|
Post by TOK Hehe'd Around & Found Out on Feb 13, 2012 11:19:17 GMT -5
I'm seeing a bit of revisionist history here. I (and I thought this was the prevailing sentiment at the time) found the build of Taker/HHH last year to be pretty lackluster and underwhelming until the last segment. Everyone remembers the original segment (which was absolutely fantastic), but after that it sort of stalled when they tried to duplicate it multiple times. The build stalled for a while, until they added HBK at the last minute which really led to the story of HHH doing anything he could to end the streak, but still falling short even as Taker was left for dead.
|
|
|
Post by Zaq "That Guy" Buzzkill on Feb 13, 2012 11:43:10 GMT -5
I love Triple H threads. I really do.
|
|
The Ichi
Patti Mayonnaise
AGGRESSIVE Executive Janitor of the Third Floor Manager's Bathroom
Posts: 37,304
Member is Online
|
Post by The Ichi on Feb 13, 2012 11:55:24 GMT -5
While I do give Triple H credit for staying around through thick and thin, I cannot make the argument that he's the single most important WWE superstar since the dawn of the Attitude Era. While The Rock and Stone Cold Steve Austin both took their metaphorical ball and went home, they were also integral factors in the rise and overarching success of the WWF in the late 1990s. Without either of those two, WCW probably continues to win the Monday Night Wars and wrestling as we know it today is completely different. That being said, I've never heard a Triple H story as damning as Stone Cold Steve Austin refusing to job to Brock Lesnar in the summer of 2002. While his reasons were noble, that, yes, it would have been a much more significant encounter had it been saved for a pay-per-view event and not just a random Monday Night Raw, the facts are the facts, that Stone Cold refused to do the job and when pressed, went home. If a story like that ever broke about Triple H, you'd have to shut these Forums down for a few days to allow for cooler heads to prevail. If I had to rank the WWF on-screen talent in order of importance during the rise of the Attitude Era, I'd list them as follows: Stone Cold Steve Austin, The Rock, Vince McMahon, Mick Foley, The Undertaker and Triple H. Hunter is not THE guy, but he's one of the few that are most directly responsible for the success of the company during that era. Whether it was D-Generation X in its initial or second incarnate or if it was his phenomenal run as the company's top heel in 2000, he was hugely important in the grand scheme of things. There's a reason why 2000 is looked upon so fondly in terms of in-ring performance, and Triple H is a huge part of that. He would consistently put on some of the best matches of the night, and, as the company's primary heel, it was usually in the main event. The only real stinker I can recall is the main event of WrestleMania 2000, and that was just an overbooked mess that no single performer was capable of saving. So, what I'm saying, is that he might not be the be-all, end-all of the Attitude Era that some are making him out to be, he's also not on the level of midcarders that some want him to be. He was an elite talent, in the ring and on the microphone, and he was one of a handful of superstars that were most crucial in the WWF overtaking WCW in the late 1990s. Gotta say, this is the best pro-HHH argument I've ever read. I actually didn't disagree with it. Kudos, sir.
|
|
|
Post by FUNK_US/BRODUS on Feb 13, 2012 12:00:23 GMT -5
HHH isnt the most important Attitude Era guy ever. Thats Stone Cold without question.
However, I think the "Reign of Terror" gets WAY more shit than it deserves.
|
|
Marty McFry
Don Corleone
"She was mine before she was yours.... Wooooo"
Posts: 1,657
|
Post by Marty McFry on Feb 13, 2012 12:07:17 GMT -5
|
|
Beartato
Hank Scorpio
Conspiracy Victim
Posts: 5,913
|
Post by Beartato on Feb 13, 2012 12:09:31 GMT -5
Whether you love or hate HHH, this statement is ridiculous.
|
|
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: 41,515
|
Post by Ben Wyatt on Feb 13, 2012 12:13:28 GMT -5
While I do give Triple H credit for staying around through thick and thin, I cannot make the argument that he's the single most important WWE superstar since the dawn of the Attitude Era. While The Rock and Stone Cold Steve Austin both took their metaphorical ball and went home, they were also integral factors in the rise and overarching success of the WWF in the late 1990s. Without either of those two, WCW probably continues to win the Monday Night Wars and wrestling as we know it today is completely different. That being said, I've never heard a Triple H story as damning as Stone Cold Steve Austin refusing to job to Brock Lesnar in the summer of 2002. While his reasons were noble, that, yes, it would have been a much more significant encounter had it been saved for a pay-per-view event and not just a random Monday Night Raw, the facts are the facts, that Stone Cold refused to do the job and when pressed, went home. If a story like that ever broke about Triple H, you'd have to shut these Forums down for a few days to allow for cooler heads to prevail. If I had to rank the WWF on-screen talent in order of importance during the rise of the Attitude Era, I'd list them as follows: Stone Cold Steve Austin, The Rock, Vince McMahon, Mick Foley, The Undertaker and Triple H. Hunter is not THE guy, but he's one of the few that are most directly responsible for the success of the company during that era. Whether it was D-Generation X in its initial or second incarnate or if it was his phenomenal run as the company's top heel in 2000, he was hugely important in the grand scheme of things. There's a reason why 2000 is looked upon so fondly in terms of in-ring performance, and Triple H is a huge part of that. He would consistently put on some of the best matches of the night, and, as the company's primary heel, it was usually in the main event. The only real stinker I can recall is the main event of WrestleMania 2000, and that was just an overbooked mess that no single performer was capable of saving. So, what I'm saying, is that he might not be the be-all, end-all of the Attitude Era that some are making him out to be, he's also not on the level of midcarders that some want him to be. He was an elite talent, in the ring and on the microphone, and he was one of a handful of superstars that were most crucial in the WWF overtaking WCW in the late 1990s. *cue citizen Cain clapping gif*
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Feb 13, 2012 12:17:51 GMT -5
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH....no
|
|
|
Post by TOK Hehe'd Around & Found Out on Feb 13, 2012 12:21:54 GMT -5
That probably wasn't his call, to be fair.
|
|
|
Post by Baldobomb-22-OH-MAN!!! on Feb 13, 2012 12:33:08 GMT -5
it probably wasn't. it's still hilarious, though.
|
|
Marty McFry
Don Corleone
"She was mine before she was yours.... Wooooo"
Posts: 1,657
|
Post by Marty McFry on Feb 13, 2012 12:37:41 GMT -5
I just don't get what possible reason anyone could have to release that statement to anyone wanting to review SvR08. What were they worried about?
|
|
|
Post by Snaptastic on Feb 13, 2012 12:38:21 GMT -5
Hahahaha no...
|
|
|
Post by machomuta on Feb 13, 2012 15:45:59 GMT -5
Austin was way more important.
Without Austin there is no Attitude era.
|
|
mizerable
Fry's dog Seymour
You're the lowest on the totem pole here, Alva. The lowest.
Posts: 23,475
|
Post by mizerable on Feb 13, 2012 15:50:31 GMT -5
Where is that overused Joker pic when you need it? At home? Washing it's tights?
|
|
|
Post by Rolent Tex on Feb 13, 2012 17:34:08 GMT -5
Degeneration X as a whole is more important to the Attitude Era than Trips solo. If it wasn't for D-X being so popular and Shawn Michaels being injured when he was, Triple H never gets to lead DX, never turns on them and becomes the uber heel he was. He may have feuded with HBK and been led on that path eventually, but I doubt he'd have been at the level that he was at. That's just my opinion though.
|
|
Renslayer
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
every time i come around your city...
Posts: 16,624
Member is Online
|
Post by Renslayer on Feb 13, 2012 17:39:39 GMT -5
While I do give Triple H credit for staying around through thick and thin, I cannot make the argument that he's the single most important WWE superstar since the dawn of the Attitude Era. While The Rock and Stone Cold Steve Austin both took their metaphorical ball and went home, they were also integral factors in the rise and overarching success of the WWF in the late 1990s. Without either of those two, WCW probably continues to win the Monday Night Wars and wrestling as we know it today is completely different. That being said, I've never heard a Triple H story as damning as Stone Cold Steve Austin refusing to job to Brock Lesnar in the summer of 2002. While his reasons were noble, that, yes, it would have been a much more significant encounter had it been saved for a pay-per-view event and not just a random Monday Night Raw, the facts are the facts, that Stone Cold refused to do the job and when pressed, went home. If a story like that ever broke about Triple H, you'd have to shut these Forums down for a few days to allow for cooler heads to prevail. If I had to rank the WWF on-screen talent in order of importance during the rise of the Attitude Era, I'd list them as follows: Stone Cold Steve Austin, The Rock, Vince McMahon, Mick Foley, The Undertaker and Triple H. Hunter is not THE guy, but he's one of the few that are most directly responsible for the success of the company during that era. Whether it was D-Generation X in its initial or second incarnate or if it was his phenomenal run as the company's top heel in 2000, he was hugely important in the grand scheme of things. There's a reason why 2000 is looked upon so fondly in terms of in-ring performance, and Triple H is a huge part of that. He would consistently put on some of the best matches of the night, and, as the company's primary heel, it was usually in the main event. The only real stinker I can recall is the main event of WrestleMania 2000, and that was just an overbooked mess that no single performer was capable of saving. So, what I'm saying, is that he might not be the be-all, end-all of the Attitude Era that some are making him out to be, he's also not on the level of midcarders that some want him to be. He was an elite talent, in the ring and on the microphone, and he was one of a handful of superstars that were most crucial in the WWF overtaking WCW in the late 1990s. What he said
|
|
|
Post by mayabristow on Feb 13, 2012 17:58:59 GMT -5
unselfishly help build stars ... Um he didn't build guys like Brian Kendrick & Paul London & also Cade & Murdoch On topic: Sure he was an important piece of the Attitude Era puzzle but lets be honest here he wasn't the Ace of Spades of the Attitude Era, Austin & The Rock were
|
|
|
Post by Manute Bol on Feb 13, 2012 17:59:49 GMT -5
On the subject of CM Punk, he had the entire world's eye on him and he dropped the ball because he was too busy trying to become a tumblr meme. Triple H didn't do anything to Punk last year except be who he is...someone that the fans respect and admire. I've read some flat out dumb posts on this forum, but this one takes the cake. CM Punk dropped the ball? If by dropping the ball you mean he had his mega-hot storyline hijacked by Triple H and Kevin Nash, then yeah he did drop the ball for sure. How did Punk's legendary promo end up being nothing more than the spark plug for a HHH/Nash Ladder Match? Cause Hunter saw Punk had the hottest wrestling angle the company's had in years and couldn't keep his big nose out of it. Why did Punk never get revenge on Nash for costing him the title, yet Hunter did?
|
|
Yami Daimao
Patti Mayonnaise
Really, really wants to zigazig ah!
Posts: 31,784
|
Post by Yami Daimao on Feb 13, 2012 18:35:34 GMT -5
I admire your effort to highlight the pros of Triple H's career, and while you do bring up some good points, your entire approach and attitude while presenting them is ALL wrong.
He's not the most important star of the Attitude or current era (as much as he constantly tries to push us to believe so), but he was a key player. He's made some stars, but he's also derailed some too, and the ones he's broken FAR outweigh the ones he's made.
Your choice to constantly include CM Punk in your arguments, even though he has absolutely nothing to do with the topic, leads me (and others) to believe you're purposely stirring the pot, to get a rise out of people. And it's not a case of people that can't take criticism, or some "IWC hivemind" bullshit, let's just get that cleared. Being the hottest star and having the hottest angle hi-jacked in favor of 2 middle aged semi-retired men, both who's quads are made out of styrofoam and do not continuously need to be in the spotlight, is not considered dropping the ball.
|
|
|
Post by Cela on Feb 13, 2012 19:02:11 GMT -5
Only in that he gained total control and became Poochie in chief. So yes, he was the central figure, but only because politics made him the central figure. Dozens of people could have done his role, probably better, but he was given it.
Think of him as Sam Worthington. For some reason he was cast in Avatar, Clash of the Titans, and Terminator. Was he competent? Sure. Did anyone go to these movies because of him? Of course not. Is he being pushed as a big star because of the movie's success? Definitely.
|
|