|
Post by joediego on Mar 18, 2015 15:03:01 GMT -5
Eddie Guerrero King Kong Bundy Guerrero never Main Evented...
|
|
StuntGranny®
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
Not Actually a Granny
Posts: 16,099
|
Post by StuntGranny® on Mar 18, 2015 15:04:09 GMT -5
1a) L.T. 1b) Roman Reigns 1c) The Miz
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Mar 18, 2015 15:36:14 GMT -5
Eddie Guerrero King Kong Bundy Guerrero never Main Evented... And would have deserved the shit out it if he had.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 15:39:21 GMT -5
Miz deserved his spot that year and I will fight everyone I have to over this. Lawrence Taylor is my choice. It does my heart good that this has so many likes. I mean, I probably would've instead done Cena / Barrett and set up Rock / Cena by having Rock lay Cena out allowing Miz to cash in, but that idea was dead at Survivor Series and with that out of the way Miz was really the only acceptable heel for the job.
|
|
|
Post by KAMALARAMBO: BOOMSHAKALAKA!!! on Mar 18, 2015 16:15:20 GMT -5
I mentioned Brutus too. I always liked him and you can't help but feel sorry for him having a brutal accident at that point in his career but, well, we all know that all three guys are in the "Main Event" because of Hogan. At least Money Inc. had been working constantly for years. Funnily enough that was Brutus' SECOND Mania "main event". He was also the main event of the Chicago portion of Wrestlemania 2. With Mr. Ugly Greg Valentine. Yes Brutus Beefcake has two Wrestlemania main events. Brutus Beefcake has more main events than Jeff Hardy, Chris Jericho, Rey Mysterio, Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit, CM Punk or Daniel Bryan. lol, I just loved that you remembered RD's Mr. Ugly story. Been a while since I've listened to much RD on Wrestlecrap, but recall the mailbag where that Mr. Ugly story was first mentioned. IIRC at the same event someone held up a Greg "The Dildo" Valentine sign lol.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 16:22:43 GMT -5
Bam Bam Bigelow. He was a midcarder and not a particularly over one at that. It would be like if you took current Luke Harper and suddenly thrust him into the main event of Wrestlemania with a months notice. At least Lawrence Taylor was getting them some mainstream attention. So out of all of them I would say...The Rock in WM 28. BS match which achieved nothing. It achieved the feat of becoming the highest grossing wrestling match of all-time. Which is pretty damn impressive since ultimately the goal of Wrestlemania, like any other entertainment event, is to make as much money as possible.
|
|
|
Post by KAMALARAMBO: BOOMSHAKALAKA!!! on Mar 18, 2015 16:29:38 GMT -5
For my money, the second Batista turned heel he deserved the main event. He was a heat magnet. As a babyface he didn't deserve shit but once they turned him heel he deserved everything he got. They never really fully turned him heel though until they reformed Evolution, he was face/tweener through most of the WM build last year and it was awkward and sucked because clearly what they had planned rightfully blew up in their faces. And fans didn't just reject him because he came back as a face, face or heel it didn't matter, they clearly wanted a payoff to months worth of story with only one guy in particular being the one to dethrone The Authority. If I could rebook it and Batista had to be in the WM main event, then he would have gotten the title match vs. Orton at Royal Rumble and they do a double turn where The Authority (who had been disapproving of Orton for weeks) would help Batista win and he would become the new Authority champion and movie star "face" of the company, and a beaten and battered Bryan returns after losing to Wyatt earlier in the night to win the Rumble. The held down underdog fan favorite dethrones the Hollywood Heel at Wrestlemania and The Authority is no more. WM30 ending with anyone other than Bryan winning the title would have been absurd, movie stars or otherwise.Same thing could be said about WM 31 ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png)
|
|
|
Post by Milkman Norm on Mar 18, 2015 16:31:58 GMT -5
What the hell does deserving have to do with it? Miz shouldn't have main evented because he wasn't a draw as a heel. It had nothing to do with deserving it or not. Hell Mick Foley probably did deserve it but he wasn't gonna draw in a 1 on 1 match the way Austin or Rock could so he never got his Mania main event until they needed a fourth guy for Wrestlemania 2000.
|
|
|
Post by Kay Faban on Mar 18, 2015 16:39:14 GMT -5
In order by Mania Bundy Sid both of these were purely hogan foils Yokozuna @ 9 I think he wasn't a bad choice, but he would be shit on today I wanna say Bam Bam but he was a good choice to work LT. I think the title should have gone on last Big Show Miz - he was hot at the time though I will admit reigns doesn't feel ready, but I think they feel they have one golden opportunity to cash in on the Brock streak beater heat and I think he was the right choice, just was booked poorly after the massive pop he got coming back at TLC. I think they should have held bryan to the night after rumble and he should have made his intentions to win the IC title and restore its glory clear that night.
|
|
|
Post by g1megatronfan on Mar 18, 2015 16:47:14 GMT -5
We have him this year: Roman Reigns.
What the hell has he done? Name 5 good matches he's had since being a singles guy. He's done absolutely Jack shit. Even John Cena worked his way up the card before getting the main event shot. Same with Miz. Reigns hasn't done anything. Not one damn thing which is why his push is so infuriating to many.
He's getting the shot because of his family and Vince McMahon thinks he's hot. That is it.
|
|
|
Post by MichaelMartini on Mar 18, 2015 16:51:55 GMT -5
Can't believe how many people are saying LT. He got that event more mainstream exposure than any wrestler on that roster could have. He's also one of the all time greatest football players and a big tough dude that could believably go over anyone. Bigelow I can understand but not LT.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 17:13:40 GMT -5
Can't believe how many people are saying LT. He got that event more mainstream exposure than any wrestler on that roster could have. He's also one of the all time greatest football players and a big tough dude that could believably go over anyone. Bigelow I can understand but not LT. For me, it's just the idea of having a non-wrestling celebrity main event a show called WrestleMania. It would be like if Floyd Mayweather had main evented Mania 24 - his match with Big Show was really fun, but it still would've bullshit if that match ended up closing the show.
|
|
|
Post by MichaelMartini on Mar 18, 2015 17:16:57 GMT -5
Can't believe how many people are saying LT. He got that event more mainstream exposure than any wrestler on that roster could have. He's also one of the all time greatest football players and a big tough dude that could believably go over anyone. Bigelow I can understand but not LT. For me, it's just the idea of having a non-wrestling celebrity main event a show called WrestleMania. It would be like if Floyd Mayweather had main evented Mania 24 - his match with Big Show was really fun, but it still would've bullshit if that match ended up closing the show. I wouldn't have had a problem with it. Mayweather is the biggest PPV attraction for years. I was more entertained by that match than Edge/Taker.
|
|
|
Post by KAMALARAMBO: BOOMSHAKALAKA!!! on Mar 18, 2015 17:18:27 GMT -5
Bam Bam Bigelow. He was a midcarder and not a particularly over one at that. It would be like if you took current Luke Harper and suddenly thrust him into the main event of Wrestlemania with a months notice. At least Lawrence Taylor was getting them some mainstream attention. So out of all of them I would say...The Rock in WM 28. BS match which achieved nothing. It achieved the feat of becoming the highest grossing wrestling match of all-time. Which is pretty damn impressive since ultimately the goal of Wrestlemania, like any other entertainment event, is to make as much money as possible. WM 32: Luke Harper vs. LeBron James. Book it! ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png)
|
|
|
Post by KAMALARAMBO: BOOMSHAKALAKA!!! on Mar 18, 2015 17:36:44 GMT -5
Can't believe how many people are saying LT. He got that event more mainstream exposure than any wrestler on that roster could have. He's also one of the all time greatest football players and a big tough dude that could believably go over anyone. Bigelow I can understand but not LT. I can get the rationale for the LT hate. I expected him to be a VERY popular answer for this thread. My OP about the Miz was a little tongue in cheek though I think he should've never main evented and WWE could have done something better for WM 27. To play devil's advocate for LT though you could argue that his football career (where he unquestionably excelled) contributed to him being deserving of main eventing a WM. I mean this wasn't David Arquette main eventing the PPV. Or someone even more famous, but not known for his athleticism say like a Tom Cruise. By contrast, LT was a world caliber athlete in the highest drawing sport in the US, which also happens to be known for attracting tough guys.
|
|
|
Post by StormanReigns on Mar 18, 2015 17:39:29 GMT -5
LT was over
Miz was not great in the ring, but was still the biggest heel
Reigns is not over at all.
|
|
|
Post by KAMALARAMBO: BOOMSHAKALAKA!!! on Mar 18, 2015 17:46:26 GMT -5
The thing that bugs me about some folks defending the Miz is the, "But he was the best heel they had" argument which seems very weak.
What about Warrior/Hogan at WM VI? What about how we never got Cena/Taker at Mania and that could have been a PERFECT time to do it. True, that might have screwed up the HHH/Taker rematch storyline, but it could be delayed a year. It's not like there was that much to that storyline anyways and certainly nothing that couldn't have been held off a year. Just have HHH get distracted with someone else then have him come back at WM 28 to avenge HBK.
This is just one scenario too. There was A LOT WWE could have done other than put Miz in a singles match at WM 27 in the main event. Perhaps they book Punk better going into it, or make it some kind of multi-man match, or even done Cena/Orton (a match that tends to suck, but WWE loves and even if it did suck might have been better than what happened). It's just this reasoning, "But Miz was the best heel they had" as justification for that piss poor main event seems flimsy at best.
|
|
bob
Salacious Crumb
The "other" Bob. FOC COURSE!
started the Madness Wars, Proudly the #1 Nana Hater on FAN
Posts: 79,136
|
Post by bob on Mar 18, 2015 18:34:47 GMT -5
LT followed very closely by Hogan at WM 9 at a very close second
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2015 18:37:46 GMT -5
The thing that bugs me about some folks defending the Miz is the, "But he was the best heel they had" argument which seems very weak. What about Warrior/Hogan at WM VI? What about how we never got Cena/Taker at Mania and that could have been a PERFECT time to do it. True, that might have screwed up the HHH/Taker rematch storyline, but it could be delayed a year. It's not like there was that much to that storyline anyways and certainly nothing that couldn't have been held off a year. Just have HHH get distracted with someone else then have him come back at WM 28 to avenge HBK. This is just one scenario too. There was A LOT WWE could have done other than put Miz in a singles match at WM 27 in the main event. Perhaps they book Punk better going into it, or make it some kind of multi-man match, or even done Cena/Orton (a match that tends to suck, but WWE loves and even if it did suck might have been better than what happened). It's just this reasoning, "But Miz was the best heel they had" as justification for that piss poor main event seems flimsy at best. To be fair there was no reason to think the main event would suck going in (outside of whoever booked the thing to have a f***ing count out) because Miz and Cena have a lot of chemistry and have put on some very good matches. Just it was an off night for both of them.
|
|
|
Post by KAMALARAMBO: BOOMSHAKALAKA!!! on Mar 18, 2015 18:48:18 GMT -5
The thing that bugs me about some folks defending the Miz is the, "But he was the best heel they had" argument which seems very weak. What about Warrior/Hogan at WM VI? What about how we never got Cena/Taker at Mania and that could have been a PERFECT time to do it. True, that might have screwed up the HHH/Taker rematch storyline, but it could be delayed a year. It's not like there was that much to that storyline anyways and certainly nothing that couldn't have been held off a year. Just have HHH get distracted with someone else then have him come back at WM 28 to avenge HBK. This is just one scenario too. There was A LOT WWE could have done other than put Miz in a singles match at WM 27 in the main event. Perhaps they book Punk better going into it, or make it some kind of multi-man match, or even done Cena/Orton (a match that tends to suck, but WWE loves and even if it did suck might have been better than what happened). It's just this reasoning, "But Miz was the best heel they had" as justification for that piss poor main event seems flimsy at best. To be fair there was no reason to think the main event would suck going in (outside of whoever booked the thing to have a f***ing count out) because Miz and Cena have a lot of chemistry and have put on some very good matches. Just it was an off night for both of them. Good matches is one thing (though racking my brain I can't recall a Miz/Cena match I thought was particularly good), but Cena/Miz has never screamed WM main event to me.
|
|