|
Post by Princess Kendall on Oct 18, 2010 18:00:05 GMT -5
It was overshadowed by the greatness of this.... And just when I thought I'd pushed that whole feud out of my mind..
|
|
|
Post by Hobby Drifter on Oct 18, 2010 18:11:45 GMT -5
Vince created the WWF and the WWF title. If he wanted to give himself a 3-day reign as champion to stroke his ego and provide a bit more spark to the ongoing storyline, then so be it.
A lot of fans felt (legalities, be damned), that he didn't have the right to do what he did. And, if you look at some of the (WWE produced) interviews with ECW Originals, it seems that was kind of the point. Piss off the (pardon the expression), hardcore ECW fans so that they'll pay to see him get his ass kicked. It didn't seem to work, but it was sound in theory.
|
|
Ben Wyatt
Crow T. Robot
Are You Gonna Go My Way?
I don't get it. At all. It's kind of a small horse, I mean what am I missing? Am I crazy?
Posts: 41,552
|
Post by Ben Wyatt on Oct 18, 2010 18:31:10 GMT -5
Vince can do no wrong in the eyes of some. And he can do no right in the eyes of most. Aren't opposing views fun?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2010 21:14:00 GMT -5
Him winning the title was pretty meh, but I think him winning the rumble was about all they could really do. (They pretty much booked themselves into a corner on that one, shouldn't have done that)
Alternative would have been for Austin to win it again...but he had already won the last 2 rumbles.
|
|
|
Post by Shaun2k5 on Oct 18, 2010 21:44:43 GMT -5
I never got that title change. He won it on Smackdown (The B show) from Triple H, dropped it on Raw (The A show) and it went back to Triple H within a week.
I don't mind his run because it was a gentle breeze in the middle of Triple H being rammed down our throats.
|
|
|
Post by Hugh Mungus on Oct 18, 2010 23:12:42 GMT -5
Vince's title win was one of the very last things Russo booked in the WWF. I dare say Russo was never a big HHH fan, given the mediocre way he booked HHH during that initial heel run H had in mid 1999. Bear in mind HHH lost his title shot at Austin to CHYNA at one point. In a shoot interview, Russo claimed that Trips, along with The Undertaker and JBL, were the reasons why he left the WWE for a second time in 2002. What were Russo's grudges with these three, and vice versa? I don't think Trips has anything bad to say about Russo, according to his 2005 autobiography/exercise book.
|
|
|
Post by kingbookermark on Oct 19, 2010 1:32:41 GMT -5
Hey everyone. I remember Vince's reign as WWF champion, and it happened for a very legitimate story reason. They had to write Vince McMahon back into the show.
Here is what happened: Vince had lost the end of the Era match where Stone Cold defeated the Undertaker in a first blood match, which meant he could no longer be involved in WWE affairs. HHH shortly after lied cheated and reigned over the WWE as champion. Austin, Big Show, Kane, The Rock and several other wrestlers were assaulted and taken out because of the feud. HHH felt invincible and start threatening the other members of the McMahon family with Stephanie. He beat up Shane, then he threatened Linda. McMahon came out to say his wife, this was the first we had seen of him since. HHH challenges him, threatens him, and out of sheer heel overconfident stupidity challenges him to a WWE title No holds barred match. Vince accepts to defend his wife and he has no other choice. Vince gets the crap kicked out of him. Shane tries to come help, and he gets beaten up too. HHH is gonna win, and maybe even cripple Vince until holy crap here comes Stone Cold outta the blue and helps Vince win.
Next week on Raw, three days later: Vince gives up the title, because he cannot be involved in WWE affairs. The WWF title match is vacant, and a new concept is created the six pack challenge match to make a new champion. Austin reinstates Vince because he wants some in charge beside HHH and Stephanie who will grant Stone Cold one more shot at the WWE title.
After that Vince came back into the fold as a power force and the evil mcmahon returns shortly after that.
|
|
Ken Ivory
Hank Scorpio
This sorta thing IS my bag, baby.
Posts: 5,282
|
Post by Ken Ivory on Oct 19, 2010 4:20:34 GMT -5
In Vince's defence, he owns WWE. If he wanted to he could put the WWE Title on himself for all eternity and completely abuse his power. However "Mr McMahon" almost always gets his come uppance and frankly gets his ass kicked when he doesn't really have to.
So yes, you can complaina about him giving himself the WWE and ECW title but you have to give him credit for taking a beating or two also in order to balance things out.
|
|
Jimmy
Grimlock
Posts: 13,317
|
Post by Jimmy on Oct 19, 2010 7:44:39 GMT -5
Vince's title win was one of the very last things Russo booked in the WWF. I dare say Russo was never a big HHH fan, given the mediocre way he booked HHH during that initial heel run H had in mid 1999. Bear in mind HHH lost his title shot at Austin to CHYNA at one point. In a shoot interview, Russo claimed that Trips, along with The Undertaker and JBL, were the reasons why he left the WWE for a second time in 2002. What were Russo's grudges with these three, and vice versa? I don't think Trips has anything bad to say about Russo, according to his 2005 autobiography/exercise book. Russo didn't have anything against those three but they represent the 'old guard' who didn't want him coming back. My best guess is that they were happy with the writing team (HHH in particular) and didn't want Russo coming in and doing his thing. Additionally Undertaker didn't care for his character being subservient to the McMahon's in 1999. Also Ed Ferrara said in an interview that the WWF was going to fire Bradshaw (and Faarooq) before he and Russo decided to team them up as the Acolytes.
|
|
|
Post by Clash, Never a Meter Maid on Oct 19, 2010 7:49:47 GMT -5
I prefered the ECW title reign, but at the very least Vince had a character that the fans were involved in- whereas Russo, love or hate his writing, doesn't have much of a "TV personality" at all.
|
|
|
Post by The Portable Stove on Oct 19, 2010 10:50:09 GMT -5
so then what was the point of him winning it from Triple H if Triple H was gonna win it again the next week? For some reason upon hearing this, I had a flashback to when Eric Bischoff made the WHC vacant upon the screwy finish where Trips defended against Edge and Benoit, only for Trips to win it right back in the Elimination Chamber. For some reason as a kid, I thought it was cool up until the Six-Pac challenge. Then again as a kid, I wondered why Austin wasn't in it if Vince was trying to do away with Triple H at the time, so.
|
|
|
Post by Hugh Mungus on Oct 19, 2010 11:03:37 GMT -5
In a shoot interview, Russo claimed that Trips, along with The Undertaker and JBL, were the reasons why he left the WWE for a second time in 2002. What were Russo's grudges with these three, and vice versa? I don't think Trips has anything bad to say about Russo, according to his 2005 autobiography/exercise book. Russo didn't have anything against those three but they represent the 'old guard' who didn't want him coming back. My best guess is that they were happy with the writing team (HHH in particular) and didn't want Russo coming in and doing his thing. Additionally Undertaker didn't care for his character being subservient to the McMahon's in 1999. Also Ed Ferrara said in an interview that the WWF was going to fire Bradshaw (and Faarooq) before he and Russo decided to team them up as the Acolytes. I guess this is after they saw what Russo did in WCW, and how he still had that stigma at the time.
|
|
|
Post by nerdinitupagain on Oct 19, 2010 11:14:10 GMT -5
Yeah. Storyline wise it fit very well. It didn't degrade the title or make a mockery of it. It didn't hurt HHH because he lost to Austin's interference, not Vince beating him.
In my opinion, it seemed more like a good way to honor Vince's contributions to the company than a way to stroke his ego at the time. Retrospectively, it may be the other way around, but it worked storyline wise and added to the storyline, unlike Russo's WCW Reign which just degraded the value of the title and the product.
|
|
"Hollywood" Cactus Matt
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
You couldn't ask for a better custom title!
How do you spell "Goddess"? C-H-R-I-S-T-Y!
Posts: 15,300
|
Post by "Hollywood" Cactus Matt on Oct 19, 2010 13:31:33 GMT -5
Why was it ok for Vince McMahon, but not Vince Russo?
Easy. Look at them.
McMahon looks like - even though he's pushing 70 - he could (or could have, at one point) kicked some ass. He didn't look like a total pussy against Austin, and he had (limited) wrestling experience.
Russo, on the other hand, looks like a shmuck who should be driving a cab, making pizza, or living out some other New York stereotype.
In my opinion, of course.
|
|
|
Post by Long Live the Stream on Oct 19, 2010 14:19:09 GMT -5
Vince winning the WWF Championship and Royal Rumble made some sense in the terms of storyline. I hated the ECW Title run because, if anything, it should have been Vince screwing Lashley and helping Umaga win.
David Arquette was just plain stupid.
|
|
Dr. T is an alien
Patti Mayonnaise
Knows when to hold them, knows when to fold them
I've been found out!
Posts: 31,375
|
Post by Dr. T is an alien on Oct 19, 2010 14:20:46 GMT -5
Why was it ok for Vince McMahon, but not Vince Russo? Easy. Look at them. McMahon looks like - even though he's pushing 70 - he could (or could have, at one point) kicked some ass. He didn't look like a total pussy against Austin, and he had (limited) wrestling experience. Russo, on the other hand, looks like a shmuck who should be driving a cab, making pizza, or living out some other New York stereotype. In my opinion, of course. Basically, that is the crux of it all. Shane could have also pulled off some success as a boss/champ, perhaps even moreso due to the fact that he actually put together some fun matches (mainly because of the ass-whoopings that he took to make them good). Russo booked a few doozies in WCW. David Arquette would not have been that horrible if he simply surrendered the belt on the next show rather than get his scrawny ass kicked again. The title win itself was not the worst thing ever because he only won because DDP won it for him and it did actually get mainstream publicity for one day. It was the continuance that was the bane of all things wrestling. Russo's reign was in much the same vein, but with the added curse of following not only Arquette's reign but a slew of absolute crap (including Booker T, one of their best prospects as a new and exciting main eventer, becoming GI Bro).
|
|
|
Post by thuschongswing on Oct 19, 2010 14:53:04 GMT -5
Honestly, it would have been thirty times better if Vince won the title as a heel.
Instead, he was a face who won the belt off of Triple H thanks to Stone Cold's help. That just isn't right no matter how you slice it.
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Oct 19, 2010 17:54:31 GMT -5
I hated this reign.
The ECW reign was the most genius bit of heel work in the last five years, though. That's the closest to ECW he's come, because - like Heyman - he played all of us smarks for the chumps that we are.
|
|
|
Post by Stu on Oct 19, 2010 18:58:35 GMT -5
I recall reading at the time that the WWF Championship win was supposed to be symbolic. It was around that time that Eric Bischoff was ousted from WCW, and the title win was supposed to represent Vince's win over Easy E.
|
|
Mozenrath
FANatic
Foppery and Whim
Speedy Speed Boy
Posts: 121,224
|
Post by Mozenrath on Oct 19, 2010 19:20:17 GMT -5
I think it was good. Vince winning the title didn't put him over, it put Austin over for truly humiliating Triple H, making him lose the title to Vince.
|
|