HHH/Randy Orton Wrestlemania 25

[RKO18]

I know it has been discussed before but Im watching the Best of Raw 09 DVD and Orton was so sick back then. I was at the Rumble that he won and his Intermitten Explosive Disorder was sick. His attacks on the McMahons were some of the best WWE television segments ever in my opinion.

But then HHH beat him about as clean as you can at the Mania 25 and Ortons unstoppable character died. Hunter winning did nothing for his own character and killed Ortons character in 3 seconds. Hunter doesnt need the championship to be a top guy and him keeping it after 25 only to lose it at Bachlash made no sense at all.

Orton on the other hand could have won and continued to develop his amazing character on the destruction of the entire McMahon family.

He needed that win at Mania.

What do you guys think. Should HHH or Orton have won and why?

 

[Kanye South]

I feel that Randy Orton losing the WWE Championship at WrestleMania was the biggest WWE mistake of 2009. Randy Orton was basically a heel Stone Cold Steve Austin. He had the unpredictablity of Steve Austin, but the sneakiness and cleverness of Ric Flair. What was the fucking point of Orton losing that night? So Batista could return and get injured literally two months later? I don't know, maybe it's just wishful thinking, but I'm pretty sure that if the Orton we had in January/February of 09 was at the top of Raw for about a year, it would have been a hell of alot more interesting. Sure he won it a month later, but how effective would it have been if John Cena beat JBL a month later, or Batista beat HHH a month later, or Austin going over Michaels a month later? Randy over Hunter that night would not have hurt a soul. But again, I guess since Vince is rich and can afford to have people straighten his ass hairs, he knows best, right?

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

Let me start by saying Randy Orton is my favorite wrestler since Steve Austin retired. I think he plays the heel role better than any wrestler of this past decade. Great in the ring, and really natural on the mic. But I do not think he should have won at Mania.

This was an old school rivalry. It was personal. It was maybe the most personal rivalry (along with Jericho/Michaels) I have seen in years. It was classic heel vs. face, with the heel making the faces' life hell for months (with the exception of HHH invading Orton's home). In a storyline like that, the face eventually HAS to get the upperhand and win out, preferably at Mania (Backlash shouldn't have happened). The way this feud was set up, it would have been anti-climactic to have Orton win at Mania. Triple H had to win eventually, and it was the main event at Mania, so what better place to have the face win out.

I think wrestling fans today are far too into "who get's pushed" and "who deserves to win." IT'S ENTERTAINMENT! It's not a real competition. They need to have interesting and entertaining storylines and characters to keep it fresh and entertaining. Telling a good, sucessful story is FAR more important than giving a guy a win because he may "deserve it."

And I really don't think this killed Orton's character. He still has THE best character in the WWE, and he is a young guy. He has many more title reigns ahead of him, while Triple H is getting up there in years. Why is it that WWE fans always want guys to get title pushes in their early to mid 20's? Guys like Kofi, Ted Jr., Miz, Morrison, etc. are not ready for that yet. What is wrong with being on top of the mid card for 5-10 years before winning your first title? Nothing is wrong with that. Wrestling fans today are FAR too impatient. Orton has another 10-15 years of being a top notch heel in professional wrestling. He will main event plenty of wrestlemanias, and he will WIN the main event at wrestlemania plenty of times.

Now, if you want to complain in a few years that he isn't on top of the company, I will agree, seeing I believe he is HEAD and SHOULDERS the best guy they have.

 

[Dagger Dias]

Different arguments could be made for both guys deserving to win this match. I'll start with why Triple H deserved the win and then discuss reasons why Orton did.

Few rivalries these days get as intense as this one (Vance Archer pun not intended) and it gave the fans in attendance a good moment to go home with as the face won over the heel who had made his family's life miserable (kayfabe) for a whole semester. It also deals with the placement of this match on the card. If this match had to go last, then Triple H had to win. Taker had retained his streak, Cena got his big win, Stone Cold made his "final" cameo appearance, and then for Orton (the heel) to win after that long string of cool moments? Orton winning would have screwed up the momentum leading up to the happy ending of the show. (From a storyline and kayfabe'd perspective). I was there in person, and even though I wanted Orton to win it made sense to let things happen the way they did because everyone had a continuous chain of cool/good moments for the whole last part of the show, it made sense for the face to win as the show closed.

Alright, now the reasons for Orton. His character had grown so much in popularity that he was showing signs of becoming an anti-hero tweener during the segments when he attacked the McMahons and pretended to have IED. The match against Triple H being last on the card is part of why Orton "had" to lose. If the match had gone before Taker's and Cena's matches, then Orton could have won and the fans would still have gotten their happy/good moments from Taker retaining his streak and Cena's victory could have closed the show. Orton losing this match hurt his character's credibility a little and Triple H didn't look any better from winning the match. Then all the strange booking that plagued 2009 began with Orton having to win the title through that 6 man tag match at Backlash. It would have made more sense to just have Orton go over at Wrestlemania then retain cleanly against Trips at Backlash in a regular match.

BOTH guys deserved the win for separate reasons. Trips deserved it for storyline and kayfabe'd reasons, while Orton deserved it from the business standpoint as his character needed the win to retain his increased momentum. Trips wouldn't have had to go over if the match had been on a different spot on the Wrestlemania card. Orton could have won, then have the Taker VS HBK match, then Stone Cold's cameo, and Cena's match closing the show. However that's not how it happened in real life and since the match went on last, Trips had to win so the fans still had a good moment closing the show. Not all fans like heels so it does make sense no matter how much us Orton fans wanted him to win.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

I feel that Randy Orton losing the WWE Championship at WrestleMania was the biggest WWE mistake of 2009. Randy Orton was basically a heel Stone Cold Steve Austin. He had the unpredictablity of Steve Austin, but the sneakiness and cleverness of Ric Flair. What was the fucking point of Orton losing that night? So Batista could return and get injured literally two months later? I don't know, maybe it's just wishful thinking, but I'm pretty sure that if the Orton we had in January/February of 09 was at the top of Raw for about a year, it would have been a hell of alot more interesting. Sure he won it a month later, but how effective would it have been if John Cena beat JBL a month later, or Batista beat HHH a month later, or Austin going over Michaels a month later? Randy over Hunter that night would not have hurt a soul. But again, I guess since Vince is rich and can afford to have people straighten his ass hairs, he knows best, right?

Tsk...Tsk...Tsk

For one, Orton didn't lose the championship at Wrestlemania because he was the challenger and not the champion.

It would have made 0% sense for Orton to win and here's why. In the buildup to WM, Orton punted Vince and Shane in the head and RKO'd, DDT'd, and kissed HHH's wife Stephanie. All HHH was beat on up Legacy and throw Orton through a window. Throughout history, wrestling has been good overcoming evil and what no better way for HHH to exact his revenge on Orton by beating him on the biggest stage of the year. And not too many Wrestlemania's close with heels winning titles so I surmise that had something to do with as well but not as much.

What they should have done was let HHH win the Rumble and Orton win the title at the Elimination Chamber so it would be more justified and wouldn't have many people complaining about HHH winning than what originally happened. The match wasn't that great but the right person won.

 

[Billie Jean]

There was another thread saying how you don't need to win to go over in match, and they are right. I feel this describes it best.

It would have made 0% sense for Orton to win and here's why. In the buildup to WM, Orton punted Vince and Shane in the head and RKO'd, DDT'd, and kissed HHH's wife Stephanie. All HHH was beat on up Legacy and throw Orton through a window. Throughout history, wrestling has been good overcoming evil and what no better way for HHH to exact his revenge on Orton by beating him on the biggest stage of the year. And not too many Wrestlemania's close with heels winning titles so I surmise that had something to do with as well but not as much.

This^^^.

What do you guys think. Should HHH or Orton have won and why?

There was one reason why this match is not regarded as great as it could have been, and that is because of Shawn Michaels vs The Undertaker. It drained the crowd. If the fans were as involved as they could have been it would have made the match seem closer than it was and made Orton's momentum look more viscus, which would have made the title win even more special at Backlash.

But, wrestling is about good going over evil, it made seance for Tips to win. And I am not going to come on here and lie, I was rooting for Randy in that match, as I feel at the time he was awesome. But the win at Backlash also helped Cody and Ted, where as the Mania match would have been all about Randy, so in all cases it was more useful for future preferences to have the match go the way it did.

I can see where you are coming from through, I just think it would be more sensible to have a happier end to Mania that a "psychopath" walk out with the title.

 

[Ambiguous Turd]

I know it has been discussed before but Im watching the Best of Raw 09 DVD and Orton was so sick back then. I was at the Rumble that he won and his Intermitten Explosive Disorder was sick. His attacks on the McMahons were some of the best WWE television segments ever in my opinion.

But then HHH beat him about as clean as you can at the Mania 25 and Ortons unstoppable character died. Hunter winning did nothing for his own character and killed Ortons character in 3 seconds. Hunter doesnt need the championship to be a top guy and him keeping it after 25 only to lose it at Bachlash made no sense at all.

Orton on the other hand could have won and continued to develop his amazing character on the destruction of the entire McMahon family.

He needed that win at Mania.

What do you guys think. Should HHH or Orton have won and why?

I proposed this ending to the match on another forum and was blasted for it, however I am absolutely convinced that this was the way to go.

One, I thought this match should have without a doubt been the final match on the card so that was a good decision.

Secondly, I felt that Orton should have gone over but the problem was "closing the show to let the fans go home happy".

Personally, I think that should be less of a priority in this day and age, then what it used to be. Unpredictability is what I view as the most important element to keeping a fresh wrestling product, and Orton going over at the end would have been an appropriate ending in this day and age.

People jumped on my case for "not sending the fans home happy", so what I proposed was having Legacy come down during the match at some point and interfering behind the ref's back.

This prompts Vince McMahon to come down. However, Orton takes care of Vince. Then, Stephanie comes down to the ring and tries to get involved.

While Legacy hold Vince back and while Triple H is down, Orton again DDT's Stephanie. Triple H helplessly watches. Legacy distracts the ref, Orton uses a Foreign Object on Triple H and wins the match and the title.

However, that isn't good enough.

Orton handcuffs Triple H to the rope, while Legacy holds Vince back. Orton then prepares to go over to Stephanie, when the Glass shatters and Austin comes down to the ringside to clean house.

This prompts an intense staredown between him and a psychotic Orton.

Vince breaks free, Legacy gets the beatdown, and Austin stuns Orton.

We get Triple H out of the cuffs and he gives Orton the absolute worst beating Orton has ever taken. He kicks his ass all the way to the backstage area.

Vince goes over to Austin and puts out his arm for a handshake, and Austin shakes it. Vince helps a groggy Stephanie to the back stage area.

Austin celebrates one last time with the audience to close the show.

I was blasted for that as well, because they thought Austin had no business being a part of the entire scenario, and had no motivation, but I disagree that this was an issue at all. I think they just hated me, and therefore shat all over my ideas just because they came from me. Regardless, that would have been ten times better than what happened, I am absolutely convinced of that.

That way, Orton gets the title, although it was a shallow win since he got beat up badly by Triple H on the way back. But the program would fiercely continue.

A title win in that capacity over a major program like that would have helped get Orton over tremendously since interest was at its peak with his psychotic character at Mania. And obviously, I would have never killed that gimmick at all, like WWE did the week prior.

We could have had that, but instead what we got was probably the biggest dud of a Main Event in recent Mania history, that completely fizzled out.

 

[jayteeERA]

Well I liked the build up to the match better then th match itself. But if i were to pick a winner it would be HHH.

I mean I don't see any real reason why Orton should win. If anything Orton has been the 2nd heel who successfully defended his WWE title at a WM. How many ppl has pulled that off besides HHH.
If it was any other PPV i wouldn't really care who won but it was WM. The good is always gonna win the main event most of the time. A different scenario would be if HHH would have faced Orton in a HIAC match. Orton could have won after a hard fought battle. He is weak and tired only for CM Punk to come and cashed his MITB briefcase to get some revenge on Orton for coasting him to lose his WHC at Unforgiven 08.

The match was really a waste. It was like a rematch from WM 24 just without Cena. I was expecting it to be a HIAC atleast. I blame the idea of this match mostly on HHH. The guy cannot chill out of a WM ME, (which is another thread)

 

[Y 2 Jake]

The outcome was right, after all that Orton did over the few months prior to WrestleMania, Triple H should've got his revenge. The problem was that nothing they did in the match that could compete with what was done in the run up to it, worst of all they didn't even try. And Triple H should've come out as champion, not gone in as one. Who wasn't to see the last match at WrestleMania end with somebody retaining their title?

It possibly would've been better if the original ending had happened, Legacy, McMahons & Batista getting involved, but the match still would've been dead up to that point. I also don't buy into people being tired come the end of the show as the reason nobody was into the match, they reacted well to Austin just before, they didn't cheer because they were bored and there was nothing to get excited about. They got the psychology of the match all wrong and the blame must surely fall on Triple H.

 

[Via Armbar]

The biggest problem I have witht he outcome of the match is that it didn't do anything for either men. Orton still one the title in less then impressive fashion and Triple H just reunited with Michaels to fued with Legacy. And the argument that they want the crowd to go home happy, I still believe that Orton winning would have left alot of fans happy. He was really over at the time and the night would have been far more memorable if he had won. Instead we got a Triple H celebration, while the guy they had been trying to push for the past 5 months limped away defeated. It just seems pointless for someone to be pushed and then completly throw the push out the window. Sure he still won the title, but he didn't pin the champ cleanly. And yes I know, the heels never do because it plays to the coward role, but at that point he hadn't been booked as a cowardish heel. He was playing up to his nickname the Viper.

Orton was incredibly hot at the beginning of 2009. He was touted as the next huge star, the next Austin or whatever. That might have been an exageration, but he was over nonetheless. It just seems contrary to what you want to do with a wrestler your pushing, having him earn the shot, show his dominance for months and then have almost nothing come from it. A title win at Mania would have added far more credibility to his reign in my opinion.

The match probably would have been lackluster anyway no matter who won. I honestly don't feel chemistry between them and there has only been maybe one or two matches of their entire fueds I have enjoyed.

 

[mrperfect19_6]

I believe that Orton should have won that title that night. The build up was just all in his favor and HHH cheated to win anyways. I just feel that Orton was robbed once again to make HHH look good as usual

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

I believe that Orton should have won that title that night. The build up was just all in his favor and HHH cheated to win anyways. I just feel that Orton was robbed once again to make HHH look good as usual

The momentum was in Ortons favor, as he had just demolished the entire McMahon family. But that plays against a heel. When the heel does those types of things, especially before Mania, you can always expect the heel to lose. I think it played out the right way, and IMO, didn't hurt Orton one bit. He went on to win the title at Backlash, and the feud was essentially over (at least the feud between HHH/Orton).

 

[DX vs NWO]

What I'm hearing mostly is that Hunter should have won because a face always has to close the night. But lets look at history folks, lets go back to WrestleMania 17, which ironically was in Houston Texas. The Mainevent was WWE Champion Rock (Heel) vs Stone Cold Steve Austin (Face). During the end of the match Mr McMahon comes to the ring and gives Austin a steel chair, who then screws The Rock, going heel and winning heel that night in the Mainevent. Orton winning would not hurt anyone, the fans saw HBK/Taker that night so they wouldn't complain. Orton winning would make more sense than having Triple H win, wait three weeks later to lose the title to Orton, bring back Batista from injury then get injured 2 months later and start fueding with Triple H again. Doesn't make sense, does it?