The Enigmatic Failure?

[Papa Shango]

Yeah, all his good ideas were in 2007, but when it came to 2008, he just become repetitive for my liking.

2008 was a continuation of the 2007 storyline. There had to be at least a little repetition, if only to retain the angle's continuity. Besides, Edge did plenty in 2008. First and foremost; he RETIRED the Undertaker! Who actually expected that to happen? Course, WWE jumped the shark by bringing him back two months later, but that doesn't hold any weight in this conversation. Edge also had two weeks of back-to-back CLASSIC promos, where he and Mick Foley managed to do an electrifying main event by just TALKING. Then the next week, he went psycho on Vickie, in a promo that would have made Jack Nicholson proud. These three events were the buffers between a trifecta of new age classic matches between him and Taker. Top that off with a surprise return and title win, and being the red herring in the mystery attacker angle, and Edge had a thoroughly engaging year.

Randy Orton's punt to the head still seems fresh and interesting. Did you hear the crowd in amazement when he kicked Vince a few weeks back?

That's cuz he accidentally REALLY kicked him in the head.

Hence why I said "a long time". That being 5 years.

Actually, it was almost six years ago now. Holy shit, I feel old.

You're missing my point. I mentioned that the WWE spent over a whole year building up Jeff Hardy.

Actually, it was more like they had spent about six months building him up, then he fucked up and got suspended. When he returned, they started over, but they couldn't quite re-capture the same momentum Jeff had before his suspension. They realized that they needed a new idea for Hardy, and they came up with the mystery attacker angle. But they also knew that the needed to give the fans some sort of pay off after waiting for well over a year. By giving Jeff even a transitional reign, it both helped further the mystery attacker angle AND gave Jeff Hardy fans a moment they will never forget. A few years from now, people won't care that it was a one month reign. The two things they'll remember are Jeff winning and celebrating all over the arena, and Matt Hardy costing Jeff the title by betraying him. It's a situation much similar to HBK's title win in 02; they gave him the belt to give the fans that moment, the moment that represents HBK's cemented return to the profession. Very few people linger on the fact that he only held the title for 28 days.

Why would the WWE build him up for so long and so good, put him in a "feel good" moment when he finally won the title and they even made it seem like they were serious about giving Jeff a good title reign that at least would last until Wrestlemania, only to have him as a transitional champion. If that was the case, he should have won the title much earlier then. That way the WWE wouldn't have to waste all this time on him. Hope that makes sense.

The WWE built up Edge throughout 2005 as Mr. Money in the Bank. Despite a injury to his pec, Edge still managed to make an impact, invading SD! on a couple occasions, and starting his talk show the Cutting Edge. He had the feud of the year with Matt Hardy. And after about ten months of building Edge up, and constantly saying how MITB can be cashed in any time anywhere, we were still shocked when Edge cashed in the briefcase at NYR 06, and won the title in a now classic moment. But he only held the title for three weeks. What I'm saying is, it may not have been a legendary reign (well, besides the live sex celebration and beating the hell out of Ric Flair in the first one on one TLC match.) But Edge ended up with doing quite well for himself anyway.

Yeah Edge is considered lucky for that. But in 2007, he proved that he was reliable. He proved to the world that he was capable of carrying Raw and becoming a great WWE Champion. You may not think he was ready, but he did nothing to indicate that he didn't deserve it during his reign, as he stayed out of trouble.

Like I said, by the end of his reign, Orton had won me over. But I still think it took him two feuds with two great workers in HBK and Y2J to really help him transition into the role of RAW's champion. It's ironic too, because one year later, Orton is one of the best things going on RAW, yet he DOESN'T have the title.

Jeff Hardy still has not convince me that he is credible championship material. Like I said, I think this feud with Matt will be pivotal in deciding the direction of Jeff Hardy's career.

I do agree with this to an extent. Jeff Hardy just won't become another John Cena or another Triple H. He doesn't have the "it" factor that makes him so damn special that he can be the face of the whole company. But he can be a main eventer. And in all honesty, giving him the belt at SummerSlam 2009 would have been a great idea if he wasn't already a former WWE Champion. It could still happen, but it seems Jeff will be busy with his brother Matt for the next few months. In my opinion, the WWE shouldn't have made him a transitional champion simply because we've had too many of those lately, and because they pushed him to the moon in which they should have taken great advantage of that by giving him a fairly length reign (not too long though).

Lol I think some of you younger guys have been spoiled by long reigns from Cena and Trips and Batista. Back in the Attitude Era, the World Title was constantly changing hands. Steve Austin's first reign only lasted about two months. All three of Mankinds title reigns were completely transitional. I believe Triple H's first title reign was relatively short as well. The Rock's first few title reigns were all pretty much a way to get him to the Main Event of WM to drop the title to Austin. But still, these four men defined the Attitude Era, and are remembered not for how long they held the title, but simply that they held the title.

When Jeff Hardy is released on his third strike, he'll still be able to go to indy shows and be advertised as "Former WWE World Champion Jeff Hardy". And that may be more than he deserves.

Santino is fairly over right now, they find him entertaining, but not in the same way they find Jeff Hardy entertaining. See the difference?

Not really. I thought entertainment was entertainment.

And who the hell was talking about Santino?

Triple H, Undertaker, Finlay and a few others have beaten him cleanly, so what would make this so special? It's not like he's undefeated.

Yeah, a few people have beaten him cleanly in a wrestling match. But what would you think if The Great Khali was found knocked unconscious in a stairwell? Just think about that for a second. What kind of a man(monster) would be able to attack The Great Khali, and leave him knocked out in a stairwell? That'd be pretty shocking.

And if we're going your route, TONS of people have beaten Jeff. What makes finding HIM under a stairwell so special? Especially seeing as people have probably found him unconscious under a stairwell TONS of times.

No, I was just pointing out to you that the WWE somtimes gives supestars a World Title even if people don't think they are ready for it.

Pretty bad choice of examples, there Rusty, seeing as you're trying to make the point that Jeff deserves the title, and Rey Mysterio and CM Punk are regarded as having been terrible World Champions, and will be lucky if they ever get to hold the title again.

So you're honestly implying that Jeff Hardy is in the same league and card position as R-Truth, the Colons and Festus!?

No, you were. You believe that Jeff Hardy deserves the World Title because he is entertaining and is over with the fans. I simply gave you the names of other SD! stars who are entertaining and over with the fans.

And why wouldn't Undertaker be a viable option for the belt?

Not that it really matters to the topic at hand, but the fact is that Undertaker can work anywhere on the card at Wrestlemania, he's proven that time and again. He's headlined SD!'s part of the show two year's in row now. I think it's time to move back down the card, and work with a younger guy at the big show, like Kozlov or Umaga. OR I wouldn't mind seeing him wrestle HBK at Mania.

Anyways, right now Taker isn't needed in the title picture, other than to give some star power to the Elimination Chamber.

But he too would still be a better option for the title than Jeff Hardy.

 

[klunderbunker]

I don't see how his reign can be called a failure. He was never going to be a longterm champion. Hardy's reign was meant to do two things: give the fans a thrill, and set up the Matt/Jeff feud. It did both things perfectly. Sure he was the champion but was he ever a long term one? No. Not even close. He was never going to be the champion past the Rumble and that's all there is to it. His reign is very similar to Punk's. They both had the title thrown on them to see if they could handle it and they both did relatively well with it. Punk's reign was better as he had more defenses, but the fans reacted to Hardy's win and now he's almost a permanent fixture in the title hunt because he's a former world champion. Everybody wins.

 

[hArdyPUNKmArk]

To be honest, I'm a huge Jeff Hardy fan and have been since he first started. I was so keen for him to be given the title but now looking back i agree with some of you guys they should have held off until later this year.

WWE should have had him win it in like September so he could have a decent run, make the fans happy and set up the Matt Hardy turn. Giving him the title 1 month before pulling the trigger on Matt's heel turn was rushed and stupid i thought. WWE should have done either of these options.

1. Jeff wins the title. Holds it and defends it at a few PPV's and then gets turned on by Matt and loses the title. This would allow for a massive shock when Matt hits Jeff in the face (probably bigger than it was at RR), it would make Jeff fans happy (and let's face it Jeff has ALOT of fans) and it would prove he has the kahunas to hold the major title and it would also allow Edge or Trips or someone to take the title to WM. I agree with the fact Jeff wasnt ready to defend a major title at WM.

2 Don't give hime the title yet. Have him and Matt trying to get at Edge for taking his spot in the triple threat with HHH & Koslov. Then have a title match between him and Edge and then have Matt turn on him when he is about to win. This would fuel the feud, would keep the "brass ring" out of his grasp and when he finally does win the title, maybe around June or July, It would be the biggest pop, WAY BIGGER THAN ARMAGEDON.

I honestly think they should have held off giving him the title. They could have still set the Matt v Jeff storyline and give him a good reign later. I really wanted an awesome reign from him and was let down by a 1 month reign with no defences or even matches. The whole reign Jeff fans didnt get to see Jeff on the ramp with the title coming out to his music. They didnt get to see him after a good match holding up the title. They didnt get to see any moments where Jeff might lose it only to swanton his way to a win. All these things i wanted to see, instead all i saw was a crappy "police" video of him on the side of the road and a pointless interview with JR.

All in all, I'd say the reign wasnt a failure because WWE got what they wanted from the reign but, they could have done it sooooooooooooooooooooo much better and ended up letting down Jeff fans. I'm keen for the Matt v Jeff storyline though so am not too concerned with Jeff not having the title and I'm sure he has now proved he is capable of being in mainevents and will hopefully have another reign in the next 12 months. Only time will tell....

 

[Stickstar 16]

I don't really think that you can call the title reign a failure. As KB said this title run served its purpose, it satisfied all the fans who were cheering week in and out for Jeff to take hold of the brass ring he was always reaching for, and it lead to this feud with Matt, even though quite a few of us expected it to be Christian.

I think if this feud goes well then it should help to legitimise Matt or just to boost him, and it'll continue to show that Jeff is putting in the work and staying out of trouble, which could lead to a more substantial title reign.

Also this reign may have been there to serve another purpose, as with Cena and his recent finisher name changes, the WWE's new kid friendly attitude, they may be trying to reach out to the young alternative demographic, your so-called emos and punks. Plus the whole thing of giving someone with Jeff's noted record winning a title can inspire the wayward youth that if they work hard they can make it too. Or maybe its just how i see it.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

It wasnt a failure. It was merely an angle from start to finish, probably in anticipation for a mania showdown. they are testing Jeff's meddle in bit time spotlight situations, to see if he can handle the responsibility and pressure. Who better to tkeep him on track in a high profile program, than his brother Matt. A lot of WM plans are made WAY in advance, so I see this entire angle, with the aformentioned title reign, as just a way of putting Jeff into a huge high profile Mania angle, to ensure he can handle it. After this, it may be time for Jeff's TRUE big run. The title reign did exactly as it shouldve, which was further an angle, and develop characters, which it did in spades. The title reign was a ringing success, for what it was intended for.