J
juggalo9912
Guest
best wrestlemania 22
worst wrestlemania 19
worst wrestlemania 19
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
Hey...What are you trying to say there buddy?Ipswichicon said:Then you saw what happend when you put limitied guys in the ring togther.
Jusr for people who don't know he's talking bout the Warrior/Hogan match at mania six. That match was One guy doing a series of moves then the other guy doing pretty much the same moves back. It stunk IMO. Watch that then watch Angle/HBK at Mania 21 or Vengance 2005 or Bret vs Austin at Mania 13 or Rock vs Austin at mania 19 or Angle/Lesner at mania 19 or ANY TLC match and see how far short it falls. Be honest if WWE was based on in ring ability alone would ethier guy have been in the main event?hothead25 said:Hey...What are you trying to say there buddy?
That match was a classic...
J/K some people think it was a great match, obviously others didn't.
That's the whole point. The WWE isn't based on in ring ability. Everybody knows that. It's WWENTERTAINMENT. Wrestling was so much different at that time any way. Back then wrestling was about Dino Bravo squashing some jobber on Saturday morning and then doing push ups in the middle of the ring. Comparing the matches you want to compare is like comparing apples to oranges. You wouldn't compare a Sabu/Funk barbed wire match to the Bret Hart/Chris Benoit Owen Hart tribute match would you? I know it's the cool thing these days to hate Hogan, and bash the Warrior, but come on man. I would ask you to find one person at WMVI who thought that match didn't live up to the hype. I can enjoy all styles of matches, from lucha libre to hardcore to technical. You knew when Hulk Hogan faced the Ultimate Warrior is wasn't going to be a Flair/Steamboat 40 minute classic. To think so would be doing yourself a disservice. Enjoy the match for what it was, ENTERTAINMENT.Ipswichicon said:Jusr for people who don't know he's talking bout the Warrior/Hogan match at mania six. That match was One guy doing a series of moves then the other guy doing pretty much the same moves back. It stunk IMO. Watch that then watch Angle/HBK at Mania 21 or Vengance 2005 or Bret vs Austin at Mania 13 or Rock vs Austin at mania 19 or Angle/Lesner at mania 19 or ANY TLC match and see how far short it falls. Be honest if WWE was based on in ring ability alone would ethier guy have been in the main event?
I see what your saying about diffrent types of matches but what I'm saying is it is not the classic match people pretend it was.also it was not entertainment it was boring and predictable that was the problem. I understand WWE is about entertainment. However entertainment for me is about the guys who when cutting promos and when there in the ring make be suspend my disbelief becuase they make it believablre. This match didn't do that for me. If you enjoyed it good I'm glad you were entertained but we obvouisly look for diffrent things in what we consider to be a classic match.hothead25 said:That's the whole point. The WWE isn't based on in ring ability. Everybody knows that. It's WWENTERTAINMENT. Wrestling was so much different at that time any way. Back then wrestling was about Dino Bravo squashing some jobber on Saturday morning and then doing push ups in the middle of the ring. Comparing the matches you want to compare is like comparing apples to oranges. You wouldn't compare a Sabu/Funk barbed wire match to the Bret Hart/Chris Benoit Owen Hart tribute match would you? I know it's the cool thing these days to hate Hogan, and bash the Warrior, but come on man. I would ask you to find one person at WMVI who thought that match didn't live up to the hype. I can enjoy all styles of matches, from lucha libre to hardcore to technical. You knew when Hulk Hogan faced the Ultimate Warrior is wasn't going to be a Flair/Steamboat 40 minute classic. To think so would be doing yourself a disservice. Enjoy the match for what it was, ENTERTAINMENT.
Like I said the build up was great until the bell rang it was the perfect match. After that it was poor to say the least. Like I say if you like it thats cool but IMO it was a poor mania with no pay off except Hogan making sure he stayed the no 1 face(again he pretty much admits this in his book)!hothead25 said:When was the first time you saw the match?
because you have to remember what it was like at the time. You have to take in to consideration that those two guys were the biggest stars in wrestling, and even more unprecedented was the fact they were both faces. To see Hulk Hogan vs. The Ultimate Warrior was unfathomable. That match was the first of it's kind. Two faces with the legions of fans those guys had. When you take in to account the months of build up, all the hype, the fact it was Title for Title, 68,000 fans split 50/50, I don't think you could say that match was a disappointment.
That's all I'm going to say about it.
EC MF'N W said:Best: X-Seven//Rock v Austin...HHH vs Taker...Best TLC Match...Raven vs Big Show vs Kane was entertaining...Shane vs Vince... Good stuff
Worst: Wrestlemania 2000...Fatal Four way was lame and thier was only one or 2 good matches I enjoyed
C-Man said:Wrestlemania 17 was my favorite PPV because it satisfied every aspect of a real show. Epic Main Event= Rock vs. Steve austin, Extreme= Dudleyz vs. Hardyz vs. E and C, Hardcore=Kane vs Raven vs Big Show,Shane vs Vince and Undertaker vs HHH, Nostalgia=Legends Battle Royal, Technical Wrestling: Angle vs. Benoit and opening match, and fantastic moments in the spots from TLC 2, Austin allying with Vince Mcmahon, return of legends, and so much more. I love the WM 17 theme song
Worst....Wrestlemania IX nuff said
juggalo9912 said:best wrestlemania 22
worst wrestlemania 19
To be honest I wouldn't say Booker T vs Triple H was a main event. I know the world title was on the line but the three matches that followed were the main events. Hogan/Mcmahon,Austin/Rock and Angle/Brock. All three were really great matches. Having said that Booker T/Hunter was quite a good match(In fact it's probaly the best match of bookers WWE career). This years I wasn't keen on. The WHC match was too short and ended just when it was getting going. The Tag match again was too short. Edge/Foley THAT was off the chart. MITB was good but not as good as last years. HBK/Mcmahon was cool but it was mainly high spots. Triple H/Cena was cool but ruined for me by the ending.newsboy_88 said:yeah, i'd have to agree with you on that one, though that's just because of that one main event match, Booker T vs. HHH. that one wasn't really that much of a build up and i didn't really think that Booker T proved through that year that he deserved the wrestlemania main event match.
Wrestlemania 22 was the best just because of it being the latest one and it didn't really have that kind of "dream match"... match in it. All of the matches were well promoted (and i mean REAL matches, the playboy pillow fight isn't a real match). And it also gave a hint of light to the fans, saying that wwe is maybe going on to bigger and better things by having some matches where the wrestlers haven't fought one another before and gave some good hype for the match.