|
Post by machomuta on Apr 1, 2016 5:49:56 GMT -5
- Cannot remember the last time he put on a bad match, especially on the big stage like this. Last year against Sting. That match wax awful.
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Apr 1, 2016 5:57:47 GMT -5
I'm pissed off that the top two matches involve McMahons (and Triple H is one for all intents and purpose) in 2016. As much as I don't want Roman as champion, that's still the better option for me.
As much as I want to think business will be better with Triple H in charge, Vince never put his ego ahead of anybody he was working with.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 7:21:34 GMT -5
Blaming injuries is pretty flimsy, IMO. Chances are Cena/Taker would have been the main event this year but Reigns would have still been in the title match. Who was he going to face other than HHH? They still could have done Reigns/Brock again if they wanted to.
HHH knew the writing on the wall a long time ago. The fact that he went into the Rumble and won in clean as a sheet seems to indicate he didn't exactly fight to have someone else in thei spot. He feels he could get Reigns over and it did the exact opposite, predictably. It has happened before.
|
|
|
Post by Snaptastic on Apr 1, 2016 8:34:09 GMT -5
Potentially the largest attended Mania in history? Of course HHH was going to be in the main event. Hell I told myself when it was announced for AT&T Stadium that HHH would somehow wiggle into the main event. I don't like it, but for me the better outcome is a Reigns win but overall this is simply...
|
|
|
Post by Tea & Crumpets on Apr 1, 2016 8:42:10 GMT -5
I'm probably as displeased with it as anybody, and I don't actually think HHH in his Reign Of Terror was that bad, possibly due to fond childhood memories of WWE at the time.
It's 2016. I don't care how many boos Roman gets, he's been booked AWFULLY and simply is not and should not be the #1 face, but I'd rather he win than HHH retains. I'd rather SHEAMUS had held the title through til Mania, as poor as his reactions and booking are. I honestly don't give a shit, because I am so beyond done with HHH being a main eventer. He's a good wrestler, yes. Don't care. It's 16 f***ing years since he started main eventing. And since "retiring" from full time competition? He's beaten Sting when he shouldn't. Punk when he shouldn't. Lesnar when he shouldn't. He's had way too many big wins and titles that he simply shouldn't have had and this is another one. Never mind anyone but Roman, speaking as a guy who likes HHH as a wrestler (when he isn't in burial mode), anyone but HHH. Cena's stale on the top, Orton's stale on the top, but HHH isn't stale he's full on dessicated.
Keep wrestling by all means, Hunter. Just not for the title, please.
|
|
|
Post by Chris Hammers on Apr 1, 2016 9:00:56 GMT -5
What should've mained over the WWE Title match at Mania 2000? Really, of all the things wrong with Mania 2000, Triple H main eventing wasn't one of them. He absolutely deserved it that year, coming off of the amazing Royal Rumble match with Foley. Nothing should have main evented over that match, I just forgot about it .
|
|
danny
Tommy Wiseau
Posts: 66
|
Post by danny on Apr 1, 2016 10:28:54 GMT -5
I don't blame injuries, but more how they've booked based on those injuries in the last year. It's been pretty ridiculous. There are two younger guys on the roster now that last year were booked in HUGE spots (even though they both lost), who are both uninjured now, who are both in lousy spots this year. It's like booking isn't even working off of their own build up with them and it's leading to this year's cluster-f.
Last year, Rusev was booked in a big match with Cena, was undefeated going in, and given probably the Greatest entrance of all time. This year: slotted into a mostly-comedic (7)-man tag which will likely be the curtain jerker.
Last year Wyatt was booked in a huge match with the freaking Undertaker a year after taker's first ever WM loss. This year...not on the official card but "might" do a run-in.
|
|
|
Post by froggyfrog on Apr 1, 2016 10:31:34 GMT -5
Not a fan of it but this will prob be the last time. I think it's more out of necessity than anything wlse
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 11:27:34 GMT -5
Storyline-wise, the trajectory makes sense since Rollins is out. I'd imagine they were originally building towards Rollins v Reigns as the main event and then this happened. Its not a particularly interesting storyline, even if Rollins was still active since they way they've given Reigns no real character makes it hard to cheer for him. The whole story has always been "The Authority vs. ______" which isn't an especially thrilling storyline after 3+ years. Same as with Taker v Shane really when you get right down to it.
In terms of how it reflects on WWE as a whole though, its just kind of sad that they have no one else they could have even put in this spot other than HHH.
Along those same lines, HHH shouldn't be main-eventing in general though. No one should who is basically a part-timer. If they had a strong set of full-time stars that WWE found bankable, then sure bring in the part-timers to further enhance the talent they have. Because then its enhancing the overall product. The way they do it now just feels like they're clamoring to make something interesting in the next 2 weeks, rather than thinking about the next 2 years.
|
|
the2ndevil
Grimlock
Super Seducer Survivor
Where Is Your Santa, Now?
Posts: 13,629
|
Post by the2ndevil on Apr 1, 2016 12:13:18 GMT -5
I think I would be more open to it, if the Champion/Challenger roles were reversed.
If Triple H was going to win the Rumble, he should have gotten the main event spot that way.
Reigns could have defended the title against Sheamus, the triple threat at Fastlane would have been for the title, and Roadblock would have been Triple H against Ambrose for the Number one contendership.
|
|
schma
Hank Scorpio
Posts: 6,739
|
Post by schma on Apr 1, 2016 15:34:01 GMT -5
There are no top heels who can put on a match that will make Roman look as good as Triple H can. Rollins could, but he's injured. Ambrose has already faced him plenty of times before, and nobody will boo him. The Brock thing happened last year. Sheamus is a joke. Kane or Big Show are too clunky to main event Mania and the match would be extra shat on for its boringness. WWE's made their bed with their own shitty booking and the ensuing rash of injuries, but this really does feel like it's circumstances forcing their hand into bringing Triple H in to main event. No doubt he'd be on the card, but I doubt this would be the plan if it could be helped. Owens or Wyatt could easily have been built as viable contenders with even an ounce of forethought. They should never be putting their eggs in one basket anyways because as we've seen injuries happen. I still Argue Ambrose/Reigns would be a fantastic match for WM.
|
|
|
Post by Vice honcho room temperature on Apr 1, 2016 15:42:21 GMT -5
Shit its f***ing shit and I'm not watching.... thou for a product I'm boycotting I spend alot of time talking about it.
|
|
|
Post by Mid-Carder on Apr 1, 2016 15:45:31 GMT -5
Storyline-wise, the trajectory makes sense since Rollins is out. I'd imagine they were originally building towards Rollins v Reigns as the main event and then this happened. Its not a particularly interesting storyline, even if Rollins was still active since they way they've given Reigns no real character makes it hard to cheer for him. The whole story has always been "The Authority vs. ______" which isn't an especially thrilling storyline after 3+ years. Same as with Taker v Shane really when you get right down to it. In terms of how it reflects on WWE as a whole though, its just kind of sad that they have no one else they could have even put in this spot other than HHH.Along those same lines, HHH shouldn't be main-eventing in general though. No one should who is basically a part-timer. If they had a strong set of full-time stars that WWE found bankable, then sure bring in the part-timers to further enhance the talent they have. Because then its enhancing the overall product. The way they do it now just feels like they're clamoring to make something interesting in the next 2 weeks, rather than thinking about the next 2 years. This bit isn't true though. It's incredibly easy to build somebody up as a viable heel for Roman. Hell they did it with Kevin Owens against Cena, a much much bigger star and a total newcomer. It didn't have to be Triple H. He may well be a veteran who can help Roman but it's awfully convenient that he benefits with a title reign and a Mania main event.
|
|
|
Post by Fade is a CodyCryBaby on Apr 1, 2016 15:45:32 GMT -5
It's kind of bizarre considering the IWC was making jokes his would be the case...and it totally turned out to be the case.
|
|
AdamAFL was sooooo wrong
Hank Scorpio
note to all: he's a pants-less heathen
I Survived The Impact Spoilers 7/22/15-7/30/15
Posts: 7,095
|
Post by AdamAFL was sooooo wrong on Apr 1, 2016 15:53:48 GMT -5
I've always liked HHH so I have no problem main eventing a 'Mania in 2016 with the caveat that he has to put over the young guy he's going against. At this point in time I don't mind seeing him main event or hold the top title but it has to be part of a bigger plan to put over the next generation so they no longer have to rely on HHH as an attraction and he can just be used sparingly to add to a card rather than being the main draw - after all he's not got that long left.
Thankfully this does seem to be the plan.
Unfortunately, however, the plan is to put over a guy I don't like. So against all my logical senses, come Sunday, I will be cheering on Triple H.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 15:55:44 GMT -5
Storyline-wise, the trajectory makes sense since Rollins is out. I'd imagine they were originally building towards Rollins v Reigns as the main event and then this happened. Its not a particularly interesting storyline, even if Rollins was still active since they way they've given Reigns no real character makes it hard to cheer for him. The whole story has always been "The Authority vs. ______" which isn't an especially thrilling storyline after 3+ years. Same as with Taker v Shane really when you get right down to it. In terms of how it reflects on WWE as a whole though, its just kind of sad that they have no one else they could have even put in this spot other than HHH.Along those same lines, HHH shouldn't be main-eventing in general though. No one should who is basically a part-timer. If they had a strong set of full-time stars that WWE found bankable, then sure bring in the part-timers to further enhance the talent they have. Because then its enhancing the overall product. The way they do it now just feels like they're clamoring to make something interesting in the next 2 weeks, rather than thinking about the next 2 years. This bit isn't true though. It's incredibly easy to build somebody up as a viable heel for Roman. Hell they did it with Kevin Owens against Cena, a much much bigger star and a total newcomer. It didn't have to be Triple H. He may well be a veteran who can help Roman but it's awfully convenient that he benefits with a title reign and a Mania main event. Oh for sure, I think WWE could/should have WAY more dudes who could step into that main event WM spot. And they could have also built someone up if they REALLY wanted to, but in the environment they created for themselves they're so afraid to actually give anyone a chance without basically being forced to. Just look what happened with Daniel Bryan. They literally brought in Batista as a face because they didn't think Bryan was a "WM Main Event guy." THAT is how obtuse they are. They don't see anyone who wasn't around during the attitude era as a "real star" except Cena.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 1, 2016 16:30:07 GMT -5
I think people get a bit too caught up in the whole "he's been around since the 90s therefor he should leave" mindset. Triple H is a main event level wrestler and deserves to be in main events. Really doesn't matter if it's Triple H, Kevin Owens, Seth Rollins, the crux of the failure here is that they goofed Reigns' push and it was gonna look bad no matter who they put him up against.
The main event is pretty much what a wrestling main event should be, a first ballot hall of famer against an up and comer to pass the torch to. This is far more productive than Undertaker vs. Shane McMahon which isn't helping anybody at all who has any future unless they have some really effective run in.
|
|
SAJ Forth
Wade Wilson
Jamaican WCF Crazy!
Half Man-Half Amazing
Posts: 27,214
|
Post by SAJ Forth on Apr 1, 2016 23:10:46 GMT -5
Remember when Undertaker asked Who in the hell do you think you are? That.
Though I do know it's injuries, and he's doing good with NXT, I imagine he was saying "I'm not sure if I should" as he's getting fitted for his entrance.
|
|