|
|
Post by Hulkster2001 on Mar 16, 2017 20:47:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by The Brain on Mar 16, 2017 20:57:02 GMT -5
Definitely Hogan. His 1st reign was over 4 years while Austin would lose it in 3 months.
|
|
robbutler01
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 10, 2013 15:10:27 GMT -5
Posts: 1,282
|
Post by robbutler01 on Mar 17, 2017 3:03:37 GMT -5
Hogan for the reasons above. A four year run - can't ever see that happening again. Unless vince gets some crazy idea about roman reigns?  Lol |
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Mar 17, 2017 11:57:26 GMT -5
Austin because it was the start of the true Attitude Era.
|
|
Eugene69
Mid-Carder
Joined on: Jul 19, 2016 14:14:10 GMT -5
Posts: 466 
|
Post by Eugene69 on Mar 17, 2017 12:46:16 GMT -5
Tough pick but I went with hogan even though austin is my favorite. Austin was best chasing the belt, his best run holding the belt to me was his heel run.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 30, 2024 5:34:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 17, 2017 13:23:23 GMT -5
Thought Austin had more Interesting Matches with the belt.
|
|
|
|
Post by PJ on Mar 18, 2017 5:44:20 GMT -5
Austin because it was the start of the true Attitude Era. In my opinion a very overrated era for the WWF. Did they have some good talent that could put on good matches? Sure, but much of the programming they were airing durimg that time was cr@p. |
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Mar 18, 2017 14:55:59 GMT -5
the attitude era was a totally different style of wrestling writing that specifically took the focus off wrestling and almost solely on storylines, so i'd agree that the attitude era is overall a fairly overrated period. but that week to week writing was exciting, as you never knew what was coming next. it was truly when television wrestling had eclipsed the original format of just having all the action in the ring.
|
|
|
|
Post by hbkbigdaddycool on Mar 19, 2017 17:17:32 GMT -5
You can't even compare the two.
Hogan held the belt from January 1984 - February 1988.
Austin held the belt from March 1998 - June 1998. He lost it for a day, won it back but still only held his second reign from June 1998 - September 1998.
Hulk Hogan was clearly the greatest WWE World Champion in the history of that organization. Maybe of wrestling all together actually.
|
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Mar 19, 2017 17:30:14 GMT -5
Austin because it was the start of the true Attitude Era. In my opinion a very overrated era for the WWF. Did they have some good talent that could put on good matches? Sure, but much of the programming they were airing durimg that time was cr@p. If it wasn't for the Attitude Era we wouldn't be sitting here now. The New Generation was failing so the Attitude Era was a successful reboot for the company. |
|
|
|
Post by PJ on Mar 19, 2017 17:43:18 GMT -5
In my opinion a very overrated era for the WWF. Did they have some good talent that could put on good matches? Sure, but much of the programming they were airing durimg that time was cr@p. Sure we would. Maybe you wouldn't be here but there still would have been sites like this for those who love wrestling. But most of the Attitude era RAW's were unwatchable for me. I would flip over during Nitro commercial breaks, but would switch back as soon as possible unless it was one of the very few wrestlers I liked. Even when Nitro wouldn't air because of the NBA playoffs or other programming issues I couldn't sit through an episode of RAW. All the raunch they aired just wasn't my thing. |
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Mar 19, 2017 18:58:17 GMT -5
If it wasn't for the Attitude Era we wouldn't be sitting here now. Sure we would. Maybe you wouldn't be here but there still would have been sites like this for those who love wrestling. But most of the Attitude era RAW's were unwatchable for me. I would flip over during Nitro commercial breaks, but would switch back as soon as possible unless it was one of the very few wrestlers I liked. Even when Nitro wouldn't air because of the NBA playoffs or other programming issues I couldn't sit through an episode of RAW. All the raunch they aired just wasn't my thing. If it wasn't for the Attitude Era the WWE would've lost, Nitro would've won and then WCW would possibly have been dropped by AOL which means there would be no huge promotion. Also the RA era was much more raunchier than the Attitude era so I there was worse. |
|
|
|
Post by PJ on Mar 19, 2017 19:20:53 GMT -5
Without the "Attitude era" the WWE would still be around it would have survived, because WCW still would have ended up screwing themselves with the crap of Russo, Leno, & Arquette.
|
|
