have to be built first in order to then build their own stars, just look at how many failed pushes their have been for wrestlers.

WHo is ill informed now? Mir beat Lesnar in the first fight and was doing okay in the second fight until a missed jumping knee took it to the ground.

And as for Couture - he was Heavyweight champ at the time - how can that be seen as feeding someone?

Truly bizarre comment - I dont like Lesnar but I cant but admire him taking on top class opposition so soon.

Brady12 wrote:Talking Point I've read your posts in the past & I think you talk a lot of sense but your wide of the mark on this one.

No one is disputing the fundamental differences between UFC & 'Sports Entertiament'. One is essentially a rehersed dramatics & the other sporting combat. Two completely different animals. Comparing Mark Callaway to any UFC fighter is like comparing Tom Cruise to David Beckham.

To say wrestling would be in the same state today regardless of Hogan is completely laughable. Stars are manufactured that is never in doubt but you need the personality charisma & marketability to begining with. Do you think Virgil could of been as big a star as Hogan? He didn't have any of the attributes neccessary to make it.

I am not trying to insult anyone's intelligence - we're all wrestling fans here and I know people understand how the wrestling industry works. I don't profess to know more than other people here about wrestling and I know there are some people who know a lot more than me on here. But I do think the way the industry works helps to create megastars like Hogan etc. I'm not disputing Hogan's talent - I grew up watching Hogan in the early 90s.

Also I think you're putting words in my mouth I never said just anybody could have filled Hogan's shoes - that would be like me saying Jimmy Wang Yang could have been bigger than Cena. We are speculating - that was the purpose of the original post. Guys like Hogan and Cena etc aren't your dime a dozen wrestlers of course they have something special about them - but at the same time they have the full hype machine of the industry behind them! It's no wonder they're so over, particularly with the more impressionable younger fans because they've been given meteoric pushes; they have gimmicks that are easily marketable and able to sell huge quantities of merch, a small but readily identifiable moveset along with catchphrases that are rememberable and fans can identify with. Usually their gimmicks tap into something in the American psyche such as Hogan being the All American Hero during the Gulf War or Cena's hustle loyalty and respect.

Regarding Mark Callaway I made that comparison because he has said himself in an interview that if the UFC was as popular in the early 90s as it is today he would have become a pro fighter! You can see the interview here imagine if the UFC and WWE timelines had run parrallel to each other - who knows what other guys would have made the cross over too? So no, comparing Mark to a UFC fighter is not like chalk and cheese - it is a very real debate.

@ Ent how am I ill informed? I never said the WWF would be exactly as it is today if Hogan had been with a rival company - the original post said if Hogan had never existed. If Hogan had never existed then I think Vince would have found another charismatic talented wrestler to be his number one babyface. If Hogan had never existed then we would never have known about him to compare this other hypothetical wrestler to! And as such because Hogan exists and because he was hugely influential in WWF's commecial success we'll never know what could have been either.

And as far as Dana's booking is concerned, I don't deny some of the top guys are given 'easy' fights to build up their win record early in their careers but are you saying Couture and Mir are chumps? Couture may not have been in his prime but he is still an extremely respected pro fighter and a UFC hall of famer. Mir's pedigree is plain to see as well, especially considering he came back from a near career ending motorbike accident to become interim world heavyweight champion again. As for Jones he has beaten most recently Ryan Bader who is a former TUF winner, Mauricio 'Shogun' Rua to become light heavyweight champion and Quintin 'Rampage' Jackson, two extremely successful fighters in both Pride and the UFC and he is set to face Lyoto 'The Dragon' Machida at UFC 140 again another former light heavyweight champion. These guys are not chumps by any stretch of the imagination. But that is a completely different debate for another topic.

Regarding Mark Callaway though, you said he wouldn't have been a successful UFC fighter, which is irrelevant in the world of wrestling.

If somebody else who was as popular and as charismatic as Hogan was around at the same time as Hogan then sure Vince could have used him to make wrestling massive, however there wasn't anybody with the same kind of main stream exposure as Hulk Hogan at the time, so it could only be Hogan. I also think Cena is a different example to Hogan, as Cena had the machine behind him, where as there wasn't the same kind of machine to put beind Hogan.

the-gaffer wrote:

silverfox wrote:Hmm Rhodes instead of Hogan, a real what if?

WM6- Dusty Rhodes V Ultimate Warrior- Don't think so

The Mega Powers - Savage and a fat bloke in polka dots - No thanks

WM7 - Rhodes versus the evil turncoat Sgt Slaughter, during the build up the fans turn on Rhodes as at least they can get the gist of what Col Mustafa and General Adnan are saying.

And of course what is on most fans top 5 "mark out" list:

April 5 1992 WrestleMania 8: Dusty against his former friend Sid Justice. Fast forward to where Justice and Shango have "big Dust" tied up in the ropes and all hope seems lost.....

Heenan: "HE HASN'T GOT A FRIEND LEFT IN THE WORLD" (or words similar)

"AHHHHMERRRRRICAAAAAAAANNNN...."

Monsoon: "WAIT!...."

".......DREEEEAM..."

Monsoon: "THAT'S SWEET SAPPHIRES MUSIC!!!!"

Sweet Sapphire waddles to the ring, and the crowd go nothing....

(If I recall the aisle at WM8 was particularly long so Shango would have needed to stand dumbstruck in the middle of the ring for a lot longer whilst Sapphire ran around the ring twice then shook the ropes before engaging)


The best Wrestler is the one that makes the most money, true today and even more so back then. VKM knows this, and in his hands a Wrestler with charisma will be more successful than a Wrestler with ability. Of course some like CM Punk and Michaels have both.

while that was all very cute I don' think you've got a clue about Dusty Rhodes in the early 80s, going on what you've said all you seem to know is the late 80s version whose whole gimmick was a rib, instead of being a smartarse you could trying understanding how over Rhodes was all over America in the late 70s and the 80s and his American Dream gimmick was one of the most popular simply for what it stood for.

Another guy who had the tools and the look for me would be Michael Hayes

Well when you're right you're right...

I'm a total child of the WWF in its 1980's Prime. If you say Dusty was hot back in late 70's then fair enough, I probably didn't catch him at his best.

I guess what I was trying to say (admittedly in a very sarcastic way) way that I can't see how anyone could have matched Hogan or even come close. Love him or loathe him, the man became an icon. Take any main event in the 80's and substitute Hogan for any other wrestler from the same time period and it doesn't seem to work as well.

I can imagine the 8 year old kids worshiping Cena now will slagging him off in later years much like adult fans do now with with Hogan. Ignorance is bliss.

As for "Big Dust" well it doesn't help that the interview that sticks in my head the most was Rhodes talking about "offering his innocence " to Sweet Sapphire. Even as a young lad I didn't need that thought in my head.

I totally get what you're saying about Rhodes but no-one can base his career on a two year rib in the WWF between 89-91

He did look coked out his box at times but so did Hogan

Another guy that had all the tools and possibly a little bit more was Macho Man Randy Savage

Savage.... Well the guy had everything so that's a decent shout he was a great foil for Hogan I don't know whether you could have him in Hogans roll

What do you think Vince could have done with Flair in this crazy alternate universe?
I would imagine he wasn't big enough physically for Vince, especially in those days.

Vince never let heels run with the ball til Yoko im 93 so I think Flair would have been good but DiBiase or Jake good, never Hogan good

What about Cena?

Who could have filled this void?

I personally don't think there was any need for Cena to be pushed to those heights

In 05 you had Christian, Eddie, Beniot, Orton, Hassan, Edge and possibly Matt Hardy and the triffic JBL character

Cena and Batista where always going to be big but with the above potential and also seasoned pro's like Shawn, Trips, Taker and Angle I don't think not making Cena the focal point would have done any damage