Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 15:34:14 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2012 22:40:49 GMT -5
So, after looking at the card from EVERY Wrestlemania, there have been some issues over the years as to which match should have been the actual main event.
By main event I mean LAST MATCH ON THE CARD.
These days, it seems like every other match is referred to as the "Main Event".
Without changing any of the participants in the matches, which match would YOU have placed last on the card?
This doesn't have to be from each Wrestlemania. Just those that stand out...
Wrestlemania 8 - Should have been Flair vs. Savage
Wrestlemania 11 - Should have been Michaels vs. Diesel
Wrestlemania 18 - Should have been Hogan vs. Rock
What other matches do you guys think SHOULD have been the main event?
|
|
hammer
Main Eventer
Joined on: Jun 12, 2009 2:30:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,619
|
Post by hammer on Mar 2, 2012 23:24:59 GMT -5
25 immediately comes to mind [hbk/taker]... and 24 could be argued [hbk/flair]. i think flair declined to go on last at 24 though, saying the title match should be the main event.
i think sid had something in his contract that he had to main event at 8, or some such.
|
|
Daniel F'n Bryan
Main Eventer
Joined on: Oct 24, 2011 0:33:48 GMT -5
Posts: 2,929
|
Post by Daniel F'n Bryan on Mar 2, 2012 23:36:55 GMT -5
Definately the 3 you named plus these ones:
WM 25: Taker/Michaels
WM 13: IMO Bret/Austin but Taker/Sid was fine aswell
WM 27: Edge/Del Rio. I mean I like Cena and Miz but there was no way they were going to put on a classic match that would be remembered for years. I think Rock was the only reason that that was the main event instead of Edge/Del Rio
|
|
|
|
Post by Rule 30 on Mar 3, 2012 7:41:51 GMT -5
Undertaker and Batista main eventing Wrestlemania 23 wouldn't have been bad, but I enjoyed the WWE Title match as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by ToastMaster General on Mar 3, 2012 9:10:15 GMT -5
WM 23 totally should've been Taker-Batista ending the show, Taker won the Royal Rumble and the match was totally bad-ass. The show wouldn't have ended on a sour note, that's for sure.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 15:34:14 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2012 10:03:25 GMT -5
yes Batista vs Taker should have ended WM23 no two ways about it.one of Batistas best WWE matches too.HBK not winning against Cena(who the crowd had loathed for 2 years)was a collossal anti climax and the crowd hated that outcome.it was just Vinnie forcing Cena on us again.
also HHH vs Orton should NEVER have followed UT vs HBK.booking sense please.the world and its mother knew UT vs HBK was gonna be a scorcher.
plus when HHH turned up for the ME his desire for revenge seemed to have evaporated alongside Ortons heel mannerisms.didnt help of course that when Orton attacked Steph the crowd cheered wildly and then he was beaten up by Shane.oops sorry the entire Legacy faction was beaten up by shane.
Jesus wept.
|
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Mar 3, 2012 10:18:42 GMT -5
Wrestlemania 8 - Should have been Flair vs. Savage Wrestlemania 11 - Should have been Michaels vs. Diesel Wrestlemania 18 - Should have been Hogan vs. Rock Those are honestly the very first 3 that popped into my head. The first two being the biggest fouls of the lot imo. The only other Mania I have a problem with the main event is 25, but that's just because I know how it turned out. Had that match actually panned out, it should have been one of the better main events imo. Life being what it is, HBK/Taker blew it out of the water. That is why they got to close the show the following year. I guess the same could be said for Triple H/Jericho, at the time I would have booked that match last as well. You just didn't know the crowd was going to react the way they did. With the other two though, I would have booked those last prior to the event because that's what makes sense imo. Not to mention they were both the best matches on their cards imo. |
|
r44gz96
Main Eventer
WF 10+ Year Member
Joined on: Mar 8, 2009 10:42:07 GMT -5
Posts: 1,783
|
Post by r44gz96 on Mar 3, 2012 10:24:48 GMT -5
Wrestlemania 19 should've either had Rock/Austin or Jericho/Michaels
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Mar 3, 2012 11:47:24 GMT -5
WM8: Flair vs Savage - I know Hogan was the biggest star, but he was on his way out, and Vince had to have known that Hogan and Sid were going to stink the place up. Savage and Flair put on a solid match that should have ended the show.
WM11: HBK vs Diesel - Bam Bam and LT gave a better effort than Miz and Cena did, but HBK and Disel put on a great match that was only hindered by the botched power bomb at the end of the match.
WM18: Rock vs Hogan - This was the dream match everyone wanted to see, and this was the most hyped match on the card. Why it didn't go on last is beyond me. The fans were going nuts and they put on a far better match than expected. Steph probably wanted her and her BF at the time HHH to end the show, but that match was just average for a HHH and Jericho fight, and the fans couldn't give two shits about it after the Hogan/Rock bout.
WM22: Rey vs Angle vs Orton - Rey won the Rumble, so her should have gone on last. This match was good during the time it got, but it was criminally too short. This should have been given more time and Rey winning the title to end the show would have been a better send off than Cena retaining his title in his average match w/ HHH, thought the crowd was great during their match.
WM23: Taker vs Batista - Taker won the Rumblme, and like Rey, should have gone on last. Instead, him and Batista went on 3rd that night. It was match of the night IMO and Batista gave most fans the feeling that he seriously could have broken the streak. Cena vs HBK was okay, but their match a few weeks later on Raw surpassed it in every way.
WM25: Taker vs HBK - Just like WM18, this was the most hyped match on the card, yet it wasn't last. HHH and Orton put on a crap fest at the end of the show while Taker and HBK put on a classic, though it is overrated IMO.
|
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 15:34:14 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2012 11:52:31 GMT -5
I remember when winning the Royal Rumble meant so much more than it does now.
When you won, you got a title shot at the MAIN EVENT of Wrestlemania.
Last year...Del Rio was in the opening match.
Nice.
Anyway, I agree about Wrestlemania 22. It totally should have been Rey vs. Angle vs. Orton. Forgot about that one.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rule 30 on Mar 3, 2012 12:00:04 GMT -5
With Wrestlemania 25, I still think if they gave Orton and Triple a stip they needed, they would've had a perfectly fine main event. A plain singles match between the two was just a bad idea.
|
|
|
|
Post by punksnotdead on Mar 3, 2012 12:42:22 GMT -5
With Wrestlemania 25, I still think if they gave Orton and Triple a stip they needed, they would've had a perfectly fine main event. A plain singles match between the two was just a bad idea. Agreed, I personally believe it was one of the best WM builds in recent memory and they need something more than just a basic singles match. Last man standing, something. I don't agree with the WM22 thing. I get where you guys are coming from about the Royal Rumble winner, but Cena vs Triple H was so much more important than that match, and it was a way better match as well imo. The Royal Rumble rule just hasn't held true for awhile now and it was no different on that night. Do I wish winning the Rumble meant more in 2012? Yeah, but modern era WWE isn't built the same way it was prior to the brand split. I think had Rey vs Angle vs Orton closed that show, more people would say it shouldn't have ended the show. Especially, since Triple H vs Cena and Edge vs Foley were so much better than that triple threat. |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 15:34:14 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2012 13:24:18 GMT -5
I actually really enjoyed the triple threat match from Wrestlemania 22.
It was rushed...but I liked it.
Much more than Cena vs. H.
|
|
Daniel F'n Bryan
Main Eventer
Joined on: Oct 24, 2011 0:33:48 GMT -5
Posts: 2,929
|
Post by Daniel F'n Bryan on Mar 3, 2012 13:32:05 GMT -5
22 should not have been Angle/Orton/Mysterio. That match didnt have the star power that Cena/HHH had IMO. Just listen to the crowd during Cena/HHH and then listen to the crowd during the triple threat. The crowd barely reacted for that match.
And regaurding 23 it could have been either match IMO. I enjoyed Cena/HBK alittle more for some reason so im perfectly fine with it going on last. And IMO it's one of the best examples of Cena being A TON better in the ring then anyone gives him credit for.
|
|
|
|
Post by ToastMaster General on Mar 3, 2012 16:51:08 GMT -5
22 should not have been Angle/Orton/Mysterio. That match didnt have the star power that Cena/HHH had IMO. Just listen to the crowd during Cena/HHH and then listen to the crowd during the triple threat. The crowd barely reacted for that match. And regaurding 23 it could have been either match IMO. I enjoyed Cena/HBK alittle more for some reason so im perfectly fine with it going on last. And IMO it's one of the best examples of Cena being A TON better in the ring then anyone gives him credit for. This was around the time that Cena was actually turning heads with his ring work (something that should've started back in '05, but whatever), but still got crapon because he wasn't what everyone wanted. Either way, Taker-Batista should've went on last, because that night people wanted to see HBK win and he didn't, the crowd and the fans at home would've been happier with Taker holding up the World title as the lasting image from the show. With that being said, Cena-HBK is still the better match and would've been fine as the Main Event had HBK won. |
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Mar 4, 2012 11:04:08 GMT -5
22 should not have been Angle/Orton/Mysterio. That match didnt have the star power that Cena/HHH had IMO. Just listen to the crowd during Cena/HHH and then listen to the crowd during the triple threat. The crowd barely reacted for that match. And regaurding 23 it could have been either match IMO. I enjoyed Cena/HBK alittle more for some reason so im perfectly fine with it going on last. And IMO it's one of the best examples of Cena being A TON better in the ring then anyone gives him credit for. The crowd reacted more for the HHH/Cena match because it got way more time and it was during a time that the fans absolutly despised Cena because of his crappy in-ring work and lame character w/ his "Superman" gimmick. The triple threat match was rushed but entertaining for what it was. Had it been given more time I think it would be rememberd more. W/ Cena/HHH, I don't think the fans were as into the match, but more into the idea that they'd cheer for anyone to end Cena's run. W/ WM23, I disagree that it is one of the best examples of Cena being underrated. I believe that it is one of the best examples that shows that HBK can carry almost anyone. I do believe that Cena is crap in the ring, but fans take it a tad far. Cena just seems to work well w/ some more than others, and this was more of an example of HBK creating a great match than Cena showing how underrated he is. |
|
|
|
Post by mikey1974 on Mar 4, 2012 11:05:45 GMT -5
With Wrestlemania 25, I still think if they gave Orton and Triple a stip they needed, they would've had a perfectly fine main event. A plain singles match between the two was just a bad idea. honestly,with all the bad blood between them previously,and the angle of Orton targeting HHH's family and such, it should've been Hell in a Cell.... |
|
Deleted
Joined on: Nov 18, 2024 15:34:14 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2012 16:06:02 GMT -5
WM23 showed me two things.
1)HBK could carry anyone in a match
2)Cena will never learn how to sell no matter what.HBk blew up on him afterwards for no selling all the work he did on his leg.Johnny no sell really did his job here.
also on the subject of HHH vs Jericho at WM18.....this would have been perfectly suitable to go on last if Jericho had been presented as any type of threat to HHH.similar to WM25,the feud going into WM18 wasnt about the title......it was HHH vs Steph.Jericho was an observer on the sidelines to this.....why the hell would anyone have cared?
I guarantee if it had been Austin vs Jericho(the way it SHOULD have been) with the proper build,Toronto would have cared
|
|
|
|
Post by wyleecyotee on Mar 4, 2012 18:15:23 GMT -5
11 definitely.
Others I would just change so the Royal Rumble winner was in the main event (22 with a longer match, 23 and 27). These though worked out fine for me, the other main events in there place where as good if not better.
26 was iconic with HBKs last match so that would stay the same and I'm unsure about 8 as the Royal Rumble wasnt for the main event of Mania.
Overall I think 11 would be the only one I think really needed changing.
|
|
|
|
Post by cordless2016 on Mar 4, 2012 20:02:38 GMT -5
A bit off topic but when Austin won the 1997 Royal Rumble, why didn't he get a title shot at WM? I know the origional title match was going to be Bret vs Shawn, and Austin was still going to be excluded. After HBK "hurt" his knee, Bret won the title, only to drop it to Sid the next night. Austin and Bret had the greatest WM match ever IMO, but it would have been even better had it been for the title. Anyone know why Austin never got a title shot at the event, or why Bret dropped it to Sid instead of holding onto it for his Austin match at WM?
|
|
