Is The Title Picture Better Without Triple H & Undertaker?

[PlayTheGame]

The last time Triple H or Undertaker held the WWE Championship/World Heavyweight Championship was back in 2009. In other words, the world title picture hasn't included HHH or 'Taker since '09. Since then, guys like Ziggler, Sheamus, Swagger, Del Rio, and others have had lackluster reigns. While, granted, there's been a few bright spots here and there, the main event scene around the titles has been scarce and underwhelming, especially compared to years past.

So that's where this thread comes in. Do you think Triple H & Undertaker's abscence from the title picture is a good or bad thing? These guys can provide instant credibility to matches, create enthralling feuds around the titles, and can put younger guys over huge. Rubs from HHH or 'Taker could elevate just about anyone to a much higher status. We've certainly seen it in the past. HHH & 'Taker have helped a few guys shoot to the top quickly. Batista, Orton, and Edge immediately come to mind.

So, do you think their abscence is a good or bad thing? You can look at it one way or the other. Without them, there's more room in the title picture for guys to get title shots and be involved with the titles. There's no doubt about that. But with them, they can be used to get guys over while adding some prestige to the title (because let's face it, we've seen an alarming number of poor world champions the past few years).

Personally, I think the WWE should go halfway with it (and should have been the past few years for sure) and allow at least one of them to be around one of the titles at all times. Definitely don't have them dominating the scene like they did in the early to mid part of the decade, because there's too many younger mouths to feed. But I don't think taking them away completely is the right answer either. I hope they get brought back into the hunt after their feud (granted that Undertaker doesn't retire after his WM match).

So please share your opinion on the matter, and FYI, this should NOT turn into a thread about HHH & Taker not needing the world titles to be relevant. That's obviously the case, so no one needs to make that point, nor is it relevant to this thread. It's not a question as to whether or not THEY need it, because they don't. It's a matter of whether or not the WWE, the world title picture, and the younger guys need it.

Discuss.

 

[ThinkinSmart]

Yes I think it is better. HHH and Undertaker just don't gain any thing from a title run. The company doesn't gain anything from either of them having a run with the title. Theres no where to go from there except the rub to who ever beats them for the title...that is not counting the burying of who they beat for the title. John Cena and Randy Ortan are two guys who are now at that some level where they really don't need the title to be credible. John Cena is still the face of the company and the most credible guy around and hes lost nothing since fading away from the title picture. But look at all the guys that can have the title make them into superstars. Daniel Bryan is a clear example of some one who has used his title run reign elevate him and his character. Dolf Ziggler will eventually have that real title run that is not only memorable but will also establish him as a permanent main event tallent. Younger guys in the title picture is good, guys who dont need the title to be credible getting the title hurts the rest of the roster.

Heres a twist though. When HHH becomes full fledged owner and runner of the WWE i think it would benefit the the company to THAN put the title on the game. Picture CM Punks current story line if instead of Johnny Ace he was feuding with a heel HHH who was not only in charge but was the champ. That could boost ones carear to feud with one of the greatest wrestlers of the last 20 years AND the guy who runs the whole show.

 

[AwesomeRko]

I think your right when you suggest a balance is needed. I mean I'm neithers biggest fan but Undertaker was never around the titles too much n the first place anyway considering the length of time hes been with the company. While HHH was probably around them too much but I think its premature to say they shouldn't be involved in the title picture again, they can massively put younger talent over like you said by losing the title to them.

Crucially I think they don't necessarily need to win the title they could be used in a high profile fued to challenge younger stars for the title and have the young talent succesfully defend which would put them over in the same way without HHH or Taker actually having to hold the title.

But yeah I think there is still a limited space for them in the title picture and certainly in the main event scene. HHH for one in his role as COO could play out a stroyline similar to the Mcmahon-Helmsely regime of 2001 using his position in the company to effetively safeguard the title. If played out properly this in particular I feel would provide a huge lift to the star who was able to take the title from him. While anyone who takes the title from Taker is gooing to be given a massive lift anyway as any time Undertaker gets the world title given the space between reigns it is a pretty big deal.

 

[PlayTheGame]

Yes I think it is better. HHH and Undertaker just don't gain any thing from a title run. The company doesn't gain anything from either of them having a run with the title. Theres no where to go from there except the rub to who ever beats them for the title...that is not counting the burying of who they beat for the title. John Cena and Randy Ortan are two guys who are now at that some level where they really don't need the title to be credible. John Cena is still the face of the company and the most credible guy around and hes lost nothing since fading away from the title picture. But look at all the guys that can have the title make them into superstars. Daniel Bryan is a clear example of some one who has used his title run reign elevate him and his character. Dolf Ziggler will eventually have that real title run that is not only memorable but will also establish him as a permanent main event tallent. Younger guys in the title picture is good, guys who dont need the title to be credible getting the title hurts the rest of the roster.

Heres a twist though. When HHH becomes full fledged owner and runner of the WWE i think it would benefit the the company to THAN put the title on the game. Picture CM Punks current story line if instead of Johnny Ace he was feuding with a heel HHH who was not only in charge but was the champ. That could boost ones carear to feud with one of the greatest wrestlers of the last 20 years AND the guy who runs the whole show.

For one, as I said, you don't need to state they don't gain anything from holding the title. Irrelevant. The company doesn't gain anything? What about ratings? You don't think they're big enough draws? I'm not sure what you're thinking there. I agree, rubs from them help will help. And no, you don't understand what the word "bury" means. They don't have to bury anyone in a title match, and wouldn't. Beating does not equal burying. Just being involved with one of these guys in a feud/title match will elevate you as long as it is booked properly. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make about the credibility of Cena/Orton. We're not talking about them at all. But finally, your final points made some sense, and at least go along with the spirit of the thread. Those were good input, but the beginning of your post was unfocused and irrelevant for the most part.

 

[PlayTheGame]

I think your right when you suggest a balance is needed. I mean I'm neithers biggest fan but Undertaker was never around the titles too much n the first place anyway considering the length of time hes been with the company. While HHH was probably around them too much but I think its premature to say they shouldn't be involved in the title picture again, they can massively put younger talent over like you said by losing the title to them.

Crucially I think they don't necessarily need to win the title they could be used in a high profile fued to challenge younger stars for the title and have the young talent succesfully defend which would put them over in the same way without HHH or Taker actually having to hold the title.

But yeah I think there is still a limited space for them in the title picture, cena is also the stage now where he has transcended titles so he should probably be joining them with limited involvement to put the young stars over shame that won't happen.

You make some good points here. You and I agree that a balance would definitely be ideal. I think having Taker & HHH involved in the title picture, albeit in a limited and tempered capacity, could greatly help the WWE and younger guys. As I said, rubs from those guys could really, really help some of the younger guys. Imagine if the Miz got into a 6-month feud with HHH for the title and had some great matches, memorable promos, etc., and then HHH put him over in the end? Or it could be 'Taker. And instead of the Miz, you could insert just about any young world title contender. They'll get instantly elevated. As I said, that's exactly how Batista, Orton, and Edge did it for the most part- they were involved in high-profile title feuds with BIG names like Taker and HHH, and eventually went over them, legitimizing them in the process.

I think the WWE should go that route again and help some of the younger talent out.

 

[AwesomeRko]

You make some good points here. You and I agree that a balance would definitely be ideal. I think having Taker & HHH involved in the title picture, albeit in a limited and tempered capacity, could greatly help the WWE and younger guys. As I said, rubs from those guys could really, really help some of the younger guys. Imagine if the Miz got into a 6-month feud with HHH for the title and had some great matches, memorable promos, etc., and then HHH put him over in the end? Or it could be 'Taker. And instead of the Miz, you could insert just about any young world title contender. They'll get instantly elevated. As I said, that's exactly how Batista, Orton, and Edge did it for the most part- they were involved in high-profile title feuds with BIG names like Taker and HHH, and eventually went over them, legitimizing them in the process.

I think the WWE should go that route again and help some of the younger talent out.

Exactly I mean they are still two of the top assets in the company it doesn't make any sense not to use them just because they don't have long left. Often younger superstars need that breakout moment with a more epxerienced 'legend' to really cement their status as a top guy like Austin with Jake the Snake and then Bret or Orton with guys like HHH, Taker and Foley. If you can use these guys drawing power at the same time as putting over younger talent then its completely win win for the WWE.

 

[jokernaut]

the title reigns now suck but the thing is though with guys like hhh and taker is that they have been there so many times before. them winning the title doesnt do anything for their careers. its all about putting on a classic match every time they are in the ring and helping younger guys get noticed. they are above the wwe title now. its near the end of their careers and they both want to finish strong just like austin did with his last match, hbk etc. now for the ratings if they were champ i would say that it probably would help out but they really need the younger guys to be in the spotlight. what i dont understand though is that they dont have someone like ziggler or sheamus have a big rivalry with taker or hhh. that would help out but things seem so limited in the wwe now. unfortunate but it is what it is

 

[TempestH]

Yes and No.

Yes because the young guys get a shot

No, because whenever they ARE around, their storyline will always be looked at as more important than the title picture.

 

[DirtyD79]

The last thing Hunter The Big Nose Caveman needs is yet aother vanity title reign. Undertaker doesn't need a title reign either but that's because he's on such a level that he doesn't need the belt to gain credibility.

 

[HBKperfect23]

Like you said neither of them NEED the title. I do think they can help bring out the best in the up and coming main eventers so Id like to seem them in the title hunt after their WM match. Also, they are two unselfish guys who will do whats right for the business before they do whats right for themselves and put over Ziggler, Sheamus, Swagger, Del Rio, and company. Like in the storyline, Triple H and Taker are the end of an era (an era that had storytelling in a match).....Id like to see them pass that knowledge on.

 

[iwinulose]

6 years ago i would have told you it was a bad thing, today i say its a good thing. the undertaker and triple HHH are bigger then titles by this point in their careers. i mean they aren't going to be around (in the ring wrestling) for very long so it is time for new guys to step up and take the big spots, you can't use the same guys forever, and it's time for the new era to take the torch and start running the deadman and HHH can't do it anymore, they can't be around all the time like they could in the day, theirs bodies can't do it anymore.

 

[Headman]

I don't think less star power in the main event scene is ever a good thing. I keep hearing people say "They don't need the title". My question to them is who "needs" the title? And if they "need" it, do they "deserve" it? Does anyone who doesn't draw really deserve to be the champion? Is it good for business to have a champion of the company who know one cares about? Personally I think it's time to stop paying attention to the "Give this guy a chance" crowd.

 

[Loveless]

Honestly I think it's damaging the credibility of the titles (and therefore the champions) by creating this 2-tier system of people who are supposedly "above" the belt. Look back at WWE history and try to find me a time before 2002 where the top guys weren't interested in being champion.
I get that you have to push new talent but traditionally that's done by having new talent get wins over old, that's exactly how it should be done. In this age of ego's though the WWE just can't let go of it's old stars, which is why it can't create any new ones.
That title should be the pinacle of the business and no-one should be above it.

 

[King of the Words]

Personally, I don't think Taker is every going to be around long enough for him to have another title reign. But with the Game, I can see him having one last reign. It could be a story line that the arrogant triple H. couldn't beat Undertaker at Mania 28 so he wants to do the next best thing and be WWEc once more. He could have one more epic feud with one of the younger guys and possibly pass the title And the torch to a younger buck. If this is done I see the younger buck being sheamus. He has been WWEC, King of the Ring, won the rumble, but his biggest accomplishment to me was taking out the Game back in 2010 after Mania 26. I couldn't wait for the Game to come back and get even but he never did. Then when he did come back he focused on the Undertaker, and Sheamus became an after thought. I think what will really get Sheamus to the next level is ending the career of a legend. And what better legend then his friend triple H., for him to beat for the WWEC. eventually and end the Games Career. This feud could possibly make Sheamus the top guy in the business. I could definetly see him being the guy that takes triple H.`s spot on the roster.

 

[Jenna.]

I kinda hate when people say oh they don't need the title or it does nothing for them. Honestly I think that would be pretty dope if they got another title shot, I mean it's been what? 3 years? What's the big deal? It would be a problem if they kept throwing the title at them over and over again like they did to Cena last year. But it's been 3 years. I think people would go nuts to see them as title holders because of nostalgia.

Yeah there are other wrestlers who might deserve a title shot...but are those wrestlers ready to carry the company as the heavyweight champion? You want guys who are gonna bring in ratings as a champion, not someone who just because they deserve it should get it. Look at Alberto Del Rio. He was a failure as champion, no buzz no hype, nothing. I would most definitely take another reign as champion from HHH or Taker over Del Rio any day of the week.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

In my opinion, the answer is yes. I've always liked Trips & Taker but these are two guys that are at a point in their careers in which it seems like a waste to put them in the title scene. Like Triple H aluded to this past Monday, the WWE is essentially going to be his someday, probably within the next few years in my opinion, and his attention is best spent on other aspects of the company rather than an on screen presence & character. That's mostly what's been happening over the course of the past 18 months or so anyhow and, if anything, it's probably only going to intensify as the time for him to take over moves closer.

In Taker's case, he's most definitely one of the few wrestlers you can look at and declare them to be above the championship. Taker is a highly respected veteran that always did his best even if he wasn't placed in the best of situations at times. Wrestling insiders know that, wrestlers themselves know it and the fans know it. It's also been noticable over the past couple of years that Taker's injuries have really caught up with him. He's been known to work hurt for very long periods of time, even when he probably shouldn't, and that's a huge reason why he's still so over with the company and the boys backstage. But he's almost 47 years old and the wear & tear have really taken their toll, so the WWE has come up with the idea of him being a special attraction. To me, at this point in his career, it's a perfect fit for him. He's often portrayed and spoken of as this almost mythic figure and the streak really is the only thing he has left because it's the only thing he needs. Over the past several years especially, there's been huge emphasis placed on Taker's WM streak and fans have definitely embraced it to the point that it's really become something of a tradition.

Also, to me, the title picture is just much fresher without them. While Taker was never a guy that was almost constantly in the title scene, Triple H was. For much of the past decade, Trips was almost always right there and it just got very old after a while. I'm enjoying the younger talent and/or fresher faces in the title picture these past several months. It might not have the star power at this point, but that's to be expected because it takes time for that to happen. Taker & Trips didn't become the legends & superstars in the business that they are overnight, not even when they first popped up in the title scenes in their careers.

 

[Richard Blonoff]

I think a good way to find that balance that needs to be there would be to have a guy similar to what DB currently is. Make him win MITB and get a cheap cash in. Then he keeps the belt for a month or two, barely getting by each time, sometimes weaseling his way out of matches and he starts talking about how he is a great champion. Then have Trips come out and call him out on it and challenge him to a match to prove if he really is a great champion or not. Let them feud then at SummerSlam or Survivor Series have them have the blow off match with the champ beating Trips in a good twentyish minute match. It gives the current champ a good win over a legend and keeps Trips in the title picture without putting the strap on him

 

[dkorolenchuk]

I think they should let Trips win it and then they could give someone a major push by having them "out cerebral" the master so to speak and start his title run off in a very positive way?

One thing i have noticed and wondered about,they seem to acknowledge Stone Cold as Stunning Steve from WCW days,will WWE ever do the same for HHH or Undertaker and mention in a DVd that they were Mean Mark Calious and Paul Leveques from the WCW days?

 

[TheAllStarBlogger]

Neither Triple H or Undertaker NEED more title reigns, they've had their share, Triple H is a 13-Time Champion & Taker is a 7-Time Champion, they really don't need to be put in the title picture, but it would be good for younger stars. Here's why, remember when Triple H & Jeff Hardy we're feuding for the WWE Championship back in '08? Hardy lost 4 times to The Game,to then have Hardy finally win it & it put him extremely over, because the chase is better than the accomplishment. If they did something like that with a young star, like Hardy was, then it would have a HUGE payoff just like it did.

I just don't see 'Taker or Triple H having anymore reigns though, Taker only wrestled ONCE last year & Triple H only wrestled 3 times(Wrestlemania, Night Of Champions,& Vengeance). It honestly seems like these guys aren't going to be full-time wrestlers ever again, I will never say it's impossible for one of them or both to come back on a full-time schedule,which you would assume they would have as champions, but it is very unlikely they will ever return to full-time.

I think it'll be the same way this year, 'Taker will only wrestle once & Triple H will wrestle 3 or 4 times.

 

[Evilone1942]

First time poster so be gentle!! haha. They dont need the title, but does the title need them?? At the moment if they are gunna only be doing the part time gig, then no! But having a guy like that not interested in being WWE or WHC just basically cheapens the title! The only time it wouldnt would be like a few years back and JBL was doing his color comentators run. He used to say The Undertaker doesnt fight for titles he fights for causes, that is believeable!

But to give the title credibility, the best guys should be chasing it or have it, even if they are fueding with someone else, for them to utter a line about getting back in the title hunt or getting the belt back works wonders!

By not saying it or showing any interest is basically cheapening the belt! Look at Stone Cold, everything he did for the most part was about the title or getting back to the title.

 

[Best in the World 79]

I don't think half of you read the entire op's post. Neither NEED the title. Duh. Blah blah blah read what the man said.

Both bring instant credibility to the title fued. Way more than miz, del rio, ziggler, and yes, even john the boyscout cena.

You all talk about the title is boring. Storylines are boring. That's because all the talent, other than maybe 5 guys, are fucking boring.

For example. Have punk feud 3 months with hhh for the belt. Then have 3 months with taker. Make a triple threat or fatal 4 way here or there, throw in orton, Christian or ziggler.

Boring talent going against the champ time after time. Makes the Challenger look weaker and weakens the champ. You need good opponents.

Go back to backlash 03. Who the fuck thought cena was gonna beat lesnar? Not a fucking soul.

And to all the bitching about PUSH THE YOUNGER TALENT. Quit fucking crying. They've tried. Most of the talent is almost talentless. It's like some ppl want wade barrett to end the streak. You think vince put all that into now 20 manias for taker to have him lose to a guy who gets canned heat on smackdown. Dude gets no reaction. Shut the youth shit up. Hhh and taker are right. It's the end of an era. By the year, money goes down. Ratings go down. Interest goes down. Simple. Ten years from now, no one will fucking care like now or even close to 5 or 10 years ago. Kayfabe is dead. Wrestling thrives off kayfabe. Cut off the oxygen, you die.

 

[jrichardson25]

No one person is bigger than the title. The title is the pinnacle. Everyone should always go for it. Period. Some people like John Cena, Triple H, Undertaker, Randy Orton are able to stand on their own without the title. Does that mean they shouldn't be in the picture? No, not at all. Like I said they don't need the title to be perceived as credible but when they win the title its a bit surreal (not so much Cena because of 10 WWE title reigns... but not the point)

Have Triple H or Taker chasing the title (not winning it unless something snafus incredibly) helps the star that's holding the title. If its someone that could be the next Triple H or Cena or Orton, that rub from a vet would really push them into the right status so to speak.

 

[ITrippedTheShockmaster]

Is it better w/o Triple H and Taker in the title picture? Yes it is.

Why? Because it's good to breathe new life into something every few years.

Taker and Triple H are the elder statesmen in the locker room. They've both been champions and have been at the apex of their careers. Basically, been there, done that. Their characters are so engrained in the sports entertainment industry that neither needs to be the champion anymore, but can still draw. Taker's getting near the end of his career physically, and Triple H is actually moving more into the corporate side of WWE with the eventual retirement of VKM. That's why I like the current angle they're working with these two - because they're actually playing on real circumstances, in a way.

Plus, after being shoved down our throats for a few years, Cena's finally out of the title picture, at least for a little while. So, let's see if some of the new blood and the ones who stuck it out through the years plodding through the mid-card can hold their own.

While we all know VKM is often stubborn about handing the reigns over to younger talent (especially if he didn't create them), it seems he has no choice now. After guys like Taker, Shawn, Bret, Austin, Rock and Triple H ruled the roost in the 90s, it was Edge, Jericho, Cena and Mysterio who had their chance to be at the forefront in the 2000s. Cena will be put back there shortly after his match w/Rock.

But, for right now, talent like Punk, Orton, Miz, Sheamus, Del Rio, Ziggler, Barrett and Henry (as a reward for sticking out the crap he's been through over the years. Mae Young, anyone?) are all getting their chance to carry the flag for WWE right now. Let's see if they can do it.

 

[FlairFan2003]

Having a veteran simply put over a young guy does not make that young guy a star. Did Billy Kidman become a star after beating Hogan ? How about Rico's win over Flair on RAW ? A guy becomes a top star by his overall performance, he does need to be put in situations where he can shine, not necessarily win over established veterans.

Sting became huge by feuding with Flair, though he never beat him during that run, losing on house shows and getting a draw on a TV special. Luger failed in three major runs vs Flair (1988, 1989, & 1990) but the fueds themselves and his performances in the ring made him a star.

Randy Savage gained huge exposure feuding with Hogan in 1986, but he lost nearly every match. A lot of guys got big feuds with Hogan back then and did little after the fued wrapped up. Somehow Savage used that spring board to huge success (although he ultimately lost in his next high profile feud vs Steamboat).

The initial feud and championship match vs Brett Hart in 1992 clearly elevated HBK, although he lost the fued and tapped out to lose the blow off match in Survivor Series. Feuds with Hart did not do much to elevate Isaac Yankem or Papa Shango, how much of that was because those guys were not that good and HBK was ?

Fans also dont want to see their favorites humbled by young guys who essentially have not "earned it" through the years. I have no interest in seeing some up and comer embarass HHH or Taker, the idea that "Let Wrestler A pin HHH, it will make him huge" is a false premise. Sting is a HOF caliber performer, Luger had a great career, HBK is a legend, Kidman is unemployed, Rico is long gone, Savage is remembered as an all time great.

That said, the current world title scene is much better with HHH & Taker involved, simply because there are not many guys interesting that can draw or the average fan cares enough about to draw numbers. If you want average fans to watch you need to have established veterans involved, otherwise the bulk of fans tune out and guess what, you'll never elevate those young guys to superstar level if only your die hard fans are watching.

 

[Gavschenko]

Taker had the belt in earlier 2010 and no nobody wants to see triple h with the belt again he's been the same character for years even when he's heel. all he does is comes out cracks a joke that ain't funny the crowds laughs for some reason then he's all serious and will say he's the king of kings and the cerebral assassin over and over again