Induction: Vince McMahon, WWF champion: The Two-Vince Ego Trip

63 Submitted by on Thu, 19 September 2013, 20:00

WWF, 1999

If you’ve read enough inductions on this site, you will by now have figured out that the Attitude Era wasn’t the golden age of cool angles, awesome wrestling, and mature content that many fans seem to think it was when complaining about WWE’s recent “PG Era.” At least not if you take the word, “mature” literally.

You’ve probably also heard the conventional wisdom to explain why the WWF was so much better under Vince Russo than WCW would be with the same head writer: In the WWF, Russo’s crazy ideas all got filtered through Vince McMahon, who used only the best ideas of the bunch and rejected anything on par with, say, David Arquette winning the company’s world title.

vmc01

Once again, conventional wisdom tends to over-simplify history, as a segment-by-segment look back at WWF programming in the late 90s reveals that at any given time there were at least three Wrestlecrap-worthy angles going on. In Russo’s last month in the WWF alone, fans were treated to the Kennel from Hell Match, Mark Henry’s sex addiction, and the subject of today’s induction. That would be like if in the “New Generation” era everyone loves to deride, a single Monday Night Raw featured Tekno Team 2000, Man Mountain Rock, and hype for the “Kiss My Foot” match. Okay, point taken.

What I’m saying is, Vince McMahon might have been a better “filter” than Vince Russo’s superiors in WCW (who, if I’m not mistaken, consisted of nobody), but he still let quite a few large fecal masses slip through on to national television. Mind you, McMahon didn’t green-light anything quite so egregious as putting the top championship on a non-wrestler with nearly zero build-up on a B-show just to shock fans and promote a crappy movie. What he did approve, however, was still pretty close: putting the top championship on a non-wrestler with nearly zero build-up on a B-show just to shock fans and promote himself.

vmc02

vmc03 See, the boss had been off television since July 26th due to a stipulation where if Steve Austin won his match, McMahon could never appear on WWF TV again. Basically, he would still collect checks, he just wouldn’t come to work. And you thought the Light Heavyweight division was a blatant rip-off of WCW!
Of course, according to Attitude Era calendars, “never” and “49 days later” were practically the same length of time, so McMahon was back on Raw on September 13th.
In keeping with the "Attitude Era" theme, this calendar only let you plan ahead two weeks in advance.

In keeping with the “Attitude Era” theme, this calendar only let you plan ahead a week in advance.

vmc05 I can just imagine Russo coming up to Vince that morning with a draft of the night’s script.Russo: “Hey boss, you know how you’ve been off TV for a while? How about you turn face tonight and win the title tomorrow?”McMahon: “Quick, get me to makeup! Vinnie, this is great! But you still can’t have Smackdowns off. Better hire a nanny.”
That night on Raw, Steve Austin got arrested on TV (again), so Triple H demanded that Linda McMahon cancel his title shot against The Game. The champion was being rather rude to his future mother-in-law, so husband Vince came to the rescue to defend his wife’s honor. vmc06
vmc07  His excuse for violating his contract? This wasn’t business, it was personal, so it didn’t count. I suppose that if he had ever jumped into the ring and punched Austin in the groin, that would have been “personal,” too, and therefore perfectly legal. In summary, Vince called Triple H an SOB, asked him who the hell he thought he was, and reminded him that he gave Hunter the break needed to win the title in the first place. That’s not so much a “summary” as a blow-by-blow of the promo, as the whole confrontation lasted just over a minute.
Austin then rushed to the ring (having escaped police custody somehow), ignored his arch-rival who was in flagrant violation of their contract, and started a match with Triple H. Thus, the most hated heel of the decade was turned face via a 60-second outburst against another heel. Further solidifying his face turn, I guess, was the fact that Austin beat Triple H up instead of him. Am I missing something?
This is what every WWF title match looked like in 1999.

This is what every WWF title match looked like in 1999.

vmc09 The next night on Smackdown (which was taped on Tuesday but aired on Thursday), Triple H had to defend his title again. This time, though, he had his choice of referee (given that all the real referees were on strike) and opponent, who he claimed had main-evented against Steve Austin.
Hunter chose his buddy and fellow heel Shane McMahon to officiate… vmc10
vmc11  …but when it came time to pick an opponent, he shocked the world by calling out Vince McMahon himself. That’s actually a pretty clever twist, given that Vince had indeed wrestled Austin at St. Valentine’s Day Massacre earlier that year. You would think that with how lightly the WWF took stipulations at the time, the Vinces would have had him pick, say, Billy Gunn or Road Dogg or even Savio Vega and just say, “Screw it” to the whole “main event against Austin” clause.
An angry Vince McMahon marched to the ring and — excuse me, I have just been informed that all three of the aforementioned career mid-carders did in fact main event a pay-per-view against Austin, and on the same night, in 1998. vmc12 
vmc13 Anyway, an angry Vince McMahon marched to the ring but refused to fight. Triple H then insulted his manhood and teased having sex with Linda, which was the last straw (and, given how hasty this feud was, pretty much the first straw, too).
Keep in mind that anyone who hadn’t seen that week’s Raw, or who had been flipping through the channels during its last ten minutes, would have absolutely no idea what Triple H’s problem with Vince even was. I missed that week’s Raw, so count me in that group. Frankly, after watching the footage all these years later, I’m still not completely sure what they were feuding over, unlike, say, Bossman and Al Snow, whose Pepper on a Pole match on this night was pretty clearly spelled out. vmc14 
vmc15 Vince came out swinging, but as soon as the bell rang, Triple H was in total control, beating Vince down as if he were a 54-year-old rookie recovering from a motorcycle accident. The only possible problem for Hunter, it seemed, was the fact that his hand-picked referee was his opponent’s son who was actively rooting his father on. Couldn’t he have just picked, I don’t know, Chyna to ref this match?
Triple H bloodied Vince for nine minutes (or nine times the length of the feud) until the familiar shattering of the glass played over the arena speakers. Steve Austin stunned Hunter, his rival for the past month, before dragging the limp body of his mortal enemy over top of him so that he could win the title. It was okay: Vince was a babyface now. vmc16
vmc17 Shane O’Mac counted the three and awarded the WWF title to his father and the owner of the company, who as of 24 hours earlier was not involved in any storyline whatsoever. The McMahons then held up their dazed and wounded patriarch and posed for perhaps the most gruesome family portrait ever.
The next Monday on Raw, Vince posed with the WWF title around his waist as if to remind himself and the world that, yes, he did own the whole damn company and could have done this years earlier. vmc18 
137841774317745-1 In fact, he actually did do this years earlier, but with the USWA belt.
Vince, however, had no intention of defending his title and promptly forfeited it. Basically, Mr. McMahon figured out a way to win and lose a title without ever having to put anybody over, yet he still wasn’t Triple H’s best friend. vmc19 
vmc20  Six days later, Triple H won the Six-Pack Challenge at Unforgiven to get his title back, taking us right back to where we were two weeks earlier.
Except of course, for this guy being back on television for the next 14 years, as Stone Cold reinstated him in exchange for a single title shot, which he lost and could have gotten from fan-friendly Linda anyway.
vmc21

 

You might think that with all of Vince Russo’s shenanigans in WCW, such as the constant pole matches, the David Arquette title reign, and the numerous worked shoots that fooled no one, Vinnie Ru didn’t understand his audience. But consider this: as head writer of the WWF, he put on an angle that made Vince McMahon a champion and gave him an excuse to once again be on TV every week for years and years. When your true audience is none other than Mr. McMahon himself, could you possibly do any better?

Frankly, that kind of pandering to the boss should be #1 in the playbook of any booker seeking job security.

vmc22

Written by

A wrestling fan ever since the days of Wrestlemania IX, Art graduated from college in the same building where Art Donovan called King of the Ring 1994. He currently runs the "How Much Does This Guy Weigh?" blog, where he reviews New Generation-Era Monday Night Raws and Hasbro WWF figures. Email at: art@wrestlecrap.com
63 Responses to "Induction: Vince McMahon, WWF champion: The Two-Vince Ego Trip"
  1. Down With OPC says:

    Considering Vince later on won the ECW Title, I’m surprised he didn’t go ahead and claim the WCW Title as well.

  2. Jason says:

    I liked this angle. I was glad to see the belt off Trips, didn’t care who won it. And I considered VInce forfeiting the title basically his way o saying “It was a fluke but at least Triple H doesn’t have it and I will not just give it back to him”

  3. Autrach Sejanoz says:

    To be perfectly honest, I don’t think this is wrestlecrap at all. Sure, a 50-something non-wrestler was champion, but it was obvious that Vince wasn’t going to defend it, and I think everyone was just that happy that Hunter was no longer champ.

    It made the audience happy (I honestly don’r remember anyone complaining about this) & helped advance a storyline (Austin would go on to face Hunter for the title [and lose, but that\'s beside the point]).

  4. "The Big Cheese" Paul Kraft says:

    This whole angle was… well, at least it was different and threw a couple things in there I wasn’t expecting.. and it didn’t piss me off which is a lot more than I can say for most of the things WCW was doing/would do.

  5. Marvelous says:

    Not crap, sorry. I wouldn’t have suggested it personally, but it was a good way of getting the belt off of HHH and make people think his reign was done with. It was unexpected, didn’t wear out its welcome with an overly long build, didn’t last long enough to have been a big deal. Vince McMahon wrestling and losing wouldn’t put anyone over because he’s Vince, so that’s a non issue. And Vince was probably the most popular guy in the company after Austin. Everyone knew him, as loathed as he was before he left TV his return made him an instant face because we missed him on TV while he was gone. Not even close to the arquette thing because Vince while not a wrestler was still a top performer in wrestling. Plus the guy earned some glory. You know any billionaires that would put himself through bloody matches so that fans can get proper payoffs to stories? Me neither

  6. Cpt. SuckerPunch says:

    i get what everyone is sayin but isnt it pointless to have a non wrestler become champ only to take the belt from triple h just to have triple h win the the belt back a week or two later?…all this did was make vince champ, turn him face, and erase all past animosity with austin within seconds…that part of it to me makes it crap…

  7. Tony Wilson says:

    This was TOTAL crap. Taking it off of HHH on Smackdown would have caused the title to lose some it’s prestige, but putting it on a non-wrestler makes the belt valueless. Especially putting it on a non-wrestler in a match with zero build and a storyline that was pasted together at the last second, not to mention it was only done to further a storyline that just wound up putting the belt back on HHH.

    No, this was pure crap, plain and simple.

    • Jason says:

      it only makes the belt valueless if the non-wrestler earns the belt and defends it against real wrestlers. Essentially Vince was handed the belt and he handed it back immediately after

    • Crumbs says:

      I don’t see how it makes the belt valueless when McMahon only won because Austin interfered and McMahon forfeited it anyway. Given how ridiculously frequent and unpromoted many of the title changes were at the time it’s questionable at best that this one could be considered worse just because McMahon won it, especially given that he was one of the top names in the company at the time and had wrestled on numerous occasions. I wouldn’t have booked it myself obviously but there’s no way it’s as bad as you’re making it sound, especially given the short-termism of the Monday Night Wars in general.

      Compare it to David Arquette winning the WCW title CLEANLY in a tag match where DDP could have broken up the pin and won the belt himself, then they had the balls to actually make Arquette successfully defend the title AND turn heel to get the belt back on Jarrett. There’s no question which did the most damage, as evidence by the fact that the WWE title still exists and still has prestige while the WCW title is considered the worst booked top-tier championship in mainstream wrestling history.

  8. ScMcS says:

    I think the induction could’ve done more with where the angle went: Vince is beaten at Armageddon and loses his daughter to the man he hates more than Austin (allegedly), then shows up in time for WM 2000 and helps Triple H. Because… I dunno, life sucks and then you die?

    If we’re going by September alone, I liked it. Vince hates Triple H and somehow wins back his promotions belt, only to relinquish it and have the top contenders fight. He gives Triple H a chance to win it back, if he can win 3 out of 5 matches on one night, and then have to win the 6-Pack Challenge. Yeah, the Austin/McMahon “alliance” (1999 version) made little sense, but then we could question the week or two before the Higher Power happened. There love-hate seemed like something that was on a whim that year.

  9. Sir Thomas says:

    Sorry dude, but honestly, I have to agree with a lot of the people calling “not crap” on this one.

  10. SCFNL says:

    I have to be honest in that I enjoyed this angle too! I can understand the argument that it is wrestlecrap but at the same time, for me, the 6 pac challenge at Unforgiven 1999 remains one of my favourite matches of all time – the promo for that match (with the original music, not the WWE edited version) is one of the best Attitude era pre-match promos in my view.

    I think Vince turning face after 49 days was nowhere near as bad as when Austin just suddenly became a face after a period of 1 day after being a heel that was trying to kill the WWF – now THAT was a lazy face turn by the bookers.

  11. Peter says:

    It was an egostroke, and because it was short lived and in the Attitude Era it flew by relatively unnoticed until now. Still crap though. His ECW title reign was even worse.

    • Crumbs says:

      ECW was already as good as dead and he used it as a means to try and get Lashley over. It was stupid, yes, but pretty harmless given the ECW title didn’t mean much at the time. It’s to the credit of later champions (e.g. Morrison, Punk, Matt Hardy, Dreamer, Swagger, Christian) that they managed to make the belt look like it had value again.

    • Art0Donnell says:

      I remember discussing Vince’s ECW title win with another die-hard fan at school and being flabbergasted to hear that he thought it was a great idea. His justification: it made the ECW title part of a major storyline, and it took the belt off Bobby Lashley.

  12. graham says:

    not complete crap, just rushed. For some reason once they added Smackdown the pacing went to hell for a few weeks.

  13. Alan says:

    Finally, the VKM WWF Title reign has been inducted! Well overdue! More proof that “The Attitude Era” had more than its share of crappy moments.

  14. The Scanian Maniac says:

    Who’s got the feet in the air on the last picture? :-)

  15. Anonymous says:

    This went beyond crap into full blown SHIT.

    Also, have the Lightweight Division or McMahon’s USWA title reign been inducted?

  16. Chunkylover53 says:

    I liked it. The crowd was happy to see an up-and-coming Triple H be put to a halt, and plus it didn’t have any affect on business. It wasn’t anywhere in the realm of David Arquette winning the WCW world title to promote a crappy B movie, it had a storyline purpose.

  17. Chadmw10 says:

    OMG OMG OMG, I can’t believe you bad mouthed the attitude era, don’t you know the attitude era was perfect and there could be no wrong with it. You should be ashamed of yourself for saying anything bad about the greatest era of professional wrestling

    (please note the above rant was sarcasm for those that can’t tell the difference)

    • Crumbs says:

      My 86 year old grandmother who suffers from frontotemporal dementia could have worked out the sarcasm.

    • dennett316 says:

      Yes terrible, terrible sarcasm.
      Nobody stating that they don’t consider this storyline to be crap has said anything even remotely like what you said above.

      Vince got the shit beat out of him by a wrestler, and had the title gifted to him by another wrestler doing all the work. He then vacated the title at the earliest opportunity. I don’t think it devalued the title at all.

  18. Crumbs says:

    One of the few Art inductions that I’ve really taken issue with. By all means criticise how rushed this was, which you did by pointing out that there was almost zero build and it led to very little, but trying to compare it to the Arquette reign is ridiculous. At least Vince was a mainstay and had been established as one of its big names for years and for years to come – unlike Arquette. At least he didn’t win the belt cleanly – unlike Arquette. At least he didn’t start to defend and retain the belt – unlike Arquette. And, at least it was used to further other feuds – unlike Arquette. Keep in mind that the title was changing hands way too frequently at the time anyway. In fact, at Summerslam Mankind had won the belt, then the next night Triple H had won it. This match was within weeks of that. I therefore find it really unfair that this angle is being given more flack just because the title was put on Mr McMahon. How far do you take this, anyway? Do you induct the 1999 Royal Rumble? The McMahon/Undertaker Buried Alive match? The DX vs McMahons and Big Show Hell in a Cell match? Or how about Shane’s European title reign? Stephanie’s Women’s title reign? Vince vs Shane at Wrestlemania X-7? The problem with all of these is that, aside maybe from Steph with the Women’s belt, all of them had real entertainment value and real feel-good qualities to them, as well as decent wrestling for the most part.

    The ones that CAN be justified, most certainly, are Vince’s ECW title reign and the Triple H/Jericho/Stephanie McMahon angle where Jericho was made to look like a bit player in his own title defence and Stephanie was booked in a WWF title match in which she’d be fired if she lost – I was almost certain they were going to put the belt on her, which really would have permanently destroyed it.

    • Crumbs says:

      Actually, i wouldn’t be too bothered if McMahon/Undertaker Buried Alive was inducted, if for no other reason than it was boring. McMahon/Bret could be as well. But McMahon/Hogan and McMahon/HBK were entertaining so it would be hard to justify inducting those unless it was purely to mock the build.

    • Art0Donnell says:

      I maintain that this is wrestlecrap. As I pointed out, it of course wasn’t as bad as David Arquette winning the title. Yes, it was completely rushed and had a build-up of literally minutes, once you consider that the McMahon-HHH altercation was barely even acknowledged on Smackdown before the match happened.

      But besides being rushed and relying entirely on cheap heat like vowing to cuckold Vince, the storyline involved lots of wrestlers acting completely out of character and nullifying major storylines. McMahon goes from all-around villain to fan favorite in a matter of minutes with little justification. Triple H suddenly hates Vince McMahon more than anyone on earth. He then picks Vince’s own son, out of anybody in the world to be the referee, not seeing how that could backfire at all. Stone Cold reinstates Vince after emerging victorious once and for all in their years-long feud just so that he can get a title shot he could have gotten from Linda or Shane.

      Bottom line, if an angle involves Vince McMahon etching himself into the record books as the WWF championship, it had better a) make sense, and b) have a great build. This one fails on both counts.

    • Art0Donnell says:

      PS: The 1999 Royal Rumble deserves induction for many, many reasons besides Vince winning it.

      • Anonymous says:

        The 1999 Royal Rumble was one of the absolute worst PPVs of all time and almost inarguably the worst Rumble of all time.

        • Marvelous says:

          I don’t think anyone is defending it as being great or even good. I think most of us here are just disagreeing with the label of crap

        • lightning116 says:

          You made me a happy camper. Royal Rumble 1999 was HORRIBLE. Even as a naive 14-year old back then, I thought that PPV was crap.

          Too bad people on YouTube would defend that crap.

      • Rob says:

        Yeah, I think that The Rumble 1999 should be inducted.

        You look at The Rumble match itself.
        A) Austin and McMahon were the first 2 in and the last 2 left but only because both men left the Rumble match for a while.
        B) The drawing. Vince Russo booked it in a way that all the jobbers/mid carders in it came in earlier while most of the main guys came in later. No mixing the participants around.
        C) This Rumble match had the most dead spaces in one Rumble match. I lost count as to how many there were.

        And there are other things that I am really too tired to mention.

  19. Jimbolian says:

    I’m certain this was all done to give a ratings boost for Smackdown as WWF in extremely rare fashion actually promoted Vince’s title win BEFORE it aired. Don’t know what the actual ratings were, but WWF thought letting fans know Vinny Mac is your new WWF champion is enough to tune in.

  20. Raven7309 says:

    The one thing that I remember about this was when the Raw 10th anniversary magazine came out, therewas a picture of Vinnie Mac withe the title belt around his waist, and the “WWF” attidude era logo was airbrushed out. Any othet photos in the magazine from.that era where the logo.was visible had the same thing done to them. Damn World Wildlife Fund!! :-(

  21. Thomas Moffatt says:

    Now can we have the search for Shawn Michaels angle inducted or even the WWE Tag Team match from Summerslam 96?

  22. David Jr says:

    I have a hard time calling this crap because what it eventually led too. If this never happened, then does Triple H interrupt Stephanie McMahon and Test’s wedding? Does Stephanie McMahon align with Triple H? Do we not get the Cactus Jack vs. Triple H feud that led off 2000? After Foley’s feud in start of 99 with the Rock, he had a lot of stinkers that year. His matches with Triple H at the Royal Rumble and No Way Out showed that he could still have great matches. But if he never had a chance at the those matches, then we might have never got Randy Orton vs. Mick Foley at Backlash or Mick Foley vs. Edge at Wrestlemania 22. Also would Stephanie been aligned with Test? Would he had a Wrestlemania main event with Test?

    • Art0Donnell says:

      There would have been many more logical ways to bring about all of the things you just mentioned. Off the top of my head, there’s this scenario: Shane McMahon, being Triple H’s buddy and hating Stone Cold’s guts, forbids Austin from ever getting a title shot (which is what would have happened if Stone Cold would have lost that “End of an Era” match). Austin, frustrated at being locked out of the main event, makes a deal with the devil, reinstating Vince McMahon in exchange for Vince giving him a title shot. Vince agrees. This angers Triple H, who resents Vince more and more as the months wear on, leading to his interruption of Stephanie’s wedding and literally everything that followed as a consequence. All of the events you mentioned happened months after this non-sensical hot-shot stunt; that’s how long this angle should have taken to develop: months, not hours.

      It doesn’t turn Vince face overnight, it doesn’t put the title on him, it gives Triple H a real reason to hate Vince, and it gives Austin a much better reason to do the unthinkable and reinstate Vince in the first place.

      Besides, lots of crappy angles eventually end up with good results if you wait around long enough. If Mark Calloway had been inside the Survivor Series 1990 egg as supposedly originally planned, there would have never been an Undertaker. That doesn’t make the Gobbledygooker hatching a good angle. If there were no Lex Express and Hogan-like push of Luger in 1993, Bret Hart would have faced Yokozuna at Summerslam, depriving us of the awesome Hart-Lawler feud as well as the Owen Hart heel turn and main event push that resulted from it. That doesn’t mean Lex Luger’s babyface run wasn’t Wrestlecrap. The exact same thing goes for Hulk Hogan winning the WWF title from Yokozuna in a minute; if it weren’t for that angle, Bret’s feuds with Lawler and Owen wouldn’t have happened (or would have happened under slightly different circumstances, just like the McMahon-Helmsley era you mentioned). In other words, given enough time, good things result from most any bad angle, but it doesn’t make the bad angle good, nor does it mean that those good results couldn’t have also come about from a better storyline.

      • 80's Guy says:

        I read through everything, being swayed back and forth by the arguments, but this one here really does it for me. Makes complete sense, and describes everything perfectly.

        • Thomas Moffatt says:

          May I point out that Nipple H is criteria alone for WrestleCrap? If this angle had not happened and Nips’ “wedding” had not been interrupted then we wouldn’t have had 14 years of Nipple H screeching into a microphone…

  23. CaptainRon says:

    I don’t think it would’ve been TOTAL crap had the belt not gone back to HHH six days later. Really, what was the point of putting the belt on a 50-something-year-old man, having him forfeit is, then going back to your starting point. More interesting would have booked HHH to defend the belt in the six-pack challenge. The question would then be HOW is Triple H going to get out of this one?

    • Thomas Moffatt says:

      A follow on to this would be the Smackdown where Triple H had to qualify for the Six Pack Challenge which then led to Davey Boy Smith getting Rock Bottomed into a pile of dog poo…

  24. Anonymous says:

    It was wrestlecrap in the most extreme sense possible. Is there really any debate about this? There is NEVER any justification for giving the title to a non-wrestler. It doesn’t matter what the “storylines” are.

  25. Down With OPC says:

    I think one question we should ask: Could Vince get away with this if it happened now?

  26. SCFNL says:

    I think it might be best to keep to non-contentious inductions in future – what made this site great is that you read most of the inductions and go “what the hell were they thinking??“. This sort of induction (and Art I love most of your inductions man, keep up the great work) unfortunately comes across more like smarky complaining about booking as opposed to genuine, LOLZ worthy wrestlecrap, of which there is an abundance still waiting to be inducted. I think judging from all the comments above, steer clear of angles which some fans will have liked. For example I see people above slagging Royal Rumble 99 – when I know for a fact that PPV was absolutely loved by a large number of fans at the time who would take issue with such a claim. True wrestlecrap is rarely contentious!

    • E-Squared says:

      Well, “loved” probably because of the “I Quit” match. That was pretty much the only good match on the card. The undercard was nothing special (Did we really need to see Sable vs. Luna for the 100th time? In a strap match no less?). The Rumble itself consisted mostly of waiting. The only good parts were the Austin and Vince parts of it. Towards the end, the Rumble got a little better but the rest of the Rumble sucked.

  27. Jacob says:

    It is absolutely crap. I always felt this was done just so Vince could have it in the record books. Just look at Vince’s resume: he is a former wwf champion, former ecw champion, a royal rumble winner and holds wins over Steve Austin, the undertaker and Shawn Michaels. How many other wrestlers can say that?

    • Jason says:

      it’s easy to say that when you look back, but at this time there was no reason to figure he’d be an ECW champ or that Shawn would ever wrestle again

  28. Mr Maddog says:

    Yet another IWC bitch fest… What ever happened to the ‘humor’ on this site or is that not allowed for the serious “sport” of professional wrestling?

    • "The Big Cheese" Paul Kraft says:

      Sorry, we’re only allowed to be funny three times a year, and this wasn’t one of those times. We’ll try to do better next time.

  29. Down With OPC says:

    One small gripe I have with the new inductions: the main header in the induction pages no longer features the image for the induction. It only shows up in the rotating header on the main index page. All the old inductions would have an image for the induction, with the year of the angle below it, at the top of the page. If you scroll up top here, the first picture we see is of David Arquette from 2000, and the year 1999 doesn’t even show up until the picture of Austin fighting HHH.

  30. MJ says:

    This “storyline” was horrible for all the reasons stated. I can’t even fathom anyone trying to defend it. Great induction as always Art. Extremely overdue, as well.

  31. Ken 'The Machine' Riggins says:

    While this was indeed a ludicrous and pathetic angle, I’d stop short of nominating as true ‘WrestleCrap.’ It just doesn’t have the ingredients necessary to be a true contender.

  32. Hashington says:

    Induct the “career” of Tony Dawson (who was finally fired today).

  33. Nolo King says:

    Somebody uploaded this episode online and I find it so difficult to get into the product because there was too much crap like this going on, lawls!

  34. LOBSTERHead says:

    Hey, man, you’re mistaken about the storyline. Vince didn’t show up just because. Steve Austin brought him back. He said that the WWE wasn’t the same without him and to a certain extent, he missed him. He then gave him a stunner.

leave a comment