Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Hollywood Blonds (WCW Saturday Night 10/30/93)

WCW Saturday Night October 30 1993 Hollywood Blonds Steve Austin Brian Pillman

  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Loss

Loss
  • Admins
  • 43308 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 February 2011 - 05:29 PM

Talk about it here.



#2 Loss

Loss
  • Admins
  • 43308 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 June 2011 - 02:07 PM

It's the end of Austin and Pillman teaming in a rather abrupt angle. Austin did get a push in 1994, but it still was probably not the best decision to do this.

#3 El-P

El-P
  • Members
  • 8615 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 02 November 2012 - 06:20 PM

Lame. The Blondes had so much potential to build momemtum for both Austin & Pillman. But you gotta have the Nasty Boys on top of the tag team division, and Pillman didn't had any star potential, did he ? Yawn

#4 Kevin Ridge

Kevin Ridge
  • Members
  • 4762 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Waltham, Massachusetts

Posted 20 January 2014 - 05:54 PM

They should have at least stretched out the turn over a couple weeks. Austin too easily turned on Pillman when things looked fine between them.

#5 PeteF3

PeteF3
  • Members
  • 8865 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 08 February 2014 - 10:27 PM

So, Pillman's heel turn and babyface turn both occur in anticlimactic fashion. This was ridiculously abrupt, but it was better than the initial heel turn because of a pretty decent promo from Col. Parker about racehorse metaphors, and a really cool double-team effort from him and Austin. 



#6 garretta

garretta
  • Members
  • 3565 posts

Posted 01 February 2017 - 03:46 AM

What the hell was that? Why rush a turn that could have been built over weeks or even months? There aren't too many worse fits in WCW than Boss Hogg and the Blonds, so why not exploit that? Have Austin bring Fuller into the mix over Pillman's objections, and have Fuller slowly start favoring Austin over Pillman, maybe making single matches for him instead of getting the Blonds title shots against the Nasties as Pillman assumed he would. Then, after about eight to ten weeks at the very least, you could do this exact turn note for note and it would make sense. As it is, why would Austin listen to and side with a relative Johnny-come-lately over someone who's been by his side faithfully for the last year and a half?

 

I didn't like Fuller's promo much either, but as you can tell from the nickname I gave him, I'm no fan of the whole Col. Parker gimmick, and I don't understand how it's not panned as thoroughly as some of the other ridiculous ideas that have come out of the Big Two to this point in the nineties.  Yes, Fuller does the best he can with it, but that's nowhere near enough to make it actually enjoyable. To use a WWF analogy, this is my version of Sheepherders/Bushwhackers; most people can't understand how Vince could have "ruined" Luke and Butch, and I can't understand why someone in the WCW front office who knew Fuller's work didn't clue Bischoff in as to how good he was without a cheesy gimmick like this.



#7 soup23

soup23
  • Moderators
  • 9661 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 25 May 2017 - 10:20 PM

And just like that, the Blondes are no more. A pretty bone headed decision that wasn't needed at this time. 







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: WCW, Saturday Night, October 30, 1993, Hollywood Blonds, Steve Austin, Brian Pillman

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users