|
Post by Duke Cameron on Jul 18, 2019 0:41:46 GMT -5
I would rather sit through everything Triple H did on a weekly basis than have a champion that’s never there.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jul 18, 2019 0:45:53 GMT -5
gotta go with Brock.
other stuff seemed important on the show with HHH... people were challenging for the title and the title existed.
Brock has the entire upper card of the WWE basically doing meaningless bullshit for months... until Brock shows up and kills them off and then there is nothing else for them to go after becuase the big dragon is also the champion that is never on tv.
people feuded with people to try and get the title... the title was a fixture of the product... it not existing has led to far less interesting television.
I watched all of the reign of terror... I have quit watching the WWE almost all together due to how directionless they are with Brock on top.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jul 18, 2019 0:48:36 GMT -5
Yes, Brock isn't burying anybody... but he's also pretty damn boring.
I mean yeah he kinda is... being both the big bad and the champion means when he kills someone dead they have nowhere to go but down. no one has been elevated by feuding with Brock Lesnar.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Jul 18, 2019 0:56:30 GMT -5
Yes, Brock isn't burying anybody... but he's also pretty damn boring.
I mean yeah he kinda is... being both the big bad and the champion means when he kills someone dead they have nowhere to go but down.no one has been elevated by feuding with Brock Lesnar. But that's how losing to any top champion goes 9 times out of 10. Also in terms of elevating talent, it's not a super strong point when you consider that besides Batista, no one was elevated by Triple H either.
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jul 18, 2019 1:02:34 GMT -5
I mean yeah he kinda is... being both the big bad and the champion means when he kills someone dead they have nowhere to go but down.no one has been elevated by feuding with Brock Lesnar. But that's how losing to any top champion goes 9 times out of 10. Also in terms of elevating talent, it's not a super strong point when you consider that besides Batista, no one was elevated by Triple H either. my point was if Brock was just the dragon... and they lose... they could still go after the title or something else. Brock being both means that there is no end goal in looking good in defeat to Brock at all... becuase there can be no advancement... and even if only Batista did come out looking better when facing HHH... it's still 1 better than anyone that's faced Brock.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Jul 18, 2019 1:04:30 GMT -5
But that's how losing to any top champion goes 9 times out of 10. Also in terms of elevating talent, it's not a super strong point when you consider that besides Batista, no one was elevated by Triple H either. my point was if Brock was just the dragon... and they lose... they could still go after the title or something else. Brock being both means that there is no end goal in looking good in defeat to Brock at all... becuase there can be no advancement... and even if only Batista did come out looking better when facing HHH... it's still 1 better than anyone that's faced Brock. Except if they lose to the dragon, why would they fall upwards into a title shot? I don't understand your point. That would just make Brock look bigger than the belt. How does that fix the problem?
|
|
|
Post by A Platypus Rave on Jul 18, 2019 1:09:40 GMT -5
my point was if Brock was just the dragon... and they lose... they could still go after the title or something else. Brock being both means that there is no end goal in looking good in defeat to Brock at all... becuase there can be no advancement... and even if only Batista did come out looking better when facing HHH... it's still 1 better than anyone that's faced Brock. Except if they lose to the dragon, why would they fall upwards into a title shot? I don't understand your point. That would just make Brock look bigger than the belt. How does that fix the problem? I'm talking kinda more basic wrestling... the monster rarely actually held the belt (at least in the WWF) because the attraction is seeing people fight them instead of building them towards the Title win or lose in just surviving the beast like how Undertaker hasn't really had a title reign longer than like one or two months or Andre held the belt for literally like 3 minutes. Brock being this ultimate monster badass doesn't need the title and honestly having the title doesn't particularly add anything to him... doubly so when the title doesn't exist when he's not around.
|
|
|
Post by Starshine on Jul 18, 2019 1:13:16 GMT -5
Except if they lose to the dragon, why would they fall upwards into a title shot? I don't understand your point. That would just make Brock look bigger than the belt. How does that fix the problem? I'm talking kinda more basic wrestling... the monster rarely actually held the belt (at least in the WWF) because the attraction is seeing people fight them instead of building them towards the Title win or lose in just surviving the beast like how Undertaker hasn't really had a title reign longer than like one or two months or Andre held the belt for literally like 3 minutes. Brock being this ultimate monster badass doesn't need the title and honestly having the title doesn't particularly add anything to him... doubly so when the title doesn't exist when he's not around. All things being equal, you're probably right about that. But at the same time the show still sucks when he's not champion too. It's just a badly produced program all round.
|
|
|
Post by arrogantmodel on Jul 18, 2019 1:57:16 GMT -5
Can we just agree that both reigns sucked? Either the champ is there and won't lose the belt, or the champ isn't there and won't lose the belt.
Again, personally...I'd rather the champ be an active member of the show. Not sitting home, collecting "f*** you" money, with the belt collecting dust on a mantle.
Brock has a bunch of idiots and assholes he has to face. WWE has the most unlikable bunch of faces in history. WWE's fault.
We complain about Triple H's opponents, but at the time...Booker was considering retirement, RVD showed how reliable he was when he finally did win the top title, Jericho didn't set the world on fire as Undisputed champ, and Steiner could go full trainwreck at any time.
And again, Undertaker was on SmackDown. So it's not like they had a lot of options. Even if you consider guys like Jeff Hardy, he's another sketchy choice. Really, Kane was the only other option.
If Brock was doing this shit at the same time, I wouldn't mind as much, because he was putting in work with Taker, Angle, Eddie, and other really great characters.
Rollins, Reigns, Goldberg, and Strowman are not serious threats. Again, WWE's fault.
|
|
4real
Wade Wilson
Posts: 27,674
Member is Online
|
Post by 4real on Jul 18, 2019 3:53:53 GMT -5
HHH’s run was horrendous. Many guys were more over than he was at the time, he had this period where he wore the different colour tights and the cycle shorts and beat every WCW guy he could. Who wanted his feud with Nash? Who cared? Goldberg should have squashed him as well.
Thankfully the likes of HBK, RVD, Christian, Booker, Austin, Orton & Kane were around to temporary distract you from him. But man yeah his run was horribly bad.
|
|
Malcolm
Grimlock
Wanted something done about the color of his ring.
Eternally Confused
Posts: 13,480
|
Post by Malcolm on Jul 18, 2019 11:09:51 GMT -5
Yes, Brock isn't burying anybody... but he's also pretty damn boring.
I mean yeah he kinda is... being both the big bad and the champion means when he kills someone dead they have nowhere to go but down. no one has been elevated by feuding with Brock Lesnar. I honestly agree with you, but it just seems like the definition of "buried" keeps changing every 5 minutes or so.
|
|