Tuesday, July 26, 2011

Greatest Stars of the 21st Century

From WWE.com
By Chad Smart
@ChadSmart on Twitter


I made a comment on the My1-2-3 Cents Facebook page during Raw that I don’t think was interpreted the way I meant it. So I’m going to try and clarify it here. The comment was based around the commercial for WWE’s new DVD “Greatest Stars of the 21st Century.” I will admit I have not seen the DVD. I was going to wait until I saw it to write this, but it’s not a DVD I’m going to go out of my way to see so by the time I would have seen this topic would be past it’s freshness date.

The comment I made was, “Should Stone Cold be featured on the DVD since his in-ring career was mostly over by 2002?”  In no way need I mean to imply Stone Cold wasn’t worthy of being considered in the Greatest Stars category. My query was does a two-year active wrestling stint qualify him for inclusion as greatest for an entire decade. Would Austin be considered a Greatest Stars of the 80s even though he only wrestled in 1989? I agree with his inclusion on the Greatest Stars of the 1990’s. Since he was a semi-major player in WCW in the early ‘90s and then the run at the top of WWF in the late ‘90s. Steve Austin is truly a star of that decade. 
However, even with his run at the top during 2000-2001, I don’t feel he should be included on the new DVD. Again, not taking anything away from Austin’s accomplishments.

My dislike for Austin being on the DVD may also be rooted in a problem with how WWE treats wrestlers who made a name for themselves in the post-attitude years. As I wrote in a past article,  WWE has the tendency to make current stars look inferior whenever a former star is around. True the current stars may not be as big of a draw as the former stars and they never will be if they’re treated on-air as second rate.

Austin in 2007
I looked over the chapter listing for the DVD and it does seem to include several guys who rose to main event status during the first decade of the 21st century. I simply think Steve Austin (and the Rock as well) shouldn’t be on the DVD as they were already stars and their time inside the ring was limited. That’s all I meant with the comment. Not saying Austin wasn’t a part of the decade. But showing up randomly and stunnering guys who were trying to get over with the crowd, doesn’t make him a “greatest star” in my eyes. Actually that made me dread every time he showed up. But that’s another rant.

I hope this has cleared up any confusion my comment made. Again, not downplaying the significance of Steve Austin’s career, just limiting the focal point of said career.

If you agree or don’t agree let us know on Facebook or Twitter. Come up with suggestions for the YouTube channel. And tell your friends about us. We have big plans in store and no one should miss them. 

1 comment:

  1. If Chris Benoit is nowhere to be seen on this DVD then its a farce as he was clearly one of the key players in the WWF/E in the first half of the decade.

    Seperate the man from the in-ring persona and admit that he was a star.

    Glad to see Lesnar and Angle on the cover of the DVD, had a feeling they might be overlooked too for various reasons.

    ReplyDelete