The W
June 7, 2009 - birthdaybritney.jpg
Views: 179003319
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
28.3.24 0836
The W - Pro Wrestling - Recapping "The Triple H is God" Push thus far (Page 2)
This thread has 99 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.82
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 Next
(8857 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (56 total)
dr beavis
Weisswurst








Since: 29.1.04

Since last post: 7309 days
Last activity: 7309 days
#21 Posted on
    Originally posted by MightyBastard
    RVD, Booker T and CHris Jericho are the three best examples. All were in a position to take the next step to becoming a constant main event level wrestler, but all were shot down constantly by not being able to beat HHH.

the fact that they never beat hhh is because vince mcmahon refuses to pull the trigger on any of them. you can go on and on that hhh uses his pull, but if vince was ever set on giving one of them a chance hhh would have lost the belt to them. it's as simple as that. when vince makes up his mind to push someone to the top, he does it. look at brock lesnar. any one of those wrestlers would be in main events if vince was serious about them.
geemoney
Scrapple








Since: 26.1.03
From: Naples, FL

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 12 hours
#22 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.19

    And the only men to beat Steve Austin for the title one on one are Kane (first blood match, blood caused by Undertaker), Undertaker, Angle, and Jericho. Two less than have beat HHH. How many people is he supposed to lose the belt to?

Maybe less have lost to Austin, but Austin has made his opponents at least look good, and look like they have a chance to win, whereas Trips dominates the feud to the point that we know the guy has no chance of winning.



(edited by geemoney on 31.1.04 1901)

TV, Ebay, College Scheduling and more!: http://parksg.blogspot.com

If you want to read about someone more interesting than me: http://texaskelly.blogspot.com
dr beavis
Weisswurst








Since: 29.1.04

Since last post: 7309 days
Last activity: 7309 days
#23 Posted on | Instant Rating: 0.32
stop talking bullshit. hhh makes his opponents look bad? how? does he not sell for them? does he give them no offense? do they never get heat on him?

i'd like to hear just one example of a wrestler who feuded with hhh, never got to beat him up, never got to pin him, never got to embarass him, never got any heat on him, and then went to the PPV and jobbed to him to end the feud. just one.
Mr Tuesday
Kolbasz








Since: 6.1.02
From: Chicago, IL

Since last post: 4311 days
Last activity: 4016 days
#24 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.75
    Originally posted by madiq
    1. If you got a series of promotions, while a very qualified minority candidate kept being passed over, and you were almost 100% sure that it was because of Racism, would you at least CONSIDER declining the promotion?


Nope. Never turn down an opritunity.

    Originally posted by madiq
    Or if a family member ran the company, and you got special perks and benefits that the other workers didn't get, including a cushy office, a higher salary, and bulletproof job security, no matter how badly you fucked up...would you perhaps decline that special extra Christmas bonus, when you see the hardworking guys you came in with getting laid off and yelled at for the company's poor performance (poor performance, due in part to the fact that YOU are in such a prominent position, while more competent and energetic guys are mired in middle management)


Hell no, it'd probaly make me want it more. To the others I say "screw 'em!"

    Originally posted by madiq
    If you were at a job where the company functioned smoothly and more efficiently when you were out sick, the best thing for you to do is delegate your responsibilities to someone else, and collect your paycheck.


If I had a job, that did good whil I'm gone, And I'd have the job REGARDLESS weither I come in or not? COOL!
geemoney
Scrapple








Since: 26.1.03
From: Naples, FL

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 12 hours
#25 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.19
    Originally posted by dr beavis
    stop talking bullshit. hhh makes his opponents look bad? how? does he not sell for them? does he give them no offense? do they never get heat on him?

    i'd like to hear just one example of a wrestler who feuded with hhh, never got to beat him up, never got to pin him, never got to embarass him, never got any heat on him, and then went to the PPV and jobbed to him to end the feud. just one.

Booker T. He was embarassed on interviews with Trips saying he was above him, and Booker shouldn't be getting a shot, and lo and behold Trips beats him and Booker never gets to sniff the title. And that's just one.



TV, Ebay, College Scheduling and more!: http://parksg.blogspot.com

If you want to read about someone more interesting than me: http://texaskelly.blogspot.com
SKLOKAZOID
Bierwurst








Since: 20.3.02
From: California

Since last post: 1692 days
Last activity: 822 days
#26 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.73
I find it very hard to believe that any decision Vince McMahon makes is without HHH's influence, and vice-versa. They're family. They run the show. Vince wants HHH at the top of his cards, because he's a reliable performer and the McMahons know everything about him. They know HHH would never walk out on them like Austin did.

It certainly isn't because HHH draws money or is an interesting, versitile character.

I have watched HHH manipulate and destroy much of WWE for the last 4 years, resulting in a show that stagnates and


And I agree. HHH in 2000, the one shining spot he claims in his career, was very overrated. Yet it is the one thing people use to justify HHH's spot on the card. I won't deny that people liked it and that the McMahons thought it was a success. I didn't personally like it, and I think it had some very damaging longterm effects, but that's just me.

There were many other aspects outside of the effort he put into his matches that made him boring. It's not that he was bad, it's just that he was a monster heel who mowed over sympathetic babyface characters over and over again.

    Originally posted by MightyBastard
    * Most guys given that type of push are given a year or two reign, then de-pushed slightly and used to make the next major star. Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels were de-pushed to make Austin the next big star, Sting lost cleanly to Vader to make him the major heel for WCW, etc. HHH's run as the uber-heel should have ended when he faced Kurt Angle at Unforgiven 2000. Angle was the hot heel in the fed, and it was the right time for HHH to lose, turn face, and make Angle the centerpiece. Instead, they had HHH go over, which stalled the momentum for both Angle and the WWE.



Vince did give Austin a more prominent role, but it was not at the expense of Bret Hart or Shawn Michaels. In fact, the latter two took up almost all of the main event spots, with Austin being mixed in for tag matches and prominent midcard matches, until WrestleMania XIV.

I would argue that Bret Hart and Shawn Michaels weren't depushed at all. Austin was, legitimately, that much better than them and, instead of stealing their spotlight, took a 40 million gigawat spotlight and had it shined on him. Shawn Michaels was still very much a main event player in top tier storylines, as was Bret Hart up until even his very last night in the WWF. It's all relative.

What happened with HHH, however, was that Mick Foley got the main event spot, so long as he was choking every opportunity to win the WWF Title. The Rock got in the main events too, so long as he was losing to HHH, as well. Foley and The ROck both made their characters look weaker to put over HHH and Vince McMahon.

Let's also not forget that Bret Hart beat Steve Austin every time out. And Austin was still given the opportunity to rise above him. It doesn't matter how over RVD is, if he loses to HHH, he's forgotten and never gets the belt.

    Originally posted by MightyBastard
    * All of that being said... wrestling is a cutthroat business. We've all read about wrestlers being screwed over by either the bookers or other wrestlers. HHH has been the victim of this himself. Should he really be blamed for looking out for himself, at the expense of everyone else?


Yes. This behavior results in terrible shows, and it doesn't matter who is doing it.

Ultimately, sure, it is the McMahons' responsibility, but as I said, HHH is a McMahon now. He is held to the same standard as Vince and Stephanie are.


    Originally posted by dr beavis
    stop talking bullshit. hhh makes his opponents look bad? how? does he not sell for them? does he give them no offense? do they never get heat on him?


There's more to it than just what happens in the ring, you know. The other guy has to win at key moments (ie WrestleMania) to truly get over. It doesn't matter how great HHH sells for Benoit, how much offense Benoit gets, etc. If Benoit does not win, he joins the other guys. Just another challenger that fell.

The trigger has to be pulled.

    Originally posted by Ringmistress
    You know, this debate is so old, the dead horse is starting to smell.


Old, but the dead horse is still there. No one has buried it yet.

(edited by SKLOKAZOID on 31.1.04 1643)
InVerse
Boudin blanc








Since: 26.8.02

Since last post: 2046 days
Last activity: 2009 days
#27 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.87
    Originally posted by geemoney
    Booker T. He was embarassed on interviews with Trips saying he was above him, and Booker shouldn't be getting a shot, and lo and behold Trips beats him and Booker never gets to sniff the title. And that's just one.


This was the feud where HHH never once beat Booker T clean, but Booker did pin HHH clean in a tag team match, right?
TheMASKEDComputerGeek
Chourico








Since: 7.1.02
From: Franklin, Wisconsin

Since last post: 2623 days
Last activity: 1753 days
#28 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.91
    Originally posted by geemoney

      And the only men to beat Steve Austin for the title one on one are Kane (first blood match, blood caused by Undertaker), Undertaker, Angle, and Jericho. Two less than have beat HHH. How many people is he supposed to lose the belt to?

    Maybe less have lost to Austin, but Austin has made his opponents at least look good, and look like they have a chance to win, whereas Trips dominates the feud to the point that we know the guy has no chance of winning.



    (edited by geemoney on 31.1.04 1901)



I'm going to call ridiculous earth-shattering levels of bullshit on this one. This is just ridiculous bias showing. Noone ever believed any of the heel challengers could beat Stone Cold, and none of them EVER did in a way that made them look good. Only Kurt Angle was elevated by Stone Cold. I love the guy, but his track record beats out HHH's but HHH gets shat on. And the workrate between the two is comparable, as Stone Cold was as injury-laden and somewhat weak in the ring as HHH was in 2003. So I just don't see how this statement can hold any weight.



Caped Boy: Excuse me, ladies. You may remember me as the guy who came to dinner a few weeks ago with underwear on my head. My name is Keith Stat from Milbourne, New Jersey. State bird, the mosquito. And as you may have heard I am recently a crowned class B dungeon-master. So if any of you would like to play D&D today, please speak now or forever hold your peace.
[He chuckles, and there is an awkward silence at the table.]
Caped Boy: Anyone? Alexa!
[Alexa gives him a withering glare.]
Caped Boy: Maybe you would like to join in? We do need a druid, and you have definitely cast a level 5 charm spell on me.
Alexa: In your dreams, douche-bag!
Caped Boy: Douche-bags are hygienic products, I take that as a compliment. Thank you.
[Keith walks off]
Alexa: Ewww!


- Wet Hot American Summer
geemoney
Scrapple








Since: 26.1.03
From: Naples, FL

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 12 hours
#29 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.19
    Originally posted by TheMASKEDComputerGeek
      Originally posted by geemoney

        And the only men to beat Steve Austin for the title one on one are Kane (first blood match, blood caused by Undertaker), Undertaker, Angle, and Jericho. Two less than have beat HHH. How many people is he supposed to lose the belt to?

      Maybe less have lost to Austin, but Austin has made his opponents at least look good, and look like they have a chance to win, whereas Trips dominates the feud to the point that we know the guy has no chance of winning.



      (edited by geemoney on 31.1.04 1901)



    I'm going to call ridiculous earth-shattering levels of bullshit on this one. This is just ridiculous bias showing. Noone ever believed any of the heel challengers could beat Stone Cold, and none of them EVER did in a way that made them look good. Only Kurt Angle was elevated by Stone Cold. I love the guy, but his track record beats out HHH's but HHH gets shat on. And the workrate between the two is comparable, as Stone Cold was as injury-laden and somewhat weak in the ring as HHH was in 2003. So I just don't see how this statement can hold any weight.

How come no one complained about Austin holding people back?



TV, Ebay, College Scheduling and more!: http://parksg.blogspot.com

If you want to read about someone more interesting than me: http://texaskelly.blogspot.com
The 5th Horseman
Kolbasz








Since: 23.10.02
From: Myrtle Beach, South Carolina

Since last post: 6447 days
Last activity: 6436 days
#30 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.28
    Originally posted by TheMASKEDComputerGeek
    Only Kurt Angle was elevated by Stone Cold. I love the guy, but his track record beats out HHH's but HHH gets shat on. And the workrate between the two is comparable, as Stone Cold was as injury-laden and somewhat weak in the ring as HHH was in 2003. So I just don't see how this statement can hold any weight.

I disagree with that. As much as I liked HHH before his quad injury, I still don't see how he is comparable to Steve Austin in any way, character or workrate. Steve Austin was the center piece of the company when the WWF vaulted past and far beyond WCW. Austin was main stream. Plus, Austin had another great run with many great matches even after he returned from his neck surgery.

By the way, if you want to compare Austin to HHH, didn't Austin spend a very large amount of time during his long run WITHOUT the WWF Title? I don't know the answer, but it sure seemed like Austin was without the WWF Title most of the time while it seems like HHH has had the title for a large majority of the time during his run.


I didn't have a problem with HHH's run before his quad injury because I still thought he was producing. Since his return from the quad injury, he hasn't produced yet still gets the same huge push.
geemoney
Scrapple








Since: 26.1.03
From: Naples, FL

Since last post: 12 days
Last activity: 12 hours
#31 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.19
    Originally posted by InVerse
      Originally posted by geemoney
      Booker T. He was embarassed on interviews with Trips saying he was above him, and Booker shouldn't be getting a shot, and lo and behold Trips beats him and Booker never gets to sniff the title. And that's just one.


    This was the feud where HHH never once beat Booker T clean, but Booker did pin HHH clean in a tag team match, right?

WrestleMania XIX?
http://www.411mania.com/ wrestling/tvreports/article.php? tvreports_id=1075
That's sounds pretty clean to me.

Besides, if the Champ doesn't take the challenger seriously, why should I care?

(edited by geemoney on 31.1.04 2115)


TV, Ebay, College Scheduling and more!: http://parksg.blogspot.com

If you want to read about someone more interesting than me: http://texaskelly.blogspot.com
spf
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Las Vegas of Canada

Since last post: 3069 days
Last activity: 404 days
#32 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.88
    Originally posted by InVerse
      Originally posted by geemoney
      Booker T. He was embarassed on interviews with Trips saying he was above him, and Booker shouldn't be getting a shot, and lo and behold Trips beats him and Booker never gets to sniff the title. And that's just one.


    This was the feud where HHH never once beat Booker T clean, but Booker did pin HHH clean in a tag team match, right?

I believe that was the feud where the implication for weeks by HHH was that a poor black man like Booker could never beat HHH for the title, and oh yeah, he couldn't.



Toil not to gain wealth, cease to be concerned about it. Proverbs 23:4

Dance Amongst The Ashes - Blogforamerica (blogforamerica.com)
Nenz
Fifty Millionth Hit








Since: 7.5.03

Since last post: 4467 days
Last activity: 11 days
#33 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.38
    Originally posted by geemoney
      Originally posted by InVerse
        Originally posted by geemoney
        Booker T. He was embarassed on interviews with Trips saying he was above him, and Booker shouldn't be getting a shot, and lo and behold Trips beats him and Booker never gets to sniff the title. And that's just one.


      This was the feud where HHH never once beat Booker T clean, but Booker did pin HHH clean in a tag team match, right?

    WrestleMania XIX?
    http://www.411mania.com/ wrestling/tvreports/article.php? tvreports_id=1075
    That's sounds pretty clean to me.

    Besides, if the Champ doesn't take the challenger seriously, why should I care?

    (edited by geemoney on 31.1.04 2115)


OK, so "Flair to get his licks in and send him into the stairs" is clean? And the Housten Hangover had HHH beaten, the count had to be stopped bacause Flair put HHH's foot on the rope.

Edit: spelling

(edited by Nenz on 1.2.04 0244)
Nate The Snake
Liverwurst








Since: 9.1.02
From: Wichita, Ks

Since last post: 7192 days
Last activity: 6662 days
#34 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.68
You guys might as well be arguing evolution (HAHA LOL OMG PUN) versus creationism here. "HHH = Evil" no longer depends on silly things like facts or reality.



Kansas-born and deeply ashamed
The last living La Parka Marka

"They that can give up essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Snookum
Kishke








Since: 19.6.03
From: Louisville

Since last post: 6082 days
Last activity: 6063 days
#35 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.49
The weird thing is, after seeing RAW and Benoit's challenge to BOTH HHH and HBK, I just have this recurring image in my head of somehow HBK getting the belt within the next two months. (After all, Benoit stated quite clearly that he didn't care which of the two had the belt come WM, he was going to win it.)

Then HHH has to come back and win it back come the next RAW PPV. Thus only having to lose the belt to his "nemesis/old crony" HBK, and then winning it back again within a couple of months.

I hope I'm wrong, but when I thought of it, all I could think of was, "yeah, that'll probably be the way they'll go so HHH doesn't have to lose the belt to Benoit."

Nag
Landjager








Since: 10.1.03
From: Enter your city here

Since last post: 5621 days
Last activity: 3676 days
#36 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.53
think Freeway is the only one on the right track here. Instead of dicking around with win loss records and who Hunter lost the belt to, why don't you examine the matches a bit. Were they clean? Did they involve a run it? If someone really had no life, and I may be the champion of that, take the percentages of clean defeats of all main event or Upper midcard heels since the creation of WWF PPV's, and compare them to Hunters. Back in my day, the faces usually went over clean, hell with the exception of Yoko, heels never held the titles for more than two months, but I guess Hunter is so damn good that rules don't apply anymore. Even though things have changed, it is usually the case with average wrestlers nowadays as well.

I don't give a damn who Hunter fucks everynight, and I can understand trying to protect your position. But I've yet to see a Hunter supporter explain to me how nepotism can benefit a company. This isn't Hogan or HBK here, this reign of terror will last until Steph and Hunter Divorce, WWE goes under, or Hunter dies. I fear the second is most likley!

I don't blame everything on Hunter, I don't think he is nearly as bad in the ring as some make him out to be, but I'm not going to try to be cool and go against the grain and support him. Long term, there is no, repeat no positives of this situation.
Excalibur05
Knackwurst








Since: 19.1.02
From: Minnesota

Since last post: 2915 days
Last activity: 2783 days
#37 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.90
I wish people would stop using the HHH/RVD match as a demonstration of how Hunter is killing everyone's push. If you go back and watch that match, it's pretty clear that Rob shot himself in the foot there. No, he wasn't going to win that match, but Triple H had to carry him to what was, at best, a ** match, and Rob was so lazy that Jerry Lawler, who of all people shouldn't be harping on other guys about doing their jobs, fell all over himself basically appologizing to anyone who'd paid to see the match that RVD was treating the World Title match like a sack of shit and his match with Triple H as if he were still wrestling Christopher Nowinski on Heat. All Rob had to do was expend a little bit more energy in looking like he actually wanted to be main eventing a PPV. Instead he looked like a guy who wanted to be cashing a pay check and jobbing, so that's where he is. The counter-arguement to this is often, "Well, he knew he was going to job to Triple H so OF COURSE he was lazy. Wouldn't you be too if you knew that HHHe was going to kill your push?" But the fact is, it wasn't like Rob had a shitty storyline and it wasn't like he wasn't getting pushed, he was main-eventing a Pay-Per-View for God's sake. The WWE obviously felt comfortable enough in the draw of Rob Van Dam that they thought that he would match up favorably with Triple H, and Rob blew it. The WWE couldn't have pushed him if he wanted to because he fucked up.

I really don't have a problem with a lot of the other arguements about HHH's run. I still enjoy him, but if others don't, that's cool. Hell, I'll even exploit that fact when it comes to my column. But the basis of this whole fight has been out of whack for a long time. What exactly is the purpose of saying that Triple H sucks anymore? You're not converting anyone into believing he does. It's not like it's going to hit someone when they stumble across this thread, "Oh my God! I never realized that Triple H was getting pushed this hard! I'm going to call my state senator immediately!" It's hardly relevant. But, I hear you saying "It IS relevant because he is STILL getting pushed, despite the fact that I explicitly told the WWE in those surveys in February that I didn't want to see any more Triple H. And he's STILL married to Stephanie. And he's fat." All that may be true, but them's the breaks. No matter how many times you point and yell, youare not going to change anyone's mind, with in the company or outside of it.

Hey, my favorite wrestlers are never ever ever getting anywhere near the world title, and one of my least favorite is in the midst of a giant world title push that may well lead to him winning the title at the biggest event of the year. If I can deal with that, so can you.


(edited by Excalibur05 on 31.1.04 2357)


That's Mah Stank!
SKLOKAZOID
Bierwurst








Since: 20.3.02
From: California

Since last post: 1692 days
Last activity: 822 days
#38 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.73
    Originally posted by TheMASKEDComputerGeek
    I'm going to call ridiculous earth-shattering levels of bullshit on this one. This is just ridiculous bias showing. Noone ever believed any of the heel challengers could beat Stone Cold, and none of them EVER did in a way that made them look good. Only Kurt Angle was elevated by Stone Cold. I love the guy, but his track record beats out HHH's but HHH gets shat on. And the workrate between the two is comparable, as Stone Cold was as injury-laden and somewhat weak in the ring as HHH was in 2003. So I just don't see how this statement can hold any weight.


The rules are different for faces and heels. Always have been.

Faces should not lose cleanly, and heels should. Certainly, the rules can and should be broken at key moments in wrestling history, but in general, it's the truth.

The fans pay to see Austin, and likewise, they pay to see him win. The WWF was just giving the majority what they wanted. And it worked.

    Originally posted by Nenz
    OK, so "Flair to get his licks in and send him into the stairs" is clean? And the Housten Hangover had HHH beaten, the count had to be stopped bacause Flair put HHH's foot on the rope.


The Booker-HHH match wsn't entirely clean. But, it didn't help Booker get over at all. He lost the biggest title match of his career and never recovered.

    Originally posted by Excalibur05
    But, I hear you saying "It IS relevant because he is STILL getting pushed, despite the fact that I explicitly told the WWE in those surveys in February that I didn't want to see any more Triple H. And he's STILL married to Stephanie. And he's fat." All that may be true, but them's the breaks. No matter how many times you point and yell, youare not going to change anyone's mind, with in the company or outside of it.


There is a reason why this is posted on a message board, and not in a letter to WWE, demanding that they change their ways. It's a part of open discussion, and since the topic is still relevant, this will have threads quite often. Maybe some people are still aggrivated with how they think HHH ruins the shows, maybe they're pointing out things they've finally just started to notice about the HHH push, maybe they disagree with the original poster's sentiments.

I know you aren't saying that people should be prevented from making threads about this, but if you want an answer to your question, look at all of the posts in this thead, including your own, just to see how interested people are in discussing this. We're up to Page 2, which obviously means a thread like this will provoke many people to share their thoughts. Maybe nothing will change, maybe it will, but people certainly like talking about it.

(edited by SKLOKAZOID on 31.1.04 2304)
Big Bad
Scrapple








Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 1927 days
Last activity: 1496 days
#39 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.54
Let's compare HHH to every other major build-the-company-around-him main eventer in WWF/E history in the modern era (post-Hulkamania). This list includes Hogan, Savage, Warrior, Hart, Diesel, HBK, Austin and the Rock.

Workrate
Better than Hogan, Warrior and Diesel, but that's it. You could argue the Rock, but I've always been more impressed with Rock as a worker because he's always going at full speed. I've never seen him phone in a match, largely because he always seems to feed off the crowd's energy.

Interviews
Certainly inferior to Hogan, Austin and Rocky. Certainly superior to Warrior, Savage (whose interviews were fun, but not terribly memorably outside of Savage's trademark mannerisms) and HBK (who I always thought had far better in-ring mannerisms and body language to get over his character than his shaky interviews did). Hart was no great shakes on the mic, but he could get his point across strongly and succintly, and fans bought into the fact that the Hitman was all business. Nash, as we all know, was often gold on the mic, but didn't really get a chance to show it much as the watered-down Diesel character.

Ability to Carry Others to Good Matches
HHH's greatest weakness. You can talk about his match with TAKA in 2000, but this is TAKA we're talking about, one of the best cruiserweights in the world. All HHH did was believably sell, and since I think this is something EVERY wrestler should do no matter who they're facing, HHH doesn't get points just for doing his job. Also in 2000, HHH had Rock, Foley, Angle, Jericho and Benoit to work with, so no wonder he was able to have all kinds of good matches. As we've seen with Steiner, Nash, Undertaker and Goldberg just in the past two years, HHH lowers himself to the level of his opponents, rather than picks them up. He's at that British Bulldog-ish level of being capable enough to be carried to five stars, but cannot to the same with others. HBK, Hart, Savage, Austin and even Rock could do this, whereas Hogan, Diesel and the Warrior weren't rarely even good enough to reach the 'carryable' level.

Ability to "Put Asses in the Seats"
Probably unfair to compare to Hogan, Rock and Austin, as they're the three biggest overall audience-drawing stars in North American wrestling history. Savage drew sold-out houses for his year-long run, HBK had a fairly successful run as champ (though history has neglected it due to his being overshadowed by the nWo as the main story of 1996), as did Hart. The Warrior and Diesel, of course, were both big failures, though in the Warrior's case, you could argue that he was still in Hogan's shadow. HHH, however, has clearly bombed, as seen by the buyrates for his short-lived face run in 2002. Coming back from that injury, HHH should've been golden for a couple of years, but instead he had to turn heel again within six months because he simply wasn't getting a good response as a face. Judging from the PPV buyrates and RAW ratings from the last 1.5 years, people aren't tuning in to see him get beat as a heel, either.

So in summation, HHH is clearly middle-of-the-pack in all respects compared to other major main eventers in WWE history, and yet has been given a stronger and more sustained push than all but Hogan and Austin. The evidence shows that it's time for a change, and yet Raw is still the HHH show every Monday. I'm all in favour of whomever suggested the 'fall from grace' angle that would do wonders for rebuilding HHH's image not only with the smarks, but with the casual fans as well.



Wait…if it’s MLK Jr. Day AND Pat Patterson’s Birthday…who gets the token win here?-- Matt "Excalibur05" Hocking on a match between Mark Henry and Rico

MH: What’s a clever way to say that I have a penis?
CJ: Uh…Mark, nobody’s going to buy that shirt.
MH: How about if I say that I’ve got…a…uh…?
CJ: Coming up with T-Shirt ideas is hard Mark, why not leave it to the WWE marketing department.
MH: I know! I’ve got it!
CJ: Got what?
MH: Stank! That’s Mah Stank! I’m gonna make a fortune!!
CJ: “That’s Mah Stank”?
MH: On the front it’ll say “Can You Smell It?” and on the back it’ll say “That’s Mah Stank”. Everybody’ll buy it because they’ll think it’s a Rock shirt.
CJ: You know…you might be on to something there, sad to say.
MH: I can’t wait to show mah stank to Trish.

You know, I have a feeling that Spanky didn’t quit, he was fired. Why? So they could repackage Mark Henry as “Stanky.” Think about THAT!
--Matt "Excalibur05" Hocking, 1/19/04 Raw Satire


OlFuzzyBastard
Knackwurst








Since: 28.4.02
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 1819 days
Last activity: 995 days
#40 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.59
    Originally posted by The 5th Horseman
    By the way, if you want to compare Austin to HHH, didn't Austin spend a very large amount of time during his long run WITHOUT the WWF Title? I don't know the answer, but it sure seemed like Austin was without the WWF Title most of the time while it seems like HHH has had the title for a large majority of the time during his run.


HHH first won the title the night after Summerslam '99. He held it for about a month and a half, before losing it to Vince McMahon (thanks entirely to Austin's interference.). He won it back in a six-way match at the next PPV, then inexplicably lost it to The Big Show at Survivor Series. He wound up winning it back shortly after the new year, just in time for the great Cactus Jack feud.

He wound up trading it back and forth after Wrestlemania with The Rock, and he ultimately lost the WWF Title to him at King of the Ring in June of 2000. He didn't win the belt again until Wrestlemania X-8, in March of 2002. (Which does, to be fair, include the seven months he missed with the quad injury - although that didn't happen until almost a year after he dropped the belt.) He lost that belt a month later.

Then he was given the World Title belt*, and that's when the Reign From Hell started. Before that, though, he really didn't have any overly extended run with it, and had one extremely long period without it.

Austin first won the WWF title at Wrestlemania XIV. He held the belt pretty much straight until that fall - minus a one-night reign for Kane. He lost it to BOTH Undertaker and Kane in a very silly match at [Whatever They Called The September PPV That Year], eventually leading to the title being declared vacant and the first reigns for Rocky and Foley. Rock eventually dropped the belt back to Austin at Wrestlemania XV.

Austin had another two months or so with the belt before losing it to the Undertaker at Over The Edge '99, which is certainly not remembered for that title change. He didn't get the belt back until Wrestlemania X-Seven, which started the awesome "New Stone Cold" heel run. He lost the belt that fall to Kurt Angle for about two weeks, then held it again until Vengeance (which was the December PPV that year) when he lost it to Chris Jericho.

That was his last title reign. The hissyfit came a few months later, shortly after Wrestlemania X-Eight and his comeback has largely been a non-wrestling one.

So, to answer your question, Austin probably held it more, but it was close.

(*: I've never understood why this pisses people off so much in a "HHH Is The Devil" sort of way. I mean, wrestling isn't *real*, you know. Everyone who's ever held the title was essentially handed the belt every bit as much as Hunter was.)

(edited by OlFuzzyBastard on 1.2.04 1417)


Pages: Prev 1 2 3 Next
Thread rated: 4.82
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 Next
Thread ahead: Raw 2-2-04
Next thread: PWI 2003 Awards
Previous thread: New DVD: The Stone Cold Truth
(8857 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
I have had the steroid discussion with a lot of people including PhD's in sports medicine, and kinesiology as well as a lot of MD, DC, and DO friends of mine.
The W - Pro Wrestling - Recapping "The Triple H is God" Push thus far (Page 2)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2024 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.355 seconds.