Flair's Last Match (spoilers)

[lordprimeau25]

His title reign when DX formed and the attitude era began, that wasn't bad business.

[shamelessposer]

[QUOTE=lordprimeau25;366961]His title reign when DX formed and the attitude era began, that wasn't bad business.[/QUOTE] It wasn't bad business because that was when the Steve Austin phenomenon took off. And even then, ratings were in the crapper compared to WCW's until after Michaels had retired.

[Self]

Pre-Austin, Michaels had to go up against the nWo, one of the hottest storylines in wrestling EVER! Can you blame him for not keeping WWE on top?

[shamelessposer]

[QUOTE=Self;367061]Pre-Austin, Michaels had to go up against the nWo, one of the hottest storylines in wrestling EVER! Can you blame him for not keeping WWE on top?[/QUOTE] I'm not blaming him; I'm saying that there's little to no statistical evidence that he's ever been a draw. My issue is that he's a very good wrestler who people keep mistaking for a legendary wrestler.

[James Casey]

poser, Michaels is one of the best American workers in the last thirty years - possibly of all time. He is remarkably athletic, technically proficient, capable of working good matches against almost anyone, and possessed of the charimsa and superstar quality that sets him apart from the Bobby Lashley's and Batista's of the world. He may never have been a headline draw when pushed on top - but no-one was in the early/mid 90s. WWF, WCW - hell, the whole American wrestling scene was in the dumps. WCW was promoting rubbish (Lost in Cleveland, Cheatum...), WWF was stuck with the backlash of the steroid trial, and ECW was just getting going. Through all this, Michaels was as much of a proven draw as anyone, alongside workers like Razor Ramon and Bret Hart who had true name value. I'd argue that WWF didn't do great business back then because the company as a whole was much weaker than it would be a few years later - Lex Luger, Yokozuna, Giant Gonzales... They were workers pushed in the limelight who couldn't handle it. You shouldn't assume that because Michaels' title runs didn't pull in business, that he was a bad worker - he was headlining against Vader and Sid a lot of the time, and they were never headline draws in WWF. That he didn't singlehandedly carry the business back to Hogan's peak levels of popularity was more down to the fading interest in the business than anything else - people simply weren't that interested in the gimmicky offerings the WWF had to offer. When Vince decided to really move away from the family friendly aspect of the business, Michaels was one of the forerunners of the Attitude era. Had he not been injured, I could well imagine him becoming one of the business' most over stars, alongside Rock and Austin. Triple H took his place in every sense of the phrase, and did a fantastic job of it. We'll never know if Michaels would have done any better (his fractious relationship with Rock would have worked against him) but I suspect that he'd have been a similarly big draw to Rock and Austin, and bigger than H at his peak. Michaels' status as one of the legends of wrestling is assured, if only because of his run from ditching the Rockers to getting injured in '98. Coming back four years later and spending the last five years putting over damn near everyone he's faced, making them look good in the process, and time after time doing what's best for business (not always - it is Michaels - but often) merely cements his place. After all, he's been at or near the top of the business for over ten years. The fans adore him, his list of great matches, against dozns of different opponents, is as long as anyone's, and he's continued to put the business first of late, despite knowing it's going to cost him in later life. If that doesn't make him a legend, I'm not sure what your definition of legend is. But I can't imagine there's very many of them :D Anyway, getting back on topic... Surely it's going to be Vince/Flair at WM?