Wrestlemania XXVII... worse than IX?

[I *still* ✡ Johnny]

I admit to enjoying Wrestlemania, even though the ME sucked.

I've never seen IX, but from what I've heard I'd be best giving it a miss. Those who have seen IX, do you think this WM sucked more than it?

[slappy]

Hell no.

[Wii M Punk]

Wrestlemania XI is worse than IX.

This Wrestlemania was NO WHERE near the worst.

[Disaster Report]

Wrestlemania IX gets crap for the Hogan swerve and the UT match being a disaster, but it's honestly not bad aside from those two things.

[Deleted]

This isn't even near the worst WM. Not even close.

[Kay Faban]

People that comment on WrestleMania's should really go actually watch the whole event. The modern WrestleMania's top to bottom are far superior then the older ones.

[Robbymac]

Just off the top of my head

2, IV, VI, IX, XI, XII, 13, XV, 2000 are all worse than this one.

Its in the group with I, VII, XII, X8, XX, 23, XXV, and XXVI as middle of the pack.

[2CSultan]

IX was not the worst show they have ever done. For my taste, nothing is worse than IX. HBK vs. Diesel is the only match on the whole show that's entertaining. Everything else is garbage. But for the sake of the poll 27 was way better.

It's also better than 2, VI, V, VI, VII, X, XI, XII, 13, XV, 2000.

[foreveryoung]

I think it was.. The Bret-Yoko match was FAR BETTER then the Miz-Cena match.. And looking back in hindsight with us internet smarks and marks, maybe the Hogan swerve wasn't the best idea, but ADMIT IT.. You MARKED LIKE CRAZY at the time.


Steiners and Headshrinkers was a very good match, Shawn-Tatanka was. You had MORE matches at WM 9.. While this wrestlemania was just filled with useless skits killing time. You had Rock take a half hour just to OPEN THE SHOW. I dont mind promos and skits, but if you are cutting into valuable match time, they better be good.

Outside of Trips-Taker (Which was a good story but nothing but spots and rest periods, not much of a match) and the Orton-Punk match. This WM was pretty dang forgettable

[Deleted]

Since it did not have Billy Gunn it is automatically better than any wrestlemania where Billy Gunn appeared.

[DiBiase is Good]

I enjoy Wrestlemania 9, it gets way too much s*** thrown at it.
As I said in another thread, I think it's a bit too early to judge WM27 until I've seen it more than once.

[2CSultan]

HHH/Taker was better than anything on IX. Orton/Punk and Edge/Del Rio was too. Rey/Cody was on par with the Steiners match. I still don't see how IX was better.

[thegame415]

No way...

[Johnny Flamingo]

I enjoyed 27, didn't think it was that bad. Actually liked the main event as well.

[Bishblast]

No, not at all. In my opinion, last night had three ***+ matches, and then one solid ****1/2 classic. Mania IX had... one or two half decent matches. From a booking standpoint, though... I think we'll have to wait and see.

I personally think 2, IV, VI, VII, IX, XI, XIII, XV, 2000, XXV (and maybe XXII) are all worse than last night... but it's definitely in the bottom half of manias.

[Cranjis McBasketball]

Yes. IX was a good WrestleMania.

[repomark]

I didn't think this year's mania was a bad mania at all - nor did I think 9 was bad either. Now eleven. That was a bad mania.

[pink]

No. Not even f****** close.

[ScottishProWrestling]

This years mania had a few damn good matches, ME sucked but im not going to complain. Also, WM9 is nowhere near as bad as the smarks would have you believe, the Taker match sucks and the Hogan spot is annoying but it wasnt bad.

[Cyborg Franky]

Yeah there were some good matches this year. But it wasn't as bad as WM IX. I say it was more like WM XV. But that just my opinion.