jason1980s
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 30, 2009 14:58:56 GMT -5
Posts: 2,335
|
Post by jason1980s on Jan 29, 2012 19:25:36 GMT -5
Michaels and company kept the spotlight for themselves at the expense of other talents. I'd like to see official stats and financial numbers for Michaels and Rock. Everyone could get behind Rock, man, woman and even child but Michaels' appeal was women and girls and maybe boys he thought he was cool.
|
|
|
|
Post by Emerald Enthusiast on Jan 29, 2012 23:33:17 GMT -5
Michaels and company kept the spotlight for themselves at the expense of other talents. I'd like to see official stats and financial numbers for Michaels and Rock. Everyone could get behind Rock, man, woman and even child but Michaels' appeal was women and girls and maybe boys he thought he was cool. Michaels had a lot of support among hardcore fans back then (yes, mostly men) because he was the antithesis of most of the champs WWE pushed between '84 and '94, who were big but limited in terms of athleticism. As for who made the most money due to his fame, I'm sure it's Rock. He's one of Hollywood's top action stars. As for who made the most money for WWE, I'm sure it's Michaels due to Rock's career being so short. |
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Jan 29, 2012 23:59:08 GMT -5
Michaels and company kept the spotlight for themselves at the expense of other talents. I'd like to see official stats and financial numbers for Michaels and Rock. Everyone could get behind Rock, man, woman and even child but Michaels' appeal was women and girls and maybe boys he thought he was cool. Michaels had a lot of support among hardcore fans back then (yes, mostly men) because he was the antithesis of most of the champs WWE pushed between '84 and '94, who were big but limited in terms of athleticism. As for who made the most money due to his fame, I'm sure it's Rock. He's one of Hollywood's top action stars. As for who made the most money for WWE, I'm sure it's Michaels due to Rock's career being so short. The WWF was closer to going out of business than any other time when Michaels was on top from 1996-1997. The Rock was on top from 1998-2003 and was the top star during their most profitable years ever from 1999-2001. Even though Rocky's career was alot shorter than Michael's, I wouldn't be surprised to find out if Rock made more money for Vince than Shawn. And back in 1996-1197, the majority of male fans couldn't stand Michaels or his "girly" personality. He was putting on good matches, but the majority of fans just didn't get behind him. |
|
|
|
Post by Emerald Enthusiast on Jan 30, 2012 0:39:29 GMT -5
Michaels had a lot of support among hardcore fans back then (yes, mostly men) because he was the antithesis of most of the champs WWE pushed between '84 and '94, who were big but limited in terms of athleticism. As for who made the most money due to his fame, I'm sure it's Rock. He's one of Hollywood's top action stars. As for who made the most money for WWE, I'm sure it's Michaels due to Rock's career being so short. The WWF was closer to going out of business than any other time when Michaels was on top from 1996-1997. The Rock was on top from 1998-2003 and was the top star during their most profitable years ever from 1999-2001. Even though Rocky's career was alot shorter than Michael's, I wouldn't be surprised to find out if Rock made more money for Vince than Shawn. And back in 1996-1197, the majority of male fans couldn't stand Michaels or his "girly" personality. He was putting on good matches, but the majority of fans just didn't get behind him. Rock's first push as a single's star began in '97 and while he was still around in '03, he had become a part-timer by '01 when he began his movie career. Michael's first push came in '92 and ended in '98. Then he returned in late '02 and was a main eventer/special attraction until 2010. So HBK spent 2X-2 1/2X as long as a featured performer than Rock. It stand to reason that he sold more tickets/merch. As far as Michaels' appeal, he had a large amount of fans behind him at WM 11 and the majority of fans behind him at WM 12. It wasn't until he cost Bret the belt that fans began to turn against him. But even before that, he was an early IWC star with the same guys who were part of the ECW revolution. I was there, and he was one of the few guys that got respect from hardcore fans who valued ( and still do) workrate over gimmick. |
|
|
|
Post by Calcifer Boheme on Jan 30, 2012 5:02:42 GMT -5
That's pretty funny to me, you continue to believe whatever Bret Hart has to say, he's a hero!  Bret Hart has been nothing but a paranoid compulsive liar since about 1996 imo, so to each their own. I'd believe Hart over the compulsive liar Shawn Michaels. Its basically a known fact that everybody on the roster couldn't stand him back in 1997. Even Taker wanted to kick his ass at one point. Anybody who believes HBK's word over anybody else needs to be checked out.  I love interviews HBK does now (especially the greatest rivalries dvd). the most common answer was "I don't remember that happening, but I was a huge prick back then, so I'm sure you're right" Obviously, that's not word for word, but it always made m smile. On topic, i don't know of any heat between Rock and HHH, but it wouldn't surprise me either. |
|
Rob7274
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 3, 2010 5:46:16 GMT -5
Posts: 3,821
|
Post by Rob7274 on Feb 3, 2012 7:52:09 GMT -5
I'm sorry but it's well documented from multiple sources that behind the screen HBK and HHH are liars, cheats, bullies and would do anything to get to the top. Just the kind of men I hate!
It's funny though before I found out about that stuff I didn't like them anyway I always seemed to sense that about them. Same with Ric Flair.
|
|
jason1980s
Main Eventer
Joined on: Sept 30, 2009 14:58:56 GMT -5
Posts: 2,335
|
Post by jason1980s on Feb 4, 2012 11:26:53 GMT -5
Amazing that Hunter was basically the S.D. Jones of Wrestlemania XII and nearly has the keys to the WWE kingdom. Hopefully he truly is in love with Stephanie, and I think they are cut from the same power desire mold enough to be in love with each other, but I damn sure wish it was Test who got to see the marriage angle. They would wind up being together enough to be in love, get married and Test wind up with a power position and Test sure wasn't good enough to deserve it. I don't think Hunter was either. He really didn't even find his spot until Chyna came along and gave him something unique. Mr. Perfect probably figured he wasn't going anywhere with a mentor angle with Hunter. He was good but more lucky than good and as Jesse says "sometimes it's better to be lucky than good."
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Feb 4, 2012 21:09:56 GMT -5
I did enjoy HHH from 1997-2001. Those were his prime years. After that, his in-ring work has been very hit and miss at best(more miss than hit), and his promos have been the exact same thing over and over about how "he is the game and hes that damn good." After his 1st quad injury, his muscle mass was so out of control that he could barely move.
I've heard that Stephanie and him were very upset when he had to put over Hogan at Backlash 2002, and this is where his power hungry ego seems to have gone crazy. From 2002-2005 almost every one of his feuds were unwatchable and only benefitted him for the most part. I won't get into that whole thing but even to this day he is still going over in matches when he shouldn't(his match last year against CM Punk).
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 15:40:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 4, 2012 21:18:32 GMT -5
I've heard that Stephanie and him were very upset when he had to put over Hogan at Backlash 2002, and this is where his power hungry ego seems to have gone crazy. From 2002-2005 almost every one of his feuds were unwatchable and only benefitted him for the most part. I won't get into that whole thing but even to this day he is still going over in matches when he shouldn't(his match last year against CM Punk). at least he didnt go over Punk clean but as you say he still went over and really shouldnt have.the only guy that benefited from HHH in 2002-2005 was Batista. |
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Feb 4, 2012 21:51:55 GMT -5
I've heard that Stephanie and him were very upset when he had to put over Hogan at Backlash 2002, and this is where his power hungry ego seems to have gone crazy. From 2002-2005 almost every one of his feuds were unwatchable and only benefitted him for the most part. I won't get into that whole thing but even to this day he is still going over in matches when he shouldn't(his match last year against CM Punk). at least he didnt go over Punk clean but as you say he still went over and really shouldnt have.the only guy that benefited from HHH in 2002-2005 was Batista. His good buddy HBK looked good in they're matches too, but it can be debated because HHH went over in the majority of their matches as well. |
|
|
|
Post by Emerald Enthusiast on Feb 5, 2012 0:26:00 GMT -5
I'm sorry but it's well documented from multiple sources that behind the screen HBK and HHH are liars, cheats, bullies and would do anything to get to the top. Just the kind of men I hate! It's funny though before I found out about that stuff I didn't like them anyway I always seemed to sense that about them. Same with Ric Flair. That describes, to varying degrees, 90% of the guys who have main evented for WWE. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 15:40:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 5, 2012 7:52:29 GMT -5
at least he didnt go over Punk clean but as you say he still went over and really shouldnt have.the only guy that benefited from HHH in 2002-2005 was Batista. His good buddy HBK looked good in they're matches too, but it can be debated because HHH went over in the majority of their matches as well. it sure can be debated.HBK didnt really benefit from their series at all IMO.big Dave is the only one that did IMO. after all he was the only one permitted the honor of beating ol "Champ In Law" in HIAC.which to me is a still a ridiculous statistic. |
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Feb 5, 2012 13:04:09 GMT -5
His good buddy HBK looked good in they're matches too, but it can be debated because HHH went over in the majority of their matches as well. it sure can be debated.HBK didnt really benefit from their series at all IMO.big Dave is the only one that did IMO. after all he was the only one permitted the honor of beating ol "Champ In Law" in HIAC.which to me is a still a ridiculous statistic. Defeating HHH at SS 2002 and then in the Elimination Chamber the same year did give him credibility as still being a main eventer, but I agree that the whole feud made HHH look better in the end of their feud. Hunter won the 2 out of 3 falls match, their match at Tabbo Tuesday 2004, and the HIAC match, and then they tied during their epic match on Raw at the end of 2003 and in their last man standing match. The only match I think they should have changed the ending too was their match on Raw at the ending on 2003. I remember people being super pissed he took the title from Goldberg at Armageddon and every fan at the time wanted HBK to take it from HHH fast. The crowd was super into HBK and I was 13 at the time and marked out crazy when HBK got the "win" and then they did the whole it was a tie. Stupid BS so Hunter could say he made HBK look good but to still keep the title. |
|
|
|
Post by Rule 30 on Feb 8, 2012 21:02:33 GMT -5
Honestly, with the Triple H reign of dominance in 02-05, the only problems I saw was going over Booker and Orton. Maybe RVD to an extent.
Orton just won the title and the fact that he couldn't be given more than a month before losing it to Hunter was ridiculous. (Funny enough, Orton toppled Christian's second WHC reign in a month)
Then Booker is even worse. The build up was clearly to have Booker overcome Triple H and Evolution and prove him wrong for being a racist bastard, but for some reason Triple H walked out champion.
For guys like Steiner, Goldberg, and Nash? Well, to be honest, I think it was better to keep the title away from them.
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Feb 8, 2012 22:44:54 GMT -5
Honestly, with the Triple H reign of dominance in 02-05, the only problems I saw was going over Booker and Orton. Maybe RVD to an extent. Orton just won the title and the fact that he couldn't be given more than a month before losing it to Hunter was ridiculous. (Funny enough, Orton toppled Christian's second WHC reign in a month) Then Booker is even worse. The build up was clearly to have Booker overcome Triple H and Evolution and prove him wrong for being a racist bastard, but for some reason Triple H walked out champion.For guys like Steiner, Goldberg, and Nash? Well, to be honest, I think it was better to keep the title away from them. Agreed. I guess Booker was origionally suppose to go over, but a combo of Goldberg signing w/ the WWE and Hunter's ego changed that outcome. HHH going over though made no sense what so ever. The who storyline was built for Hunter to get his ass whooped at WM. Instead, Hunter not only got to trash all of Booker's accomplishments and momentum each week, but he also got to go over in the end. W/in 2 months Booker went from being the top face on Raw to jobbing in the mid-card. Gonna go off topic a bit but gotta say that Booker was misused throughout his whole WWE run. He was made into a joke the minute he stepped into a WWE ring and was a jobber to the WWE stars during the invasion angle. He basically did nothing for most of 2002 until teaming w/ Goldust, but the WWE ruined that quick. Booker then jobbed to HHH, Christian, and Mark Henry throughout 2003, and then jobbed to Cena and JBL throughout 2004. He spent 2005 in the mid-card doing nothing, and FINALLY got a world title run after having to turn to that stupid "King Bookah" gimmick. He went back to jobbing in 2007 and that was that. Seriously, this guy was one of the most versitile performers ever, yet Vince misused him for years because he was a "WCW" guy. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 15:40:20 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 9, 2012 8:59:47 GMT -5
thats a good point man-Goldbergs signing probably did impact on the outcome of Booker vs Champ In Law.
|
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Feb 12, 2012 9:23:15 GMT -5
Honestly, with the Triple H reign of dominance in 02-05, the only problems I saw was going over Booker and Orton. Maybe RVD to an extent. Orton just won the title and the fact that he couldn't be given more than a month before losing it to Hunter was ridiculous. (Funny enough, Orton toppled Christian's second WHC reign in a month) Then Booker is even worse. The build up was clearly to have Booker overcome Triple H and Evolution and prove him wrong for being a racist bastard, but for some reason Triple H walked out champion. For guys like Steiner, Goldberg, and Nash? Well, to be honest, I think it was better to keep the title away from them. I believe the thought process was that Orton would win it back at Mania that year. But when the fans got behind Batista instead that all changed. But we'll just all ignore that cause it's easier to blame it on Hunter's ego. |
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Feb 12, 2012 11:30:31 GMT -5
Honestly, with the Triple H reign of dominance in 02-05, the only problems I saw was going over Booker and Orton. Maybe RVD to an extent. Orton just won the title and the fact that he couldn't be given more than a month before losing it to Hunter was ridiculous. (Funny enough, Orton toppled Christian's second WHC reign in a month) Then Booker is even worse. The build up was clearly to have Booker overcome Triple H and Evolution and prove him wrong for being a racist bastard, but for some reason Triple H walked out champion. For guys like Steiner, Goldberg, and Nash? Well, to be honest, I think it was better to keep the title away from them. I believe the thought process was that Orton would win it back at Mania that year. But when the fans got behind Batista instead that all changed. But we'll just all ignore that cause it's easier to blame it on Hunter's ego. Your ignoring the fact that Orton's heel character was turned face out of no where when all of his success had been as a heel. One week he goes from being the most over heel to the next being a loser who got beat up by his buddies. Did Vince really expect fans to get behind a guy who was always a heel but now a face simply because he was beaten up by his buddies. Orton was portrayed more as a loser than anything else. Also throw in the fact that Orton lost to ALL 3 of the other Evolution members multiple time over the next 5 months, and you have sabatage written all over this. Hunter's ego couldn't stand that another heel was the champ on Raw. If they were serious about making Orton look good, they would have had HHH take the title from Benoit, and then have had Orton make a slow face turn over the next few months. Or they simply would have let Orton be the #1 heel w/ the title w.out jobbing to HHH in 3 weeks. Instead, we got Orton being portrayed as a loser for 5 months. But I guess it was really because Batista got over ... It had nothing to do w/ Batista getting over. In fact, he wasn't even that over until right before the Royal Rumble when Vince knew they messed up Orton and needed someone else to feud w/ HHH. |
|
|
|
Post by marino13 on Feb 12, 2012 13:17:55 GMT -5
I believe the thought process was that Orton would win it back at Mania that year. But when the fans got behind Batista instead that all changed. But we'll just all ignore that cause it's easier to blame it on Hunter's ego. Your ignoring the fact that Orton's heel character was turned face out of no where when all of his success had been as a heel. One week he goes from being the most over heel to the next being a loser who got beat up by his buddies. Did Vince really expect fans to get behind a guy who was always a heel but now a face simply because he was beaten up by his buddies. Orton was portrayed more as a loser than anything else. Also throw in the fact that Orton lost to ALL 3 of the other Evolution members multiple time over the next 5 months, and you have sabatage written all over this. Hunter's ego couldn't stand that another heel was the champ on Raw. If they were serious about making Orton look good, they would have had HHH take the title from Benoit, and then have had Orton make a slow face turn over the next few months. Or they simply would have let Orton be the #1 heel w/ the title w.out jobbing to HHH in 3 weeks. Instead, we got Orton being portrayed as a loser for 5 months. But I guess it was really because Batista got over ... It had nothing to do w/ Batista getting over. In fact, he wasn't even that over until right before the Royal Rumble when Vince knew they messed up Orton and needed someone else to feud w/ HHH. Sounds like a hell of a pop for a heel. I'd probably have turned him face too. But no you're right must have been Hunter's ego making the fans cheer for Orton. And no offense but I'd much rather take the word over someone with actual knowledge on the matter over someone who does not... |
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Feb 12, 2012 14:22:08 GMT -5
Your ignoring the fact that Orton's heel character was turned face out of no where when all of his success had been as a heel. One week he goes from being the most over heel to the next being a loser who got beat up by his buddies. Did Vince really expect fans to get behind a guy who was always a heel but now a face simply because he was beaten up by his buddies. Orton was portrayed more as a loser than anything else. Also throw in the fact that Orton lost to ALL 3 of the other Evolution members multiple time over the next 5 months, and you have sabatage written all over this. Hunter's ego couldn't stand that another heel was the champ on Raw. If they were serious about making Orton look good, they would have had HHH take the title from Benoit, and then have had Orton make a slow face turn over the next few months. Or they simply would have let Orton be the #1 heel w/ the title w.out jobbing to HHH in 3 weeks. Instead, we got Orton being portrayed as a loser for 5 months. But I guess it was really because Batista got over ... It had nothing to do w/ Batista getting over. In fact, he wasn't even that over until right before the Royal Rumble when Vince knew they messed up Orton and needed someone else to feud w/ HHH. Sounds like a hell of a pop for a heel. I'd probably have turned him face too. But no you're right must have been Hunter's ego making the fans cheer for Orton. And no offense but I'd much rather take the word over someone with actual knowledge on the matter over someone who does not... Edge got a huge pop when he first won the WWE Title. Would you have turned him face right away as well? Orton was the first heel other than HHH in years at that point to win the world title on Raw. Add that to the fact that Canadian fans usually always cheer the heels and you have your explanation. Lets also look at Orton's promo the week before SummerSlam. He called all the 24 year old fans fat and lazy...sounds like a great way to get your future face of the show over in 1 week. Sorry but you defense of HHH isn't too convincing. |
|
