Triple H: an absolute pseudo-legend in pro wrestling?

[Navi]

HHH has given a lot to this business and he's been around forever. He's had some great matches, and did he promote himself, well of course he did, that what the great ones do. And it's also how they get ahead.

He's not a Cena, Austin, Rock or Hogan, but he's up there in the upper echelon. A lot as been made of his marriage to Stephanie, but so what, they seem to be very happy and have three cute little daughters. No one says anything about any other relationships that wrestlers have so like I said who cares.

HHH knows the business and he's learning from one of the best in Vince McMahon. Just look at the job he's done with NXT. He's seen the problems that exist on the main roster and is avoiding them with the NXT roster. Is he a legend, yes he is, he's put his heart and sole into this business and will continue to do so for years to come.

 

[Loveless]

Pseudo-Legend is absolutely correct and anyone who believes otherwise really had been brainwashed by the WWE

Has he ever been "The Man"? By that, I mean, has he been on the level of Austin, Hogan, Rock, HBK? The answer, quite simply, is no. You could argue that he was in that position around 2000-2001 and you may have some merit, but he fell into that position because of Austin being gone. HHH could never have taken that spot from Austin or Rock, just like he could never have gotten out from Shawn's shadow. He's Savage to someone else's Hogan.

Is his character legendary? Again, nope. When you talk about icons, you think of Taker, Savage, Warrior, Hogan, even Hart to an extent, people who have iconic memorable looks or styles. He is not at that level.

Is his ring-work legendary? Is he as good in the ring as HBK? Hart? Angle? Flair? Stop me when I find his level. Jericho? Savage? Rude? Steamboat? If you're honest, as an in-ring worker he's probably not Top 50 All Time.

Lastly, I want to address this argument that 13 world titles makes him a legend.

It does not.

If HHH is a legend for 13 world titles, then Neil Patrick Harris is a legend for getting women into bed. This is not a real title, it's something someone has written for him, it's not reality, he didn't really win it. Doesn't Edge have more world titles than Hogan? Because that really shows up how irrelevant the titles have become.

In no way is HHH legendary, he's slightly above average in most things but not even close to being the best at anything.

 

[Aquaman6686]

JackHammer: The 'theory' of Triple H being a mediocre wrestler has absolutely not been debunked by fanboys like yourself. As the OP stated, just because 'you' believe Triple H is amazing that in itself does not make it so. And just because you 'believe' the relationship to Stephanie in his career ascension has been debunked DOES NOT mean it has been. You carry yourself around here like you are the 'all knowing voice of reason' when you're most likely just a WWETriple H PR guy. Every single one of your posts I read has a Triple H promotion in it. I find it really annoying as I've always seen him as a tier 3 guy. WWE tries so hard to make Triple H bigger than anyone in history. He seriously has had more exposure than anyone ever and it's unwarranted. Just Monday night Triple H was front and center for the first full hour of the show. Yawwwn. Then Hollywood Helmsley was back later in a segment that had less to do with pushing Sting and more to do with building Trips heel legacy. It's sick. Triple H flat out sucks. He cannot push himself and book himself without it being called out! He's always been the vanilla guy to hang with the colourful and charismatic. Shawn Nash Hall Steph Flair..they were the draws. They were the true heels people paid to see. The dream match right now is Taker vs Sting. It has to happen now if at all. Instead we get the overrated, third tier heel vs Sting. In a feud all about solidifying Triple H's legacy. It's all about manipulating perception. Making that wife beating liar as big as Harley Race or Superstar Graham. Please. Remember how he attached himself to Brock after his UFC run. Immortal Trips is last man to pin the Beast. For what reason? Cronyism. Nepotism. Whatever it is you want to call it, it had EVERYTHING to do with Levesque's political maneuvering. EVERYTHING. Debunk that. What other reason to devalue the former ultimate fighting champ and BEAST who would go on to do the unthinkable: End Takers WM streak. But f'n Tripls had just beat him! Oh and don't get me started on Punk and why he left. Remember Punk's year long title run? Trips got a clean pin, for absolutely no apparent reason, just before the run. Just to remind everyone during the reign who was still better than Punk. The same old man who beat the former UFC champ. That pointless 'pin' almost detailed Punk's run. How many world titles too many did Trips win again?? 15 LOL For what reason??? LOL No reason!! Trips as immortal and Trips as 15 time champ is outrageous. It would NEVER have happened if WWE had any real competition over the past 15 years. Undebunkable Jack Hammer..Not a conspiracy theory. Never has been. And never will be.

You're absolutely nuts and not a thing you said makes any sense. You say Kevin Nash was a bigger draw than Triple H, and yet Kevin Nash's run as a top guy resulted in one of the lowest-attended and lowest-buyrated periods in WWE history. You find it ridiculous that Triple H beat Brock Lesnar and yet you're clearly buying into WWE's revisionist history of Brock Lesnar being some unbeatable god, despite him having been beaten clean by numerous opponents. You find it ridiculous that Triple H beat CM Punk and "almost ruined his reign", despite that match happening months before Punk would go on to be WWE Champion for well over a year. Yeah, that one loss to Triple H REALLY screwed up CM Punk's career. Just because YOU see Triple H as a "third tier" guy doesn't make it so. Why did Triple H win 13 (not 15) World Championships? A lot of people feel it's because he's one of the best of all time. But the #1 reason is because Triple H DRAWS MONEY. He draws more money than Kevin Nash or Scott Hall could ever dream of drawing, and is now one of the legendary "special attraction" guys that WWE can count on for big events. Simply having Triple H competing on a card makes it a special event. You're blindly hating on Triple H simply because you don't like him, but that doesn't change facts.

 

[MC_Live]

Not organically over? Have you ever seen the pop he got the night he returned in MSG from his 1st quad injury. That's how you describe over buddy.

Look, politicking is one thing. But you don't remain as relevant for as long, and win as many titles as Triple H just through politics. You have to actually be good. Triple H is one of the best storytellers in the history of the business. Opinions are opinions, but there's no denying that Triple H has made a significant impact on this business. Sure, he wasn't as technically sounds as Shawn or Bret. Sure, he wasn't as main stream popular as Austin or Hogan. But he was damn close. If you start going up to random people on the street and ask them if they know Triple H, a pretty large amount will probably say yes. He was over in the attitude era, and politics or not, he's good enough to back it up. He's a legend, no ifs ands or buts about it.

A lot of people like to bash Triple H, and don't really know what they're talking about. Bret said that he never really saw Triple H contribute anything major, but Bret also missed Triple H's entire run on top. Triple H gets hate on, probably just for the sole reason that he married the bosses daughter. If he never married Stephanie, I still think he is good enough to warrant any accomplishment he's ever achieved. He's damn good, and he knows a lot about this business. He made a name for himself, no matter what anyone wants to say. Sure he has his faults. Maybe he hasn't always done the right thing. But at the end of the day, anyone should see that he loves this business, and he worked his ass off to be one of the best.

 

[marquez76]

Lets see if in 10 years he won't be named a legend. IMO he already is.
Organically over? this...

[YOUTUBE]uRGQugQpjz8[/YOUTUBE]

 

[FarFromFine]

Not organically over? Have you ever seen the pop he got the night he returned in MSG from his 1st quad injury. That's how you describe over buddy.

Look, politicking is one thing. But you don't remain as relevant for as long, and win as many titles as Triple H just through politics. You have to actually be good. Triple H is one of the best storytellers in the history of the business. Opinions are opinions, but there's no denying that Triple H has made a significant impact on this business. Sure, he wasn't as technically sounds as Shawn or Bret. Sure, he wasn't as main stream popular as Austin or Hogan. But he was damn close. If you start going up to random people on the street and ask them if they know Triple H, a pretty large amount will probably say yes. He was over in the attitude era, and politics or not, he's good enough to back it up. He's a legend, no ifs ands or buts about it.

A lot of people like to bash Triple H, and don't really know what they're talking about. Bret said that he never really saw Triple H contribute anything major, but Bret also missed Triple H's entire run on top. Triple H gets hate on, probably just for the sole reason that he married the bosses daughter. If he never married Stephanie, I still think he is good enough to warrant any accomplishment he's ever achieved. He's damn good, and he knows a lot about this business. He made a name for himself, no matter what anyone wants to say. Sure he has his faults. Maybe he hasn't always done the right thing. But at the end of the day, anyone should see that he loves this business, and he worked his ass off to be one of the best.

So a pop after being gone for a long time means you're a legend? Bubba Dudley must have been top tier after hearing the Philly crowd go nuts for him at the Rumble this year!!

And you actually do win as many titles and he has through politics (and being in with the family that gets to decide who wins said titles). And, yeah, Bret Hart doesn't know what he's talking about? There was a "who's better: HBK or Bret" thread on here and the majority of people here were saying that Bret was better than HBK. If that is true, to be fair I don't think he is, then I think that as one of the best ring workers of all time his opinion should have some value.

He's done great with NXT and he does work hard and love the business, but I work hard at and love golf but that doesn't make me a PGA tour guy. Talent is talent and you either have it or you don't. And you can have a lot of it at something but if there are a good number of people that have more then you're not going to be one of the best. He was and is a good showman, a solid worker, and achieved far more than his talent earned him.

Accolades aren't reflective of talent when your family is the one handing them to you.

 

[OYDK]

Pseudo-Legend is absolutely correct and anyone who believes otherwise really had been brainwashed by the WWE

Of course, because it's the 30 people who voted Yes that are brainwashed, and not the 5 that voted No, right? The people who vote yes, vote yes because we can make an unbiased judgement... the ones who vote no (or the majority) are the ones who delude themselves into believing all the garbage propoganda that's out there about HHH. I think that's pretty clear based on this thread so far.

Has he ever been "The Man"? By that, I mean, has he been on the level of Austin, Hogan, Rock, HBK? The answer, quite simply, is no. You could argue that he was in that position around 2000-2001 and you may have some merit, but he fell into that position because of Austin being gone. HHH could never have taken that spot from Austin or Rock, just like he could never have gotten out from Shawn's shadow. He's Savage to someone else's Hogan.

Actually, HHH was "The Man" from 2002-2005... Rock and Austin had just left, Cena and Brock were beginning their rises, and Angle was the face of Smackdown. In this period HHH created Evolution, had his epic feud with Shawn, put both Orton and Batista over BIG TIME, feuded with Goldberg, and held 5 World Titles. He was the featured man every Monday, so technically he was "The Man". Even if he wasn't though, what does that have to do with anything? Are you saying the only people who should be considered legends are Austin, Rock, Hogan, Flair, Sammartino, and Cena because they were the only faces of the company? (Shawn was never the "face" either fyi, and if he was, it was only from SSeries 97-Mania 14). I don't understand your argument here in the slightest.

Is his character legendary? Again, nope. When you talk about icons, you think of Taker, Savage, Warrior, Hogan, even Hart to an extent, people who have iconic memorable looks or styles. He is not at that level.

Is his ring-work legendary? Is he as good in the ring as HBK? Hart? Angle? Flair? Stop me when I find his level. Jericho? Savage? Rude? Steamboat? If you're honest, as an in-ring worker he's probably not Top 50 All Time.

His character is most definitely legendary. He's known as "The Game", "The Cerebral Assassin", "The King of Kings", and now the "COO". He is widely considered one of the greatest heels of all time due to his ruthlessness and has lived up to the hype. Just because somebody wears purple tights to the ring, or a mini cowboy hat, does not constitute them as a legendary character.

Ring-work... meh, he's not a technical masterpiece, but he is a master of ring psychology and can tell a story in the ring like nobody else. The emotion alone of such matches like HHH/HBK SS 02, HHH/Taker Mania 28, HHH/Foley 2000, makes these instant classics. Again though, this argument doesn't prove anything. Is Hogan's ring work legendary? How about Warrior's? Rock's?

Lastly, I want to address this argument that 13 world titles makes him a legend.

It does not.

If HHH is a legend for 13 world titles, then Neil Patrick Harris is a legend for getting women into bed. This is not a real title, it's something someone has written for him, it's not reality, he didn't really win it. Doesn't Edge have more world titles than Hogan? Because that really shows up how irrelevant the titles have become.

This argument can be used to denounce the WWE entirely. If the title means nothing, than who cares about Ric Flair? It's all fake bullshit right? He wasn't really good, he just won 16 fake Championships because that's how it was written. Who knows if he was REALLY over, because he hasn't really done anything. No. Ric Flair won 16 World Titles because he was great. Cena has won 15 because he's great. You don't win 13 World Titles and hold those titles at the most prosperous time in company history, if you're not great at what you do.

 

[Hollywood Naitch]

He was one of the best all-rounders we've ever seen, and he has practically untouchable credentials. People like to bitch and complain that he slept his way to the top, which is moronic, as he was already a top guy by the time he hooked up with Steph, and Vince was far more likely to punish him for banging his daughter than rewarding him. Or he's somehow not a legend because he played third fiddle to Austin and the Rock, even though anyone not named Hulk Hogan or Ric Flair would've ended playing third fiddle to Austin and Rock if they were put in that era.

The fact is, he's a great wrestler, has done everything there is to do, and he continues to cement his legacy as one of the best minds in the business by booking NXT to perfection.

This is absolutely correct. Triple H is a phenomenal performer, always has been and still is today. He's had great matches with so many different opponents over the years, has every tool in the book needed to become a top star in the business- the mic skills, the in-ring skills, the look and everything else.

He's led 2 of the greatest factions in wrestling history, had classic feuds and rivalries with the likes of HBK, Mick Foley, The Rock, Austin, Batista and many more, had MOTY candidates, been an excellent face and heel on multiple occasions... what more do you need to do to be a legend?

Just because Austin/Rock were more popular....is Triple H not a legend? I guess in that case Mick Foley and Undertaker aren't legends, as they were never THE guy in WWE? Would Rocky not be a legend if he had married Stephanie instead of Hunter? The fact is, YES Triple H's career will have been aided by his relationship with the McMahon's, BUT he was already a top guy when he got together with Stephanie and if he hadn't been a major draw he wouldn't have remanied on top for so long- Vince loves money after all. Also, how many other top stars have played the political game in their careers- Hogan, Austin, Michaels jump to mind immediately, everyone tries to protect their spots in such a competitive industry.

He's responsible for a lot of the success of NXT, which is a good sign that the WWE will be in good hands when Vince eventually hands Triple H the reigns, and his genuine love for the business is exactly what the company needs to ensure it's success in the future.

Any true fan of the business should respect and admire what Triple H has achived, how dedicated he is to his craft and what he continues to do for the WWE. Just look at that video (already posted) of the pop he received in 2002 when recovering from his torn quad- that pop is for RESPECT for the man, as he was a huge heel before he left. They wanted to see him, he's that fucking good.

My only complaint about Triple H is that he stuck around a touch too long for my tastes, with almost ten years between his first and his last title runs.

See, I disagree. I'd be happy to see Hunter win the title again even now. His in-ring work is still world class. I wouldn't want him to have another year-long reign, but it would be awesome to see The Game with the title strapped around his waist again, and he could put over someone like Ziggler or Ambrose for the title after a couple of months.

[YOUTUBE]80XFRM0l0gE[/YOUTUBE]

[YOUTUBE]8uEsKTjv6co[/YOUTUBE]

 

[FightOwensFight]

Pseudo-Legend is absolutely correct and anyone who believes otherwise really had been brainwashed by the WWE

Has he ever been "The Man"? By that, I mean, has he been on the level of Austin, Hogan, Rock, HBK? The answer, quite simply, is no. You could argue that he was in that position around 2000-2001 and you may have some merit, but he fell into that position because of Austin being gone. HHH could never have taken that spot from Austin or Rock, just like he could never have gotten out from Shawn's shadow. He's Savage to someone else's Hogan.

Is his character legendary? Again, nope. When you talk about icons, you think of Taker, Savage, Warrior, Hogan, even Hart to an extent, people who have iconic memorable looks or styles. He is not at that level.

Is his ring-work legendary? Is he as good in the ring as HBK? Hart? Angle? Flair? Stop me when I find his level. Jericho? Savage? Rude? Steamboat? If you're honest, as an in-ring worker he's probably not Top 50 All Time.

Lastly, I want to address this argument that 13 world titles makes him a legend.

It does not.

If HHH is a legend for 13 world titles, then Neil Patrick Harris is a legend for getting women into bed. This is not a real title, it's something someone has written for him, it's not reality, he didn't really win it. Doesn't Edge have more world titles than Hogan? Because that really shows up how irrelevant the titles have become.

In no way is HHH legendary, he's slightly above average in most things but not even close to being the best at anything.

So, just so I am understanding you correctly. In your first section you say he is "The Savage to someone else's Hogan". Then in the very next section, when discounting his "character" you use as an example of someone that you feel meets your criteria as Savage...

The next section you again reference Savage. Also, talking about his in-ring work. You mention Flair. I would say HHH is at least as good in the ring as Flair, never mind people like Hogan and Cena that aren't considered the best in-ring tacticians of all time but are considered in the legend category.

The issue is that you are cherry picking. His promos and character put him light-years ahead of most of the "technical" wrestlers like Hart and Steamboat. His in-ring ability puts him ahead of those that are know predominately for their characters and persona, like Flair (sorry to all the Flair lovers out there, but while he was good in the ring, it was his combination of character and in-ring that made him a legend) and Hogan (same as Flair).

Is HHH the best in-ring guy? Of course not. He isn't at the level of the Steamboat's and Hart's. Is he the best character/personality? No, again he isn't at the level of the Hogan's and Flair's. But, his resume, taken as a whole, puts him the same category as anyone.

 

[Wald]

The issue is that you are cherry picking. His promos and character put him light-years ahead of most of the "technical" wrestlers like Hart and Steamboat.

I see people saying things like about the Hitman and I wonder if they were watching WWF back when he was the main man?

Bret had a very distinct character that made him the most over wrestler in the world for a time in the 1990s. He wasn't some Dean Malenko silent mat wrestler and he wasn't bad on the mic either. He really stepped up his game with in-ring promos in 1996 and 1997 to the extent that he was verbally able to go toe to toe with Steve Austin, who was the best promo guy in then business even at that time.

 

[Stan Hansen]

Hunter is one of the best wrestles of all time. He can put on great matches with just about anybody and has done so for years. His ability to tell a story in the ring, his match psychology, is as good as anyone the WWE has ever had. He's one of the top guys to ever lace up the boots and I don't get how you can say otherwise.

It annoys me to no end when people bring up Stephanie...the guy was destined to be big time well before Stephanie ever came into the picture. To be honest, dating the bosses daughter may have been career suicide for many.

He's a great heel, a good face, all around he can make it all work. They could have him be a face, even in his current role of the Authority, and he'd make it work.

Personally I'd like to see a Hunter face turn in his current role but I doubt we see it.

I also wouldn't be opposed to him having one last run with a title. A brief run that has him put over a young deserving talent at something like a Summerslam or Royal Rumble match. A young up and comer going over HHH in a few month feud for the title could be good TV and help a young guy at the same time.

 

[enviousdominous]

I look at HHH in the same way that I look at all other public figures. I might be psycho-critical of them when I'm having a bad case of the Mondays, but even then I can admit when things are better for their contributions.

I'm a die-hard CM Punk mark, so I'll probably never eat dinner at the Levesque mansion.

HHH tapped out for <omitted by TitanSports Inc.> at WrestleMania 20 and laid down for Daniel Bryan at WrestleMania 30. While I criticize him for putting himself into marquee matches more often than I feel that he deserved to, it's still tough for even myself to find a HHH match where he gave any less than 110%.

Based on my sources, I'm very confident that HHH didn't pop the question to Steph as a cheap ploy to weasel his way into a lifetime of job security and financial freedom. I do believe that love brought them together and that love keeps them together, I don't think it's a marriage of convenience. From what I hear, HHH is actually a very good father to his kids.

He's still writing his story, and I think he's doing a decent job of it on tv. Now I need to go shower.

 

[KangFu]

I find it funny some posters here glorify 2002-2005 when HHH cemented his legacy and was shoved down throats. That's also the time period 70% of the wrestling audience left and never came back. Overexposure of the McMahons and HHH were key in driving people away from wrestling including myself for a good decade.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

I find it funny some posters here glorify 2002-2005 when HHH cemented his legacy and was shoved down throats. That's also the time period 70% of the wrestling audience left and never came back. Overexposure of the McMahons and HHH were key in driving people away from wrestling including myself for a good decade.

Surely that had nothing at all to do with the AE ending in 01, and a legion of fans who were only interested in the crash tv the WWF provided trickling out. I mean, you yourself siting the fact they never came back certainly doesn't back that up.

 

[KangFu]

Surely that had nothing at all to do with the AE ending in 01, and a legion of fans who were only interested in the crash tv the WWF provided trickling out. I mean, you yourself siting the fact they never came back certainly doesn't back that up.

That vulgar crash tv was still going on any Vince story line like the Kiss my ass club, katy vick was in late 2002. Terrible booking and making austin sing love songs to vince helped drive fans away. 2001 was also when that terrible HHH-Stephanie authority story began with cringeworthy promos and overexposure.

Then from there having HHH steamroll over his competitors including being a racist and beating down Booker T with no payoff made little sense. Most intelligent fans were sick of Triple H by this point.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

2001 was also when that terrible HHH-Stephanie authority story began with cringeworthy promos and overexposure.

Remember that most lucrative year in history I spoke of in my first post?


Yea, 2001 was the one.


Try again.

 

[A11oftheLights]

HHH is a legend simple as that and if he wanted to he could make himself a 4 time hall of famer.

1. Solo Career
2. DX
3. Evolution
4. The Kliq
And when he's completely finished with the business he could even have a claim to being a legendary booker/promoter, looking at NXT I wouldnt put it past him.

Nobody can be a 13 time world champion, a main member of DX, the head of Evolution & a part of the Kliq and all their infamy and not be considered a legend of the business. Anybody who says otherwise simply refuses to face the facts.

 

[KangFu]

Remember that most lucrative year in history I spoke of in my first post?


Yea, 2001 was the one.


Try again.

so what? 2001 was when WCW collapsed and WWE was the only organization left gaining all fans out there by default. Wrestling fans have a high tolerance and they gave the botched invasion a chance hoping for dream matchups and storylines which never happened. Then compounding that with a terrible HHH-McMahon authority angle pushed down their throats in the latter half of the year drove them away. Ratings and attendance continued to dip post 2002 each year with the HHH steam rolling over his opponents who gained nothing out of the feuds with him.

 

[FightOwensFight]

I see people saying things like about the Hitman and I wonder if they were watching WWF back when he was the main man?

Bret had a very distinct character that made him the most over wrestler in the world for a time in the 1990s. He wasn't some Dean Malenko silent mat wrestler and he wasn't bad on the mic either. He really stepped up his game with in-ring promos in 1996 and 1997 to the extent that he was verbally able to go toe to toe with Steve Austin, who was the best promo guy in then business even at that time.

Don't get me wrong, I liked Hart, and while he didn't have the worst personality in the world (citing Malenko as you did is a pretty good contrast, and I agree) he wasn't on the same level as a HHH. His comedy while with DX (and he carried as much of their stuff as HBK, if not more) combined with the more intense stuff while more in his Cerebral Assassin mode put him in pretty rare company.

At the end of the day, this is all just opinion though, and nobody on the pro-HHH side is going to convince those that don't think he was much otherwise, and vice-verse.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

so what? 2001 was when WCW collapsed and WWE was the only organization left gaining all fans out there by default. Wrestling fans have a high tolerance and they gave the botched invasion a chance hoping for dream matchups and storylines which never happened. Then compounding that with a terrible HHH-McMahon authority angle pushed down their throats in the latter half of the year drove them away. Ratings and attendance continued to dip post 2002 each year with the HHH steam rolling over his opponents who gained nothing out of the feuds with him.

So when fans "go away in droves and never come back" Triple H is to blame, but when the company makes the most money it has ever made in one year with him as the main focus and he headlines numerous of the at-the-time highest grossing Wrestlemanias ever, he doesn't deserve any of the credit?




Stop. Just stop.

 

[KangFu]

So when fans "go away in droves and never come back" Triple H is to blame, but when the company makes the most money it has ever made in one year with him as the main focus and he headlines numerous of the at-the-time highest grossing Wrestlemanias ever, he doesn't deserve any of the credit?




Stop. Just stop.

He is certainly partly to blame being in the main spotlight of the company for 3+ years and nobody he feuded with got anything positive lasting out of it. Ratings were also going down in 2001 and on despite your "most profitable" argument.

 

[Mighty NorCal]

He is certainly partly to blame being in the main spotlight of the company for 3+ years and nobody he feuded with got anything positive lasting out of it. Ratings were also going down in 2001 and on despite your "most profitable" argument.

My mistake anyways. All this time I had 01' mixed up with 00.


00 was its most lucrative year, which was based around the Mcmahon-Helmsley faction. I don't see how you can blame Triple H for decline in 01, since he wasn't around for most of it

But thank you for posting something I can visually see so that I may correct myself.

Besides, ratings =/= drawing power.


Ask Eric Bischoff.


Also, what do decling ratings in 01 have to do with the 6+ Manias that he has headlined which have also grossed more than any other ones before them? The many, many classic matches he has been involved that are readily acclaimed?

Ok, you don't fucking like Triple H, so you didn't like WWE's tv for a couple years. Your personal opinion doesn't mean he isn't one of the highest grossing draws in the history of wrestling.

 

[KangFu]

My mistake anyways. All this time I had 01' mixed up with 00.


00 was its most lucrative year, which was based around the Mcmahon-Helmsley faction. I don't see how you can blame Triple H for decline in 01, since he wasn't around for most of it

But thank you for posting something I can visually see so that I may correct myself.

Besides, ratings =/= drawing power.


Ask Eric Bischoff.

Ratings = health of the business. More people watching does indicate the better the product. Again my argument against the HHH-Mcmahon cancer in the company started at Q3 of 2001 with the steph authority angle.

I don't have much trouble with HHH from 96-2000, it was when he got into the McMahon family did we start seeing him steamrolling over the product and when many fans just stopped watching since it became so stale.

 

[Thriller Ant]

Ratings = health of the business. More people watching does indicate the better the product. Again my argument against the HHH-Mcmahon cancer in the company started at Q3 of 2001 with the steph authority angle.

I don't have much trouble with HHH from 96-2000, it was when he got into the McMahon family did we start seeing him steamrolling over the product and when many fans just stopped watching since it became so stale.

According to the chart you posted, the ratings were 90% of the way to the '03-'07 levels by fall of 2001. There is probably a way to argue whatever it is you are trying to argue, but whatever you are trying to do with that ratings chart isn't it.

 

[KangFu]

According to the chart you posted, the ratings were 90% of the way to the '03-'07 levels by fall of 2001. There is probably a way to argue whatever it is you are trying to argue, but whatever you are trying to do with that ratings chart isn't it.

What I was trying to argue with that chart was the state of the business in 2001 was in decline and being most profitable for a year doesn't indicate how healthy of a direction the product is going on camera. The 3 year HHH-Steph era is a significant marker in the downward trend of the business that didn't recover much as years went on.