Triple H vs Undertaker was pure garbage.

[FlexAmerican Dynamite]

It was overhyped,utterly dissapointing,and it's given way to much credit. And please don't even try to tell me that Triple H tombstoning Taker completely made you think the streak was over automatically making it the best match of year(or the best match ever according to some posters). The fact that their thinking about doing it a third time makes me die alittle inside. The fact that HHH came on raw the week before TLC I believe and basically said because he was apparently the closest to beating the streak automatically means he broke the streak is just utternonsense.I want to state that these are just my opinions,and even though you may think otherwise you are completely entitled to your opinion....even if it may be flawed.

 

[Che Delilas]

I agree with you.

I hated that match with a passion. It was totally stale and had no tension in it, even the tombstone I knew Undertaker was going to kick out of. The match was awful.

Hell, I'd rather see a Taker vs Kane III if they're going to go with an older wrestler and not try to push someone new.

 

[Harthan]

Wasn't the best match of the year or anything, but not garbage. A watered down version of HBK/Taker at Mania. Apply the same arguments as you would to those matches, just with less general effectiveness all around.

 

[GI Cake]

The match overall was pretty damn entertaining. In fact, I would go as far to say it was the best match on the card. But was it a contender for match of the year over Punk/Cena at Money in the Bank? No. Could the match have been better if Taker had more left in him to perform? Of course.

 

[keehlnate]

It was not a pure garbage, but it is definitely overrated.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

The only match this year better than HHH/Taker was Cena/Punk. This match was physical, had some great moments and most of all told a fantastic story in between the ropes (which is what wrestling is all about). It was a little old school but the match was pretty damn good, I don't know how you could call it garbage. Seriously what more do you want in a match?

 

[Daniel]

It was actually a good match. A very good match. Fuck, in a few years, it might become a great match.

I haven't heard a decent argument against it.

 

[FlexAmerican Dynamite]

The only match this year better than HHH/Taker was Cena/Punk. This match was physical, had some great moments and most of all told a fantastic story in between the ropes (which is what wrestling is all about). It was a little old school but the match was pretty damn good, I don't know how you could call it garbage. Seriously what more do you want in a match?

Don't tell me it told a fantastic story in the ring.

I'll go on record and say if HBK didn't end his career last year against Taker this match wouldn't of even happened. This match was a poor man's HBK/Taker. They put more stock into this match then they did their actual main event only to dissapoint like I knew they were going to. Triple has to try to do everything Shawn did but attempt to be better at it. And yes I can think of few more matches that were better than this one that happend this year.

 

[Poop Master Flex]

Don't tell me it told a fantastic story in the ring.

I'll go on record and say if HBK didn't end his career last year against Taker this match wouldn't of even happened. This match was a poor man's HBK/Taker. They put more stock into this match then they did their actual main event only to dissapoint like I knew they were going to. Triple has to try to do everything Shawn did but attempt to be better at it. And yes I can think of few more matches that were better than this one that happend this year.

Before I tear that comment and this thread to shreds I would love to know what you think constitutes as a great match. Enlighten me!

 

[Paralyzer Z]

Before I tear that comment and this thread to shreds I would love to know what you think constitutes as a great match. Enlighten me!

X2

 

[Tequila Dave]

A professional wrestling match is as good as people think it is.

 

[Diet Soda]

Don't tell me it told a fantastic story in the ring.

I'll go on record and say if HBK didn't end his career last year against Taker this match wouldn't of even happened. This match was a poor man's HBK/Taker. They put more stock into this match then they did their actual main event only to dissapoint like I knew they were going to. Triple has to try to do everything Shawn did but attempt to be better at it. And yes I can think of few more matches that were better than this one that happend this year.

(1) You're failing to see the match in it's own right and you're clouding your judgement by comparing it to matches from previous years that set the bar incredibly high. On it's own, the story behind HHH/Taker is one veteran wrestler accepting the challenge of another; it needs no stock, the story writes itself.

Which brings me on to (2), of course Trips has tried to do what Shawn could not. Anyone with half a knowledge of the WWE kayfabe knows that HBK and HHH are the best of friends, and the match at WM last year is Triple H's way of trying to avenge the way in which his Kliq and DX buddy was retired. Like I said the story writes itself .

 

[Paralyzer Z]

I'm still waiting for Black Dynamite's enlightenment of arguing against storytelling.

 

[xoxo French Kiss xoxo]

Once the "No Holds Bared" stipulation was added it was obvious the match had no chance of being a great wrestling match. It was going to be a brawl, full of spots, with a ton of rest holds.

Triple H is Triple H and probably thought he could put on a better match with Undertaker than HBK had the two years prior, and it feel short, extremely short.

Was it a horrible match, no. But it didn't live up to the hype and the quality of what many come to expect from the Undertaker or Triple H.

 

[FunKay the Inevitable]

The match overall was pretty damn entertaining. In fact, I would go as far to say it was the best match on the card. But was it a contender for match of the year over Punk/Cena at Money in the Bank? No. Could the match have been better if Taker had more left in him to perform? Of course.

WHOA-OH?!?

 

[Martin Gabriel]

While I don't agree with your views on the match last year, Black Dynamite, I do share your lack of enthusiasm for wanting to see it again, but I can't think of anyone that is on the current roster, or anyone willing to come back, that is worthy of facing Taker at Mania yet. Him saying he broke the streak is just stupidity and if WWE expects us to go with that and that we are that dense, they need to wake the hell up. Then again I can almost guarantee that was Triple H's idea to put himself over.

 

[JTeller]

I was slightly disappointed but I do not agree that it's garbage. Sure, it could've been done to a better extent and sure, it should've been done but it was what they did and that's the bottom line and not because Stone Cold said so, because it has passed.

 

[KnowMyRole-ShutYourMouth]

It wasn't garbage. But the idea of them facing each other is. Instead of elevating other talent (such as Sheamus @ WM26, even in defeat), Undertaker and Triple H have to waste everyone's time competing in a match in which we KNOW Taker has no shot of losing. I can't believe they are considering doing this match AGAIN!

I, along with countless others I'm sure, would rather see a Wade Barret or Cody Rhodes or Sheamus challenge the streak. Triple H could help elevate someone like a Miz or Ziggler by just having a competitive match with them. Sure, it'd be nice if he lost. But I understand the concept of keeping someone of Triple H's calibur looking strong so when he finally does lose it seems important. And he has jobbed quite frequently @ Wrestlemania, all things considered.

But yeah. The match was pretty good last year. But everyone knew at the end of the day Triple H wouldn't be the guy to end the streak. I don't know why we have to endure this for a 2nd straight year, and really, you could argue its been 3 or even 4 b/c I felt the same way about the HBK encounters (albeit WM25 was epic, hence the 3 OR 4 year gap).

 

[Mr. Artistic guy]

That match was a win for storytelling. A technical marvel it may not have been, but it was surely a memorable spectacle. I remember the Orton/Punk and Rhodes/Mysterio matches being good but I'm strapped to try to remember any specific thing happening within them.

As for what constitutes as a good match, it's a personal thing. Hence how people are managing to have this debate.

 

[The Champ]

Taker/HHH was the best match I saw in 2011.

Never saw Cena/Punk. I know, I know, blasphemy and all that.

 

[Uncle Sam]

Taker/HHH was the best match I saw in 2011.

Never saw Cena/Punk. I know, I know, blasphemy and all that.

You didn't see the rest of WrestleMania either, apparently.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Or any of the Christian/Orton matches or Cena/Mysterio for that matter.

Hell, I enjoyed Snooki more than I did HHH/Taker.

 

[FunKay the Inevitable]

You didn't see the rest of WrestleMania either, apparently.

I hope you saw the WOAH-OH! comment I left in here earlier. That was for you.

 

[Lion's Sacrifice]

It wasn't a great match from a technical stand point, and that was the point. This wasn't going to be that type of match. This was a grudge match. One that happened to have the streak on the line. The match was there to be a flat out brawl, nothing more. There is no way they were going to top Taker's match from the last two mania's. That wasn't the point. This was more we're going to beat the hell out of each other and see who's left standing in the end. I don't even believe it was the best match at mania, but to say it was garbage is going a little bit overboard. I thought while the match wasn't the best it was entertaining.

 

[The Champ]

You didn't see the rest of WrestleMania either, apparently.

No other match at Mania came close for me.