pepentorresHHH
Getting Noticed By Management
We all know the nature of the game in wrestling, wrestler A vs Wrestler B and they get x amount of matches to resolve the feud they are currently in.
Sometimes they fight for the right amount of time for example austin vs mcmahon, they destroyed each over for 2 years straight almost and it never felt old because of their hatred and quality television they provided us. Another more recent example might be hbk vs the deadman, they fought on 2 consecutive wrestlemanias and it felt right cause they had and awesome first and the second culminated with months of build up and the retirement of shawn michaels but if they could have squeezed in another match i would have been all for it because those were so amazing at what they did i could have watched fight for many more matches.
But sometimes you also get those feuds that are sooo mishandled that you cant wait for them to be over and when they do you wonder why did they kept them going for so long. A clear example would be Michael cole vs jerry the king lawler. That feud (although some think it should have never happened) should have ended at wrestlemania with a victory of lawler over cole but they decided to drag it on for months!!!!
But anyways, i think ice made my point. So which feuds do you think should have gone longer and which ones should have been shorter than they were?
Discuss......
Sometimes they fight for the right amount of time for example austin vs mcmahon, they destroyed each over for 2 years straight almost and it never felt old because of their hatred and quality television they provided us. Another more recent example might be hbk vs the deadman, they fought on 2 consecutive wrestlemanias and it felt right cause they had and awesome first and the second culminated with months of build up and the retirement of shawn michaels but if they could have squeezed in another match i would have been all for it because those were so amazing at what they did i could have watched fight for many more matches.
But sometimes you also get those feuds that are sooo mishandled that you cant wait for them to be over and when they do you wonder why did they kept them going for so long. A clear example would be Michael cole vs jerry the king lawler. That feud (although some think it should have never happened) should have ended at wrestlemania with a victory of lawler over cole but they decided to drag it on for months!!!!
But anyways, i think ice made my point. So which feuds do you think should have gone longer and which ones should have been shorter than they were?
Discuss......