|
Post by hbkjason on Sept 2, 2019 10:57:49 GMT -5
I always find it interesting how people have different dates for what they class the beginning and end of the Attitude Era. For me personally, the night Bret Hart cursed and shoved Vince McMahon was the start and WrestleMania XVII is the end of it.
As far as a favorite year..... that is really tough. I think I would have to say 97-98 for me personally. You had Bret Hart which I think should be classed as one of the greatest heels the WWE had ever seen. Yes, he was a technical master and one of the best in ring performers of all time. But his heel run in 1997 was amazing stuff. Then in 98, you have the rise of Stone Cold Steve Austin when RAW was must-see TV each week.
While I picked those years, I think that the run of The Rock, HHH, Jericho, and Angle in 99-00 was amazing stuff too! It was such a great time that I really have a hard time cherry-picking a specific time as my all time favorite, but if I was forced too 97-98 gets my pick.
|
|
HandsomeHollywood
Main Eventer
Joined on: Mar 6, 2005 20:55:01 GMT -5
Posts: 4,981
Member is Online
|
Post by HandsomeHollywood on Sept 3, 2019 11:28:24 GMT -5
A lot of eras to me have different starting points. To me it's about feel and presentation more than it is about Vince's official declarations.
Last I checked, according to WWE the attitude era lasts well into 2002. Their last Attitude Era DVD included things like the first elimination chamber match. I don't want to be "that guy" but I would find it hard to believe that it wasn't partly revised to include more of Triple H being on top.
|
|
|
Post by HHH316 on Sept 4, 2019 8:59:20 GMT -5
I consider the starting point the Montreal Screwjob and it ending at WM18.
|
|
|
Post by Prophet of Ash on Sept 20, 2019 10:15:08 GMT -5
Ok I can understand not liking 1999 and 2001, but 2000? What was wrong with that? BTW I forgot to mention about 1997, those awesome Jim Cornette shoot promos. The one towards the nwo was gold and when he said in one of them that people want to see a wrestling show for wrestling, people actually popped in the arena. For 2000 I forgot to mention Mick Foley as commissioner was great and Trish Stratus debuted that year. In WWF, the McMahon-Helmsley Era dominated screentime and feuds across all programming. There was even an entire hour of Sunday Night Heat dedicated to HHH and Stephanie. In WCW, David Arquette won the WCW World Championship, the title was hot potatoed for several weeks in May and June, Vince Russo won the WCW World Championship, the company lost $60 million... As has become apparent in hindsight through lawsuits, people like JJ Dillon's first hand accounts, and books like Nitro by Guy Evans, WCW lost significantly less money than what all's been reported. In the Turner cup game hierarchy, most of WCW's profits were never reported or accounted for as profits. 100% of Pay Per View sales & video sales were filtered away from WCW to Turner, 100% of ad revenue too. So literally the only revenue they were bringing in were ticket sales, which was never a priority for WCW since it was a TV product. Even toy sales were filtered away to Marvel. Then at the same time as all of these profits are being filtered away, a lot of the bigger contracts were also paid under Turner, thus not accounted into gains/losses for WCW. Then there's stuff like the infamous "Lanny Poffo made $100,000 a year to do nothing" but through lawsuits, the WCW books have become public and on the record, Lanny Poffo only made like $1500 one year and $300 one year. Obviously he was being paid way more than that, but WCW and Turner had things going all over the place and incestuous money, that there'd be no way to know true totals.
|
|
TheEvilDoink1987
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 22, 2010 21:37:52 GMT -5
Posts: 2,816
|
Post by TheEvilDoink1987 on Sept 25, 2019 16:28:25 GMT -5
I'm going to make this short as I can probably write paragraphs on this topic.
1997-1998 are infinitely better from a storyline and match quality aspect. Wrestling was just stupid popular in 1999, but there were too many sleazy angles as the in-ring action clearly took a back seat. I think it is one of the most overrated years in WWF/WWE history. 2000 was a fantastic year where you had excellent angles with some amazing wrestling as well.
... personally speaking, of course.
|
|
jking1979
Superstar
Joined on: Oct 3, 2019 20:00:02 GMT -5
Posts: 754
|
Post by jking1979 on Oct 9, 2019 3:09:52 GMT -5
The Attitude Era was a great time to be a wrestling fan. I still like the New Generation better. It was exciting to see WWE struggle and try to create superstars.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 28, 2024 18:38:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 11, 2019 18:25:53 GMT -5
I'm going to make this short as I can probably write paragraphs on this topic. 1997-1998 are infinitely better from a storyline and match quality aspect. Wrestling was just stupid popular in 1999, but there were too many sleazy angles as the in-ring action clearly took a back seat. I think it is one of the most overrated years in WWF/WWE history. 2000 was a fantastic year where you had excellent angles with some amazing wrestling as well. ... personally speaking, of course. I agree about 1999. Definitely the weakest attitude era year. 97, 98, and 00 are 3 of my favorite years in wrestling. I miss them!
|
|