Triple H Main Event Push

[Brad]

After watching The Legacy Of Stone Cold Steve Austin again, the part where he talks about his year off for surgery got me to thinking...

If Owen had never hurt Austin, if it hadn't ultimately put him on the shelf for a year, if it hadn't cut his career short, would HHH had as big of a role in the main event scene?

I am not so sure. I mean, don't get me wrong, from 2000-2002 Trips was my favorite but he was never a guy who put butts in seats in my opinion.

He's great in the ring, an awesome heel, the McMahon/Helmsley Era was great stuff but I don't ever think he was THE draw.

Guys like Hogan, Austin, Rock, Flair they were the guys of their time. Some guys are more like supporting cast and as much as I like Trips, I think ultimately that's what he was.

[drifter]

I think if Austin hadn't had the neck problems, Triple H would have still gotten to the main event, but I don't think we would have seen nearly the kind of dominance he had once he got the main event. And the interesting to think about too with Austin, had he not injured his neck, would he still be competing today?

[Deleted]

Triple H gets way more credit than he deserves, IMO. He has average ring skills, average mic skills and hasn't really cemented any kind of legacy in all the years he was on top as champ.

Anyway, I didn't mind the 2000-2001 Triple H because his character was still fresh. However, his 2003 run was total garbage and he basically went over everybody in the company even though he was bloated and hurt most of the year.

[drifter]

Apr 18, 2012 22:42:23 GMT -5 @bashcrashwiley said:

Triple H gets way more credit than he deserves, IMO. He has average ring skills, average mic skills and hasn't really cemented any kind of legacy in all the years he was on top as champ.

Anyway, I didn't mind the 2000-2001 Triple H because his character was still fresh. However, his 2003 run was total garbage and he basically went over everybody in the company even though he was bloated and hurt most of the year.

Ah the period in time, that was dubbed by someone from an old board I used to go to, as the "Reign of Terror"

And the old joke I always loved when Triple H was getting pushed way to much:
Hulk Hogan made Vince McMahon a millionaire, Stone Cold made him a billionaire, and Triple H made him a millionaire again.

[Deleted]

Agreed with above.

Hogan had "it". Bret and Shawn had "it". Rock and Austin had "it".

Triple H didn't.

[cordless2016]

And the old joke I always loved when Triple H was getting pushed way to much:
Hulk Hogan made Vince McMahon a millionaire, Stone Cold made him a billionaire, and Triple H made him a millionaire again.

lol I remember hearing something like this back in the day. From 1997-2001, I loved the guy, especially his heel stuff. But from 2002-present, the guy has sucked big time. His in-ring work has never been the same since his first quad injury, and his marriage allowed him to be pushed down our throats every single week w/ long reign's of terror (2002-2005), and terrible 20+ minutes promos each week. The guy was a great heel in his prime, but IMO not anywhere near the top 10 of all time. The guy was never as big a star, nore as big a draw, like Samartino, Hogan, Warrior, Macho, Andre, Flair, Sting, Hart, HBK, Taker, Austin, Rock, and Cena were/are.

Anyway, I feel that HHH would have still been as big as he was back then. Taker was hurt and stale at the time, and the WWF was in need of a new top heel. HHH filled that role well because nobody else was even close to his heel spot.

[drifter]

Yeah, really, once the World Title was re-introduced, he got out of control. I mean from the day Bischoff handed the belt to him in 2002 up until 2005 when Batista won it, whenever Triple H didn't have the belt, the champion never came off like the top guy. They still acted as if Triple H was Raw's number one. If the champion wasn't feuding with him, they were almost an after thought.

I still say he screwed up Orton's rise. While I believe Orton still wasn't ready to win the World Title when he did, the way he got booked afterwards hurt him big time. Made him winning look like a fluke, and hurt the credibility of Benoit's reign, since he lost the belt to a paper champion. Just seems to me Orton was basically a transition champion so people would complain that Benoit lost the belt back to Triple H.

[Deleted]

I'm sure most of the members discussing this in this topic were young children either during the end of 1999 or during the 2000-2003 period. So I'm not expecting any of you to have the knowledge about this era. But I've witnessed it all and was a teenager at the time during these time periods. To say Triple H never sold out arenas or brought the fan base in is just absolutely absurd. During his rise to the Main-event not only did his D-generation X faction bring the fan base in.

Once he turned heel and began coming into the character we all know today. He was selling out arenas without Austin or The Rock's help. People came to see Triple H, because they simply wanted to see who was going to knock him off his rise to becoming "The Game" and it did not happen. The McMahon/HHH era was one of the highest rated set of broadcasts and pay per views in wrestling history. "The wedding" episode were it all started, was reported one of the highest rated episodes of all time. And guess what? It wasn't Test or Stephanie who drew that rating. I don't even need to discuss his Madison Square Garden return, the video speaks for itself.

Triple H is beyond average, you need to do your wrestling research and no I'm not talking WWE's DVD's. Triple H is simply the best the business ever had period. He is one of the best in ring workers and has more than excellent microphone and story telling ability's. I've heard the argument before about Austin being better than Triple H. It's simply because Austin was a face for most of his career and many remember him for being outrageous. However he was terrible in the ring and without Triple H and Shawn Michaels he would of never been in the spot he was in. Not to mention Steve Austin had terrible microphone skills, if you look back over it, it was nothing more than some hell yeah's and profanity. Triple H could bring you in and make you believe he truly was going to do what he said he was going to in the ring. Which made his feuds amazing no matter who he worked with. This man even put over the Brooklyn Brawler in a clean match and he was cheered out of the building because Triple H lost to him. No one else in the business could of done that EVER!

Now on to Randy Orton's first run. He was green and wasn't ready, Triple H was able to save the market in the WWE because Randy Orton was loosing the interest at the time. The reason Triple H took back the championship so soon was because of loss of ratings and viewers. Not to mention, Batista was getting ready for his singles push and there was no way in hell it was going to be two up and comers going for a World Championship with both of them being that green. There had to be a ring general, and Triple H was that man. Sorry to hurt everyone's feelings but you can have a biased fan opinion but when you sit down to discuss business. Don't even remotely bad mouth Triple H because he made the WWE what is today.

Oh and by the way, Triple H is bigger and better than Ric Flair ever was in any period of his career. Ric Flair is known due to over exposure that is the only reason non fans know who he is.

[Deleted]

I think he would have still gotten to the main event and everyone saying Triple H never "had it" is insane. Did you not watch the product all through the Attitude Era? The fans hated Triple H and would pay good money to see him get his ass kicked and then when he retained, they hated him even more but still payed their hard earned money to see him hopefully lose the title. Also, if you're implying that Triple H wasn't as over and couldn't draw a crowd, go watch the January 7th 2002 episode of Raw and then tell me the guy isn't over. I don't know why but Triple H gets a lot of hate from the internet and it's always that excuse about how he married Stephanie....and I for one loved the "Reign of Terror". None of the guys he faced after regaining the title needed it or weren't going to do anything except flop with the title.

[cordless2016]

I'm sure most of the members discussing this in this topic were young children either during the end of 1999 or during the 2000-2003 period. So I'm not expecting any of you to have the knowledge about this era.

Yeah, no. I was a teenager as well during this period so I know about this era. And I don't see what age has to do about having knowledge about the era. Even if you were a kid you still watched it when it happened and can go back today and analyze it.

He was selling out arenas without Austin or The Rock's help. People came to see Triple H, because they simply wanted to see who was going to knock him off his rise to becoming "The Game" and it did not happen.

Again, no. He was selling out arenas because he was feuding w/ Austin in 1999, and then The Rock in 2000. Those are two of the biggest stars of all time. W/out those guys and Foley feuding w/ HHH, his early main event days would have been as boring and bland as his days on top of Raw from 2002-2005.

I've heard the argument before about Austin being better than Triple H. It's simply because Austin was a face for most of his career and many remember him for being outrageous. However he was terrible in the ring and without Triple H and Shawn Michaels he would of never been in the spot he was in. Not to mention Steve Austin had terrible microphone skills, if you look back over it, it was nothing more than some hell yeah's and profanity. Triple H could bring you in and make you believe he truly was going to do what he said he was going to in the ring.

Again I'm going to have to disagree. W/out Bret Hart there would be no Stone Cold. Bret was the one who really brought the best out of Austin and helped launch him to becoming the biggest draw ever. Hell, Austin was already over big before he even began feuding w/ HBK and HHH in 1997. And he wasn't bad in the ring. Watch his Japan and WCW stuff. He was actually considered a technical wrestler at one point. It's once he got on top that he switch to a more brawler style because it fit his character better. Not to say HHH was bad in the ring because he was great from 1999-2001, but Austin was good as well. As for mic skill, Austin had short but memorable promos. HHH basically got boring quick when every one of his 20+ minute promos said the same exact thing week after week.

Now on to Randy Orton's first run. He was green and wasn't ready, Triple H was able to save the market in the WWE because Randy Orton was loosing the interest at the time. The reason Triple H took back the championship so soon was because of loss of ratings and viewers. Not to mention, Batista was getting ready for his singles push and there was no way in hell it was going to be two up and comers going for a World Championship with both of them being that green. There had to be a ring general, and Triple H was that man. Sorry to hurt everyone's feelings but you can have a biased fan opinion but when you sit down to discuss business. Don't even remotely bad mouth Triple H because he made the WWE what is today.

Wow, and you say we need to learn our history...Orton was the most over heel in the company in early 2004. Far more over than the stale HHH by SummerSlam. I'll agree that he was green and wasn't ready for the title, but he deserved it more than HHH at the time and wrestling fans all over were excited to see a new heel on top of Raw...until he was turned face for no exact reason the very next night. Ratings were sinking because he was turned face. Not because he failed as a champ, but because the writing team and HHH's wife deemed Orton a failed face.

1) He had no face qualities and people were excited for a new heel champ on Raw. Turning him face made no sense what so ever. The only logical excuse for this is that HHH didn't want to play the #2 heel to a younger and more over star.

2) When they turned him face, they did it in the worst possible way ever. They simply had HHH and Evolution beat him up. So now they expected the WWE fans to get behind a lame face who was beat up by his buddies and then was beaten in the ring by all three of them. Again, why they booked him like this we'll never know for sure, but HHH's wife was aprt of the writing team...

3) The orgional plans were for Orton and HHH to face off at WM21. Batista's singles run wasn't even in anyones mind yet because he was simply a bodyguard at the time Orton won the title. Batista's push literally happened right after Survivor Series, after Orton had been jobbed out to evey member of Evolution.

And you say we need to do our research... Triple H didn't save Raw by taking the title off of Orton. He kept it bland because over the 2 years up to that point, he literally killed off all other believable contanders for the title, besides his buddy HBK, and Raw was more stale than ever w/ HHH dominating Orton week after week.

[Deleted]

Apr 18, 2012 23:40:45 GMT -5 @youknowhoiam said:

!

Sorry to hurt everyone's feelings but you can have a biased fan opinion but when you sit down to discuss business. Don't even remotely bad mouth Triple H because he made the WWE what is today.

.

point of order 1#.under no circumstances tell people what to say in here-thats not how it works with me.and starting your post by condecsending on everyones age was not the way to go.I was 20 in 2000 and a full time watcher-does that qualify me to participate in this discussion?

ok then.....now on to my own thoughts on your post.

1)to say HHH is better than Flair at any point in his career is absolutely absurd IMO.you are entitled to your opinion but I doubt you will get many to back you on that one.Flair was one hell of a competitor to say he was never as good as HHH is absolute insanity IMO.plus he was very effective at getting people over.......

2)now this is where your cred takes a serious knock.......Austin had terrible mic skills???utter nonsense. and terrible in the ring?what product were you watching?if you would like to see terrible in the ring check out HHH 2002-2005 when he ISNT wrestling HBK.

3)Austin wouldnt have been where he was without HHH and HBK?I think Vinne Mac and Bret Hart were the ones that made Stone Cold.he was over as hell before he even got near DX which was post RR98......cmon now.

4)HHH was struggling at the top until his feud with Foley and if Rock hadnt jobbed for him so many times in 99/00?who knows where he would be.its well know he was given the win at WM16 to cement his status as top Heel.now he was an incredible worker at this point.but post quad tear?no way.slow,overmuscled and a much reduced cardio which was obvious to all.

5)if HHH did make WWE what it is today that is certainly nothing for a HHH supporter to shout about.Vince has shown a staggering ineptitude for creating stars in recent years.this years WM card shows that in spades....

BTW I foudn HHH VERY entertaining from 99-01 .I also liked him in 2002 excpet when he buried the absolute crap out of Jericho.

and to the OP this is a good topic.and to answer your question HHH would still have got the push IMHO.Vinnie had him turn on the super popular DX Army at WM15 to get his heel turn off to a flying start....and man did he get GREAT heat for turning on DX.what an underrated heel turn
and his victories over Rock in the summer cemented his status as the new 1# heel-something he richly deserved IMO.

I feel the only thing Austins injury changed was HHHs challengers.

[jammer311]

I always thought that Triple H's 'reign of terror' in 2003 was to build up to Goldberg beating him for the title?? Though, I suppose if that was the case, Goldberg should have beaten Triple H at SummerSlam that year in the elimination chamber.

[Brad]

I said from the start of this thread. I was and am a Triple H fan. But for NIN to say that he made the business what it is today is absolutely ridiculous.

I was not a young kid during this time, I was a teenager. I remember the era very well. Yes, IMO he was a great, great heel. And I disagree with whoever said he was mediocre in the ring. The man can tell one heck of a story and he's just great.

Even going back to 09 with his match with Cena on Raw that was billed as possibly Cena's "last match on Raw" that was a great match, due to Triple H.

But, to say he was a huge draw is ignorant. He was a part of feuds that were a huge draw, that's all there is to it. He himself will never been in the same light as THE draws (Austin, Rock, Hogan, Cena etc)

[Deleted]

Apr 19, 2012 11:51:42 GMT -5 @jammer311 said:

I always thought that Triple H's 'reign of terror' in 2003 was to build up to Goldberg beating him for the title?? Though, I suppose if that was the case, Goldberg should have beaten Triple H at SummerSlam that year in the elimination chamber.

Ive heard that theory too man but i dont think theres anything to it.and yeah if it was for Goldberg to beat him it would have happened at the EC when yknow HHH was injured and couldnt do much......that was defo the night to do it.

[wyleecyotee]

I like Triple H, sure he "burried" a few people but he had the JBL factor of wanting to watch every week in hope this is the week he loses the title and gets his butt whooped. He has had some great matches, his mic work is quite good and most of all he was believable as a heel. When he went one on one with the Rock and Austin you believed he could win, most matches you watched then you believed either man could win. Compare that to the John Cena era where 80% of the time all you see is a Cena win.

The commentary helped him a lot too, King was gold selling Triple H the best ever and really sucking up to him in a good heel commentator way and JR did just as good a job as making you believe Triple H could beat anyone clean if he wanted to but he just liked to cheat.

Now comments like Triple H is better than Flair are not wrong but not right for me, I honestly prefer to watch a Triple H match over a Flair match but I grew up on Triple H and Rock and people of that era onwards so didnt see Flair in his "prime." Really it all comes down to taste, I'm not a massive fan of Flair but a lot of people are and I cant argue with their opinions.

[Deleted]

I completely disagree with the points you made about Randy Orton Cord. I understand he was over during his feud with Mick Foley but at no point was he even remotely over during his rise to become the youngest champion.

Steve Austin's injury had nothing to do with Triple H period. Steve Austin was mediocre at best in WCW. He will always be a better tag team competitor in my eyes. Once Austin won the championship in a disastrous Wrestle Mania 14 match with an injured Shawn Michaels. He was completely over with the fan base and his feud with Vince McMahon only pushed him further into it. Bret Hart only helped Steve Austin become a soiled main event contender. Steve Austin was no technical wrestler, I understand he used certain holds but at no point was he anywhere near someone like Kurt Angle ability's. Who is the best technical wrestler in the history of the business. Steve Austin was a brawler in the ring and nothing more. He used a ruthless punching style with several signature moves he used every match. Similar to the John Cena and Hulk Hogan characters.

As far as Bradh84, I solely believe you are Steve Austin fan and nothing I can say even with the facts can change your opinion on the matter. Therefore I won't get into any further discussion with you. The other points you brought up Cord, are typical fan base opinions and not backed by any real information. Which is the reason I said I'm not sure if any of you actually remember this era. Teenager or not, if you were a causal fan during the time you weren't paying enough attention to the business to see what Triple H contributed. Which is understandable and I hope none of you take it personal. I'm just discussing some of my opinion and the actual facts of the WWF product. Do not take it personally.

Now for Ric Flair, I've watched nearly ever big match he had. I've watched him for well over a decade. But at no point was he a better in ring competitor than Triple H. Was he more flamboyant and flashy? Yes. Was he an amazing story teller? Yes. Was he a good interviewer? Yes. But in the ring he cannot touch Triple H's skills. However he was way over exposed in the media in early NWA/WCW years and he was not that great once he returned in the WWF. Which I understand why due to his age and personal problems. But if those two could wrestle in their prime Triple H would come out the better man any night.

[Deleted]

Apr 19, 2012 1:50:56 GMT -5 @whathefreak said:

I think he would have still gotten to the main event and everyone saying Triple H never "had it" is insane. Did you not watch the product all through the Attitude Era? The fans hated Triple H and would pay good money to see him get his ass kicked and then when he retained, they hated him even more but still payed their hard earned money to see him hopefully lose the title. Also, if you're implying that Triple H wasn't as over and couldn't draw a crowd, go watch the January 7th 2002 episode of Raw and then tell me the guy isn't over. I don't know why but Triple H gets a lot of hate from the internet and it's always that excuse about how he married Stephanie....and I for one loved the "Reign of Terror". None of the guys he faced after regaining the title needed it or weren't going to do anything except flop with the title.

Thank You, I completely agree.

[Deleted]

Apr 19, 2012 17:13:59 GMT -5 @youknowhoiam said:

a

As far as Bradh84, I solely believe you are Steve Austin fan and nothing I can say even with the facts can change your opinion on the matter. Therefore I won't get into any further discussion with you. The other points you brought up Cord, are typical fan base opinions and not backed by any real information. Which is the reason I said I'm not sure if any of you actually remember this era. Teenager or not, if you were a causal fan during the time you weren't paying enough attention to the business to see what Triple H contributed. Which is understandable and I hope none of you take it personal. I'm just discussing some of my opinion and the actual facts of the WWF product. Do not take it personally.

.

for people not to take it personally the tone of your posts will have to change.saying "dont take it personally" wont change that.plenty of people differ in their opinion in here and do it without putting others down.

I remember this era verbatim and I know exactly what HHH contributed.I agree with you that he was very important but I will continue to completely disagree on your opinions about Austin.which I firmy believe to be incorrect.especially about the fact that he was a better tag wrestler.

you say Brad wont hear any bad about Austin-you are doing the exact same thing with HHH.

[Deleted]

Apr 19, 2012 1:50:56 GMT -5 @whathefreak said:

I think he would have still gotten to the main event and everyone saying Triple H never "had it" is insane. Did you not watch the product all through the Attitude Era? The fans hated Triple H and would pay good money to see him get his ass kicked and then when he retained, they hated him even more but still payed their hard earned money to see him hopefully lose the title. Also, if you're implying that Triple H wasn't as over and couldn't draw a crowd, go watch the January 7th 2002 episode of Raw and then tell me the guy isn't over. I don't know why but Triple H gets a lot of hate from the internet and it's always that excuse about how he married Stephanie....and I for one loved the "Reign of Terror". None of the guys he faced after regaining the title needed it or weren't going to do anything except flop with the title.

I disagree.I think Booker T could have been great on top.

I do agree with you with you on the HHH during the Attitude Era.he was doing very well on top especially during and after the Foley feud.

and about MSG reactions......Steiner and Cena both had enormous reactions there too on their returns.its a great arena to return in.

[Brad]

@nin, I am a Stone Cold fan but I'm also a Triple H fan, an HBK fan, Bret Hart fan, Jerry Lawler fan....... see where I'm going with this? I'm just a fan of wrestling in general, so saying I'm an Austin fan is a moot point.

I'm not saying that Triple H didn't deserve his push. I've stated repeatedly that I am a fan of his. I just have my doubts that he would have been as big as he was, if Austin hadn't been out with an injury.

Who someone is a fan of doesn't factor into who the bigger draw was and I think we can all agree, Austin was a bigger draw.