|
Post by Next Man’s Yeeter on Jul 25, 2014 10:13:16 GMT -5
1996. Austin became Stone Cold. Mankind and Rocky debuted. The cracks started to show in the New Generation albatrosses of Hart and Michaels. WWF lost its other stalwarts in Diesel and Razor, who revitalised the industry with Hogan in WCW. Vince's back was against the ropes for the first time in '96. It just took around a year to figure out a solution, and then another year for that to work.
|
|
|
Post by The Kevstaaa on Jul 25, 2014 10:22:57 GMT -5
I totally get that 1996 was the seeds planted for the greatness that was 1997, but if the question is "most intricately balanced" year, I'd still go 1997. It had a good balance to it. But yea, 1996 is ridiculously pivotal.
|
|
|
Post by BrIaNMeRcY on Jul 25, 2014 10:28:50 GMT -5
1996. Austin became Stone Cold. Mankind and Rocky debuted. The cracks started to show in the New Generation albatrosses of Hart and Michaels. WWF lost its other stalwarts in Diesel and Razor, who revitalised the industry with Hogan in WCW. Vince's back was against the ropes for the first time in '96. It just took around a year to figure out a solution, and then another year for that to work. The transit enthusiast in me is going to make a good example. The station for the WWF ended when Shawn Michaels became champion. Eventually, the WWF had to build a few more stations along the way to get to the desired terminal. Austin 3:16 was the first station they had to open it with. Along the way, the stations were Survivor Series 1996, then WrestleMania 13, SummerSlam 1997, Survivor Series 1997, and finally WrestleMania XIV. There were a couple of stops the WWF had to make to ensure they were on the right track. Once they got to the end of that track in 1998, they kept on building more stations and tracks till WCW folded in 2001.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: May 20, 2024 0:57:27 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2014 10:54:19 GMT -5
I totally get that 1996 was the seeds planted for the greatness that was 1997, but if the question is "most intricately balanced" year, I'd still go 1997. It had a good balance to it. But yea, 1996 is ridiculously pivotal. Cheers Kev, that's what I took from the question, as opposed to 'What was responsible for 1997 being a great year?' Everything flows on in some aspects of the business...well, it used to, before Cena...but I'll stop there... Cheers fellas.
|
|