TheXtremisT
Main Eventer
10 Year Member
This is the way
Joined on: May 3, 2008 8:03:15 GMT -5
Posts: 3,951
|
Post by TheXtremisT on Feb 1, 2023 9:10:05 GMT -5
TLDR; Triple H in 1999 was excellent. But what was the point of winning the WWF title the night after Summerslam instead of the night of, and what was the point of losing the title to Vince McMahon, only to regain it 10 days later?
I've been watching WWF in 1999 and Triple H's ascension to main event/WWF champion was actually really well done.
He came off as a savage competitor, willing to do anything to gain/retain the title and had the attitude to back it up.
I got to September 1999, and the show still doesn't suffer from Triple H fatigue. The stories he's involved in are truly compelling.
But I have to say - what was the point of Mankind beating Austin and Triple H at Summerslam, only to lose the title the next night? Was it literally only just for political reasons so that Ventura would be raising the hand of a babyface? If that was done for publicity, surely the media/critics who were already critical of his involvement with wrestling would look at Foley, being overweight, scruffily dressed the way he was as Mankind and wearing an almost Hannibal Lecter mask and turn their noses up at Ventura even more. So I don't get the political reasoning.
Triple H winning the next night completely negates Mankind's win, and makes me question why they couldn't have just put the title on HHH the night before. Transitional champions are usually pointless, and this certainly was one of those. HHH already had his heat, beating Foley up the next night was literally only to pop a rating. But tarnishes Mankind's win as he never got it again, and he didn't even seek his revenge beyond that week. It took until late December 1999 for him to get back at Triple H, making him look weak in the process as the story was that it was Stone Cold who wanted revenge.
HHH was on a tear for the weeks after, brilliantly done, taking competitors out (contributing to his cerebral assassin nickname). Then he lost the title to Vince McMahon, who then vacated it 4 nights later. It was a brilliant angle PRIOR to Vince's win. Very captivating tv.
But what seriously was the point for Triple H to lose the title, only to regain it a week later at Unforgiven like nothing happened?
Again, my only guess was they wanted to pop a rating, except had the title win be rewritten into HHH retaining somehow, but the parts leading up to Vince's victory still stood, there would have been absolutely no change to the ratings or long-term story.
So HHH losing the title, Vince winning, vacating and HHH regaining was completely pointless.
What do you guys think/remember of this?
|
|
|
|
Post by Evil Abed on Feb 1, 2023 10:00:19 GMT -5
Pretty sure its been said Austin refused to drop the title to Triple H at Summerslam straight up. Which is why Mankind was added to the match in the first place.
Im guessing Vince and Co. did what they could to keep their main star happy and still get the result they wanted working around the issue.
Im going to attribute Triple H losing the title to Vince to one of Russo's many "brilliant booking ideas". I agree that Vince winning made no sense. It seems like they did it simply as a storyline plot to give McMahon power back negating the whole "End of an Era" storyline only two months prior.
Although I miss the days where the stories would continuously intertwine because everyone's main goal was to be WWE Champion. Sure you'd have spin off stories to settle feuds, but it always came back to wanting to be WWE Champion. That's what's sorely missing nowadays. Why aren't like 15 people chasing Roman Reigns to be champion? Instead its always one at a time like everyone's waiting in a deli line. Triple H escaping the likes of Taker, Kane, Rock, Austin, Mankind on a nightly basis just got him that much more heat as champ.
|
|
|
|
Post by hbkbigdaddycool on Feb 1, 2023 11:55:20 GMT -5
Triple H's WWF Title reign of terror from 1999 - 2000 was so well done and fresh that it was very enjoyable.
Triple H's World Title reign of terror from 2002 - 2004 was the complete opposite.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Brain on Feb 1, 2023 14:24:59 GMT -5
Regarding SSlam IIRC Jesse Ventura didnt wanna raise the hand of a heel in his hometown so in the end they gave it to Mankind.
Vince winning the belt well I always looked at it as more crazy Russo booking before his departure.Shock value just for the sake of it
Said this before and I'll say it again, Trips heel run here from March 99 till May 01 is the best of his career IMO
|
|
TheXtremisT
Main Eventer
10 Year Member
This is the way
Joined on: May 3, 2008 8:03:15 GMT -5
Posts: 3,951
|
Post by TheXtremisT on Feb 1, 2023 15:20:24 GMT -5
Pretty sure its been said Austin refused to drop the title to Triple H at Summerslam straight up. Which is why Mankind was added to the match in the first place. Im guessing Vince and Co. did what they could to keep their main star happy and still get the result they wanted working around the issue. Im going to attribute Triple H losing the title to Vince to one of Russo's many "brilliant booking ideas". I agree that Vince winning made no sense. It seems like they did it simply as a storyline plot to give McMahon power back negating the whole "End of an Era" storyline only two months prior. Although I miss the days where the stories would continuously intertwine because everyone's main goal was to be WWE Champion. Sure you'd have spin off stories to settle feuds, but it always came back to wanting to be WWE Champion. That's what's sorely missing nowadays. Why aren't like 15 people chasing Roman Reigns to be champion? Instead its always one at a time like everyone's waiting in a deli line. Triple H escaping the likes of Taker, Kane, Rock, Austin, Mankind on a nightly basis just got him that much more heat as champ. Austin and Bruce Prichard have both gone on record many times saying Austin did not have any problem dropping the title to Triple H directly. But the narrative now is that it was something to do with Ventura's political career. |
|
|
|
Post by The Brain on Feb 1, 2023 16:43:31 GMT -5
Triple H's WWF Title reign of terror from 1999 - 2000 was so well done and fresh that it was very enjoyable. Triple H's World Title reign of terror from 2002 - 2004 was the complete opposite.Anytime I think of this run I think of Booker T. No excuse for not giving em the belt at WM XIX |
|
|
|
Post by hbkbigdaddycool on Feb 1, 2023 17:16:44 GMT -5
Triple H's WWF Title reign of terror from 1999 - 2000 was so well done and fresh that it was very enjoyable. Triple H's World Title reign of terror from 2002 - 2004 was the complete opposite.Anytime I think of this run I think of Booker T. No excuse for not giving em the belt at WM XIX
I feel that if Goldberg didn't come to the WWE then, Booker would have won it.
I also find it interesting that from January - September that Triple H destroyed all of WCW main event stars.
Scott Steiner, Booker T, Kevin Nash, Goldberg at SummerSlam. If DDP was still an active wrestler in 2003 for WWE I am sure he would have been defeated too by Triple H.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Brain on Feb 1, 2023 17:23:46 GMT -5
Anytime I think of this run I think of Booker T. No excuse for not giving em the belt at WM XIX
I feel that if Goldberg didn't come to the WWE then, Booker would have won it.
I also find it interesting that from January - September that Triple H destroyed all of WCW main event stars.
Scott Steiner, Booker T, Kevin Nash, Goldberg at SummerSlam. If DDP was still an active wrestler in 2003 for WWE I am sure he would have been defeated too by Triple H.
That Steiner feud  |
|
|
|
Post by The Brain on Feb 1, 2023 17:30:45 GMT -5
But back on topic to the beginning of his main event run, The feuds with Austin,Foley and Rock were all fantastic.Played the role to perfection to where you couldnt wait to see em get his ass kicked
I even enjoyed the match with Vince at Armageddon.They couldve cut it down some but still a fun brawl with Stephanie turning heel in the end a nice swerve
|
|
|
|
Post by theoutlaw1999 on Feb 1, 2023 17:53:58 GMT -5
As a kid I hated Triple H. From 99/00 I despised him and the fact that he held the belt made me sick.
When he lost the belt to Vince and Big Show I was overjoyed and then red with anger when he won again.
Looking back now the reason why I hated Triple H so much was because he was a fantastic heel and the whole World Title run was perfect.
The McMahon's despised him and did everything to try and get the belt off him. That was perfect storytelling.
Then DX reformed and that gave Triple H cronies who would help him win which gained huge heat from the crowd.
Also he didn't win the belt until August 99 and by January 00 he was already a 3 time champion, those times he lost the belt helped boost his number of reigns.
IMO from 1999/2001 Triple H was the most hated man in wrestling, I would go as far to say he's one of the greatest heels of all time.
|
|
TheXtremisT
Main Eventer
10 Year Member
This is the way
Joined on: May 3, 2008 8:03:15 GMT -5
Posts: 3,951
|
Post by TheXtremisT on Feb 1, 2023 18:59:20 GMT -5
As a kid I hated Triple H. From 99/00 I despised him and the fact that he held the belt made me sick. When he lost the belt to Vince and Big Show I was overjoyed and then red with anger when he won again. Looking back now the reason why I hated Triple H so much was because he was a fantastic heel and the whole World Title run was perfect. The McMahon's despised him and did everything to try and get the belt off him. That was perfect storytelling. Then DX reformed and that gave Triple H cronies who would help him win which gained huge heat from the crowd. Also he didn't win the belt until August 99 and by January 00 he was already a 3 time champion, those times he lost the belt helped boost his number of reigns. IMO from 1999/2001 Triple H was the most hated man in wrestling, I would go as far to say he's one of the greatest heels of all time. 100% this. And I realised this about Jeff Jarrett in WCW from 1999-2000, and again in TNA 2003-2006. Made me understand why a strong heel was so needed and if the guy knew how to make you hate him, they were doing their job right. |
|
|
|
Post by JokerFC on Feb 1, 2023 19:02:17 GMT -5
The Austin refusing to drop it to him has been debunked MANY times IF it was true and thats why Foley was added? HHH would have just beat Foley for the strap....despite the faces HHH makes about it in his Docu? It was never true. It was down to Jesse. HHH has known this since it happened.
When Vince was deliberating over who to give the big heel push to in the Summer of 99? Austin endorsed HHH over Gunn & Jarrett.
Vince was also hot on the idea that HHH never beat Austin for the belt so it would feed into a further PPV and they knew they were on borrowed time with Stone Cld because they knew his neck was finito from the day after Fully Loaded 99.
But yeah...it came off as weird. But dammit if HHHs 99-may 2001 werent some of the finest eras of ANY wrestlers career.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Brain on Feb 1, 2023 19:21:48 GMT -5
The Austin refusing to drop it to him has been debunked MANY times IF it was true and thats why Foley was added? HHH would have just beat Foley for the strap....despite the faces HHH makes about it in his Docu? It was never true. It was down to Jesse. HHH has known this since it happened. When Vince was deliberating over who to give the big heel push to in the Summer of 99? Austin endorsed HHH over Gunn & Jarrett. Vince was also hot on the idea that HHH never beat Austin for the belt so it would feed into a further PPV and they knew they were on borrowed time with Stone Cld because they knew his neck was finito from the day after Fully Loaded 99. But yeah...it came off as weird. But dammit if HHHs 99-may 2001 werent some of the finest eras of ANY wrestlers career.
Yep. Like I said best time frame of his career |
|
|
|
Post by JokerFC on Feb 1, 2023 20:42:03 GMT -5
The Austin refusing to drop it to him has been debunked MANY times IF it was true and thats why Foley was added? HHH would have just beat Foley for the strap....despite the faces HHH makes about it in his Docu? It was never true. It was down to Jesse. HHH has known this since it happened. When Vince was deliberating over who to give the big heel push to in the Summer of 99? Austin endorsed HHH over Gunn & Jarrett. Vince was also hot on the idea that HHH never beat Austin for the belt so it would feed into a further PPV and they knew they were on borrowed time with Stone Cld because they knew his neck was finito from the day after Fully Loaded 99. But yeah...it came off as weird. But dammit if HHHs 99-may 2001 werent some of the finest eras of ANY wrestlers career.
Yep. Like I said best time frame of his career Crazy good.... |
|
TheEvilDoink1987
Main Eventer
Joined on: Feb 22, 2010 21:37:52 GMT -5
Posts: 2,801
|
Post by TheEvilDoink1987 on Feb 1, 2023 23:50:56 GMT -5
Yep. Like I said best time frame of his career Crazy good.... It really is crazy because as great and long of a career that he went on to have, Triple H absolutely peaked during that first main event run from 1999-2001 even though it felt like just the tip of the iceberg back then. That is not meant to knock him. However, his "reign of terror" between 2002-04 paled in comparison and he just was never able to recapture that same heel lightning in a bottle that he had during his first run on top. Triple H in 2000 is one of the greatest wrestling heels of all-time. |
|
|
|
Post by K5 on Feb 2, 2023 0:12:45 GMT -5
well now I’m confused, as I was pretty sure Michaels went on a tirade about Austin over not dropping it to HHH on livewire. but Shawn Michaels in 1999 isn’t your most reliable source admittedly
|
|
|
|
Post by JokerFC on Feb 2, 2023 1:30:30 GMT -5
well now I’m confused, as I was pretty sure Michaels went on a tirade about Austin over not dropping it to HHH on livewire. but Shawn Michaels in 1999 isn’t your most reliable source admittedly The same Michaels who said the screw job was a work in a 99 shoot....he was pilled off his face 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Actually wasn't September 99 when Vince finally pulled the plug on him after he no showed to follow up on costing Rock the title on the 1st SD! |
|
|
|
Post by hbkjason on Feb 2, 2023 4:03:28 GMT -5
I have always been a Triple H fan, even during his Grewnich Snob days, he put on entertaining matches. His run in 1999 to 2001 was truly awesome, he for sure is in my top ten of all time.
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Feb 2, 2023 5:00:25 GMT -5
The rumor for the longest time was Austin refused to drop the belt to HHH, but that’s been debunked by Austin himself and others. I think it came down to a combo of Jesse not wanting to raise the hand of a heel while his political career was going, as well as Russo loving to swerve the crowd with the least likely scenario (hence Vince winning the belt not longer after this).
|
|
