Is Triple H The Most Overrated Superstar of All Time?

[Sykesy]

God, I am sick of the Triple H hate. It is all over the Internet.

Triple H has earned his way to where he is today. He started at the bottom and got to the top before Stephanie was even involved so i don't consider that an argument. To me, triple H was the top guy from April 2002 - 2005. He dominated those years with great feuds and one of the greatest stables in memory. Triple H deserves everything that has happened in his career. Would I put him over The Rock, Hogan or Austin? ... Maybe, maybe not. It all depends on what we are talking about. HHH is great at everything he days and he is one of the reasons why I kept watching from 05-07 before I stopped from 07-09.

The hate is undeserving and complete BS to be honest. And in regards to Taker carrying Triple H in their WM 27 match ... You're kidding right? It was the complete other way around and Triple H proved that he can still but on a 5 star match.

I may not agree with everything Triple H has done in his career like the MSG incident or Tomb-stoning Taker at Wrestlemania but overall he is not overrated and has earned everything he has received.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Sorry Lawler I gotta bring something up here

Personally I don't care if you can do 657893 moves in 78 seconds, but are you really saying that we shouldn't be bored if ALL we see is the same general 7-8 moves from someone?

I know for a fact guys like Cena and HHH have more than 5 moves (come on people wake up) but I believe we DO have a right to be annoyed when their ENTIRE ARSENAL is somewhat limited. Cena's been trying to use that dropkick again recently (i think) so I guess that's a start.

I mean hey, if you enjoy watching a perfectly executed spinebuster week in, week out, for the entirety of his career then all the power to you.

I think some people here are just frustrated at the lack of moves that seem to be presented by these multiple time world champions. I think they'd like a reason to believe WHY they've won so many titles and WHY we should believe you're the 'champion of the world/WWE', if you've won more championships than you have moves in your arsenal, I think it pisses people off, and rightfully so.

Gee, I think the reason they've won a lot of titles because they know how to work a crowd and are huge draws. I know it's a crazy concept. Why do you think guys like Malenko never were champion? They were boring. I love it when people like you try to count the number of moves a wrestler does because you're always way off. Vince wants draws and you won't see Evan Bourne headlining anytime soon. Good try, though.

 

[radec]

IGNORANCE! HHH deserves his achievement and he already won big tittles before steph! his intesity and just being 1 of the best heel and leader of 2 successful great factions in just enough.

 

[blueskyy]

Triple H is not overrated, no, not by a long shot.

The most overrated superstar in my opinion is Goldberg. I was surprised that there were others who feel the same reading through a couple of threads here. I remembered saying that many years ago on another forum, and almost got stoned to death.

The most overrated superstar right now is Sin Cara. I'm certainly not impressed by his last match with Jack Swagger.

 

[Good Golly It's Ollie]

This subject again.

Triple H is still talented, irrespective of who his wife is. Let's face it, he's always been over. He's always had the look, and the way he's aged has only cemented that. He's decent in the ring - all right, not the best or the flashiest - but he looks powerful and he tells a good story. He was on the way to being pushed to the top before he struck up a thing with the boss's daughter anyway.

At WM Triple H probably could have gone over Taker if he wanted to. But he didn't. I guess he must respect Undertaker too much. Yes, he made himself look like the guy who could come that close to defeating Taker, but you have to admit he's pretty damn convincing.

Without Austin or Rock, WWF would have fallen entirely on Triple H and Undertaker's shoulders for the Attitude Era and beyond. Would it have been as successful? Probably not - in fact, definitely not - but Trips would have got the job done regardless.

 

[Mantaur Rodeo Clown]

Sting is Miles better than Triple H and its not even a close run. Ring work,pops from the crowd and he knows how to carry Goldberg through a match unlike Triple H. The match between Triple h and Goldberg was horrible.

[youtube]AQYRRp2i-pU[/youtube]

[youtube]ZW0x5PX7AX4[/youtube]

Wow. You chose Wolfpac Sting as your argument? Really? I mean....really? Didn't think to look back to Surfer Sting? No? I'm not disagreeing, and Sting probably is better than HHH...but still. Come on man.

Triple H is an alright heel, whats he got? like two moves (pedigree and spine buster) just because Triple H was a steriod freak and like to spit water in the air dont make him great.

I'll have you know that I watched Victory Road, and I saw Sting only using 2 moves. 'Scorpion Death Drop' and 'Hide my face from the shame of this promotion.' In all seriousness, to rate a wrestler on the amount of moves that they do is ridiculous and anyone who does so should be taken around the back of the forums and shot. Hogan had 5 moves and he never seemed to have trouble being the biggest wrestling icon of all time.

As for the overrated comment: God no.

To be overrated, you have to be shitter than the amount of hype you recieve. HHH has been flamed for 10 years now about his role in the WWE and has never been "rated" by internet fans. Overrated is Ted DiBiase and Drew McIntyre who have done nothing since EVER. At least HHH has some great matches under his belt. All McIntyre has is that nifty coat. And I'm not even sure if he wears it anymore.

 

[berlinbrawler]

This has become somewhat of a bimonthly tradition on wrestling boards - someone claiming Triple H would be nothing if he hadn't knocked up Steph. I guess that generally is something you just have to live with when you marry the boss's daughter.

I could go back to about a dozen of old topics and just copypaste my answer.

This argument came up a lot more when Triple H was still the centerpiece of the promotion, rather than the respected elder who doesn't need the world title or the main event to be a big attraction anymore.
It was utter nonsense then and it is utter nonsense now. Maybe he wouldn't be a 14 time champion (only a laughable 10 or 12 times) but obviously he would still be one of the guys that carried the company over the last 10+ years.
Yeah, he was never the ratings draw that Rock or Stone Cold were, but then again, no one ever was. He made up for it with longevity and very solid old school ring skills. Some may not think his style is flashy enough, but you have to admit that he brings realism to the ring. Most of the things he does would also be effective in a real fight (granted, irish whips or back suplexes would never work anywhere in the real world, nor would one bother to cover a sledgehammer with his hand if he wanted to knock someone out with it...).

Overall it would be more realistic to say that he is the most underrated superstar of all time because so much of his success will always get unjustly credited to his marriage.

 

[ShawnDiscipleSmith]

And don't forget Randy Orton and Batista basically owe their careers to Trips and Naitch, without evolution the whole landscape of the WWE could have been drastically different

 

[Hunted-RKO]

1.Triple-H Aint Screwing Stephanie.
2.He May Not Be The Best In Ring performer,But Is Better Than Most Other 'SuperStars'
3.I Agree With U On His Mic Work!

 

[Sir_Michael_Cole]

Every time I blinked he was on the floor and Triple H was up and hitting him. What happened at the end of the match. Undertake lost, but who walked out first?

It's still real to you dammit!

This has become somewhat of a bimonthly tradition on wrestling boards - someone claiming Triple H would be nothing if he hadn't knocked up Steph. I guess that generally is something you just have to live with when you marry the boss's daughter.

No one has argued that Triple H "would be nothing" if it weren't for Steph, so you and everyone that continues to say that fails. We're talking about number of titles, and all but the most irrational Triple H fans agree he'd have less.

The question is if Triple H is as big of a name as his 13 titles suggest. He's clearly not. Someone above argued that he's right there with Austin, Hogan, and Dwayne Johnson. This thread is not about personal favourites. I like Cody Rhodes more than Triple H, but I'm not going to say that Cody has meant as much to pro wrestling because that would be a stupid thing to say. What's this guys argument? Triple H was around in the attitude era and he got big ratings too? The fans clearly showed how much less they cared about him than Johnson and Austin, when the ratings were way down with Johnson and Austin out of the way and with Triple H as the top guy. Don't even try to compare Triple H to the way bigger star John Cena, let alone the top three stars of all time, Hogan, Austin, and Johnson.

 

[berlinbrawler]

No one has argued that Triple H "would be nothing" if it weren't for Steph, so you and everyone that continues to say that fails. We're talking about number of titles, and all but the most irrational Triple H fans agree he'd have less.

The question is if Triple H is as big of a name as his 13 titles suggest. He's clearly not.

Don't read too much into the number of title reigns. Shawn Michaels was only champion 4 times. Eddie Guerrero only once. Does that make them any less important?

If the Rock or Austin had stuck around until today, like Triple H did, they would also have 14-20 championship reigns on their resume.

There was a period in the mid 2000s, after Rock and Austin had left, when Triple H hogged the spotlight a bit too much. A considerable portion of his championship reigns happened in that time period and the fans got pretty much sick of it then. If there was ever a time when one could say Triple H got spoiled due to to nepotism, that was it.

Nevertheless, he did carry the company when they pretty much had no one else. He was the only big remnant from the Austin/Rock era and he had to hold the torch until Batista and Cena appeared on the scene. He has always been a reliable main stay, and while he never brought the super ratings and sales, he always brought decent ones. That's why over time he amounted to so much success.

Edge won almost as many titles as Triple H. Which McMahon did he sleep with?

 

[dude_d_dude]

Gee, I think the reason they've won a lot of titles because they know how to work a crowd and are huge draws. I know it's a crazy concept. Why do you think guys like Malenko never were champion? They were boring. I love it when people like you try to count the number of moves a wrestler does because you're always way off. Vince wants draws and you won't see Evan Bourne headlining anytime soon. Good try, though.

I'm not saying that wrestlers with 5000 moves are the ones that should only be champion, all I'm saying is that it'd be nice for the people who are regarded as champ to have a decent moveset. I don't even like Evan Bourne all that much lol
You're right in saying that drawing power and the way they work a crowd obviously is a huge factor in who's champ and who's not, to me though I'm just saying that it's nice to have a champ who's got a nice, varied moveset too.

 

[Sir_Michael_Cole]

If the Rock or Austin had stuck around until today, like Triple H did, they would also have 14-20 championship reigns on their resume.

The difference is, they would deserve those titles (like how Flair deserves his) and it wouldn't be bad for business because they are both way bigger stars than Triple H ever was, and brought the ratings like Triple H couldn't.

Edge won almost as many titles as Triple H. Which McMahon did he sleep with?

Edge - 550 days as a world champion
Triple H - 1,151 days as a world champion

Not comparable at all.

 

[Nate DaMac]

The difference is, they would deserve those titles (like how Flair deserves his) and it wouldn't be bad for business because they are both way bigger stars than Triple H ever was, and brought the ratings like Triple H couldn't.

Dude, Triple H won the majority of his world titles in the early 2000's as a heel and as a heel, he was a far bigger success than either Austin or Rocky. He wasn't suppose to draw huge numbers, he was there to make you love the faces and in his time frame, no one was better than him. I mean, fuck, he had people going nuts for Scott Steiner. I repeat, Scott Steiner was the most over face in the biggest wrestling company in the 2000's and it was solely because of Triple H's heel work as a heel. I'd say that would speak volumes to how great he truly is.

So yes, if Austin or Rock would have stayed as long as Triple H, they would have had an enormous amount of title reigns as well. It isn't Hunter's fault that he didn't sustain a career ending injury or go off to Hollywood. He started to break during the peak of the Attitude Era along with Austin and Rock and if those 3 were to have remained in the company together to this point, Triple H would still have around the same amount of title reigns he has now. They would have just come in a different fashion.

Edge - 550 days as a world champion
Triple H - 1,151 days as a world champion

Not comparable at all.

Were talking about the amount of reigns, not the longevity. So yes it is comparable.

 

[Nate DaMac]

And you are a douche bag who doesnt respect others peoples opinions, hes entitled to his, but thats whats wrong with this site, if anybody shits on wwe or any of its "superstars" theyre trolls, or smarks, and if someone tries to argue that they get banned.

You get banned if you break the rules. No one in the history of this forum has ever been banned for disagreeing with someone or trashing the WWE. There is a rulebook that is incredibly easy to follow and if you're still not capable of doing it, you deserve to get banned.

YES HE IS, i am not a fan of cena at all, but i always see he gets trashed for using the same "5 moves", have you noticed triple h uses probably about 4??

lets review:
knee to the face
spinebuster
troll yell
knee to the face while opponent on the ground
then pedigree

THATS IT! thats a triple h match

People just buy whatever wwe tells them, they tell them triple h is gonna be a legend and theyre gonna buy it, hes not, hes pretty average. Look at the horrible shit he put together with taker. For a moment pretend that wasnt trips and taker, and it was a couple of nobodies, would you be saying it was a good match?? NO, it is only cause wwe has been telling you theyre superstars and that you buy into.

Now we've come to the part where it becomes clear that you don't know what you're talking about. The amount of moves performed by someone isn't the criteria for judging what makes a good wrestler. Taking your opponents move properly and selling are much more difficult to do than just hitting your moves. I've seen and used this example before: If someone does a Hip Toss, who is doing more work? The guy that is simply extending his arm and rotating it, or the guy who is jumping, flipping, taking the bump, and selling all in one fluid motion. Triple H is excellent at selling his opponents offense and he rarely if ever botches it. More often than not, botches in a Triple H match are caused by the opponent.

People who call guys like Triple H and Cena bad wrestlers are usually the same guys who are praising the likes of JoMo and Dick Butt who are entertaining in their own right, but they have never elicited a crowd reaction like the latter. That's what the ultimate goal is in professional wrestling, not doing 79 moves in a 5 minute match.

go a head a call me a smark, which is stupid and makes no sense, since when is it a bad thing to review a show or a character and have an opinion on it?

Well the word smark is a combination of the word smart and mark. While I haven't learned enough about you to judge whether you're a mark, it's quite clear that you don't fit the criteria for the other half of the equation. So no, you're not a smark. Congratulations.

 

[Sir_Michael_Cole]

Dude, Triple H won the majority of his world titles in the early 2000's as a heel and as a heel, he was a far bigger success than either Austin or Rocky. He wasn't suppose to draw huge numbers

lolwut he wasn't supposed to draw big numbers? No one is "supposed to" draw big numbers. You either have the talent or you don't. Triple H is not near the talent he has been booked as in his career. Him mostly being a heel is no excuse. Are you telling me heel Hogan, Flair, Austin, and Rock were not supposed to draw big numbers? Your argument fails.

I mean, fuck, he had people going nuts for Scott Steiner. I repeat, Scott Steiner was the most over face in the biggest wrestling company in the 2000's and it was solely because of Triple H's heel work as a heel. I'd say that would speak volumes to how great he truly is.

You just lost all your credibility right there. Steiner was never the most over face in the entire WWE. That's a joke. And why would you bring up Triple H's feud with Steiner? They had one of the worst World title matches in the history of the business. Samoa Joe was able to put on a decent match with an even older Steiner years after that.

So yes, if Austin or Rock would have stayed as long as Triple H, they would have had an enormous amount of title reigns as well. It isn't Hunter's fault that he didn't sustain a career ending injury or go off to Hollywood.

Actually it is his fault that he didn't go off to Hollywood. He tried, but he is such a terrible actor that he failed miserably. Look at the previews for his new movie. It looks like it could be the worst film ever made. Triple H wishes he had half as great a legacy as Dwayne Johnson, even half of Dwayne Johnson's overness, and half the acting ability of Dwayne Johnson.

Were talking about the amount of reigns, not the longevity. So yes it is comparable.

So a two week title reign is as big a deal to you as a year long reign? After this and calling Steiner the most over babyface in the WWE, you've got to be trolling. You can't be serious.

 

[Nate DaMac]

lolwut he wasn't supposed to draw big numbers? No one is "supposed to" draw big numbers. You either have the talent or you don't. Triple H is not near the talent he has been booked as in his career. Him mostly being a heel is no excuse. Are you telling me heel Hogan, Flair, Austin, and Rock were not supposed to draw big numbers? Your argument fails.

Heels don't draw large numbers. The only exceptions are Hogan and Flair and the circumstances were far from what the norm is. Austin nor Rocky were huge draws as heels, you clearly just started watching wrestling 6 weeks ago.

You just lost all your credibility right there. Steiner was never the most over face in the entire WWE. That's a joke.

Um.. no? He was the biggest face in the company for a month or so there. I was actually watching, it's apparent that you weren't. It wasn't on his own merit at all, but thanks to Triple H he got massive face pops and everyone was begging to see him win the title.

And why would you bring up Triple H's feud with Steiner? They had one of the worst World title matches in the history of the business. Samoa Joe was able to put on a decent match with an even older Steiner years after that.

Believe me, I'm completely aware that Steiner sucked and even Hunter, one of the best ring generals of this generation couldn't drag a good match out of him.

Actually it is his fault that he didn't go off to Hollywood. He tried, but he is such a terrible actor that he failed miserably. Look at the previews for his new movie. It looks like it could be the worst film ever made. Triple H wishes he had half as great a legacy as Dwayne Johnson, even half of Dwayne Johnson's overness, and half the acting ability of Dwayne Johnson.

Well yeah, I guess you got me there. However, with his family connections to the business I highly doubt he was willing to bail.

So a two week title reign is as big a deal to you as a year long reign? After this and calling Steiner the most over babyface in the WWE, you've got to be trolling. You can't be serious.

Hunter had a reign that lasted less than an hour and it still counts. I was just saying that that wasn't the topic at hand. Edge still has almost as many reigns as Hunter and that's the thing that will be remembered, not the longevity of the combined reigns.

I'm also dead serious about the Steiner thing. Look, the build was absolutely horrible and the match was somehow even worse. But what you're not understanding is that Hunter was so unbelievably hated around that time that they could have put fucking anyone against him and the fans would have flocked to him. It certainly fizzled out after the disastrous match they had, but there's no denying that the fans were behind Steiner more than anyone else at the point in time for around a month.

 

[Sir_Michael_Cole]

The fans were behind Steiner but he was not as over as Brock Lesnar.

 

[iwinulose]

I mean the dude is decent in the ring at best.There's nothing great about him. Hes good on the mic,but in all honesty if he wasnt screwing Stephanie would he be a 14 time world champion? I mean for years people complained about him holding talent back. Not only that how in the hell does this guy win the world title more than Austin, HBK,Brett Hart, The Rock & Taker? Those guys are miles better than him. If Anything HBK/ Taker shouldve won the belt that many times. Taker carried his ass at WM 27.

-triple hhh is good inring and he busted his ass off for the wwe. steve austin left in 2002 or 2003 so triple hhh had 7 years to get titles.

-steve austin, well stone cold steve austin is stone cold steve austin he didnt need titles, he is probly the best guy to have ever wrestled, he controls the crowd better than like everybody so thats that. plus he left early so triple hhh has had more time to get titles.

-HBK, is called the greatest wrestler to have ever wrestled and has a huge reputation he was taken good care of. he didnt need the title, he was part of some of the biggest moments in the wwf/e.

-bret hart was big, but he didnt need the titles to be big. he to was part of many major moments in the wwf/e

-the rock, he was with the wwf/e for awhile then left for 7 years, he has had many moments plus he is huge and he wasnt with the wwf/e very long. he did what he wanted to do then up and left, you know, to play a fairy with a tooth XP.

-undertaker, he didnt need the titles to be big, he has captivated crowds for the entire course of his career.he has held 7 world titles and has a WM streak of 19-0, that streak easily beats the likes of either the WHC or the WWE championship by far. so you cant really compare him to triple hhh.

-plus since hunter is a 14 time world champ, that meens he has lost the title 14 times so its to be admired yet looked upon poorly so it kinda evens out there.

 

[sajsSAMynwa1892]

He's one of the most overrated, but not as overrated as Randy Orton is currently by his fans.

The commentary team used to try to put Triple H over by calling him the best wrestler in the world for a long time, but the reality is that Triple H is not a top fifteen star of all time. Anyone who denies that he'd only have half the world titles if he wasn't the male Michelle McCool is simply being delusional.

His ability on the mic is really overrated too. As a babyface his promos are not interesting at all, and he fails to be funny every time he tries his comedy act.

His wrestling is good but nothing spectacular, and his matches are forgettable unless he's working with a top talent in the ring. He's been involved in some of my favourite matches ever against Shawn Michaels, but he's also had his good share of shit matches (Orton, Nash, Steiner, RVD, Goldberg, etc).

male michelle mcCool haha

i think your being a bit harsh though, ye he used political pull to get himself to the top but his first year at the very top(2000) he had so many quality matches, granted he faced opponents who made it easy. to call him overrated though means that wrestling fans rate him as highly as bret and the like. and no-one does do they? he cuts good promos and is capable of very good matches when he needs to, overall hes very good, but not in hbk or jerichos league

 

[The Beast]

Triple H? Overated? Wow dude, great way to get people to disrespect you. HHH is one of the best entertainers in the history of WWE. Triple H isn't at the top cause he's giving Stephanie McMahon a good time in bed. Triple H was still at the top when he was with Chyna. If anyones overated, it's you.

 

[AntiChristDeicide]

Saying that HHH is overrated is like saying Undertaker is overrated. You would have to be either the youngest poster in wrestzone's forums history or the dumbest poster in wrestlezone's forums history.

 

[The Beast]

I know I already said what I had to say, but 1 more thing. If you say HHH is overated, then HBK is overated and Undertaker as well as Edge is overated. None of these superstars are overated, they work hard to entertain the WWE Universe, and I know if I was Triple H (which I hope to become a WWE Superstar in the near future) I know I wouldnt appreciate being called overated! Really dude? As Miz says, "Really? Really? REALLY?" These superstars share blood sweat and precious tears in that work and work there asses off to entertain us! Even Chavo Guerrero as a MAJOR low heel, I respect him for coming out there on Superstars to entertain us! As well as Evan Bourne,Curt Hawkins and Chris Masters along with Trent Barretta! They all work hard for us! Let me guess Zack Ryder is overated. No,not at all! He is even doing side episodes on YouTube to entertain us.And if your not down with that, I got two words for ya. Suck-it! Thats the bottom line cause I said so, and I guarran-Damn-tee it, that you Cant See Me!

 

[BIGJUICYNIPPLES]

It annoys me when people act as if Tripple H is some horrible Wrestle, he is a fantastic Heel, a good face, and he's incredible on the Mic, he's always interesting, has a cool voice, always working hard to be were he is and he has a heart like few others do, i mean how many damn injuries has HHH had? i cant even count, yet he always comes back in the best shape possible, him having a relationship with Stephanie is there thing and not ours, Over all what makes others that much better then him? he is indeed a Legit 14 time Champ, he is also the guy who was in a couple of the best factions ever in Pro wrestling, (Evolution, DX), he has done every thing there is to do and is a certified legend, to think other wise is simply ignorant

 

[Karaoke Superstar]

I mean the dude is decent in the ring at best.There's nothing great about him. Hes good on the mic,but in all honesty if he wasnt screwing Stephanie would he be a 14 time world champion? I mean for years people complained about him holding talent back. Not only that how in the hell does this guy win the world title more than Austin, HBK,Brett Hart, The Rock & Taker? Those guys are miles better than him. If Anything HBK/ Taker shouldve won the belt that many times. Taker carried his ass at WM 27.

[YOUTUBE]iiD3_lPT0fE[/YOUTUBE]

For the last time, no. Triple H is the definition of a complete superstar. He has the size, look, wrestling ability, presence, elite mic skills, passion, loyalty, tenure, and everything in between. If he wasn't worthy of being that guy then he wouldn't have been, regardless of if he married Vince himself.