HBK needed one more title reign

[LongLiveTheStreak]

I was inspired to post this thread by the "Best Title Reign" thread series.

Shawn Michaels is a future WWE Hall of Famer and unquestionably one of the greatest in-ring performers of all time. But the man was limited to only four title reigns. I believe he deserved better than that because of all of his hard work and dedication over the years in both stages of his career, before and after the 4-year hiatus. And for the way HBK turned his life around during his break from wrestling. Between the time he returned to WWE in 2002 and his retirement at Wrestlemania 26, Michaels definitly deserved more than just his one-month WHC title reign after winning the first ever Elimination Chamber.

I personally would have had Shawn Michaels beat Chris Jericho for the World Heavyweight Championship at No Mercy `08 in the ladder match. For everything that Jericho did to Shawn and his wife, I thought it would have made a much better storyline to have HBK get even by taking the belt. Even if it was to be for only a month, `til the next PPV and have Jericho win it back.

Lets look at the world championship reigns of some future or current Hall of Famers:

Ric Flair- 16
Triple H- 13
Edge, John Cena- 9
Undertaker, The Rock- 7
Stone Cold, Randy Orton, Hulk Hogan- 6
Bret Hart, Batista, Chris Jericho- 5 (Chris isnt a 6-time champ, is he?)
Shawn Michaels- 4
CM Punk- 3
Kane, Rey Mysterio, Randy Savage, etc.....2 titles each

Don't you think HBK is a little to far toward the bottom of that list for how great he was at everything he did in wrestling? If you agree with me and wanted HBK to have one more title reign before he retired, where would given it to him? Over Jericho? Over Orton? Maybe another win over HHH in their great feud? OF course some might think HBK was fine with 4 world titles, so let your voices be heard too.

Oh yeah, moderators if this should be in the Old School Forum, put it there please.

 

[SpoodBeest]

I am a huge fan of Shawn Michaels, in fact he probably ranks as my favorite wrestler of all time and I will give you different perspectives for this topic so firstly I will start off with why HBK didn't really need any more title reigns. Michaels was always a great in ring performer. He went out there each and every night to wow the crowd and attempt to steal the show, which was usually always a successful one. Michaels got himself so over that he practically didn't need any belts. Shawn felt this way as well and decided to have a career where he would help build up younger guys but when he was needed in the main event he would go. When somebody flat out say he doesn't need to be the champion anymore and basically is around to put guys over, you have to admire that.

Now from the perspective of the huge HBK fan that I am. I would have loved to see him get one last title run in the sun. The perfect opportunity I thought would have been having him go over Cena at WrestleMania 23 but Michaels not needing the championship was just there to put on a great match in the main event. The two did tear the house down that night and capped off the show in a great way. Even Michaels would have only held the belt for three weeks meaning one pay-per-view to the other I would have ate up every second of it. However since he lost the belt in 2002 he has never once said he's needed and instead opted yo help build for the future which is something that was so admirable about the last run of Shawn Michaels' career.

 

[1_2_3 Kid]

Good thread ..

But I gotta go ahead and say I'm one of those who think he was fine with it.

HBK had a hell of a carrear, you know it and I do. He has done innovative and trendsetting things that could never be forgotten even if you tried. He will always be tried to WWE by the heart. And he knows it as well. He has done a lot for the buisness and yes, I would have LIKED to see it but I don't think it mattered that much to Shawn. I gotta say, after him getting saved , IMHO , he was just happy to be back and was loving every minute. He had his last run as champ. In the EC. Member he was so passionate and thankfull that it looked like his goodbye run. And its all good. HBK is HBK and the last 2 matches really define that great carrear. No titles needed. Just 2 guys telling a story between those ropes. HBK always kept me entertained , ALWAYS. No matter what he did, if he was champ. It didn't matter, HBK was what all the kids in school wanted to be the heartbreaker and the boy toy. I used that line soo much so thanxx HBK!

But massive amounts of titles can and will do nothing to ever replace Shawn or take his place away in the HOF. He is and will always be "The Showstoppa" and that's that.

 

[Megatron]

Honestly, a lot of those title reigns that each of those guys have have been ****ed out (as in, a few reigns where they didn't break 60 days) so their numbers are gonna be inflated. The amount of reigns shouldn't matter, just the quality of those reigns. Randy Savage was pretty much the number 2 guy throughout the 80's-mid 90's, yet he only had 2 WWE reigns. Yet, many people remember that reign (the year long one starting from WM 4) because of the Mega-Powers angle. A lot of people put him in the top echelon of all time even though he only had those small total of reigns. That's the same case as Shawn. He didn't have many reigns, but they were memorable.

Quality of reigns > quantity of reigns. Shawn didn't need another run. He wouldn't have benefited from one. Everyone knows he's probably a top 10 company wrestler of all time, 15 at worst.

 

[Ultra Awesome]

I don't believe that Shawn Michaels needed another title reign really. He has pulled off some really great matches over his 20+ years. Most notible matches that come to mind are against The Undertaker, Ric Flair, Triple H, Owen Hart, Bret Hart, & Razor Ramon. And I think that should satisfy anyone who is an HBK fan. Shawn Michaels has won "Best Match of the Year" for a good number of times and to me that is a far better accomplishment than recieving a belt 16 times.

Sure, the more number of championships you have, the better you look to the common person. But even still, Shawn Michaels has been "pinned" as one of the all time greats for his "actual wrestling" accomplishments. Which to me is more than enough.

True enough, I would have wanted to see HBK get at least one more title reign but thats only because I am a big fan of his. But in reality, he doesn't really need it. His credibility has already been established and he will go down in the history books as one of the best ever to walk into the squared circle.

 

[Yarrie]

Shawn out grew titles, it almost would have been a step down for him to WWE Champion, the only down side to that is see him lose so much. I mean I like John Cena as a person (from what I have heard of him, not personally ), but no way could he beat HBK, nor could Jericho, or even HHH.
Shawn Micheals is an absolute legend. In saying that everytime he lost I would be so angry and frustated. I think in the last Wrestlemania, taker should have been champ, and Shawn should have beaten the streak and taken the belt. Then never retired and lived forever.
Shawn put over a lot of guys. He is THE best performer ever. He should have only been a 2 time champ tho, once when he orginally won it, then kept it til he lost it to Austin, taken his four years to heal, and be saved, then again at the elimation chamber, and not lost it again EVER!!!!

 

[CJ The Pirate]

You need to factor a few things in to see the bigger picture here

First of all, don't forget that Shawn was out of the game for four years. Shawn actually had three title reigns in relatively quick succession. You can only imagine what would have happened after Wrestlemania XIV.

Secondly, the term World title is a very broad concept. This includes, WWE, WCW, TNA, ECW, AWA and NWA titles. So comparing Ric Flair, a man who has spent a lot of time in Jim Crockett promotions, WCW, and other companies both before and after his WWF days, to a man like Shawn Michaels who spent his entire singles career in one place is a little unfair.

I'm not dismissing what Flair has achieved but Shawn has held a reasonable amount of titles for his era.

Look at Hogan. Similar era, Two companies and only 6 titles. Randy Savage. Two companies and only 2 titles. The Undertaker may have had an advantage of both his gimmick being an unstoppable being and also Shawn's four year hiatus. That has led him to 7 titles. Sting also managed 6 titles in WCW and 1 in TNA. Not that much more than Shawn really.

If you look toward the era after Shawn, the Attitude era guys like The Rock and Steve Austin, Their respective 7 & 6 title reigns come during a time where title changes were much more frequent.
The most blatantly obvious example of this was the trade of the WWF title The Rock and Mankind had during 1998/99. The Rock won at Survivor Series, lost at Rock Bottom, Won at the Royal Rumble, Lost at Halftime heat, Won on Raw and then finally lost it to Steve Austin at Wrestlemania.

In the space of 5 months, Rock and Mankind had gone from Upper Mid Carders to 3 and 2 time champions respectively. If you consider that Diesel held the belt only once but for over a year less than five years prior to that, you can really see how times had changed in the WWF.

And now we get to the next generation. Edge, John Cena, Randy Orton and Batista.
Edge has 9 titles in 4 years. Cena has 9 in 5 years. Orton has 6 in 6 years, most of them happening in the last 2.

What about Triple H? Well, in his first year as champion he went from zero to four reigns, only stopping due to his first quadriceps tear. He then racked up a five more reigns in the next 3 years, including one reign lasting 280 days. Despite that, Triple H is clearly a special case and we know the reasons as to why.

So no, I honestly feel Shawn has done what he needed to with the time he was given. He may have had more had he not been injured and when he returned, WWE was in the process of giving new guys the rub they needed. Shawn had already solidified himself as a great in the ring and it was clear he didn't need any more. Even after injury he was better than most. By 2002, the WWE title had become a prop to elevate guys. Shawn was as high as you could get.

 

[CyDeez]

I don't think he NEEDED another world title. But I think he SHOULD have been world champion at least once more.

A lot of guys on the all time list are gonna pass him and have already passed him.

Take Edge for instance. I think he is GREAT. I take nothing away from him. He is truly one of the greats! But he could never be considered better than HBK. He has more than doubled HBK's reigns as champion.

I am not necessarily a Cena hater, though I agree with most of the negative comments based on him. I don't hate him for no reason, I dislike him for numerous reasons.

My point is Cena could never be considered better than Michaels. In no way! HBK, especially for his size, could be considered the BEST ever! And Cena will end up tripling if not quadrupling, or more, HBK's world title reigns.

Shawn Michaels legacy and legend is cemented. And the longer he is retired and the further away we get from him being an active superstar, his legend will grow. But in a way, I think it is somewhat of a tragedy he wasn't given the world title more often.

I don't think it hurts him. But, I think for his fans sake, to have been able to say HBK is a 6 or 7 time champion, or even a 10 time champion, would have been better.

Batista is ahead of him for Christ's sake!!

In the grand scheme of things, Sheamus has only been in WWE, especially on Raw for a short amount of time. He already has half as many title reigns as Shawn. No doubt he will soon be dropping The WWE Championship. He is hot right now, so I can see him grabbing the World Title at least once more over the next year. That would give him 3. He has a long time left in this business, and in WWE (Barring any injury). So he almost surely will pass Shawn on World Title reigns. I think Sheamus is a breath of fresh air, gimmick wise and just what he can do. Plus he is a very young talent and it's great to see him get a push. But, is he better than Shawn Michaels? Absolutely NOT!

Most guy's careers are based on how many title they won. That goes for all sports. Obviously it's great and by the grace of God to be a champion once, let alone multiple times.

I think he will always be like a Magic Johnson, compared to like Austin, Rock, Hogan, being The Michael Jordan. Robert Horry has more championships than Magic Johnson. Does that make Horry better? No way.

I think he is good where he is at. But if people do solely judge him on championships, I guess he would be lacking in that department, compared to a lot of other guys.

To sum things up, I say, if anything, Shawn Michaels SHOULD and DESERVED to be World Champion at least once more. It does not damage him to me in any way. But, I can't speak for everyone!

 

[mmprgreen350]

i agree with everyone on this thread he didnt need anymore title regins whatever shawn did was great is great will always be great the first ladder match with razor my personal fav match of all time he was my idol as a wrestler when i grew up and for him to be able to pass the torch and help so many younger superstars get along there way proves he didnt need more than 4 title reigns to be one of the greatest future hall of famer ever

 

[mkman613]

heres the thing....
HBK never needed the title. He was always able to make fantastic feuds and matches and performances without the title. So instead have some like cena or batista who need something like the title to raise the stakes in the feud. hbk transcended the need for a title to keep his character and matches interesting.

 

[MoxViolence]

Yea he shoulda had more than 4 being he's shawn michaels and all but to be perfectly honest hes just a bit overrated !!IMO!! (probably get assisinated for that) but for all the hoopla of him being the show stopper and MR. WRESTLEMANIA, he sure did have his share of loses at the big one. his dx counterpart seems a bit more "wrestlemania" than shawn did. lets face it, he beat jericho at wrestlemania in the early 2000's then after that the only wins at WM hes received were over two old guys...vince mcmahon and ric flair. oooooooooo mr wrestlemania like OVER 15yrs ago! and if they werent gonna give him a final title reign then he shoulda beat THE REAL MR WRESTLEMANIA the undertaker in his final match. but he didn't.

 

[The Pagan]

Lets look at the world championship reigns of some future or current Hall of Famers:

Ric Flair- 16
Triple H- 13
Edge, John Cena- 9
Undertaker, The Rock- 7
Stone Cold, Randy Orton, Hulk Hogan- 6
Bret Hart, Batista, Chris Jericho- 5 (Chris isnt a 6-time champ, is he?)
Shawn Michaels- 4
CM Punk- 3
Kane, Rey Mysterio, Randy Savage, etc.....2 titles each

Well I have to say your world title reign list is off quite a bit.

Hogan held the title 6 times in WWE and another 6 in WCW.

Bret held the title 5 times in WWE and another 2 times in WCW.

I'm pretty sure Jericho is indeed a 6 time world champion.

 

[dman1373]

the thing is he had 4 title reigns that meant something. hhh, cena, batista, and orton all had reigns that seem to meld togrther. When you think of their title defences you don't remember if their from the first or 6th or 3rd reign. While i remember the majority of shawns defences. Its like shawns ic reigns. Not many but very memorable. Thats why shawn is not only the best ic champion but as jr said, he is the best wwe champion of all time. Not to mention, best wrestler of all time as well.

 

[YEDemon]

I've never been the biggest HBK fan. It's only in the past two years that I've gotten behind him. Never really saw his matches before that, so I figured he was just one of those guys that the IWC overrated.

However, even before I got behind him, I had wanted to see him get a reign just because he was one of those guys who hadn't had a reign I'd seen before, and I thought it would make things more fresh. HBK as the main face of Raw would've been nice, but ultimately, it just wasn't needed.

HBK has joined an exclusive group of people who are bigger than the title in my opinion. Jericho and the Undertaker are also in this group, in my opinion. While title reigns for these guys might be nice, at this point, the title doesn't matter to their careers because they will always be able to lead the fans in either cheering for them, or, as in Jericho's case, possibly booing him.

 

[martymcfly]

The main thing I want to add is an answer to this question posed at the start of this thread:

Don't you think HBK is a little to far toward the bottom of that list for how great he was at everything he did in wrestling?

The answer to that I guess is how you define greatness. If to you, greatness is defined by the number of title holdings, then I suppose the answer is yes. If it's not--and to be honest, I don't think that many people define greatness in that manner despite the WWE and folks in it such as HHH wanting us to--then the answer is no.

 

[dman1373]

Yea he shoulda had more than 4 being he's shawn michaels and all but to be perfectly honest hes just a bit overrated !!IMO!! (probably get assisinated for that) but for all the hoopla of him being the show stopper and MR. WRESTLEMANIA, he sure did have his share of loses at the big one. his dx counterpart seems a bit more "wrestlemania" than shawn did. lets face it, he beat jericho at wrestlemania in the early 2000's then after that the only wins at WM hes received were over two old guys...vince mcmahon and ric flair. oooooooooo mr wrestlemania like OVER 15yrs ago! and if they werent gonna give him a final title reign then he shoulda beat THE REAL MR WRESTLEMANIA the undertaker in his final match. but he didn't.

Wow. You are complaining that shawn is actually willing to put over others. Do you know why he is mr. wm? Because he always has the best match. Thats something you don't have to politic to do.

 

[thegame95]

Shawn michaels ranks in top 3 of my fav. wrestlers of all time. But i dont think hbk needed titles, he proved to everyone that a great feud dosent have to have a title in it. Thats why i dont consider cena as a good wrestler,because he hasent had many good feuds without a title. and i think 9 is way to much for cena,hell hes got more than undertaker thats not right at all.but not to get off track. HBK was one of the greatest of all time. He earned every god dam dime. He dident coomplain to the wwe about not having titles. This is y i think hbk is were he is today. just think wat if hbk would of broken the title record. would we still have loved him today. Thats the main question,can a title hurt a wrestler

 

[Theo Mays]

I have no problems with Shawn only being a 4 time champion. Some of the best in the biz didn't hold the title or only held it once or twice. Sure another run or two would have been nice to see from HBK, but the fact that his 4 mean more than some guys who are higher than him on the list. HBK's reigns meant something and he had them when the championship belt wasn't hot potato'd around. Like I said more would have been nice, but there is no shame or discredit in the fact that he is a 4 time world champ.

 

[Decarow]

I don't have much time so I'll keep this short.

The quality of a star's reigns outweighs the quantity of reigns. You can put 15 title reigns on Khali but that doesn't make him a great champion.

Shawn had one hell of a career. From being a Rocker, to the Boyhood Dream, DX, and his return. The numeric of title reigns doesn't even matter after a career like that.

PS here's some food for thought... If he did have that last title run, people would be bitching in 3 years that he needs "JUST ONE MORE".

 

[ilapierre]

Shawn Michaels' legacy as one of the greatest wrestling performers ever has been built on the great matches he had and his loyalty to Vince McMahon for 20 plus years. He should be regarded now, in 10 years, in 100 years and forever as one of the best wrestlers ever. Mind you, a few more title reigns would have 100 percent guaranteed his proper legacy. If he were to turn on WWE or piss off Vince he could find himself in the same boat as one of the all time greats Randy Savage. Savage was regarded as one of the best overall wrestlers ever until the WWE propaganda machine kicked into gear to tear down Savage's legacy a little over a decade ago. Savage's 2 WWF titles apparently do not seem to be accurately conveying to this generation of wrestling fans just how important his contribution to wrestling was.

Savage had only two WWF World Title runs, but one run lasted a little over a year while a second lasted almost six months. His runs were memorable, long, and were key periods in wrestling that old school fans will never forget and present fans should stop forgetting. He is not even close to the same category as Kane and Rey Misterio who had two title reigns each that lasted perhaps a combined week. Savage also wasn't a 2 time World Champ for a combined year and a half, he was also a 4 time WCW champ. That's 6 World Titles..2 more than Michaels. (Based on this thread, it appears Savage's legacy has been diminished as no one even corrected the fact that the original poster forgot Savage's other 4 world titles..and yes WCW titles count as titles or else the greatest wrestler ever Ric Flair only had two World Title reigns..two less than Michaels and the same number as Savage).

Anyway, my point is that Michaels legacy as one of the greatest is set in stone as long as he doesn't screw Vince or molest his daughter..which i don't see happening. For example, do you think Cena and Edge will ever be considered more important to wrestling than Hulk Hogan?? Or Savage, or Flair, or Bret or Taker or Shawn? I don't think so. But in 20 or 30 years will wrestling fans overlook Michaels' quality matches and see overrated buttkissers with more world titles like Triple H or Batista as better overall wrestlers based on their number of title reigns? It's very possible, as we've already seen major twisting of history in only 10 years as most wrestling fans don't give anywhere near enough credit to the Macho Man (who I believe was the Shawn Michaels of the generation before him). Savage, the best technical heavyweight who also happened to be the company's most exciting entertainer and promo guy. Michaels and Savage are also similar in how they played second fiddle to politicking, butt kissing, spotlight hogging, ability-lacking big guys in both Hulk Hogan and Triple H. I'd argue both Hogan and Triple H wouldn't have had the success they had or legacy they now have without Savage and Michaels making both look so good by taking a World Title back seat to do what was believed to be best for business.

 

[Clark Kent]

I don't think he needed another reign, but it would've been nice.

The main reason is because he went for the title quite a few times and I think he should've came out on top at least one of those times. I was at WM23 and I honestly thought it was time for him to have another reign. He lost, though, and I knew then he would most likely never get that gold again. At the same time, I realized it didn't matter because he's a hell of a performer that didn't need it. Like I said, however, would've been nice.

 

[ToWhomItConcerns.]

did he deserve more reigns? you'd be an idiot to say no
did he NEED more reigns? no. not at all.

Shawn will be remembered as the guy who put on great matches not the guy who had too many title reigns...bottom line is Shawn could out-wrestle any of the guys with more reigns than him

 

[kingjaekob]

Shawn Michaels has been the Best Overall Wrestler Ever! for the last 15 years HBK wrestled the Best, and beat the best! The only guy he should have wrestled, but never did, is STING! It is still Possible, if Sting would get his head out his ass! I think Shawn Deserved at least 2 more Reigns! I think within the last 2 years, he should have won it once! But hey, Vince doesnt know how to do things nowadays! Wrestling Sux now! Last time I remember Hbk with title was in 2003, for about a month.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

I think his championship reign (pre-return in 2002) starting from WM 12 to WM 14 might be one of the longest reign in modern pro-wrestling history.
Whenever he held the title, if not for injury or refusing to job, I think he held it for a considerable period of time.

Shawn is a perfect example of a man who doesn't need the title and still keep you very much interested in his storylines and match.
As a big fan of his, I am kinda gutted that guys like Batista have more title reigns than him but when history does look back, they won't be counting his title reigns, but the super-quality matches he was in again and again and again.
It takes a special performer to do that

 

[mayankeagle]

Even though HBK hasn't won the title many times, I'm sure that put together all his 4 reigns will amount to a longer duration than some other superstars like Undertaker. For example, see this list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_WWE_Champions - scroll down to the table below and see the durations of each champion.

Later in his career, Shawn didn't get title reigns because he didn't need them and because he was also working part-time, taking time off after Mania to heal injuries. You can't have such a guy as a champion because a champion has to work a full-time schedule, do house-shows, etc. Undertaker on the other hand, never got long title reigns and most of his reigns were cut-short due to injury or through some interference/ cheating/ cheap shots in his matches and so the WWE wanted to give him a long title reign before he retires (which is why he won it 3 times in the last 3 years), and since he's on Smackdown, which is not the premier brand, its ok to let him be the champion while he might not wrestle every week, because fans pay just to see him. Even if he appears and cuts a promo or just chokeslams/ tombstones somebody, they are happy.

I agree that both these guys should have got more/ longer title reigns when they were in their prime, considering how good they can still perform (just look at the performances they gave at Wrestlemania the last 2 years, outsmarting 20 year olds) and how much they have contributed to the business.

The only thing that Shawn wanted to have before retirement was DX winning the tag team title, because, despite being ranked the greatest tag team in Raw history at the 15 year anniversary of Raw, they had statistically never won the belt. That is why they won the tag team titles for once, so that Shawn could retire knowing that he did everything he wanted to before calling his career quits.