Bret Hart calls out Triple H, says HHH vs Taker at Mania 28 was mediocre....

[Mitch H. Winnfield]

Eh, I'd have to disagree with Bret also.

I can understand someone being irritated by Shawn's hysterical antics (the flailing, the superkick, the crying), but I still consider HHH VS Taker to be one of the, if not the best match on the entire card at Wrestlemania 28, and an easy MOTY contender. The drama, the suspense, the action, and the conflict within Shawn. The crowd was sucked into everything from all three men. Two well known and respected veterans beat the shit out of each other, and when the dust settled, they embraced at the end as a sign of respect and admiration. And the crowd rewarded them with a collective applause. That's storytelling.

The fact that both men are well into their forties, and they can STILL tear the house down at Wrestlemania is an impressive feat. And more importantly, it's an impressive feat that deserves admiration. Especially when you have this match on the same card with Rock VS Cena.

EDIT: whoops forgot about the Triple H being overrated part.

HHH had a great heel run against Austin, Rock, Jericho, and Foley years ago, but I think a lot of people have a problem with his Flair-esque run as a main event heel and WHC in pre and post Evolution. Anybody who watches out of character stuff with Paul Levesque knows the man worships the ground Ric Flair walks on, and I honestly believe Triple H is/was obsessed with being a PERFECT Flair imitation.

That said, Triple H is still capable of putting on great matches well past his prime. And you're full of shit if you trash his lengthy WWE Championship reign from '08.

[Pedigree1]

I normally agree with Bret Hart on well everything but i cant agree with him on this one. HHH is a great wrestler IMO one of the best of all time. Yes his moveset has never changed but it really hasnt needed too. I think regardless Trips would have been great without marrying the bosses daughter. Or i could be blind seeing as how Trips is my favorite wrestler of all timez.

His match against Taker was nothing short of well breathtaking. That match last year was just awe-inspiring. Those men beat the hell out of each other and just kept asking for more from one another. As far as saying HHH is not great i disagree. He has had great matches and is a great wrestler and will go down as such. I dont wanna go as far as to say its sour grapes on Brets part i think he was just speaking his mind. But what he said was wrong

[BlackOut10]

I agree with you a little on this. The part about being predictable and not being great because of it.. Hogan was probably the most predictable wrestler in the history of wrestling along with Cena.. But at the same time Hogan makes Cena look like he should be bagging groceries somewhere.. I still agree with Bret though. Triple h is good but that's it. His match with michaels at Summerslam was good ,but great hell no. Great matches are Austin vs Hitman WM13.... The Rock vs Hollywood hulk hogan... The Undertaker vs mankind.. Matches that leave a mark on the sport.. Triple h to date has non of that.. Not even close. he does have a bunch of good matches and good tv gimmick but nothing more.. And it's fine.. Lets not get caught in these taker wrestlemania matches they were ok at best really.. They just look great because triple H and taker are the last remaining wrestlers from generations ago... And the other matches on the wrestlemania card are always terrible. I mean come on. The title hasn't meant anything since 2000. And trying to get me to watch and Orton Cena Ziegler or even miz match is completely out of the question.

[sdelfin]

Everyone has their own perspective. You got one post about getting emotionally involved in the last Taker/HHH match, which is great if the match did that for you. I didn't get that from that match. I thought the pace was too plodding, even considering the circumstances of the participants. That's not what I consider effective storytelling. It didn't give me what I expected, wanted or thought the feud needed. And sledgehammers have no place in a wrestling ring in my opinion. I hated the match. I'd rate it about the same as Bret did.

People are quick to jump on Bret and call him an idiot or bitter. Not from what I can see. He's telling it how he sees it. Frankly, I agree on most points. I never had any interest in HHH either. Doesn't make me right or wrong. I never enjoyed his work for the most part. Bret's talking from the perspective of a guy who came up in Calgary in the late 70s and 80s. That Taker/HHH won't necessarily be the type of match for someone like that. That's why I hated the match.

[dukes07]

Originally Posted by AhSpicyDrop

I'm not going to debate that Bret has had some all-time great classics. He's one of my favorite wrestlers but he's my least favorite outside the ring. Again I'm a big fan of shoot interviews and Hart gets a lot of shit from "the boys" for not wanting to put people over and being "a big mark for himself". After all this entire situation between HHH/Hart stems from Hart not wanting to do what was right. He was leaving the company and didn't want to put Michaels over, regardless of the circumstances.

Triple H worked hard to get to his spot, and yeah he should have put more people over along the way, but there was a point in time where he was one of the only stars WWE had, and the people he was working with couldn't be relied on to be top dogs. Remember when he put Shelton Benjamin over? Remember what came of that? Not shit, that's right.



The first match as in Biker Taker vs. HHH at Wrestlemania 17? I haven't seen many people talk shit on that match, most people have it cataloged as one of their favorites. I thought the last two Taker/HHH matches had insane storytelling and blew the WM 17 match out of the water. Neither were as good as Taker's matches with HBK at Mania, but they were close.




It was easy for Bret to be a heel in America in 1997... His gimmick was a cheap heat magnet. It was however the best promo work in Hart's entire career, which was mostly made up of horrible face promos where he hid behind his sunglasses because he admittedly had stage fright when talking. I would have been more impressed if Bret could have managed to make the people in Canada hate him. But the fact that Bret was a heel in the US and a face in Canada made him more of a middle of the road guy.

I dunno how you figure he was the last great heel in WWE though... I would readily argue that Vince McMahon(after Hart's departure) was a much bigger heel than Bret. Triple H, The Rock, Kurt Angle... all better heels than Bret and for longer durations. Triple H was at the top of the heel pack for years.



Except Triple H was already winning titles and a bonafide main-eventer with interesting storylines before he ever stuck a ring on Stephanie's finger.



He put over Lesnar when John Cena wouldn't. Yeah, it was dumb that Punk didn't beat HHH but I would argue that Punk still got a rub for being competitive and hanging with him, and as the old argument goes a victory doesn't = being put over.

I think we pretty much agree on a lot. I don't think that Bret was as effective as a face. It was a bit generic. He was an awesome heel....My thought about Bret as the most effective heel is opinion only. Sometimes cheap heat is the best and it was really effective. The Hart Foundation was a blast to watch. I think a DX v. HF feud into 98 would have been great. Austin beating Hart for the title at WM....I liked the character because he was not the cowardly heel. Angle played that role the first few years. You pretty much knew that Trips was going to beat Angle or get screwed. Hart won cleanly. He went toe to toe with everyone like Savage did as a heel. I just loved that he was booked strong and his feud with Austin is still so awesome today....As for the Rock, his early heel run was a bit short but solid. I have not seen his 03 run yet.

For me after 98 the Vince character got played out. It never really evolved and jumped the shark numerous times.

Like I said, Trips moved up due to paying his dues. Sure he used his connections but who doesn't. But he did get the full carpet treatment starting in 99. The WWF put its muscle behind him. They did EVERYTHING possible to get him over as a heel. If you go back and watch, it took awhile too. Many fans just shrugged. But they kept at it, put hi, back with DX and Chyna. Then as the asshole heel with Stephanie and then Foley in 00. Not many guys get this type of support, proving that it can be done. Trips did a lot but got a lot of help.

As for Benjamin: I have not seen that yet. Just read about it. The cynic would say they did that to "prove" that Trips puts people over, and then they didn't. All I have heard is that the WWE did not follow up on the Shelton thing. Now, the first thing I read to get back into wrestling were the Scott Keith books and that probably clouded my opinion a bit. However, from what I have seen it is not too far from the truth.

[Da Solo]

To say HHH never had a great match is a flat out lie. He's had some memorable matches in his career, like it or not. That being said, everything else Bret said or implied is right. HHH's greatness is kinda overrated in general.

The thing about HHH is his longevity granted him one of the best senses of in-ring psychology in the business. However, that's the only real positive. He's good in the ring, but he's not a real masterpiece like the other notable names in the business. He isn't innovative like a Rey Mysterio, he doesn't have an extensive moveset like a CM Punk, he doesn't really have an eccentricity or a distinctive charisma with it like a Booker T, he isn't a master seller like HBK, I could go on here. He could carry the match along, that's it. And if you notice, this kind of ties in with what Bret is saying: HHH has had a couple classics, yes, but HHH's best matches always depend on his opponent. HBK could make a match with anyone look worth watching, Taker made a feud with Mark Henry when he was at his worst and made it work, The Rock made a feud with the Hurrican of all people worth remembering, Hogan couldn't wrestle worth a shit but hyped the crowd like crazy to get them on their feet. My point being, the best wrestlers can have a good match at any time. Look at HHH's best matches: vs. Taker, vs. HBK, vs. Shelton Benjamin, vs. The Rock, vs. Jericho; all these matches had a great competitor. HHH is incapable of carrying a match, as evidenced by some of his worst main-event matches: vs. Vladimir Kozlov, vs. Cena, vs. Scott Steiner, vs. Kevin Nash, etc. Hell, he couldn't even have a good WM main event with a prime Viper version of Orton, which is kinda sad.

HHH has always seemed like the placeholder of legends. He's never done anything where I can say "Damn, only HHH." When Austin went and flipped off Mike Tyson and brawled with him, it was like "Wow, no one else could have pulled that off." When The Rock went and put the whole city of Sacramento on blast with The 1st Rock concert, "No one else." When CM Punk had the pipebomb, "No one else." When Hardy Swantoned off the scaffolding, "No one else." Hell, even Shane McMahon with his crazy Leap of Faith elbow that makes us cringe when he misses, "No one else." HHH never had that. HHH has never done anything that WWE couldn't have plugged someone else in to do. A heel Jericho or Angle could have just as effectively done an Evolution, a brawler like Batista could have made the Orton home invasion spot look just as badass, his only purpose for being in DX was because Shawn loves him; there is nothing he has ever done that made him as a character stick out. Anyone could have been HHH with the right push.

Bret makes a lot of sense here. The only reason his argument seems flawed is because of the common knowledge that he can't stand anyone in the Kliq.

[BlackOut10]

Originally Posted by Wrestling101

Bret doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as Austin or Rock....he's not in that league.

I'm far from a HHH mark, but to say what Bret said, and epecially what you're saying, is stupidity.

Austin or The Rock... How old are you... Yes Austin and the rock are very big names no question about that, but in another league than the Hitman. That's stupidity. Bret brought one thing to the wrestling bussiness that very few if any did, and that is authenticity and prestige to the title itself which should be the backbone of the industry but isn't any more due to the high of storyline that bombed in the late 90s.. So Austin and the rock reaped the benifits of Bret harts labor, and killed the since of accomplishment for anyone who one the title after their historic feuded. Which is why the title match hasn't been the center of attention at wrestlemania since WM17... The Rock hogan 18 The Rock Austin 19 who even cares after that.

[RicSpade]

I will give Hunter this, he has come a long way from that guy in WCW, to being the whipping boy for the famous kliq incident to being the guy on top and the one to run the company. Here is the thing he has had some pretty intense matches. Cage matches with Mankind, Hell in a Cell with Jericho, the 3 stages of Hell with HBK, and WM 27 with Taker. Here is the thing... Hunter was never a high flyer or a submission specialist, and he was handed the reins by HBK for DX, but the reason he gets a bad rep is because he is a wrestling frankenstein, a cookie cut out of those who help molded him.

Evolution and the whole suit thing happened because of him and his relationship with Flair, he wanted to be like Flair.
DX was him and Shawn being themselves, but when HBK was gone HHH tried to be more like Shawn to get over.

Now in terms of his matches being mediocre I think HHH gets the same bad rep Cena gets sometimes because after a while its the same cookie cutter match the same moves or same sledgehammer spot. Triple H I think had his best matches before the 2000's, with the exception of a few HIAC matches, but I think the wrestler helps make the match, Rock, Foley, HBK, Jericho and Taker do bring the best out of HHH. HHH had a better match and told a better story with Taker at 27 than 28. and I think the reason the HIAC match may be considered mediocre is because the match the year before was so much better

[RyanCallaway]

lol, that cracked me up Kong. As to Bret's comments... Bret Hart is my favorite wrestler of all time. That being said, I think he's dead wrong when it comes to Triple H, and particularly H's match with Taker. That was a great match in my opinion and although there are some who disagree - I know I'm not in the minority. I believe H has done more than enough to be considered a Great, even if I was less than pleased with his 02-03 run.

[BlackOut10]

The Rock vs Triple H backlash... is that the one one when austin came back
The Rock vs Triple H iron man match was good but only good...
Triple H vs chris Jericho anything not worth remembering
Wrestlemania 27 28 WTF was the that finisher match for the streak
only Triple H vs foley match worth anything was summerslam 97 that was real good...

Stop naming main events from yesturyear that no one cares about.. None of those matches are industry changing... hes a good wrestler nothing wrong with being a good wrestler.. Jeff jarret, kevin nash, rick rude, lol even goldust were good wrestlers..
they worked well but never really left a lasting mark on the industry.