Did the WWE miss a golden opportunity by NOT putting the strap on HHH in late 2013?

[UFOcalling]

Hear me out here, because leading up to the Cena/Orton "unification match" at TLC last year I honestly thought this was what the WWE was poised to do:

If the WWE wanted the Wrestlemania XXX main event to really mean something, HHH should have screwed Orton & Cena at the end of the unification match to take the belt for himself. That would have lead to months of Cena fighting Orton anyway (pretty much like we've seen) to get a number one contender spot, etc. HHH could have gotten the Shield involved, keeping heat on him, etc. HHH could have even fought Batista and/or Lesnar in the main event slots of the PPVs leading up to WM (winning with screwy finishes) to appease those guys. The payoff, of course, would have had to have been Bryan going over by winning the Rumble and then "the big one" at WM XXX.

So...did the WWE miss a golden opportunity to really "make" Bryan this way? I know they still want their eggs in the Cena/Orton/Batista basket(s), but I mean...come on. Do you think this could have worked if they tried? Is HHH too old to work a full-time schedule? I do like the idea that's been floating around of DBry beating HHH early on the WM card to earn a spot in the main event (then winning), but I still think it would have been better if it was Bryan vs. HHH for the title this year. I bet it would have been almost as big as Stone Cold winning his first WWE Title. Now, if Bryan wins in a triple-threat it will be more like Benoit's first WHC Title reign in the WWE (if it happens at all). More of a let-down than going over the COO "Champion of Champions", that would have been huge.

In all honesty, I can't believe the title didn't go to HHH last year. Since Rocky had it the year before, I would've thought HHH would've been jealous as hell (ie: Hunter just had to wrestle Taker two years in a row, like Shawn did). I could have easily seen it happen, since that way Vince & HHH could say they were the ones that made Bryan. Not the fans. How do you see it? Missed opportunity, or a mistake - but one they will "fix" in time for the main event of WM this year, or was the WWE on the right track all along by pushing Bryan to the wayside for Cena, Orton & Batista?

If this was posted recently, or I put it in the wrong section I apologize. I searched the forums and didn't see this specific topic being recently discussed.

 

[three count bout]

Interesting idea. At a certain point HHH might have just realized that he was truly "Best for Business" as the face of the WWE. Bryan going over him at WM would accomplish a few things namely the huge Yes payoff on the biggest stage and the "comeuppance" in the authority angle simultaneously. At worse we wouldn't be getting the alledged championship match of Batista V Orton and those guys could be doing something else on the card. Hell they could actually still fight each other because in your scenario Batista probably doesn't get half the flack he's getting right now due to being gifted a title shot.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Generally speaking, a LOT of internet fans are going to bitch & moan in regards to anything involving Triple H having a prominent role in the main storylines. It's been that way for the better part of a decade & a half, but there'd be even more of an uproar now. A lot of net fans flat out don't like Triple H, so having him ultimately be the guy to unify the WWE & World Heavyweight Championships would've had a them shitting bricks.

I honestly thought that was what WWE was going for when it was all said & done. I could easily see Triple H getting into the match, hitting both of them with the Pedigree after they'd beaten each other half to death, use his authority as COO to restart the match and insert himself into it. While Orton & Cena are laid out, Trips scales the ladder and removes the titles. I don't believe I was the only one who thought the match could have played out that way.

Hingsight's always 20/20, but WWE officials couldn't have predicted what's gone down over the past several weeks. For all we know right now, CM Punk has walked out of WWE and did so, reportedly, about half an hour before Raw went on the air the night after the Royal Rumble. Fans vehemently voiced their displeasure of Daniel Bryan not even being included in the Royal Rumble match. They booed the shit out of Batista when he won, prompting him to go off on some of the fans there. The fans also hijacked the Orton vs. Cena rematch at the Rumble and prior to all that, the fans hijacked the title unification match contract signing with overwhelming support for Daniel Bryan. If WWE put the title on Triple H, Punk may well have not waited until after the Royal Rumble to leave and there'd be no end in sight to the constant whining & complaining about Triple H's ego being in the way or holding down other wrestlers.

Could it have worked out in the end with Bryan getting a mega moment by going over Trips at WrestleMania? Possibly so, but a lot of fans simply don't want to wait. Some fans are of the idea that they thought Bryan would eventually get the better of The Authority when it was all said & done and were waiting patiently. However, the return of Batista and Batista subsequently winning the Royal Rumble gave the appearance that not only was Bryan not going to get his big opportunity come WrestleMania, but that WWE management seemed intent on ramming a feud from 2009 down there throats that wasn't all that great even in 2009.

 

[The Eighties]

I actually think this would have worked well, Randy Orton has done a good job with what they have given him but he's been beaten multiple times since he won the title and has been treat as a paranoid puppet, Triple H would have had a strong reign and really he was Bryan's true enemy all through the summer, Randy was merely Triple H's avatar.

Personally I've not been interested in Triple H as a wrestler or a character much since 2006, but storytelling-wise this was absolutely the best route they could have went.

 

[kadroan]

I wouldn't have been surprised if it happened. I'm just not sure how the masses would have taken the match.

I wonder would it be looked at like David Arquette/Vince McMahon winning the WCW/ECW/WWE titles respectively, where as, a full-timer like Cena or Orton could have won the title and kept a consistent storyline going in the main event.

 

[UFOcalling]

Generally speaking, a LOT of internet fans are going to bitch & moan in regards to anything involving Triple H having a prominent role in the main storylines.

I considered this, when writing the OP - but figured it was long enough already. HHH is hated by a lot of the IWC, but it seems that if the WWE had put the strap on him it would have enraged not only the IWC - but the casual fans as well. HHH would have been so over as a heel it would have been insanity...which Batista caught a little bit of too, except for whatever reason the WWE decided to keep him face. The episode of Raw immediately following the Royal Rumble would have been a perfect time to turn Batista heel, as a lot of people here were thinking would happen. I understand though, the WWE (or, Vince...same thing, I suppose) doesn't want "heels" or "faces" anymore, and doesn't seem to give two shits about what the fans think. "they'll think what I want them to think!"...haha.

I think that if HHH would have become the first "Champion of Champions" last year, the fans (especially the IWC) would have given him a pass once they saw the big picture...if you consider that the entire idea would have been to drop the title to Bryan at WM. If the plan all along was for HHH to drop the title to Batista, Cena or Orton, then fans would really be up in arms. Either way, everyone knows that fans will find a reason to complain no matter what, so why not let them complain for a couple of months - then finally give them what they want? Some people aren't happy unless they're complaining...some people can find fault with anything/everything just so they can be noticed, or because they're angry about something else entirely. I'm not trying to pretend I have a degree in psychology or anything, or even that I'm completely innocent of this. I'm just as guilty of complaining (for no good reason) as anyone else is. It can be a lot more noticeable from certain people, but it's also a lot easier to find fault in everything/everyone around you, instead of dealing with your own faults. That's just human nature, and that's never going to go away. These forums are a shining example of that.

I know that HHH & Vince think of (or at least thought of) Daniel Bryan as an "internet darling", but now he's getting the loudest crowd reaction wherever they go. It just seems to me that putting the strap on HHH would have been worth the initial backlash; in fact I think they'd be getting less crap from the fans about that then they currently are from placing Batista at the helm. Then again, maybe they're happy about all the criticism. No publicity is bad publicity.

 

[laodaron]

HHH would have made a much better heel title holder than Orton. Besides that, HHH could have been making decisions this whole time as COO to screw over Orton, Cena, Bryan, etc. It makes it better to book if the Authority Figure is also an active wrestler.

 

[WarroBODFan]

I was totally with you in thinking that HHH might take the title at TLC. I wasn't the only one who thought this was actually more likely than Orton winning it. I also agree that the heat he would've generated would be on another level to what Orton is currently doing for the title.

Wouldn't have changed much if anything in regards to the Royal Rumble outcome and reaction to Batista winning if the WWE had still decided to go that way. If anything, it might've put even more heat on them for not letting Daniel Bryan be the one to take the title off HHH at WM30. But I do also agree, it could've been massive for them to put DB in the rumble and main event WM.