mrjl
Fry's dog Seymour
Posts: 20,319 
|
Post by mrjl on Jul 27, 2014 22:31:59 GMT -5
This one is easy: RVD. HHH actually did job to Goldberg but given the nature of his 1 year deal there's no way that was going to be long term so why bother? Let's face it though. WWE from 2002-05 was a company in desperate need of a top babyface and RVD was the best qualified choice for that role. Some might say Eddie Guerrero as well but he ultimately was even more unreliable than Van Dam. People forget how massively over Van Dam was in 2001-02. All it would have taken is someone to really put him over for a world title, but they never pulled the trigger on it. He really should have been the top babyface from the post Invasion era up until about 2005 when guys like Cena and Batista ascended to the main event (and RVD got hurt anyway). Guys like Booker and Kane are solid journeymen to have around, but they weren't hugely over. As in drawing bigger pops than The Rock kind of over. No, I do not think RVD should have been the top face long term. |
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Jul 27, 2014 22:32:09 GMT -5
No one until Batista. I like Triple H and his rule over Raw. That not to say I didn't like seeing HBK and Benoit get their runs but Triple H getting it back just felt right and it wasn't until Batista that I didn't want to see Hunter get it back. I wish Hunter would have held it from when he was handed it until WrestleMania 21. I would have been perfectly fine with HBK, Goldberg, Benoit and Orton not having a run with the title. |
|
4TheGlory
Vegeta
The Fun One At Parties
Posts: 9,744
|
Post by 4TheGlory on Jul 27, 2014 22:40:55 GMT -5
RVD they pulled the trigger a good 3 years late.
|
|
|
|
Post by pepsitwist on Jul 28, 2014 4:26:45 GMT -5
Yet he still buries the same individuals years later:
|
|
Professor Chaos
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Bringer of Destruction and Maker of Doom
Posts: 16,332
|
Post by Professor Chaos on Jul 28, 2014 4:33:07 GMT -5
I thought HBK deserved a better run with the WHC.
|
|
