First and foremost, I'm not sure the storyline has ended so how could it have failed. There is time for them to save it. Doubtful but there is still a possibility.
There were many problems with this angle but it is difficult to make some points in an ongoing storyline. I could say there was never a payoff with Daniel Bryan but that could still happen.
Bryan was made to look weak. They wanted it to seem realistic and I have no issue with that. People moaning about them belittling Bryan are morons because right from before Summerslam the notion, set by Vince, was Bryan should never be WWE Champion. I have no issue with them calling him a B+ Player (partly because he is) as it was used to further the storyline.
The whole freaking point was Bryan proving to Vince, HHH, Steph, Randy Orton, the WWE Universe and himself that he was NOT a B+ player. That is good storytelling.
The Big Show, on the other hand, was bad. Very very bad. They have a storyline filled with verisimilitude and they decide to add some crap about The Big Show and focus way too much on him. Yes it's a TV show but it was unnecessary and no-one really cared. Instantly, The Big Show killed momentum that this storyline had. He was a poor choice but with the absence of Cena and Sheamus as well as CM Punk occupied; there were few choices.
They should have made Triple H face Bryan earlier but with the absence of Cena and them thinking about a Unification it would have been difficult. They thought they needed Bryan to face Orton to help sell the PPV's but they could have had Orton face someone like Ziggler and Bryan face Triple H and I think they would have done the same.
If they teased Bryan getting a match with HHH then it would have been better. Right from day 1 if they had Bryan challenging Triple H to a fight but him rejecting (or even better, Stephanie rejecting for him) then it becomes interesting.
It should have been two things for Bryan that completely consume him. Winning the WWE Championship, thus proving he is not a B+ player and him beating the crap out of HHH. Yes he won the title (twice) but it was taken away from by the tyrant. The problem is that when does HHH get his comeuppance. Would, say, Hell in a Cell be too early. Did they need to ensure Triple H looked as strong as possible for the unification. It's a difficult one.
I suppose they could have had Bryan beat Triple H at Hell in a Cell and thereafter the Wyatt Family are introduced. Even mid-way through the match after HHH takes a beating, the lights go out, Bray cuts a promo and Triple H wins.
Bryan still might win the WWE title at Wrestlemania. At this point, I'm not sure if that is necessary. In all honesty, there is no right answer in what they could have done. It was awkward for them because they were missing some big names and there was the possibility of a unification. One thing they did do wrong was introducing the Big Show. An awful decision.
There were many problems with this angle but it is difficult to make some points in an ongoing storyline. I could say there was never a payoff with Daniel Bryan but that could still happen.
Bryan was made to look weak. They wanted it to seem realistic and I have no issue with that. People moaning about them belittling Bryan are morons because right from before Summerslam the notion, set by Vince, was Bryan should never be WWE Champion. I have no issue with them calling him a B+ Player (partly because he is) as it was used to further the storyline.
The whole freaking point was Bryan proving to Vince, HHH, Steph, Randy Orton, the WWE Universe and himself that he was NOT a B+ player. That is good storytelling.
The Big Show, on the other hand, was bad. Very very bad. They have a storyline filled with verisimilitude and they decide to add some crap about The Big Show and focus way too much on him. Yes it's a TV show but it was unnecessary and no-one really cared. Instantly, The Big Show killed momentum that this storyline had. He was a poor choice but with the absence of Cena and Sheamus as well as CM Punk occupied; there were few choices.
They should have made Triple H face Bryan earlier but with the absence of Cena and them thinking about a Unification it would have been difficult. They thought they needed Bryan to face Orton to help sell the PPV's but they could have had Orton face someone like Ziggler and Bryan face Triple H and I think they would have done the same.
If they teased Bryan getting a match with HHH then it would have been better. Right from day 1 if they had Bryan challenging Triple H to a fight but him rejecting (or even better, Stephanie rejecting for him) then it becomes interesting.
It should have been two things for Bryan that completely consume him. Winning the WWE Championship, thus proving he is not a B+ player and him beating the crap out of HHH. Yes he won the title (twice) but it was taken away from by the tyrant. The problem is that when does HHH get his comeuppance. Would, say, Hell in a Cell be too early. Did they need to ensure Triple H looked as strong as possible for the unification. It's a difficult one.
I suppose they could have had Bryan beat Triple H at Hell in a Cell and thereafter the Wyatt Family are introduced. Even mid-way through the match after HHH takes a beating, the lights go out, Bray cuts a promo and Triple H wins.
Bryan still might win the WWE title at Wrestlemania. At this point, I'm not sure if that is necessary. In all honesty, there is no right answer in what they could have done. It was awkward for them because they were missing some big names and there was the possibility of a unification. One thing they did do wrong was introducing the Big Show. An awful decision.