|
Post by BCizzle on Apr 1, 2014 16:11:30 GMT -5
Triple H is far from a great heel. Great heels don't do everything to make their opponent's look weak.
And I don't want to see him get beat. I don't want to see him at all.
|
|
|
Post by HHH316 on Apr 1, 2014 16:13:44 GMT -5
That's my boy.
|
|
Alpha Q Up
Main Eventer
Not gravitas
Joined on: Jun 20, 2010 21:48:13 GMT -5
Posts: 2,691
|
Post by Alpha Q Up on Apr 1, 2014 18:15:41 GMT -5
THE BIG MEAN HEEL MADE ME MAD MOMMY, I HATE WWE! TRIPLE H SUCKS. I don't know if this post is directed at me, but I clearly stated that the video was awesome and that he's arguablly the greatest heel of all time. Slow your horses buddy. You know what's funny? People using the term "IWC" on a wrestling message board in a derogatory way, and pretending they aren't part of it. HHH sucks, and I'm glad he's going to do the job at 'Mania. Again, don't know if this is directed at me or not..but I clearly said that the video irked me a little bit and that HHH did it to get a rise out of the IWC, basically acknowledging that I (and everyone else on here) is apart of it. I think you're wrong. Triple H may have gone over a lot of people... Booker-T the ex thug, WWE never wanted that kinda guy at the top RVD - well documented pot smoker, again not the right rep the top guy wants Goldberg / Steiner - hasbeen's they had their time in WCW and did very little ever since Jericho - I dont even know why anyone cares he's done so much and he seems happy enough coming back soley to put people over. I think he just played to the fans emotions to get a rise outta them, Do I have to list the amount of guys who have been WWE/WHW Champs who have a criminal record/drug problem? Like seriously? I could go on for ages. Booker T didn't even have to be at the top, but he was super over as a face and all they had to do was let him be a transitional champion, or give him his moment for at least a month before HHH knocked him back down the totem pole at Backlash. You don't use a racist angle on a face and then have him lose like a f*cking chump. That leaves a bad taste in everybody's mouth. They also obviously thought RVD was the right guy to put over Cena at ONS in 2006 and become WWE/ECW Champion..so obviously his pot smoking past didn't really matter. Why do people care about Jericho, especially during his undisputed title reign? Because he was the better wrestler, better mic worker, better everything pretty much other than being 6'4 250lbs at 7% body fat. That angle pretty much killed his momentum as a main eventer until he had his second go around in 2008.
|
|
Alpha Q Up
Main Eventer
Not gravitas
Joined on: Jun 20, 2010 21:48:13 GMT -5
Posts: 2,691
|
Post by Alpha Q Up on Apr 1, 2014 18:22:21 GMT -5
I still believe Booker looked better after his feud with Triple H than he did before. Coming up just short in a World Title match certainly sounds better than losing to Edge over a shampoo commercial. Sure the hell sounds better than being dragged around a grocery store for twenty minutes getting beat up with milk & flower. As for the racial overtones leading to the feud... It was no different than when Lex Luger was feuding with Ron Simmons in the early 90's. Simmons didn't defeat Luger either, but his stature improved greatly within the company. Same can be said for Booker IMO. Not getting the outcome you want or assumed you would get doesn't mean anyone was buried. Sorry to disappoint anyone. Hahahahaha, you can not be serious. There's so much wrong with this post I have to question your age and/or logic. He looked better? Really? So for a black man to be able to have a better ''stature'' in the company he has to be ridiculed for his race? And basically have his face momentum destroyed in such an embarrassing way? Is that some kind of initiation they give to them? They need to use race to garner cheap heat to make their boring top heel look better? (or worse, how ever you look at it). Oh, but Ron Simmons did it in the early 90s, that must mean Booker should, because they're both black! Lmao, what an ignorant comment. It took Booker years to make it to the top after that with the King Booker gimmick (ironically in 2007 after jobbing to HHH again in Summerslam, he left the company). He was already over and well known as one of ''the guys'' from the invasion angle, and they booked that feud with HHH so horribly that no matter what, if he didn't walk out of WM as the champ he would look bad. If you have the heel go racial, the baby face better f*cking go over, or it feels wrong and gross (which is what HHH is). I could have been ok with the horrible racial storyline for the mere fact that I was expecting to be rewarded with a Booker win at WM 19 (as was everybody else). Instead, we get the douchey racist win and there's no repercussions for his actions? Get the f*ck outta here with that. According to Bischoff in his book, they realized how wrong the whole angle was after and had him lose to Shelton a little while later to ''make up for it''. Comments like ''People like YOU don't become the face of this company, you're only here to dance and entertain us and make me laugh..not to be champion'' or gestures like where HHH made fun of Booker's hair by calling him nappy and ugly, or when HHH asked Booker to hand him a towel, implying that he was a servant. Just embarrassing all around. The only reason why they included race into the storyline in the beginning was to piss everybody off and have Booker booked to win at Wrestlemania and then drop it back to HHH a few months later. As the story goes, Triple H went backstage and whined that he needed to win at Mania to look strong for when he lost the title to Goldberg. After a few weeks of crying they gave in and you know the rest. What made it even worse to me was the fact that on the same event Rey kicked out of multiple Twists of Fates, Hogan used THREE legdrops on Vince to beat him, it took three Rock Bottom's to pin Austin, Angle and Brock both kicked out of each others finishers.. but Booker wasn't allowed to kick out of one pedigree, with a one arm cover after a 17 second delay? It was one of the most selfish acts I've ever seen in wrestling. The Rock didn't want to put over Booker because he knew HHH was going to kill his momentum anyways, just like how he did to The Hurricane. There was no buildup with that one either, just seemed like a way for Triple H to get one up on the Rock, at the expense of Hurricane. Lets not forget that Triple H is handed the WHC. HBK wins it, HHH wins it back the next month. Holds it for nine months. Goldberg wins it, HHH wins it back the next month. He's nice enough to let Chris Benoit hold it for awhile, who loses it to Randy Orton, and Orton drops it the very next month to...hey take a guess. Oh and it's later vacated after a double pin, and guess who wins the Elimination Chamber match the next month? How about the Katie Vick incident and Kane angle? Him randomly beating the Hurricane after he scored an upset over The Rock just killed any momentum Hurricane had. How about..The European, Hardcore and IC titles - It was bad enough that HHH was awarded the Raw Title/WHC in September of 2002, but over the next few months, it was merged with these three titles by (if memory serves me) RVD unifying the Hardcore and European Titles, Kane unifying them with the IC title, and HHH merging it with his own...I think as part of the Katie Vick feud, but I could be wrong on that one. How about Chris Jericho and RVD? If HHH never gets injured in 2001, Jericho never holds the Undisputed Title. There's a reason why Austin and Rocky had no problem dropping it to Jericho in the same night, whereas you damn well know they would have fought against doing it for HHH. RVD had been getting huge reactions since his debut and fans totally bought him as a top-tier guy. He could have been made overnight (and it was during the autumn when WWE typically throws crap at the wall to see if it sticks anyway) but instead he bounced around the mid-card for the next four years. The fact that they eventually did put the WWE title on him and put the responsibility of carrying a whole new brand as the face of that promotion (back when the prospect of reviving ECW still seemed like something that might actually be worthwhile) begs the question as to why they didn't just strike when the iron was at its hottest. Anyway, by all accounts at the time, fingers seemed to be pointing at Triple H wanting to cut Van Dam off at the knees and bust him back down to to IC title status. From 2002-2005, HHH used his nepotism and general control of the company to make himself look much better than what he really was. I respect the guy, no doubt about it. But he has single handedly ruined up and comers push's and destroyed momentum more than maybe anybody you'll ever see in this business. The only reason HHH is one of the greatest heels of all time is because he is naturally a f*cking bunghole and relies on cheap heat to get under the skin of the audience. I think it was Meltzer who said the Rock was lucky that Triple H wasn't powerful enough at the time to stop him from becoming a mega star back in late 98/99 (even though again, him and HBK tried their best to back in 97 by making Bret squash him in the ring, which Bret did not do; because he saw potential in Dwayne. Which is why Rocky always speaks well of Bret). It seems like whenever a face gets hot since 2003, HHH has to attach himself to that guy to milk all the attention and heat that he can from it. CM Punk is another great example in 2011. It's not necessarily a burial, but CM Punk was ridiculously hot and that loss to Trips definitely killed some of his momentum. They could have basically been printing money having their biggest star in years. Instead we got a terribly booked storyline and match that didn't further Punk's push.
|
|
|
Post by The-Rock on Apr 1, 2014 18:35:55 GMT -5
Not looking through 4 pages to see if anyone else posted this but it's very obvious to me. These are all people that are either a) no longer active competitors b) currently in TNA or c) not one of their marquee superstars. WWE was more so trying to protect their brand and current product more so than "take a dig at the IWC"
Notice how the following individuals were missing: -John Cena -Batista -Randy Orton -Undertaker -Brock Lesnar -Hulk Hogan -The Rock -HBK -Steve Austin -Sheamus -Kane
All of whom are wrestling on WM XXX (well Hogan is "hosting") this sunday except HBK (who is always billed as HBK's buddy/confidant), Stone Cold (who HHH never really dominated), and The Rock (who is still an active competitor so to speak).
|
|
Alpha Q Up
Main Eventer
Not gravitas
Joined on: Jun 20, 2010 21:48:13 GMT -5
Posts: 2,691
|
Post by Alpha Q Up on Apr 1, 2014 18:37:50 GMT -5
Not looking through 4 pages to see if anyone else posted this but it's very obvious to me. These are all people that are either a) no longer active competitors b) currently in TNA or c) not one of their marquee superstars. WWE was more so trying to protect their brand and current product more so than "take a dig at the IWC" Notice how the following individuals were missing: -John Cena -Batista -Randy Orton -Undertaker -Brock Lesnar -Hulk Hogan -The Rock -HBK -Steve Austin -Sheamus -Kane All of whom are wrestling on WM XXX (well Hogan is "hosting") this sunday except HBK (who is always billed as HBK's buddy/confidant), Stone Cold (who HHH never really dominated), and The Rock (who is still an active competitor so to speak). Yeah, that's why the first guy that they showed (and the guy who got the most camera time in the package other than HHH) was Booker T, a guy who works with their company right now, and is his most well known burial; acknowledged by guys like Bischoff, The Rock and JR. It clearly was a dig at us, and it's hilarious to say the least. Try harder HHH, self actualization is great and all..but you can do better than that.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Oct 7, 2024 23:36:08 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2014 19:18:32 GMT -5
Hhh is one of the greatest heels ever
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Apr 1, 2014 19:33:18 GMT -5
It was brilliant, especially as everyone on the video isn't with the Company anymore. If they added CM Punk to it that would of sent everyone overboard.
It does frustrate me though, that as soon as a guy becomes really hot, Triple H instantly attaches himself to them.
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Apr 1, 2014 20:23:58 GMT -5
I still believe Booker looked better after his feud with Triple H than he did before. Coming up just short in a World Title match certainly sounds better than losing to Edge over a shampoo commercial. Sure the hell sounds better than being dragged around a grocery store for twenty minutes getting beat up with milk & flower. As for the racial overtones leading to the feud... It was no different than when Lex Luger was feuding with Ron Simmons in the early 90's. Simmons didn't defeat Luger either, but his stature improved greatly within the company. Same can be said for Booker IMO. Not getting the outcome you want or assumed you would get doesn't mean anyone was buried. Sorry to disappoint anyone. Hahahahaha, you can not be serious. There's so much wrong with this post I have to question your age and/or logic. He looked better? Really? So for a black man to be able to have a better ''stature'' in the company he has to be ridiculed for his race? And basically have his face momentum destroyed in such an embarrassing way? Is that some kind of initiation they give to them? If you have the heel go racial, the baby face better f*cking go over, or it feels wrong and gross (which is what HHH is). I could have been ok with the horrible racial storyline for the mere fact that I was expecting to be rewarded with a Booker win at WM 19 (as was everybody else). Instead, we get the douchey racist win and there's no repercussions for his actions? Get the f*ck outta here with that. According to Bischoff in his book, they realized how wrong the whole angle was after and had him lose to Shelton a little while later to ''make up for it''. Comments like ''People like YOU don't become the face of this company, you're only here to dance and entertain us and make me laugh..not to be champion'' or gestures like where HHH made fun of Booker's hair by calling him nappy and ugly, or when HHH asked Booker to hand him a towel, implying that he was a servant. Just embarrassing all around. The only reason why they included race into the storyline in the beginning was to piss everybody off and have Booker booked to win at Wrestlemania and then drop it back to HHH a few months later. As the story goes, Triple H went backstage and whined that he needed to win at Mania to look strong for when he lost the title to Goldberg. After a few weeks of crying they gave in and you know the rest. What made it even worse to me was the fact that on the same event Rey kicked out of multiple Twists of Fates, Hogan used THREE legdrops on Vince to beat him, it took three Rock Bottom's to pin Austin, Angle and Brock both kicked out of each others finishers.. but Booker wasn't allowed to kick out of one pedigree, with a one arm cover after a 17 second delay? It was one of the most selfish acts I've ever seen in wrestling. The Rock didn't want to put over Booker because he knew HHH was going to kill his momentum anyways, just like how he did to The Hurricane. There was no buildup with that one either, just seemed like a way for Triple H to get one up on the Rock, at the expense of Hurricane. Lets not forget that Triple H is handed the WHC. HBK wins it, HHH wins it back the next month. Holds it for nine months. Goldberg wins it, HHH wins it back the next month. He's nice enough to let Chris Benoit hold it for awhile, who loses it to Randy Orton, and Orton drops it the very next month to...hey take a guess. Oh and it's later vacated after a double pin, and guess who wins the Elimination Chamber match the next month? How about the Katie Vick incident and Kane angle? Him randomly beating the Hurricane after he scored an upset over The Rock just killed any momentum Hurricane had. How about..The European, Hardcore and IC titles - It was bad enough that HHH was awarded the Raw Title/WHC in September of 2002, but over the next few months, it was merged with these three titles by (if memory serves me) RVD unifying the Hardcore and European Titles, Kane unifying them with the IC title, and HHH merging it with his own...I think as part of the Katie Vick feud, but I could be wrong on that one. How about Chris Jericho and RVD? If HHH never gets injured in 2001, Jericho never holds the Undisputed Title. There's a reason why Austin and Rocky had no problem dropping it to Jericho in the same night, whereas you damn well know they would have fought against doing it for HHH. RVD had been getting huge reactions since his debut and fans totally bought him as a top-tier guy. He could have been made overnight (and it was during the autumn when WWE typically throws crap at the wall to see if it sticks anyway) but instead he bounced around the mid-card for the next four years. The fact that they eventually did put the WWE title on him and put the responsibility of carrying a whole new brand as the face of that promotion (back when the prospect of reviving ECW still seemed like something that might actually be worthwhile) begs the question as to why they didn't just strike when the iron was at its hottest. Anyway, by all accounts at the time, fingers seemed to be pointing at Triple H wanting to cut Van Dam off at the knees and bust him back down to to IC title status. From 2002-2005, HHH used his nepotism and general control of the company to make himself look much better than what he really was. I respect the guy, no doubt about it. But he has single handedly ruined up and comers push's and destroyed momentum more than maybe anybody you'll ever see in this business. The only reason HHH is one of the greatest heels of all time is because he is naturally a f*cking bunghole and relies on cheap heat to get under the skin of the audience. I think it was Meltzer who said the Rock was lucky that Triple H wasn't powerful enough at the time to stop him from becoming a mega star back in late 98/99 (even though again, him and HBK tried their best to back in 97 by making Bret squash him in the ring, which Bret did not do; because he saw potential in Dwayne. Which is why Rocky always speaks well of Bret). It seems like whenever a face gets hot since 2003, HHH has to attach himself to that guy to milk all the attention and heat that he can from it. CM Punk is another great example in 2011. It's not necessarily a burial, but CM Punk was ridiculously hot and that loss to Trips definitely killed some of his momentum. They could have basically been printing money having their biggest star in years. Instead we got a terribly booked storyline and match that didn't further Punk's push. Don't worry bout my age. It's a non factor and a weak argument. Just cause someone has a different view doesn't mean they are unintelligent or inferior. I saw they same feud between Luger & Simmons in the early 90's. Same thing down to a tee. Doesn't mean it was right but I don't think it means Booker was buried either. As I said, the year before he was feuding over a Japanese shampoo commercial, so coming up short in a World title match doesn't sound all that bad. Sorry you think Booker should have kicked out but I just re-watched that match and thought both guys took a hell of a beating. Doesn't mean Triple H himself buried Booker. Till I hear Booker say otherwise I have no intentions of changing my opinion. As I've said before maybe Booker was set to go over till they signed Goldberg. Maybe Vince saw more money in Goldberg vs Triple H then he did with Booker as champ? RVD was red hot but he was never as hot as he was during the Alliance days. I didn't see Austin put RVD over for the WWE title either but that seems to be swept under the rug cause Austin sold more shirts. We've heard that several stories of top stars as Austin & Jericho hated working with RVD because of his stiff shots and his generally unsafe style. Between that and his pot smoking that may have played a much larger role than Triple H's master plan. Ask yourself this, how well did RVD handle his eventual WWE title run? Many people have commented on the similarities or Triple H's reign to that of Ric Flair's 80's run. Evolution was the new Horsemen. And much like Flair, Triple H kept the title by any means necessarily. And IMO if you have to cheat to win then you didn't bury you opponent. Flair helped Triple H defeat RVD & Booker T. He needed help because kayfabe wise, he couldn't do it himself. How does that make them look bad? Had Triple H went out and dominated the match, single-handedly won, and walked out without a scratch, then you may have a point. But more often than not he needed to be helped out of the ring because of the beating he had just suffered. Much like Flair's reign Triple H fought off all the top faces. I can't tell you how badly I wanted Luger, Sting, or Nikita to defeat Flair but more often than not it didn't happen. As I got older I appreciated Flair more because I understand that a top heel must win often so when they finally do lose, it means much more. Had Triple H lost to Booker it wouldn't have meant as much when Benoit did it a year later. Triple H/Rock/Austin have all exchanged victories so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make there. I never met Rock or Austin and wouldn't begin to assume to know their thought process. The Punk situation stunk. Not because of who won but because they had to throw a match together in a weeks time since Nash didn't pass the physical. The writing crew threw Triple H's COO job on the line to entice fans on such short notice. It took outside interference from Miz, Truth, & Nash. Not to mention 3 Pedigrees to keep Punk down. Was it ill advised, sure. But doesn't mean Triple H solely set out to ruin him.
|
|
Alpha Q Up
Main Eventer
Not gravitas
Joined on: Jun 20, 2010 21:48:13 GMT -5
Posts: 2,691
|
Post by Alpha Q Up on Apr 1, 2014 21:04:15 GMT -5
Hahahahaha, you can not be serious. There's so much wrong with this post I have to question your age and/or logic. He looked better? Really? So for a black man to be able to have a better ''stature'' in the company he has to be ridiculed for his race? And basically have his face momentum destroyed in such an embarrassing way? Is that some kind of initiation they give to them? If you have the heel go racial, the baby face better f*cking go over, or it feels wrong and gross (which is what HHH is). I could have been ok with the horrible racial storyline for the mere fact that I was expecting to be rewarded with a Booker win at WM 19 (as was everybody else). Instead, we get the douchey racist win and there's no repercussions for his actions? Get the f*ck outta here with that. According to Bischoff in his book, they realized how wrong the whole angle was after and had him lose to Shelton a little while later to ''make up for it''. Comments like ''People like YOU don't become the face of this company, you're only here to dance and entertain us and make me laugh..not to be champion'' or gestures like where HHH made fun of Booker's hair by calling him nappy and ugly, or when HHH asked Booker to hand him a towel, implying that he was a servant. Just embarrassing all around. The only reason why they included race into the storyline in the beginning was to piss everybody off and have Booker booked to win at Wrestlemania and then drop it back to HHH a few months later. As the story goes, Triple H went backstage and whined that he needed to win at Mania to look strong for when he lost the title to Goldberg. After a few weeks of crying they gave in and you know the rest. What made it even worse to me was the fact that on the same event Rey kicked out of multiple Twists of Fates, Hogan used THREE legdrops on Vince to beat him, it took three Rock Bottom's to pin Austin, Angle and Brock both kicked out of each others finishers.. but Booker wasn't allowed to kick out of one pedigree, with a one arm cover after a 17 second delay? It was one of the most selfish acts I've ever seen in wrestling. The Rock didn't want to put over Booker because he knew HHH was going to kill his momentum anyways, just like how he did to The Hurricane. There was no buildup with that one either, just seemed like a way for Triple H to get one up on the Rock, at the expense of Hurricane. Lets not forget that Triple H is handed the WHC. HBK wins it, HHH wins it back the next month. Holds it for nine months. Goldberg wins it, HHH wins it back the next month. He's nice enough to let Chris Benoit hold it for awhile, who loses it to Randy Orton, and Orton drops it the very next month to...hey take a guess. Oh and it's later vacated after a double pin, and guess who wins the Elimination Chamber match the next month? How about the Katie Vick incident and Kane angle? Him randomly beating the Hurricane after he scored an upset over The Rock just killed any momentum Hurricane had. How about..The European, Hardcore and IC titles - It was bad enough that HHH was awarded the Raw Title/WHC in September of 2002, but over the next few months, it was merged with these three titles by (if memory serves me) RVD unifying the Hardcore and European Titles, Kane unifying them with the IC title, and HHH merging it with his own...I think as part of the Katie Vick feud, but I could be wrong on that one. How about Chris Jericho and RVD? If HHH never gets injured in 2001, Jericho never holds the Undisputed Title. There's a reason why Austin and Rocky had no problem dropping it to Jericho in the same night, whereas you damn well know they would have fought against doing it for HHH. RVD had been getting huge reactions since his debut and fans totally bought him as a top-tier guy. He could have been made overnight (and it was during the autumn when WWE typically throws crap at the wall to see if it sticks anyway) but instead he bounced around the mid-card for the next four years. The fact that they eventually did put the WWE title on him and put the responsibility of carrying a whole new brand as the face of that promotion (back when the prospect of reviving ECW still seemed like something that might actually be worthwhile) begs the question as to why they didn't just strike when the iron was at its hottest. Anyway, by all accounts at the time, fingers seemed to be pointing at Triple H wanting to cut Van Dam off at the knees and bust him back down to to IC title status. From 2002-2005, HHH used his nepotism and general control of the company to make himself look much better than what he really was. I respect the guy, no doubt about it. But he has single handedly ruined up and comers push's and destroyed momentum more than maybe anybody you'll ever see in this business. The only reason HHH is one of the greatest heels of all time is because he is naturally a f*cking bunghole and relies on cheap heat to get under the skin of the audience. I think it was Meltzer who said the Rock was lucky that Triple H wasn't powerful enough at the time to stop him from becoming a mega star back in late 98/99 (even though again, him and HBK tried their best to back in 97 by making Bret squash him in the ring, which Bret did not do; because he saw potential in Dwayne. Which is why Rocky always speaks well of Bret). It seems like whenever a face gets hot since 2003, HHH has to attach himself to that guy to milk all the attention and heat that he can from it. CM Punk is another great example in 2011. It's not necessarily a burial, but CM Punk was ridiculously hot and that loss to Trips definitely killed some of his momentum. They could have basically been printing money having their biggest star in years. Instead we got a terribly booked storyline and match that didn't further Punk's push. Don't worry bout my age. It's a non factor and a weak argument. Just cause someone has a different view doesn't mean they are unintelligent or inferior. I saw they same feud between Luger & Simmons in the early 90's. Same thing down to a tee. Doesn't mean it was right but I don't think it means Booker was buried either. As I said, the year before he was feuding over a Japanese shampoo commercial, so coming up short in a World title match doesn't sound all that bad. Sorry you think Booker should have kicked out but I just re-watched that match and thought both guys took a hell of a beating. Doesn't mean Triple H himself buried Booker. Till I hear Booker say otherwise I have no intentions of changing my opinion. As I've said before maybe Booker was set to go over till they signed Goldberg. Maybe Vince saw more money in Goldberg vs Triple H then he did with Booker as champ? RVD was red hot but he was never as hot as he was during the Alliance days. I didn't see Austin put RVD over for the WWE title either but that seems to be swept under the rug cause Austin sold more shirts. We've heard that several stories of top stars as Austin & Jericho hated working with RVD because of his stiff shots and his generally unsafe style. Between that and his pot smoking that may have played a much larger role than Triple H's master plan. Ask yourself this, how well did RVD handle his eventual WWE title run? Many people have commented on the similarities or Triple H's reign to that of Ric Flair's 80's run. Evolution was the new Horsemen. And much like Flair, Triple H kept the title by any means necessarily. And IMO if you have to cheat to win then you didn't bury you opponent. Flair helped Triple H defeat RVD & Booker T. He needed help because kayfabe wise, he couldn't do it himself. How does that make them look bad? Had Triple H went out and dominated the match, single-handedly won, and walked out without a scratch, then you may have a point. But more often than not he needed to be helped out of the ring because of the beating he had just suffered. Much like Flair's reign Triple H fought off all the top faces. I can't tell you how badly I wanted Luger, Sting, or Nikita to defeat Flair but more often than not it didn't happen. As I got older I appreciated Flair more because I understand that a top heel must win often so when they finally do lose, it means much more. Had Triple H lost to Booker it wouldn't have meant as much when Benoit did it a year later. Triple H/Rock/Austin have all exchanged victories so I'm not sure what point you're trying to make there. I never met Rock or Austin and wouldn't begin to assume to know their thought process. The Punk situation stunk. Not because of who won but because they had to throw a match together in a weeks time since Nash didn't pass the physical. The writing crew threw Triple H's COO job on the line to entice fans on such short notice. It took outside interference from Miz, Truth, & Nash. Not to mention 3 Pedigrees to keep Punk down. Was it ill advised, sure. But doesn't mean Triple H solely set out to ruin him. Again, bringing up what Booker was doing a year earlier doesn't help your argument whatsoever. What he did before should have no barring on how he is treated in the present when he's over as a babyface and is in an angle where he gets disrespected for his skin color and his hair. Should Daniel Bryan accept eating one pedigree this Sunday and losing to Triple H because he lost an 18 second match two years earlier? No. Obviously both situations aren't as comparable because Bryan is more over, but I could list countless other examples of guys being in a great situation one year, and a bad situation the other. That should have no barring on whether or not they go over, especially when put in such a disgraceful angle like that one. Also, Booker T has said himself countless times when he was in TNA that he and HHH were never friends (but that they had ''mutual respect'' for eachother), he didn't want to go into more detail due to burning bridges, but it was obvious that he was basically admitting that their relationship was crap because of what happened, either in 2003 at WM, Summerslam 2007 (where he left the company 2 weeks later after finally re-inventing himself as King Booker) or some other backstage politics that happened during his 5 year stint in the WWE. I already brought up the RVD drug situation in my post to the guy before you, I can name countless superstars who were avid drug users that held the WWE/WHW title (and so can you). The WWE was different in the 80s, 90s and 2002 compared to now. Guys like RVD smoking pot meant nothing as long as they could bring in the money (which, at his over level easily could have done if booked stronger). Obviously now with all the campaigns, and the PG era-ness, a guy being busted with pot, or steroids will probably ruin his chances at ''being a top guy''. But back when RVD was super over, it didn't mean jack schit. In regards to your HHH/Flair comparisons, the job of a heel is to create new babyface stars. HHH basically failed to do that during his reign of terror, and the ratings drop by nearly 2 pts, along with the PPV buyrates proved that. RVD, Booker, Jericho, Kane, Goldberg were the most obvious guys who got hit by the shovel from 2002-2004. Benoit was really the only guy created out of the reign of terror, Goldberg doesn't count because 1. He was already over from his WCW days and didn't need a ''defying the odds'' scenario because of his size, 2. They ruined that a couple of months later by having HHH destroy him and make him look like a b!tch. I don't know what that Rock/Austin comment was directed towards? I never said HHH buried them, I said that if The Rock became the megastar that he became in 2002-2004 when HHH was on the booking committee, instead of 98-99 when HHH barely had any power..then he would have tried to attach himself to Rocky and most likely destroy his momentum (just going off of him doing so with every star that was created after he became apart of the family). In regards to the Punk/HHH/Nash comment..you pretty much agreed that it was unfortunate, but tried to take the blame off of HHH (which is what you've done in both your posts in this thread), and that's pretty much why I'm done with this discussion. It's very clear that you hold some sort of favoritism towards him, putting no blame on his failures as a top heel and using any sort of backwards logic that you can to justify what he did. He should have not gone over Punk when he was arguably becoming the biggest star the WWE had had since Austin; Nash f*ckerry or not. How about you try and justify him attaching himself to every top babyface the company and the fans have ever created and subsequently halting that guys momentum in one way or another? Oh wait, you can't because there's no f'in way that one could justify it, but I'd really like to see you try.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Oct 7, 2024 23:36:08 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2014 21:11:33 GMT -5
Personally now a days Triple H doesn't do much for me, but I loved his "reign of terror" in 2003. I could watch him go over "WCW guys" on loop. Steiner, Booker, Nash, and Goldberg.
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Apr 2, 2014 1:26:38 GMT -5
he was a huge reason i lost interest in the product and stopped watching as often as i did. he's had some good feuds and can really sell certain moments well, but overall he should not be one of the top names in wrestling in 2014 and it's sad that he's convinced so many otherwise.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Oct 7, 2024 23:36:08 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2014 8:51:40 GMT -5
Triple H is the greatest Heel of all time His heel turn on the super over DX at WM15 secured him as one of the best heels ever. I don't think he is the best but definitely a strong contender. and since this thread already has several arguments and is destined to become one long argument.....locked.
|
|
June
Main Eventer
High Fives All Around!!!
Joined on: May 31, 2009 10:54:49 GMT -5
Posts: 4,457
|
Post by June on Apr 2, 2014 8:56:11 GMT -5
Triple H is a god amongst mere mortals. Live the video and the fact that Stephanie is the the narrator.
|
|