valid points, though i think a lil skewed. but whatever, mine im sure are skewed the other way.
what about this argument: if you remove both from the sport, individually. if you delete flair from wrestling history, and try to re-imagine the timeline and industry without flair in it (maybe wcw never came to prominance, maybe wwe folded a few years back, maybe nothing changed, etc). then remove hogan from wrestling history, and try to re-imagine the timeline and industry without hogan in it (maybe vader became vadermania, maybe wrestlemania ended after 3 seasons, maybe nothing changed, etc).
which "sliders" universe is more different than ours?
to me, particularly with that perspective, hogan has by far the larger impact on the sport-dustry. do you guys really see it differently?
I've already said it many times here. Vince had a role and was looking for someone to fill it. Hogan had the charisma he needed, so he plugged ole skullet in. There were plenty of people who could have done what Hogan did. Flair being the best choice. But, as we all know, Vince likes creating his stars. Hogan was still young enough for Vince to mold him. Remember that Hogan was doing more of a Superstar Billy Graham persona just like Jessie the Body Ventura. Vince is the one behind the 'eat your vitamins and say your prayers' persona.
whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules. It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness. This is true both in politics and on the internet."
