Scott, why do people still not believe Bob Backlund’s story that he wasn’t told the finish of his title lose to Sheik? I realize at the time people were just like, “Backlund is nuts and Vince wouldn’t do that.”
Yet, looking at it all these years later, and the fact that Vince has now done it two other times it seems like Backlund’s story actually makes sense. Also, why else would they give Backlund the title in 94? Sure, the crazy old man gimmick did get over a little. But not to the level of World champion. Clearly there were no plans for him as a main eventer. Maybe it was just to get the title from Bret to Diesel.
But couldn’t it also have been the final piece to mend fences with Backlund. Vince just says, “OK, I’ll give you a short reign with the title, you’ll have your moment of glory and you don’t mention the whole Sheik thing ever again.”
Backlund has long been established as being full of shit on the subject and basically kayfabing the whole deal because he’s nuts. Everyone else says he knew and was informed ahead of time and he was just working for a rematch. Not to mention that the entire storyline was that he had a bad neck and then Sheik won with his deadly neck hold.