Terry Gene Bollea, Hulk Hogan: Why was he so popular?

These Are The Days

Oh no! We suck again!!
May 17, 2014
34,333
20,085
Tampa Bay
This is grossly underrating Hogan and Austin as performers. Hogan got over huge before he was "Hulk Hogan" that we saw under Vince McMahon. His gimmick wasn't some golden gimmick. He was a cartoonish hero. It's a fine gimmick for the 1980s, but you don't automatically get over by wrapping yourself in red and yellow and acting like a goof. Hogan got over because of who he was, and Vince smartly pushed him accordingly.

This criticism of Austin doesn't match reality. The guy was golden in ECW and delivered some of the best promos of all time. Austin didn't get over because he was a huge anti-hero as you are suggesting - he got over well before that. Heel Austin of 1996-1997 was just a sadistic heel, not some golden can't miss gimmick. He played the part so well and gave such great promos that he got over as a face officially starting at Wrestlemania 13. Only after Austin forced the situation and became a face did he become the huge anti-hero. He wasn't just some catchphrase machine. I really recommend going back and watching 1996-1997 Austin promos, or some of his work from ECW. Everything you gave credit to Jericho with (and I agree) Austin could do as well, but he generally got even bigger reactions.

Of course he was a cartoonish hero but Vince (and as you said, smartly) pushed him accordingly but everyone knew him from Rocky. That's how it started and that's why he was coming out to Eye Of The Tiger. Wrestling fans did not have a global icon back then and anyone who had seen Rocky (and that was just about everyone) was able to identify with him as that icon. So right off the bat you have a guy almost everyone recognizes from one of the greatest movie franchises of all time in a sport people still think is legitimately real circa 1984. Then you have him go over a detested Iranian heel who just took the title off WWF's best and most tenured wrestler since Bruno Sammartino in Bob Backlund. The euphoria was real for the fanbase and the sad truth is we cannot duplicate it now.

The birth of Hulkamania was a perfect storm of both him and Vince being in the right place at the right time. And after he won his first WWF championship the evolution of the All American Hero with massive gesticulations that would make Adolf Hitler jealous came not only of natural charisma, but of Vince giving the fans what they wanted. Hulk was an above average worker even by today's standards and was good for a big man too for what it's worth. On the mic he was hyped, he was exciting and he was great. But as far as I know he was the first guy to have the wrestling equivalent of stump speeches. He could talk about the pythons, little hulksters etc and it worked find. But it was the formula of giving fans what they wanted when the monster heel would beat him down only to hulk up and overcome the odds that never got old and so much of his charisma was derived from it.

But the entire reason I'm arguing for Hogan is that his historical snowball had been sitting on top of the hill for a year and a half since May 1982 and all Vince did was turn him babyface, hype him up as the American Hero (because he knew people knew who he was) and crowned him champion in his first match back with the WWF. At least that I know of. Literally all he had to do was tap the snowball and a dynasty was born.

You're dead on about Austin but the point I'm trying to make is more simple than that. He too was an above average worker, above average on the mic but the hype and aura of Austin was that he represented counterculture and anti-establishment. People felt so strongly for it that all Austin had to do was throw a punch and people lost their minds. People wanted to see someone who would stand up to Vince -who was legitimately hated because of the Montreal Screwjob. Now Austin's climb to the top was much different than Hogan's but it was still on the backs of a foreign heel was it it not? Bret Hart was about as polarizing as any figure in the WWF.

In the end it was what they got to say, it was what he got to do that made him so huge. All Steve Williams the man had to do was not trip in his shoes no different than Terry Bollea. As a heel he was Vince's ultimate experiment and got over accordingly. Then as a face... same as before. It's what he got to say and do. People wanted an American hero in the 80's and they got it. They wanted an antihero in the 90's and they got it in Austin.

Back then NONE of the other greats got to act like them. Maaayyybbbeee Shawn Michaels and the Rock. You may disagree but no big deal. I just think there's an underestimation of crowd pleasing that Vince did. The most popular become that way only if they do popular things.

The only other wrestler I've ever seen come close to Austin was John Cena. If in 2005 he does not turn into captain America and he keeps coming out with rap disses, chain gang mentality, a babyface not afraid to break the rules and delivering some of the most poignant promos then I think it's entirely possible that he would have transcended Stone Cold. Even as United States champion he was coming out to the biggest pops of the night and once he won the title off Bradshaw the arenas were literally Attitude Era worthy for him.

CM Punk had a fantastic ride but I have always felt was an insincere push towards an edgy character on WWE's part to keep the product from falling apart. By that time Vince had to keep his promotion squeaky clean because Linda was running for Senate.

But I'll ask again. Does anyone else get to say and do what they did or do we get a dozen babyfaces who we are just supposed to cheer for because it's the right thing to do?
 
Last edited:

Ozz

Registered User
Oct 25, 2009
9,467
681
Hockeytown
Austin's "mic legacy" gets watered down and underrated due to his later/most recent work in WWE. His earlier stuff? Gold, gold, gold.
 

JackSlater

Registered User
Apr 27, 2010
18,075
12,730
Of course he was a cartoonish hero but Vince (and as you said, smartly) pushed him accordingly but everyone knew him from Rocky. That's how it started and that's why he was coming out to Eye Of The Tiger. Wrestling fans did not have a global icon back then and anyone who had seen Rocky (and that was just about everyone) was able to identify with him as that icon. So right off the bat you have a guy almost everyone recognizes from one of the greatest movie franchises of all time in a sport people still think is legitimately real circa 1984. Then you have him go over a detested Iranian heel who just took the title off WWF's best and most tenured wrestler since Bruno Sammartino in Bob Backlund. The euphoria was real for the fanbase and the sad truth is we cannot duplicate it now.

The birth of Hulkamania was a perfect storm of both him and Vince being in the right place at the right time. And after he won his first WWF championship the evolution of the All American Hero with massive gesticulations that would make Adolf Hitler jealous came not only of natural charisma, but of Vince giving the fans what they wanted. Hulk was an above average worker even by today's standards and was good for a big man too for what it's worth. On the mic he was hyped, he was exciting and he was great. But as far as I know he was the first guy to have the wrestling equivalent of stump speeches. He could talk about the pythons, little hulksters etc and it worked find. But it was the formula of giving fans what they wanted when the monster heel would beat him down only to hulk up and overcome the odds that never got old and so much of his charisma was derived from it.

But the entire reason I'm arguing for Hogan is that his historical snowball had been sitting on top of the hill for a year and a half since May 1982 and all Vince did was turn him babyface, hype him up as the American Hero (because he knew people knew who he was) and crowned him champion in his first match back with the WWF. At least that I know of. Literally all he had to do was tap the snowball and a dynasty was born.

You're dead on about Austin but the point I'm trying to make is more simple than that. He too was an above average worker, above average on the mic but the hype and aura of Austin was that he represented counterculture and anti-establishment. People felt so strongly for it that all Austin had to do was throw a punch and people lost their minds. People wanted to see someone who would stand up to Vince -who was legitimately hated because of the Montreal Screwjob. Now Austin's climb to the top was much different than Hogan's but it was still on the backs of a foreign heel was it it not? Bret Hart was about as polarizing as any figure in the WWF.

In the end it was what they got to say, it was what he got to do that made him so huge. All Steve Williams the man had to do was not trip in his shoes no different than Terry Bollea. As a heel he was Vince's ultimate experiment and got over accordingly. Then as a face... same as before. It's what he got to say and do. People wanted an American hero in the 80's and they got it. They wanted an antihero in the 90's and they got it in Austin.

Back then NONE of the other greats got to act like them. Maaayyybbbeee Shawn Michaels and the Rock. You may disagree but no big deal. I just think there's an underestimation of crowd pleasing that Vince did. The most popular become that way only if they do popular things.

The only other wrestler I've ever seen come close to Austin was John Cena. If in 2005 he does not turn into captain America and he keeps coming out with rap disses, chain gang mentality, a babyface not afraid to break the rules and delivering some of the most poignant promos then I think it's entirely possible that he would have transcended Stone Cold. Even as United States champion he was coming out to the biggest pops of the night and once he won the title off Bradshaw the arenas were literally Attitude Era worthy for him.

CM Punk had a fantastic ride but I have always felt was an insincere push towards an edgy character on WWE's part to keep the product from falling apart. By that time Vince had to keep his promotion squeaky clean because Linda was running for Senate.

But I'll ask again. Does anyone else get to say and do what they did or do we get a dozen babyfaces who we are just supposed to cheer for because it's the right thing to do?

I appreciate the detail and thought put into your answer. I still think that you have the sequence backwards - Hogan and Austin were given freedom because they were so over, they didn't get so over because they had so much freedom. It's the same reason that Jericho and Cena have relative freedom today when they cut promos. I don't see Reigns getting that. In Hogan's day I think that there was far more freedom to say whatever someone wanted. Certainly Piper and Savage had complete freedom, and they were definitely better promos than Hogan. In Austin's heyday Michaels and Hart at least had ample freedom by 1997 to say what they wanted, but they couldn't match Austin in terms of promos. HHH's 20 minute monologues that plagued the early 2000s must have come with a ot of creative control given who he was. Again, I think that the sequence is out of order. It is an interesting read though. I agree that someone like Punk was hindered by the current environment. I don't think that Reigns has shown anything to indicate that he would be significantly better if given freedom to cut promos. I admit that he probably couldn't be worse though.
 

scrubadam

Registered User
Apr 10, 2016
12,438
1,904
Austin's "mic legacy" gets watered down and underrated due to his later/most recent work in WWE. His earlier stuff? Gold, gold, gold.

Probably the greatest ever. Nothing can match the intensity and realness of real ass stone cold.

His promos from 96/97 are total fire, I don't think anyone will ever be able to match him.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad