Wrestlemania #9: Was Hogan The Right Choice?
At the end of Wrestlemania #9, Hogan popped up out of nowhere to win the world title in about a minute. Was this the right idea?I think you could argue that it was, but at this they needed to have Hogan put over Bret. For some reason that never happened, even though it was planned. The ending wasn’t great, especially given that Hogan’s pop was pretty weak. He did get cheered for when Gonzalez was standing in the ring after leaving Undertaker laying though. I’m not wild on it but I guess I could see them playing things like they had for the last 8 years.
Thoughts?
Looking back I really had no problem with Hogan winning the Title after Bret lost it to Yokozuna. A Heel didn’t close out Wrestlemania by winning the WWF/E Title and I guess it was the right choice although at the same time I think Bret maybe could have won as well. Either way it could have set up a Bret/Hogan Feud going into King Of The Ring or Summerslam as planned.
Hindsight being 20/20, Hogan was CLEARLY not the right choice.
The most I can understand is that since Hogan was gonna be gone soon they[himself] squeezed everything they could of him before he left.
1. If I remember correctly, isn’t the rumor that Hogan all but begged/forced Vince to do it? If he did, I kinda can’t blame Vince.
2. They also were probably very skeptical of having a heel go over to end Mania. A Heel didn’t close out Mania until WrestleMania 2000.
3. As you said in your review, they had been building the match as “Bret has no chance.” You know what the best result for the match would have been? Bret beats Yoko. The “shock” of Bret winning would be great. Then have Hogan come out and celebrate with Bret. After the program goes off the air, have Hogan attack Bret (allow the fans watching a happy show ending), show the post-mania attack on RAW the next night, and start a Bret/Hogan thing going into King Of the Ring, where Hogan goes out on his back (or stomach in the Sharpshooter).