|
Post by SickFlipPiledriver on Jul 2, 2009 6:51:35 GMT -5
*yawn*
|
|
|
Post by baerrtt on Jul 2, 2009 6:55:33 GMT -5
If you have a main eventer who can still work a full schedule after nearly 10 years you don't demote them because ultimately a tiny subsection of the viewing audience create 23 pages on an internet forum going on and on about how said main eventer is a 'detriment' to their viewing pleasure.
If Trips had been, physically, in the same position as Taker and HBK (unable to work a full schedule) his push wouldn't continue to seem so prominent. But, as someone pointed out, if Taker and HBK were able to work a full schedule you can be sure that, in the former's case, we wouldn't be looking at a Smackdown that has CM Punk and Jeff Hardy at the top.
Besides I've always used a real sports analogy with Trips in that whether people like it or not there is(and in pro wrestling's case has to be)some form of consistency with who's on top.
Here in the UK we have the Wimbledon tournament taking place where the Ladies single final will come down to Venus vs Serena Williams which will not only mark the third time both sisters have faced each other in a Wimbledon final but will mark the ninth time this decade a Williams sister has gotten to the final (Venus has won it five times already, Serena twice all during the Naughties). Sounds familiar? The point is professional wrestling has to have some sort of stability that mirrors real sports in order for the audience at hand to take it seriously and one way it always has done that is having it's top stars stay looking strong in their spots for however long those stars can 'go'.
|
|
Mecca
Wade Wilson
Posts: 25,126
|
Post by Mecca on Jul 2, 2009 7:05:41 GMT -5
In a real sport Triple H would be an aging man trying desperately to hang on past his prime....He would be like Bernie Williams at the end of his Yankee's career.
The Hogan comparison becomes even more ridiculous when you think that when Hogan was maineventing those Mania's top guys had alot more staying power due to less events. If you actually compared total PPV mainevents in general Triple H may have the most of anyone....
By saying he has to stay there because he's proven basically means you support what sent WCW into the shitter, when guys like Jericho, Booker, Benoit etc got hosed because Hogan, Nash and all the "proven draws" who were aging would not move.
|
|
|
Post by baerrtt on Jul 2, 2009 7:15:56 GMT -5
In a real sport Triple H would be an aging man trying desperately to hang on past his prime....He would be like Bernie Williams at the end of his Yankee's career. The Hogan comparison becomes even more ridiculous when you think that when Hogan was maineventing those Mania's top guys had alot more staying power due to less events. If you actually compared total PPV mainevents in general Triple H may have the most of anyone.... By saying he has to stay there because he's proven basically means you support what sent WCW into the s***ter, when guys like Jericho, Booker, Benoit etc got hosed because Hogan, Nash and all the "proven draws" who were aging would not move.[/b] HHH can still 'go' in my eyes, Hogan by 97 in WCW was a complete physical wreck. My point was that you don't toss guys aside because a tiny minority (and given Trips still gets pops it is a tiny minority) is tired of seeing them. The WWE I see today has and is putting new guys on top more actively than WCW ever did when Hogan, Nash etc were there. Trips will, as he's done before, put some future star over properly when THEY deem it the right time. You all know that the company has never booked for the smart mentality so why raise the issue again and again? If it was bothering me as much I wouldn't watch the show (indeed I gave up on Raw for most of 2003 because of the Trips focus).
|
|
Mecca
Wade Wilson
Posts: 25,126
|
Post by Mecca on Jul 2, 2009 7:20:18 GMT -5
Hogan can still pop a crowd right now....does that mean he should mainevent?
Who he is pops the crowd now what he currently is. Also this idea that he can still go is also overblown his match quality is sinking. He's 40 years old it's to be expected plus he's blown out a leg muscle twice this is common sense.
The reason the issue is being raised is they chose to move away from all of their other past stars even Hogan quicker than they've apparently chosen to move away from H and he isn't the big draw some of those guys were...
They were phasing out Hogan and Savage when they were younger than H is and their pasts had been better in terms of "pops" and money drawn...think about it.
|
|
|
Post by baerrtt on Jul 2, 2009 7:29:42 GMT -5
Hogan can still pop a crowd right now....does that mean he should mainevent? Who he is pops the crowd now what he currently is. Also this idea that he can still go is also overblown his match quality is sinking. He's 40 years old it's to be expected plus he's blown out a leg muscle twice this is common sense. The reason the issue is being raised is they chose to move away from all of their other past stars even Hogan quicker than they've apparently chosen to move away from H and he isn't the big draw some of those guys were... They were phasing out Hogan and Savage when they were younger than H is and their pasts had been better in terms of "pops" and money drawn...think about it. They were phasing out Hogan because of the steroid scandal. And Savage, from what's been said, had personal issues (divorce from Elizabeth) that were affecting his in-ring performances. In fact the whole New Generation era would probably never have occurred if the whole steroids controversy hadn't happened. Vince built new stars because some of his older ones had compromised the company's 'family' image. There is no meaningful reason to phase out Triple H yet beyond the personal dislikes of certain fans. 'He doesn't draw as well as the others' isn't a good reason because I've got a feeling that if Trips had been the equal to Rock and Austin in drawing power you'd still be making the same complaints. I'm sure you'll give me one but then I heard the same things in 2000, HIS year, so sorry if I tune out.
|
|
Mecca
Wade Wilson
Posts: 25,126
|
Post by Mecca on Jul 2, 2009 7:37:03 GMT -5
Hogan can still pop a crowd right now....does that mean he should mainevent? Who he is pops the crowd now what he currently is. Also this idea that he can still go is also overblown his match quality is sinking. He's 40 years old it's to be expected plus he's blown out a leg muscle twice this is common sense. The reason the issue is being raised is they chose to move away from all of their other past stars even Hogan quicker than they've apparently chosen to move away from H and he isn't the big draw some of those guys were... They were phasing out Hogan and Savage when they were younger than H is and their pasts had been better in terms of "pops" and money drawn...think about it. They were phasing out Hogan because of the steroid scandal. And Savage, from what's been said, had personal issues (divorce from Elizabeth) that were affecting his in-ring performances. In fact the whole New Generation era would probably never have occurred if the whole steroids controversy hadn't happened. Vince built new stars because some of his older ones had compromised the company's 'family' image. There is no meaningful reason to phase out Triple H yet beyond the personal dislikes of certain fans. I'm sure you'll give me one but then I heard the same things in 2000, HIS year, so sorry if I tune out. People said it in 2000 because he got rammed down everyone's throat and never got what was coming to him. He was a good performer then with a big list of top caliber matches. He was complained about then for the unconventional booking. Alot of his career was made on him going over in spots heels never went over in so it got old. When you cross 40 and you have been maineventing for over a decade I think it's time to go into a different role and only mainevent occasionally. Hogan frankly was tired as a maineventer so he switched companies and then had his ace card to play so he bought himself several more years...H doesn't have that. That's where alot of the "hate" is coming from it's that this guy never steps aside. He's like Flair in that regard that when Flair was nearing 50 years old and Bischoff decided he wouldn't be pushed in a high role anymore he flipped his lid about it. I don't hate H, but Raw's biggest problem is that it's stale and he is the epitome of that. Imagine someone that hasn't watched wrestling since 2002 flips it on and goes, what the hell this guy is still on here and he's still at the top?
|
|
|
Post by wrestlecrapcrap on Jul 2, 2009 7:37:23 GMT -5
In a real sport Triple H would be an aging man trying desperately to hang on past his prime....He would be like Bernie Williams at the end of his Yankee's career. The Hogan comparison becomes even more ridiculous when you think that when Hogan was maineventing those Mania's top guys had alot more staying power due to less events. If you actually compared total PPV mainevents in general Triple H may have the most of anyone.... By saying he has to stay there because he's proven basically means you support what sent WCW into the s***ter, when guys like Jericho, Booker, Benoit etc got hosed because Hogan, Nash and all the "proven draws" who were aging would not move.[/b] HHH can still 'go' in my eyes, Hogan by 97 in WCW was a complete physical wreck. My point was that you don't toss guys aside because a tiny minority (and given Trips still gets pops it is a tiny minority) is tired of seeing them. The WWE I see today has and is putting new guys on top more actively than WCW ever did when Hogan, Nash etc were there. Trips will, as he's done before, put some future star over properly when THEY deem it the right time. You all know that the company has never booked for the smart mentality so why raise the issue again and again? If it was bothering me as much I wouldn't watch the show (indeed I gave up on Raw for most of 2003 because of the Trips focus). [/quote] I don't them to cast HHH aside, I think he has enormous value in being on the roster and indeed being one of the crop of main eventers that they have. My problem is that he is used as the focus, when even now fans have proven they are willing to react to other guys harder than for HHH. The crowd had the life sapped out of them when he beat Jeff Hardy in that chamber. If he was the heel then fair enough but they were both faces, and they had passion for one guy more than the other there, and it wasn't HHH. Raw was hot earlier this year when Orton was the focus. It was about Orton, what he could do, how crazy he could be, how uncontrollable he was and he he could get away with it. They done above a 4 rating and didn't need Trump's help to do it. It was also hot last year when Jericho was the champion. He was so damn good in his feud with HBK that he forced the company to make him the focus. Before that we had Punk as champion with the big, current stars like Cena and Batista feuding and it felt totally new, and unpredictable with the 'Marshall Law' focus. Raw now is no longer about how crazy Orton is, it's about how bad-ass HHH is. Orton is there, but he's been watered down so that HHH looks superior. Smackdown now has the focus on Punk, and before that it was on Jeff Hardy. Two fresh guys with compelling storylines. Heyman on The Sun website talked about how they put Punk 'in play' on Smackdown. Punk is clearly the focus here. On Raw, Orton was in play until HHH got involved, then he took over. Is it really the case that business is undeniably better with HHH in play than it is to have Orton, or even Cena, in play? Again, my problem isn't that he has a high spot, it's that he has the HIGHEST, still, after 10 years. There's only so much 'holy crap, HHH really is a bad-ass!' that fans can take, and when even the casuals get killed stone dead because he beats someone who is favoured more, or when a VERY noticeable 'Hey Hey Hey Goodbye' song is sang to the top babyface who just won at Mania the month before, then something is wrong. WWE do create stars, constantly. They try all the time, and give so many guys opportunities. The ONLY one that gets booked as the strongest possible threat and will always be the focus of the show is HHH, ala WCW's treatment of main eventers. It's just not right anymore.
|
|
Mecca
Wade Wilson
Posts: 25,126
|
Post by Mecca on Jul 2, 2009 7:40:32 GMT -5
I don't even like John Cena but it's pretty obvious he should be the guy being booked like Triple H is...
I'd say H would be good for the gatekeeper Upper mid/mainevent role where he works with new guys but well I'm not so sure about that.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Bunsen Honeydew on Jul 2, 2009 7:48:56 GMT -5
Hogan can still pop a crowd right now....does that mean he should mainevent? Who he is pops the crowd now what he currently is. Also this idea that he can still go is also overblown his match quality is sinking. He's 40 years old it's to be expected plus he's blown out a leg muscle twice this is common sense. The reason the issue is being raised is they chose to move away from all of their other past stars even Hogan quicker than they've apparently chosen to move away from H and he isn't the big draw some of those guys were... They were phasing out Hogan and Savage when they were younger than H is and their pasts had been better in terms of "pops" and money drawn...think about it. THey did'bt phase out Hogan. Hogan's refusal to drop the belt to Bret HArt after he got it at Wresltemania IX cause Vince to force Hogan out. Savage was broken down when Vince made him a commentator. HHH is still healthy. YOur argument doesn't hold much water.
|
|
|
Post by wrestlecrapcrap on Jul 2, 2009 7:48:58 GMT -5
I think the crowd being dead in the main event must have something to do with the fact they have seen it all before with HHH also. I think they'll cheer for him out of respect and because they are told they should, but when it comes down to it, there's no desperation for him to win like there is for Jeff Hardy for example.
It was said by Orton that they booked themselves into a corner by having a 'disqualification means the title changes hands' rule, and maybe that is true, but I'm pretty sure if it was a current star in the same situation, the crowd wouldn't have been stone dead. If it was Jeff Hardy's big chance, they would have been raising the roof in cheering him on. If it was Cena, you can guarentee there would be a big reaction one way or the other. If it was a new star who was new to the main event and was going to be solidified by winning in the main event of Mania, there would have been more buzz.
But I think the crowd would surely have known that if HHH won, it would be nice for them but he's done everything already. All they had to look forward to was more of the same. Why cheer desperately for that? There was no reason to. And they didn't.
|
|
Mecca
Wade Wilson
Posts: 25,126
|
Post by Mecca on Jul 2, 2009 7:52:47 GMT -5
Hogan can still pop a crowd right now....does that mean he should mainevent? Who he is pops the crowd now what he currently is. Also this idea that he can still go is also overblown his match quality is sinking. He's 40 years old it's to be expected plus he's blown out a leg muscle twice this is common sense. The reason the issue is being raised is they chose to move away from all of their other past stars even Hogan quicker than they've apparently chosen to move away from H and he isn't the big draw some of those guys were... They were phasing out Hogan and Savage when they were younger than H is and their pasts had been better in terms of "pops" and money drawn...think about it. THey did'bt phase out Hogan. Hogan's refusal to drop the belt to Bret HArt after he got it at Wresltemania IX cause Vince to force Hogan out. Savage was broken down when Vince made him a commentator. HHH is still healthy. YOur argument doesn't hold much water. Considering what Savage did in WCW I'd argue with you that he was "broken down" atleast not anymore so than current H is. See this is where it gets broken, he's not Hogan or Savage or Austin or Rock, he's not close to what those guys brought. He's more Hart/Michaels who mainevented in down periods and weren't huge draws or extremely well known in the mainsteam. They are well regarded within wrestling but they aren't franchise type of guys...yet H is treated like he is. I will say this I don't believe he got to the mainevent due to Stephanie or backstage connections...I do however believe he uses that relationship to stay there though.
|
|
|
Post by baerrtt on Jul 2, 2009 8:02:35 GMT -5
THey did'bt phase out Hogan. Hogan's refusal to drop the belt to Bret HArt after he got it at Wresltemania IX cause Vince to force Hogan out. Savage was broken down when Vince made him a commentator. HHH is still healthy. YOur argument doesn't hold much water. Considering what Savage did in WCW I'd argue with you that he was "broken down" atleast not anymore so than current H is. See this is where it gets broken, he's not Hogan or Savage or Austin or Rock, he's not close to what those guys brought. He's more Hart/Michaels who mainevented in down periods and weren't huge draws or extremely well known in the mainsteam. They are well regarded within wrestling but they aren't franchise type of guys...yet H is treated like he is. I will say this I don't believe he got to the mainevent due to Stephanie or backstage connections...I do however believe he uses that relationship to stay there though. Hart was going to leave because of Vince's financial issues. Michaels got injured in '98. As I said above with Hogan and Savage that company doesn't demote their top guys (regardless of who's a 'super draw' or not) unless there's a very serious, realistic reason which extends beyond 'these guys on the net are sick of seeing him'. If Trips wasn't healthy (in the way Taker and HBK aren't completely in-ring 'healthy' anymore) you'd be sure that Vince would be booking him the same way as he does/did those two.
|
|
|
Post by wrestlecrapcrap on Jul 2, 2009 8:03:43 GMT -5
When Rock got booed out of the building at Summerslam against Brock, he had to leave for movies. I imagine though if he was staying, they wouldn't have kept going like nothing happened. Rock could have showed up on Raw the next night and probably would have got a great Rock-like pop. Would the WWE have though 'Oh good, he still got a great pop and can still work a full schedule, lets keep him as the top babyface' or would they have thought 'Hey guys, perhaps we need to think about changing things up'. I'm confident they would have noted that crowd reaction, noted the crowds desire for something new after 4 years of Rock main eventing (and this was including movie breaks!) and decided to give someone else a shot in the chair.
However if it was HHH in that situation, would they have changed things up? He hasn't got booed out of the building as a face yet, but he's wrestled to complete silence in the Mania main event, got sung out of the building by a crowd happy to see him written out and killed a crowd dead pinning the up and coming Jeff Hardy. I'm pretty sure they would have found some excuse, like Brock wasn't getting over as a heel well enough, or they would have thought 'Well at least he still gets pops and can work a full schedule, no need to give anyone else the focus then is there?'
It's always different for HHH.
|
|
Mecca
Wade Wilson
Posts: 25,126
|
Post by Mecca on Jul 2, 2009 8:07:41 GMT -5
When Rock got booed out of the building at Summerslam against Brock, he had to leave for movies. I imagine though if he was staying, they wouldn't have kept going like nothing happened. Rock could have showed up on Raw the next night and probably would have got a great Rock-like pop. Would the WWE have though 'Oh good, he still got a great pop and can still work a full schedule, lets keep him as the top babyface' or would they have thought 'Hey guys, perhaps we need to think about changing things up'. I'm confident they would have noted that crowd reaction, noted the crowds desire for something new after 4 years of Rock main eventing (and this was including movie breaks!) and decided to give someone else a shot in the chair. However if it was HHH in that situation, would they have changed things up? He hasn't got booed out of the building as a face yet, but he's wrestled to complete silence in the Mania main event, got sung out of the building by a crowd happy to see him written out and killed a crowd dead pinning the up and coming Jeff Hardy. I'm pretty sure they would have found some excuse, like Brock wasn't getting over as a heel well enough, or they would have thought 'Well at least he still gets pops and can work a full schedule, no need to give anyone else the focus then is there?' It's always different for HHH. He's actually killed the crowd twice in Mania mainevents...if that was anyone else he'd never get that spot again. He's always given the benefit if something doesn't go right it's the other guys fault.
|
|
bigbossfan
Trap-Jaw
Eh, what can you do?
Posts: 290
|
Post by bigbossfan on Jul 2, 2009 8:09:22 GMT -5
Someone saying *Yawn*? *Yawn* Seriously, other pro H-ers are making actual arguments with proper points, some of which are valid, most are at the least thought provking. You, however are letting your own side down. We know your argument is you've heard it all before because you won't post anything else. Further the debate or leave your quiet indignation to yourself.
|
|
|
Post by baerrtt on Jul 2, 2009 8:10:38 GMT -5
When Rock got booed out of the building at Summerslam against Brock, he had to leave for movies. I imagine though if he was staying, they wouldn't have kept going like nothing happened. Rock could have showed up on Raw the next night and probably would have got a great Rock-like pop. Would the WWE have though 'Oh good, he still got a great pop and can still work a full schedule, lets keep him as the top babyface' or would they have thought 'Hey guys, perhaps we need to think about changing things up'. I'm confident they would have noted that crowd reaction, noted the crowds desire for something new after 4 years of Rock main eventing (and this was including movie breaks!) and decided to give someone else a shot in the chair. However if it was HHH in that situation, would they have changed things up? He hasn't got booed out of the building as a face yet, but he's wrestled to complete silence in the Mania main event, got sung out of the building by a crowd happy to see him written out and killed a crowd dead pinning the up and coming Jeff Hardy. I'm pretty sure they would have found some excuse, like Brock wasn't getting over as a heel well enough, or they would have thought 'Well at least he still gets pops and can work a full schedule, no need to give anyone else the focus then is there?' It's always different for HHH. We don't know for sure though do we? He was sung out by a minority of fans in the crowd when Orton beat him in April not by even half the building (which is what happened to Rock). The botched, crappy buildup(which started out well) to the Mania match killed the interest not the fact that it was Triple H in another main event. And if the Rock hadn't left for a movie break after SS'02 they wouldn't have changed a thing. Why? Because when Cena started experiencing the same reaction the fall of '05 the company didn't halt his push or turn him heel or 'give someone else a go'.
|
|
|
Post by Threadkiller [Classic] on Jul 2, 2009 8:12:32 GMT -5
Hogan can still pop a crowd right now....does that mean he should mainevent? Who he is pops the crowd now what he currently is. Also this idea that he can still go is also overblown his match quality is sinking. He's 40 years old it's to be expected plus he's blown out a leg muscle twice this is common sense. The reason the issue is being raised is they chose to move away from all of their other past stars even Hogan quicker than they've apparently chosen to move away from H and he isn't the big draw some of those guys were... They were phasing out Hogan and Savage when they were younger than H is and their pasts had been better in terms of "pops" and money drawn...think about it. They were phasing out Hogan because of the steroid scandal. And Savage, from what's been said, had personal issues (divorce from Elizabeth) that were affecting his in-ring performances. In fact the whole New Generation era would probably never have occurred if the whole steroids controversy hadn't happened. Vince built new stars because some of his older ones had compromised the company's 'family' image. There is no meaningful reason to phase out Triple H yet beyond the personal dislikes of certain fans. 'He doesn't draw as well as the others' isn't a good reason because I've got a feeling that if Trips had been the equal to Rock and Austin in drawing power you'd still be making the same complaints. Personally, I wouldn't be making the same complaints because at least then it would make sense for why HHH was being booked this way, in spite of tepid ratings/buyrates and bigger draws taking a back seat. That said, I've heard a lot of the "he still gets pops" arguments, but I don't really hear it. Maybe it's just me, or my TV, but the only significant pops he's gotten recently have been for his various returns, his entrance, and the Pedigree. There's something like mild apathy in-between. I'd been watching 24/7 when they aired Survivor Series 2008, and I couldn't help thinking, during the HHH-Koslov match, "Man, he really is trying to get this over in spite of itself." I'm sure it wasn't HHH's decision to put Koslov in that main event spot despite tepid fan reaction, but part of me wonders if Koslov wasn't something of a pet project for HHH. In the match there was a lot of straight-up wrestling, and I felt as though HHH was trying desperately to recreate Magnum TA vs. Nikita Koloff, or even Ric Flair vs. Nikita Koloff. While admirable, that match died a sloooooow, painful death, with the crowd literally dying off completely, such that when Vickie came out, the fans LEAPT at having something to react to. And when Edge came out? Forget about it. And then Hardy...well, the crowd spent a goodly portion of the match chanting for Hardy anyway, so that should have been the sign to move on from HHH. And if not then, Wrestlemania should have been the final nail in the coffin for HHH's time in the main event. I've never seen a main event wrestler have PPV main events die so horribly with the live crowd. People would never sit on their hands in the WM main event featuring a Hogan, Austin, or Rock. I'm not saying it happens all the time with HHH, or that it's ever happened more than (at most) one-tenth of his PPV main events in the past three or four years. But the fact that it happens AT ALL shows you that he's not Hogan, he's not Austin, he's not The Rock, and he's standing on top of the mountain fending off all the people who have the potential to be. I'm sure he doesn't book himself, but the man sits in on creative meetings, he has the pull to put others over, and to quiet his own pushes.
|
|
|
Post by TRUTH TELLER on Jul 2, 2009 8:18:34 GMT -5
'He doesn't draw as well as the others' isn't a good reason because I've got a feeling that if Trips had been the equal to Rock and Austin in drawing power you'd still be making the same complaints. If he doesn't draw as well as others, that means there's zero reason to keep him as the focal point. That's the issue here. He's been the focal point of RAW for months and there's no logical justification for it. Arena pops don't pay the bills. If no one is paying for his PPV matches, he's a failure in his position and it's time to try someone else. That's how it works. It's counter-productive to be building World Title reigns around him anymore. His ship has sailed in that regard. It's over. It's time for the so-called creative team to write some compelling Non-title stories for him. Look at HBK & Undertaker. Best build this year, and it had zero to do with a Title. Hell, it was the most over and anticipated match at Mania this year, whilst people fell asleep during the HHH/Orton abortion an hour later. I don't get it. If I was Trips, I think at this stage I'd want to be booked in matches that people will remember forever--like the way HBK is; (vs. Flair; vs. Taker). No one will ever remember any of these awful matches with Orton. The feud's failed on every conceivable level--yet they keep going with it. It makes no sense.
|
|
|
Post by baerrtt on Jul 2, 2009 8:22:18 GMT -5
They were phasing out Hogan because of the steroid scandal. And Savage, from what's been said, had personal issues (divorce from Elizabeth) that were affecting his in-ring performances. In fact the whole New Generation era would probably never have occurred if the whole steroids controversy hadn't happened. Vince built new stars because some of his older ones had compromised the company's 'family' image. There is no meaningful reason to phase out Triple H yet beyond the personal dislikes of certain fans. 'He doesn't draw as well as the others' isn't a good reason because I've got a feeling that if Trips had been the equal to Rock and Austin in drawing power you'd still be making the same complaints. Personally, I wouldn't be making the same complaints because at least then it would make sense for why HHH was being booked this way, in spite of tepid ratings/buyrates and bigger draws taking a back seat. That said, I've heard a lot of the "he still gets pops" arguments, but I don't really hear it. Maybe it's just me, or my TV, but the only significant pops he's gotten recently have been for his various returns, his entrance, and the Pedigree. There's something like mild apathy in-between. I'd been watching 24/7 when they aired Survivor Series 2008, and I couldn't help thinking, during the HHH-Koslov match, "Man, he really is trying to get this over in spite of itself." I'm sure it wasn't HHH's decision to put Koslov in that main event spot despite tepid fan reaction, but part of me wonders if Koslov wasn't something of a pet project for HHH. In the match there was a lot of straight-up wrestling, and I felt as though HHH was trying desperately to recreate Magnum TA vs. Nikita Koloff, or even Ric Flair vs. Nikita Koloff. While admirable, that match died a sloooooow, painful death, with the crowd literally dying off completely, such that when Vickie came out, the fans LEAPT at having something to react to. And when Edge came out? Forget about it. And then Hardy...well, the crowd spent a goodly portion of the match chanting for Hardy anyway, so that should have been the sign to move on from HHH. And if not then, Wrestlemania should have been the final nail in the coffin for HHH's time in the main event. I've never seen a main event wrestler have PPV main events die so horribly with the live crowd. People would never sit on their hands in the WM main event featuring a Hogan, Austin, or Rock. I'm not saying it happens all the time with HHH, or that it's ever happened more than (at most) one-tenth of his PPV main events in the past three or four years. But the fact that it happens AT ALL shows you that he's not Hogan, he's not Austin, he's not The Rock, and he's standing on top of the mountain fending off all the people who have the potential to be. I'm sure he doesn't book himself, but the man sits in on creative meetings, he has the pull to put others over, and to quiet his own pushes. Maybe not you personally but I've been a fan long enough to know that every main eventer has his detractors who say 'we don't want him on top anymore!' and that includes the guys who drew big. I saw it with Backlund, saw it with Hogan (well before WCW), saw it with Rock (before he 'sold out') and call me jaded but after awhile the arguments are always the same no matter who the guy drawing the venom is.
|
|