From: PrivateBiscuit1 | #183 - Earlier today on the KSS-FM radio station in New York, Randy Orton spoke on his match next weekend for WrestleMania against Kane. When asked about not being in the main event, Orton argued that his match with Kane is arguably bigger than the World Heavyweight Championship Match.
Every now and then, I forget that The Rock lost three WM main event title matches in a row. WM2000 was probably the worst because Mick Foley should have won and instead it came down to Rock/HHH.
I was a huge Rock mark and even I was like "what the hell?"
-- TheRock ~ Slow dramatic zoom-pan. Doesn't phase the hooded man. "You have issues." - MWC. Pot. Kettle.
From: TheRock1525 | #205 Every now and then, I forget that The Rock lost three WM main event title matches in a row. WM2000 was probably the worst because Mick Foley should have won and instead it came down to Rock/HHH.
I was a huge Rock mark and even I was like "what the hell?"
Nah, Rock should have won, IMO.
It doesn't do anyone any good for a guy on his way out to go over Triple H and Rock who will be carrying the company moving forward.
That said, it doesn't make any sense for the heel to win the WM main event either. <_<
--
Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg
From: ViviffTheGreat | #208 Ballsy? More like "Am I f***ing going over?!" move.
Ehh was he even at that sort of phase at that point? I thought it was more post-quad where he became insufferable and started throwing his weight around. And on top of that HHH is a douche in a lot of ways but it's not like he's afraid of losing (or even tapping out) at WM.
--
"whats a matter afried i might boobs punch you" - ertyu
Jakyl25 posted... From: TheRock1525 | #205 Every now and then, I forget that The Rock lost three WM main event title matches in a row. WM2000 was probably the worst because Mick Foley should have won and instead it came down to Rock/HHH.
I was a huge Rock mark and even I was like "what the hell?" Nah, Rock should have won, IMO.
It doesn't do anyone any good for a guy on his way out to go over Triple H and Rock who will be carrying the company moving forward.
That said, it doesn't make any sense for the heel to win the WM main event either. <_<
It should have been a final closing celebration to Foley's career. Him holding the title high, thanking the fans and then riding off into the sunset (figuratively speaking). Foley deserved it, IMO.
Remember, they announced that if Foley won, the title would then be put up for grabs in a tournament, and we missed out on a potentially awesome tournament. I mean, yes, it would have been Rock/HHH at the end of the day but still.
-- TheRock ~ Slow dramatic zoom-pan. Doesn't phase the hooded man. "You have issues." - MWC. Pot. Kettle.
Well, you gotta remember that this turn basically led to the McMahon-Helmsley era which was pretty awesome. I'm fine with how the whole thing went down myself.
--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/
Nah, the McMahon-Helmsley Era was before then, with just Steph and Hunter in charge with DX as their minions. The WM ending led to the McMahon-Helmsley Regime.
I liked the Era better.
From: TheRock1525 | #213 It should have been a final closing celebration to Foley's career. Him holding the title high, thanking the fans and then riding off into the sunset (figuratively speaking). Foley deserved it, IMO.
Yeah it would have been a nice moment, but you shouldn't just do that to the title. Bret Hart wanted to do that and look what happened. Plus I highly doubt Foley would WANT to take the spotlight away from Hunter and Rock after he just spent the last 2 months getting Hunter over.
Selling out the future to pop the fans today is what got WWE into its current mess.
--
Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg
Well if the rumors are true and Rock would actually be returning for some more matches down the line, then there's an argument to be made for him to go over and build to other matches, be they with Cena or others.
If this is it, Rock is 1-and-done, then it would be crazy to put him over.
--
Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg
Eh Triple H needed it more than Rock at that point I think. Rock was kinda already established as legitimate for the better part of a year and had already won the title a couple of times. That was Triple H's breakout moment.
So yeah rare instance of WWE doing things right as far as long term booking goes I think.
-- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love!
Again, I disagree. Triple H's breakout moment was the Foley feud with the Rumble streetfight and No Way Out HiaC where he retired Mick.
Now, if they have pulled the swerve, had Triple H win at Mania and establish a win over Rock and then go on to actually have a longer title reign, then okay, there's an argument there, but that's not what happened. After WM he immediately lost the strap to Rock at the next PPV and then they traded it back and forth for two more months.
Still though, the BIGGER problem is that Vince (and the McMahons in general) took center stage over both of them, which would become a recurring trend!
--
Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg
Well, the McMahon's didn't just take center stage AT the show, you have to remember, they were center stage throughout the entire PPV build as well. The whole theme was "a McMahon in each corner" for the four wrestlers.
--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/
Yeah it would have been a nice moment, but you shouldn't just do that to the title. Bret Hart wanted to do that and look what happened.
Bret Hart had just signed a deal with WCW. Mick Foley had no deal in place with WCW. Not to mention what happened that night ended up being a boon for them, anyway.
Plus I highly doubt Foley would WANT to take the spotlight away from Hunter and Rock after he just spent the last 2 months getting Hunter over.
Funny, I remember Foley spending the last two months putting over The Rock to build him up for WM, where he lost and lost a rematch at Backlash. But his popularity stuck pretty damn well, if you ask me.
Besides, by not taking the glory for himself, it ended up being all about Vince McMahon again. The whole thing left a lot of bad tastes in people's mouths, at it was the beginning of BACKSTAGE POWERZ HHH.
Selling out the future to pop the fans today is what got WWE into its current mess.
You're assuming that if Foley won, Rock and HHH would have never been as big as they became. Nevermind the fact that Rock was already huge and was going to continue being huge or that HHH wasn't going anywhere no matter what the objections (seriously, you think Mick Foley winning at WM was enough to end HHH's career?).
Choosing to celebrating an aging for one night in his illustrious career by having him win on the biggest stage of them all wasn't going to permanently derail either of these guy's careers. That's completely different from what the WWE does now (routinely put over the same guys and give spots to proven stars all the time).
We could have had another great WM moment and instead no one wants to remember WM2000's ending, or if they do they remember it bitterly.
-- TheRock ~ Slow dramatic zoom-pan. Doesn't phase the hooded man. "You have issues." - MWC. Pot. Kettle.
What are they doing with the Bellas? Are they trying to split them up or something? I mean, the whole "I'm with Team Teddy" thing just reeked of cheap heat, and I found it painful to watch. Maybe that's because the Bellas really can't work a mic, even though their vignettes are watchable.
So I just had a random thought. When was the last time Raw was preempted and either had to air later on at night, a different night, or they just didn't air an episode that week and went straight until the next week?
--
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/8-gamefaqs-contests/61035294 - My MST3K Watchthrough topic.
From: TheRock1525 | #226 Funny, I remember Foley spending the last two months putting over The Rock to build him up for WM, where he lost and lost a rematch at Backlash. But his popularity stuck pretty damn well, if you ask me.
Yeah, because Rock was the heel at the time and Austin was going to carry the company through the summer of '99, so Rock SHOULD have lost at WM to Austin, in the same vein that Triple H SHOULD have lost at WM to The Rock.
Besides, by not taking the glory for himself, it ended up being all about Vince McMahon again. The whole thing left a lot of bad tastes in people's mouths, at it was the beginning of BACKSTAGE POWERZ HHH.
Well, the main thing I'm arguing is that Rock winning is a superior option to EITHER Triple H OR Foley winning that match. Debating Triple H winning vs. Foley winning is a lot closer of a debate, and I can at least understand the idea that Foley winning was the second-best-option there, even if I personally disagree. No way is it better than Rock walking out on top though.
You're assuming that if Foley won, Rock and HHH would have never been as big as they became. Nevermind the fact that Rock was already huge and was going to continue being huge or that HHH wasn't going anywhere no matter what the objections (seriously, you think Mick Foley winning at WM was enough to end HHH's career?).
Choosing to celebrating an aging for one night in his illustrious career by having him win on the biggest stage of them all wasn't going to permanently derail either of these guy's careers. That's completely different from what the WWE does now (routinely put over the same guys and give spots to proven stars all the time).
We could have had another great WM moment and instead no one wants to remember WM2000's ending, or if they do they remember it bitterly.
I'm not saying that it completely submarines Trips and Rock to have Foley win the match, but it does unnecessarily burden them, and it cheapens the title. Absolutely no one deserves to win their final match (which at the time it was presumed to be for Foley, and was for 4 years IIRC). Not Flair, not Hogan, not Austin, not Rock, not Shawn, not Bret, not Cena, not Hunter, not Undertaker, and not Foley. None of them are bigger than the business, and none of them SHOULD be bigger than the Championship (although sadly some of them are).
Rock coming out on top WOULD have been an awesome Wrestlemania moment, and it's one he definitely deserved and never really got. That was the time for it, in hindsight. Instead he has on his resume losing at XV (fair), losing at 2000 (dumb move), losing at X-7 while being booed out of the building (bad move regardless of how much I love heel Austin creatively), booed mercilessly at X8 (total dick move by Toronto), booed at XIX (fair since he was the heel), and stuck in a midcard tag match at XX.
Rock has NEVER gotten the "triumphant at Wrestlemania to the adulation of the millions" moment he deserved, and IF he is going to stick around after XXVIII and do some more matches over the next couple years, this might be the time to do it.
--
Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg
From: Chronic1000 | #233 So I just had a random thought. When was the last time Raw was preempted and either had to air later on at night, a different night, or they just didn't air an episode that week and went straight until the next week?
Early September 2008 for the US Open probably, since that was the last time it was carried by USA.
When Raw returned to USA in October 2005, they had a deal that they no longer would be pre-empted for the Westminster Kennel Club dog show, and thusly the only time the situation you asked about ever happened again was for the US Open for a few more years. I distinctly remember them temporarily moving to SyFy and still going live to deal with it at least one time.
--
Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg
From: SmartMuffin | #238 This one is probably in SERIOUS jeopardy!
And it shouldn't happen IMHO.
Heck, Bret Hart won his last matches after his "comeback," and even I as the biggest Bret mark on this board will say "that was really really uncalled for and stupid."
He should have beaten Vince, yes. In a much shorter match, but that was a fair win. There's NO WAY he should have gone over The Miz for the US Title though, ESPECIALLY since he wasn't returning the job. If you want to MAYBE make the case that he can win the title briefly in a really goofy fashion full of run-ins and comeuppance for The Miz for one big feel-good moment, then that MIGHT work, but it hinges entirely on Bret actually doing a rematch and jobbing out to the Awesome One to give him his heat back.
--
Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg
I'm not saying that it completely submarines Trips and Rock to have Foley win the match, but it does unnecessarily burden them, and it cheapens the title. Absolutely no one deserves to win their final match (which at the time it was presumed to be for Foley, and was for 4 years IIRC). Not Flair, not Hogan, not Austin, not Rock, not Shawn, not Bret, not Cena, not Hunter, not Undertaker, and not Foley. None of them are bigger than the business, and none of them SHOULD be bigger than the Championship (although sadly some of them are).
John Elway won a Super Bowl (two, technically) and promptly retired, as did Jerome Bettis. Michael Jordan twice left basketball after winning an NBA championship.
Floyd Mayweather retired while a champion, as did Lennox Lewis. Rocky Marciano retired undefeated.
None of these instances the championship was cheapened by their decisions. And these are real sports. I'm positive that the championship wouldn't be diminished if Foley had won it that night.
Rock coming out on top WOULD have been an awesome Wrestlemania moment, and it's one he definitely deserved and never really got. That was the time for it, in hindsight. Instead he has on his resume losing at XV (fair), losing at 2000 (dumb move), losing at X-7 while being booed out of the building (bad move regardless of how much I love heel Austin creatively), booed mercilessly at X8 (total dick move by Toronto), booed at XIX (fair since he was the heel), and stuck in a midcard tag match at XX.
Rock has NEVER gotten the "triumphant at Wrestlemania to the adulation of the millions" moment he deserved, and IF he is going to stick around after XXVIII and do some more matches over the next couple years, this might be the time to do it.
I do agree that Rock doesn't have that one shining moment, though that WMXIX crowd was cheering for him pretty good when he won.
-- TheRock ~ Slow dramatic zoom-pan. Doesn't phase the hooded man. "You have issues." - MWC. Pot. Kettle.
Yeah I decided to divert my Smackdown boycott to Impact after that debacle (combined with last week's being pretty lackluster as well) so I watched Smackdown... which was probably show of the week by default.
-- No problem! This is a cute and pop genocide of love!
From: TheRock1525 | #241 John Elway won a Super Bowl (two, technically) and promptly retired, as did Jerome Bettis. Michael Jordan twice left basketball after winning an NBA championship.
Floyd Mayweather retired while a champion, as did Lennox Lewis. Rocky Marciano retired undefeated.
None of these instances the championship was cheapened by their decisions. And these are real sports. I'm positive that the championship wouldn't be diminished if Foley had won it that night.
The team sports arguments don't hold water IMO. Those titles are handed out to (ostensibly) the best team annually. If Michael Jordan retired as Champion after the 1998 season, then of course that doesn't harm the 1999 title, because he then has no bearing on which was the best team for the 1999 season.
The boxing titles are at least lineage-based like pro wrestling titles, but they're different because the sport is actually real (*cough*). Although even then I'd say that sometimes it does cheapen things. When someone retires as Champion, it weakens the next Champion's argument that they are the best in the world at their weight class, when there was someone else already established as such that they never beat.
In pro wrestling, I would argue that no Championship has ever been strengthened by a vacancy, and in the vast, vast majority of cases, vacancy weakened the title. Sure, a title tournament culminating at Backlash 2000 might have been a fun time, but then when Rock wins, it cheapens the value of his reign since he never beat Foley for it, so then we don't truly (in kayfabe) know if he's BETTER than Foley and thus the best wrestler in the world.
The core strength of the WWE Championship is its clean lineage. 49 years in and only 7 vacancies is remarkable, and as I've documented before, in the case of every single one of those vacancies, a "true" Champion was eventually determined after maybe a questionable reign or two.
Compare that to the World Heavyweight Title which in only 9 1/2 years has already accumulated 5 vacancies, or the WCW Title which scored a whopping 12 vacancies in less than 11 years of existence. The level of purity for the undisputed top title in the world is unchallenged. Foley winning the title at WM and then vacating it the next night on Raw cheapens the title going forward. Maybe not critically so, but needlessly so.
Most of Foley's great WM moments have come in losses. After reading all four of his books, I don't think he'd have it any other way.
--
Thank you, Eddie Guerrero. http://bryandanielson.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/photo3.jpg
Most of Foley's great WM moments have come in losses. After reading all four of his books, I don't think he'd have it any other way.
This is so key.
Honestly, look back at the all time greats. Think of which ones are highly respected, and which ones are mainly hated. Then think which ones put people over, and which ones hogged the spotlight and made it all about them. Those two sets match up almost perfectly. All the greats, and I include Foley AND Rock in this, *never* hesitate to put someone over when necessary.
I fully believe that Rock will GLADLY put Cena over at WM. If Rock goes over, I'm going to assume WWE pretty much ordered him to do it against his will.
--
SmartMuffin - Because anything less would be uncivilized - http://img.imgcake.com/smartmuffin/barkleyjpgde.jpg http://dudewheresmyfreedom.com/