|
|
Post by foreveryoung on Jul 22, 2011 21:52:19 GMT -5
Taker, Austin, Foley, Rock etc... Despite arguably getting more of a push then any of them by 1999 or 2000-on and all those title reigns?
|
|
|
|
Post by cool guy on Jul 22, 2011 21:54:09 GMT -5
Because there's more to being great than just getting an ultra-push?
|
|
Rican
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
July 17, 2011 - HHHe called it
Posts: 16,461
|
Post by Rican on Jul 22, 2011 21:54:58 GMT -5
He is third after Austin and Rock, but there is no shame than that. And no one can reach those two's level.
|
|
|
|
Post by alliedbiscuit on Jul 22, 2011 21:58:40 GMT -5
Who says he isn't? Rock/Austin no although I personally have enjoyed him way more than the Rock. And he's easily on the level of Taker, Foley, Hart, HBK, etc.
/insert bitching about "Reign of Terror", which in all reality was awesome
|
|
|
|
Post by The Summer of Muskrat XVII on Jul 22, 2011 22:12:27 GMT -5
Who says he isn't? Rock/Austin no although I personally have enjoyed him way more than the Rock. And he's easily on the level of Taker, Foley, Hart, HBK, etc. /insert bitching about "Reign of Terror", which in all reality was awesome This. He's no Austin, but very few people have reached that level in WWE. Hogan, Rock, Austin, Savage, and you could probably included Piper because he's about as well known as anyone. But that's it for the "household name" wrestlers off the top of my head. So, yeah, there's absolutely nothing wrong with being a part of the group just under that |
|
|
|
Post by Lance Uppercut on Jul 22, 2011 22:14:07 GMT -5
Mostly cause he came into prominence as a heel so people don't have as many fond memories like Face Austin and Rock.
Also, he stuck around while the others left leaving a legendary mystique about them. While he and the Undertaker stayed around while the product turned lame, making them lamer.
|
|
Krimzon
Crow T. Robot
This guy is the man!
R.I.P. Deadpool
Posts: 43,870
|
Post by Krimzon on Jul 22, 2011 22:21:27 GMT -5
He just didn't connect with fans the way Austin & Rock did. Few people have. Those 2 were on a completely different planet when it came to that. Triple H is right under that elite group. Honestly, any wrestler would kill to have been where Triple H was in regards to fan adoration.
|
|
|
|
Post by Piccolo on Jul 22, 2011 22:21:48 GMT -5
Taker, Austin, Foley, Rock etc... Despite arguably getting more of a push then any of them by 1999 or 2000-on and all those title reigns? I'd cut Taker and Foley out of that list (and I'm not sure who the rest of the etc refers to), because I think Trips is and was totally on their level. (Taker is, in a way, irrelevant to any conversation like this. His gimmick and appeal are so wildly different than the way anybody else does it that it's like apples and oranges.) As for Austin and Rock, I don't think it's possible to quantify why certain guys strike a chord with the audience. They just did. They were charismatic and talented, but so are lots of guys. It's one of those things that you probably had to live through it to really understand. |
|
Crappler El 0 M
Dalek
Never Forgets an Octagon
I'm a good R-Truth.
Posts: 58,479
|
Post by Crappler El 0 M on Jul 22, 2011 22:24:07 GMT -5
I'd say he has eclipsed Mick Foley. Stone Cold is on the highest of levels and the Rock is probably on this level as well. The Undertaker and Triple H are probably on the same level or at least very close to each other. I'd put Foley below them.
|
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Jul 22, 2011 22:46:59 GMT -5
HHH has several things working against him all time. First, the whole Steph thing. There are always going to be people out there that feel like he got a lot of those title runs due to his relationship/marriage to Steph. Second, HHH has simply been involved in too many bad angles, bad matches, and crappy feuds.
I'm in utter shock that anyone would defend his "reign of terror" circa 2002-03. His whole run as a top heel on Raw was dreadful during that era. This was an era that saw him do the wretched Katie Vick storyline with Kane, the entire horrid feud with Steiner, beat Goldberg at Summerslam in a match where Goldberg needed to win to get over, and on top of that he thoroughly buried guys like Rob Van Dam and Booker T. to prevent them from getting to the main event on a consistent basis.
There's also something else to consider. HHH cannot carry anyone. Honestly I can't think of a time where HHH got a better than average match out of a less than thrilling opponent. I suppose one could argue that he got a semi decent outing from Khali one time, but no better or worse than Taker or Cena got out of him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Snips Has Left on Jul 22, 2011 22:47:44 GMT -5
Who says he isn't? Rock/Austin no although I personally have enjoyed him way more than the Rock. And he's easily on the level of Taker, Foley, Hart, HBK, etc. /insert bitching about "Reign of Terror", which in all reality was awesome This. He's no Austin, but very few people have reached that level in WWE. Hogan, Rock, Austin, Savage, and you could probably included Piper because he's about as well known as anyone. But that's it for the "household name" wrestlers off the top of my head. So, yeah, there's absolutely nothing wrong with being a part of the group just under that Nothing to do with Triple H, but I'd throw Andre the Giant into the "household names" list as well. |
|
Sin Cama
Trap-Jaw
IT'S VADER TIME!
Posts: 453
|
Post by Sin Cama on Jul 22, 2011 22:51:55 GMT -5
Ever since he jobbed to Ultimate Warrior, Triple H just couldn't break the glass ceiling.
|
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Zero on Jul 22, 2011 22:58:19 GMT -5
Because he's just not that good?
|
|
|
|
Post by thelonewolf527 on Jul 22, 2011 23:02:09 GMT -5
Triple H drugs Stephanie, illegally marries her, beats up her father and takes over the company, fires Mick Foley, forces him to retire, retains the f'ing title at WrestleMania as the biggest piece of s*** in the company, while too much focus was put on the McMahons.
It's the terrible booking's fault.
|
|
Mac
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 16,502
|
Post by Mac on Jul 22, 2011 23:04:33 GMT -5
Simple... During those days people were frothing at the mouth to see guys like Austin, Rock, Foley win titles. They earned it through sticking around awhile, building up a fan base and becoming champions based on that. Triple H got his first title from turning heel and being pushed to the moon and beating Rock, Austin, Foley and Undertaker for about a year straight to prove he's "on their level" the other guys could lose and still be thought of as great, Triple H needed to be thrust into that catagory.
|
|
Rican
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
July 17, 2011 - HHHe called it
Posts: 16,461
|
Post by Rican on Jul 22, 2011 23:08:04 GMT -5
I think more than anything with Triple H it was like he HAD to be winning, always, and never look weak. He's good, he was gonna be world champion no doubt, but 13 time world champion probably wouldn't have happened without his influence. It always felt forced.
|
|
noah9322
Trap-Jaw
Titletown, USA.
Posts: 489
|
Post by noah9322 on Jul 23, 2011 1:37:00 GMT -5
Because he's just not that good? This. He's very good, but I think that he should be at most only like a 5 time Champion, which is excellent still. In 1999 when he was being pushed to the top he didn't really connect with fans as a badass, but by 2000-01 he was very good and everything was perfect, but in 2002 his in-ring work was bad, in 2003 his in-ring work was worse, but by 2004 his in ring work was ok. Since then he's been fine. While he's been given an unfair rap because of the whole Steph thing, he is also imo very overrated. And please, I know that everything has their own opinions, and that's great, but the Reign of Terror was not awesome imo. Having a subpar match with RVD, Kate Vick angle culminating in a average match with Kane, having a dissapointing 2 out 3 Falls match with HBK, two terrible matches with Steiner, having a meh match with Booker (I'm not even talking about the booking), a terrible feud with Nash, and a feud with Goldberg where every match was boring, does not a great reign make. |
|
|
|
Post by The Summer of Muskrat XVII on Jul 23, 2011 1:49:20 GMT -5
This. He's no Austin, but very few people have reached that level in WWE. Hogan, Rock, Austin, Savage, and you could probably included Piper because he's about as well known as anyone. But that's it for the "household name" wrestlers off the top of my head. So, yeah, there's absolutely nothing wrong with being a part of the group just under that Nothing to do with Triple H, but I'd throw Andre the Giant into the "household names" list as well. Good call. Totally forgot Andre. |
|
|
|
Post by carp (SPC, Itoh Respect Army) on Jul 23, 2011 1:49:21 GMT -5
Pretty much what everyone else is saying. He IS on the level of Foley and Taker, and he just wasn't interesting enough to be on the level of Austin or Rocky. He's just not a star the way they were stars.
|
|
DIIV
ALF
Sigs/Avatars cannot exceed 1MB
Posts: 1,017 
|
Post by DIIV on Jul 23, 2011 2:13:06 GMT -5
I always thought he was awesome, but it seemed like he fell off after 2001. But between 2000-2001, he was definitely one of the top guys in the company right below The Rock, well moreso 2000 before Austin came back.
I dunno, it seemed like he was their last resort as a heel to face the Rock in 2000, if Austin was still there would Triple H had been as big as he was? Arguable.
|
|
