Yeah, I mean I can remember every title change from the first one I saw (Hogan beating Savage at WM V) until Austin beat HBK at WM XIV. After that I really don't know what happened. Maybe that Austin-to-Kane dirty first blood finish was the next title change, but then Kane lost it right away IIRC but I don't remember to who. I kept watching religiously, but the title changes just lost a ton of their impact.

And to me, big title changes were one of the real foundations of an enjoyable company. While I appreciate Punk getting a nice long reign right now on some level, the fact that they treat it like they used to treat the IC title does temper my enjoyment of his reign.

think he lost it the next night to austin on raw

Technically 1998, but aired in 1999. Raw in Worcester, MA. Possibly my favorite Raw of all time.

I quit match. Foley takes a bazillion chairshots to the head.

Empty arena match that aired during the Super Bowl.

Triple threat match (also had HHH) with Jesse Ventura as guest ref. HHH with the pedigree on Austin, but Foley throws him off. Foley pins Austin to win title.

If I recall correctly, this was a part of that deplorable storyline where the Big Boss Man was tormenting the Big Show about Big Show's father being terminally ill. Big Show would win a 1 vs 4 elimination match at Survivor Series, then replace Austin (who was run over by Rikishi with a car) in the title match.

The other 6 title changes I have entirely forgotten (and I wish I could say that about the last one).

Well, in all honestly, I actually knew all of them thanks to PPV reviews and wiki. That wacky Russo and all of his 1999 booking though makes it harder to remember what though.

And to fill in the blanks for the poster above me. Mankind lost to Rock in a Ladder match on Raw, Stone Cold beated Rock at WM 15, Austin lost to Taker at Over the Edge (where Owen died), Austin regained it back the day after KOTR (some say it was the worst PPV of all time), uhhhh HHH won his first reign against Mankind the day after SS, Vince won a few weeks later, which was vacated six days later, and HHH regained it at Unforgiven.

Was that the year that Billy Gunn won? That was a really bad PPV. Worst all time has got to be December to Dismember though.

Wasn't that KOTR the one with Taker-Mankind Hell in a Cell? The sheer memorability of that match would pretty much defeat any claim to that as the worst PPV ever.

I would suggest that it wasn't even the worst KOTR ever, instead giving that honor to the 1995 edition won by Mabel. The main event featured a tag team match with Diesel and Bam Bam taking on the Million Dollar Corporation. Whole show was brutal.

Correct.

That was KOTR 98, KOTR 99 had Billy Gunn won the friken tournament and it had the infamous briefcase lift thing that no one knew who raised it, though you could be right that KOTR 95 could be the worst.

Everyone keeps saying booking was better and titles changes meant more pre-attitude era, but again I think that's just selective memory. Was it good booking having Bob Backland lose the title three days after winning it to Kevin Nash at a house show? Was it good booking having Bret Hart's first title win not be televised? Was it good booking having Mable win KOTR, then have the main event of SummerSlam be Nash/Mable? Was it good booking having Hogan get a title shot against Yokozona for no reason what so ever at WM 10 after Yokozona beat Bret, then Hogan going over? You're right that title change meant a whole lot. To say "lol the attitude era had ****ty booking and ****ty title changes" is just a ridiculous statement, ever single era has some ridiculous booking.

I mean I think we were all agreeing that the 1993-1995 era was mostly awful and certainly far worse than the Golden Era that preceded it and the Attitude Era that followed. The only thing that you named that fell outside of that three-year period was the Bret/Flair match not being televised, which was late 1992 (so right before things began to drop off pretty dramatically).

I guess I don't know what happened with that whole fiasco where Bret got the title. Seems to be widely accepted that Warrior was supposed to go heel at SummerSlam at SSlam '92, and that he vetoed it at the last minute so they had to change his match with Savage into a schmozz. Then Warrior was fired by Survivor Series that year. They did two title changes that year off live TV, first Savage to Flair and then Flair to Bret. I have to think that's well outside of what their original plan was, that the last-minute changes to SummerSlam threw them and that in an era where they only had four PPVs per year and I don't think Raw was quite yet airing then, it forced them do some odd stuff.

For what it's worth I don't think Backlund turning around and dropping the belt right away was all that bad. He wasn't in a position to be anything more than a transitional champion, and I can see why they wanted to headline Royal Rumble with Bret vs. Diesel rather than Backlund vs. Diesel because Bret was going to do a better job of putting Diesel over than Backlund would have.

There's little doubt, though, that the Attitude Era was certainly the death of good booking. This thing where we constantly watch repeat matches on TV started then. The never-ending Swagger vs. Kofi series can be pointed back to then.

I understand how it happened. They were in a ratings war so they constantly had to play the short game rather than the long game, and as such they were forced to give up instant gratification all the time and never let anything (whether a feud or an angle) have a great slow burn like they did back in the days of superior booking. Considering that WWE was fighting for its very life, I can hardly fault it for doing this. It's just that the long-term effects have been negative to say the least.

interesting tidbit: the flair/savage match was stopped and restarted at the instruction of vince because he didn't like the way the match was playing out. the "second" match ended up being aired on prime time wrestling.

i'll tell you another thing the attitude era did well and better than the golden years and modern times:

unpredictability of match results.

back in the late 80s/early-mid 90s i remember getting super excited when an unexpected result happened because they were just so damn rare (ex sid over HBK at survivor series). heels basically never stood a chance in any big match. nowadays heels fair slightly better but i still think the results are kinda easy to predict (although rock over cena was kinda surprising to me).

during the attitude era i think it was difficult to predict whether HHH/Rock/SCSA/Mankind would come out on top. at the IC/tag division-tier there were tons of title changes on raw too, which always made it an interesting watch.

Oh in terms of pure talent, I do think the top of the card contained more of it during the Attitude Era than during the Golden Era. I think the very elite level of talent at that time acted as a deodorant for a lot of what otherwise wouldn't have come off well at all in today's era.

Certainly it was nice to have four legends at the top (five when you factor in Undertaker) to give them more options. During the Hogan era, it just wasn't really viable to keep the belt off of him because they respected the belt then and it was clear that nobody was at Hogan's level for most of his run. I think they chose better by just having him strapped for most of the time rather than pulling what they do now with Cena where there's a world championship and a superior John Cena championship.

Also guys, you have to view Billy Gunn winning KOTR in the proper light. Sure it seemed terrible for a couple of years, but it was all just a build-up to one of the greatest burials of all time.

Well said. There's a time and place for a feud to outshine the feud for the WWE title (I think Cena vs. Rock at Wrestlemania qualifies). But these types of feuds are (or at least should be) extremely rare.