Who should have Hogan put over clean in his WWF/E WCW run?

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by seabs, Mar 15, 2012.

  1. Many people didn't like how Hogan didn't let many people go over him, so let's hear who he should have put over. I'll start with Sting at Starcade 97.
  2. Agree on Sting. Another one: Not really putting over, but how the match set-up was vs HBK. All he wanted to do was making alot of money by winning matches. Just winning matches. Not a good thing imo. But HBK got him good witht he whole overselling thing.

    Just had to be said with it. ;)
  3. Everyone.
  4. So you'd take the biggest star at the time and possibly ever and put John Studd over in '87? #Hater
  5. That's me. Nah to be honest I'm not in a position to judge, I haven't watched too much of Hogan's time. I won't judge on a few YouTube videos/DVD's either. But HBK would be the top of my list, however, I wouldn't have got to see the epic overselling of HBK mocking Hogan if Hogan played fair.
  6. I'm not really mad at Hogan for not putting people over when he was in his heyday, and I don't really get mad at top guys for not doing it because I understand that's just the way things work (though I could do without the typical 'super ______ schtick. You can book top guys without having them follow the same flow in every match.) I can't blame him for not putting many guys over in WCW's dying years, because things were just a mess. He should have put Goldberg over cleanly, but hey, he put him over so no real complaints there. The Bret Hart/Sting ending in '97 was complete bull shit, I agree with you there Seabs. I think Hogan told the ref to not do a fast count as was originally planned, and it made the ending a clusterfuck (even though the booked ending was shit to begin with, Sting should have gone over clean)

    He did put over Rock, Angle, Undertaker when returning to WWF after the buyout, probably others I'm forgetting, so props to him on that.
  7. HBK! Or vs. him again and let HBK win!