Which Mania Had The Wrong Main Event?

[The Brain]

Earlier today someone created a thread about WrestleMania 25. In that thread the OP mentioned that Shawn Michaels vs. Undertaker should have been the main event. That got me to thinking about which manias had the wrong match close the show. Usually the mania main event is obvious but sometimes a case can be made for more than one match that could close the show. Which WrestleMania should have had a different match close the show? For the record I disagree with those who think HBK vs. Taker should have closed WM25. Triple H vs. Randy Orton was clearly built as the main event and was the appropriate choice to close the show. That leads me to my answer in this thread.

I believe the wrong match closed WM26. I have as much respect for Shawn Michaels as anyone but I don’t believe his farewell match should have been the main event of WM26. I never really bought into HBK’s obsession with beating Taker at mania. Why was it so important to him? Just because he was Mr. WrestleMania and he lost at WM25? So what? He didn’t obsess about beating Kurt Angle or John Cena after suffering mania losses to them. I suppose my personal dislike of the storyline isn’t really relevant. Once the match was made the story was career vs. streak and it was obviously a huge story. I just don’t think it was an appropriate main event. At WM24 Shawn Michaels faced Ric Flair in basically the same kind of match. I believe it was the most anticipated match and probably the best match of WM24 but it went on in the middle of the show. Flair still got a nice sendoff and after the match the focus shifted to the superstars who were still going to carry the load. I think HBK vs. Taker at WM26 should have gone on a couple matches before the main event. HBK could have still had the nice sendoff but then the WWE championship should have closed the show.

John Cena vs. Batista is a great mania main event. The story was perfect. Their careers had run parallel since the beginning of 2005. Having the two most consistent main event guys going against each other at mania five years after winning their first world titles was perfect. With all due respect to Michaels and Taker the main event should have focused on the top two current stars. If the title matches were a little weaker like they were at WM27 I would say that HBK vs. Taker should close the show, but with stars like Cena and Batista going against each other I think the WWE title match should have been the main event. Cena vs. Batista had better star power relative to the time, a better storyline, and the WWE title.

I’m sure my opinion won’t be a popular one but HBK vs. Flair did not headline WM24 and Warrior vs. Savage did not headline WM7. Each of those were arguably the best matches on the show and a farewell to a legendary competitor but the title matches were deemed more important on each.

Which mania do you think had the wrong match close the show? When answering this question keep the mindset that the show hadn’t taken place yet. For example, we didn’t know how huge the crowd reaction would be for Hogan vs. Rock at WM18 and how it would kill the crowd for HHH vs. Jericho later. That may still be a reasonable answer but don’t use hindsight to form your opinion.

 

[bigbootydaddyV]

Wrestlemania 8 in my opinion should have ended with Savage and Flair. The ending was awful, and even if it went according to plan it still would have been awful, and nothing compared to the match/ending flair and savage had. That match was also for the title, the only heavyweight title at the time, and so it should have gone on last.

 

[M3420]

Wow, awesome idea for a discussion thread!!! And since it hasn't been totally ripped into with four whole pages of people arguing, I figured I would throw a few things out there. I was intrigued by how the placing on the card was initially used to start the discussion, but are you willing to listen to jumbling around the competitors as well...?? Obviously, some big ones along those lines is Wrestlemania 8 and 18 or X-8 as WWE for some reason felt not to title Wrestlemania 16, 17, or 18, but I digress as it could be blamed on all of us being a bit mixed up by the new millenium ('Twenty-__ vs. '2003, etc.)

Anyways, onto business, Hogan vs. Ric Flair OR Savage vs. Flair should have definitely closed out the 1992 event in Indy....I'm a little bit of a Sid fan, but I really am a bit awestruck that he's actually closed out two wrestlemanias.

As far as X-8 or 18 goes, Rock v. Hogan should have been the final match of the night OR Hogan vs. Austin should have been, which leads me to my next point....Hogan V. Austin is probably the only match I really feel cheated out of. Not that they should do it--this being 2012 and all and the combined ages of those two icons would be well over 100, but I felt that Austin Hogan really could have been one of those 'which is the greatest of all time' deals, and them teasing it in the fall of 05 or whenever that was on raw with Hogan and mean gene in the middle of the f'n ring basically foreshadowing it and then letting it all just go down the drain really bugged me. And for full disclosure purposes, I already had my Wrestlemania 22 tickets purchased, and even though I stand by that event going down as one of the best of all time, I do still recall a few 'Hogan/Austin' chants breaking out even after 11 pretty solid matches, with 5 or 6 of those having legit claims as 'main event matches'

Back to the card placement argument--I found some discrepancies in saying that HBK/Taker shouldn't have closed the night out while HBK/Flair SHOULD HAVE......I really don't think either of them should have closed out the night. I could see Shawn getting the bone toss, however since he's been incredibly unselfish in losing at Mania and putting up and comers over...which also begs the question of Wrestlemania 23...I do feel bad that HHH didn't get the chance to perform at mania, but the same main event two years straight would have been plain ol lazy and HBK raised Cena and the match to new heights, all while having some yahoo run into the middle of the ring in front of 80k at Ford Field (which I was also privileged to be in attendance of) I know I'm all over the place so I'm going to leave a bit of a final list that summarizes my answers to the question posed in this thread

WM 8--Anything but Psycho Sid and a f---ing countout victory or whatever it was and a papa shango run in ???

WM 9--not even sure where to begin...what a cluster cluck

WM 13--hindsight says that Bret and Stone Cold should have closed, but then again The Rock was still Rocky Maivia then and Triple H was probably still coming to the ring in a tux and pissed off about having to job to Ultimate Warrior the year before, HBK was injured, and no I did not get to attend and wasn't even watching wrestling at the time, and was still pissed to hear about it at school the next day that they had Wrestlemania less than 20 minutes from my house!!!!!

WM 2000--another cluster cluck, not a single singles match on the card, and an injury depleted roster, also the heel retaining was a bit lame at the time

WM X-8 --like I said before, should have just went ahead and threw Hogan the bone and put him in the final match of the night, maybe then we wouldn't have had to endure watching him beat HBK (but HBK did 'oversell'--??) and also maybe wouldn't have had to watch him selfishly beat RKO then next year, and maybe could have gotten an Austin match....

WM XIX--does anyone else feel that this one was probably the best and most loaded roster Wrestlemania of all time??? I see a lot of love for 'X-Seven' but not enough love for XIX where they finally got back to the traditional roman numerals

not much to say on 20 through 23

24--I wondered why Edge/Taker closed that one out-- not that I minded, but the WHC is now the curtain jerker and the WWE title match was really an underachieving RKO-HHH-Cena match which should have been better

25--did anyone else think it should have been HHH v. EDGE and Cena vs. Orton?? I sure did but I guess it just wasn't meant to be...

26--did anyone else think this one sucked even worse than 25??

27--The MIZ?????!!!?!?!?! REALLY?? REALLY!?!?!? REALLY!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

28--Admit it, Taker v. HHH part 3 WAS INCREDIBLE!!!!!!!

Write me up for spamming all you want, I don't give a $ hit !!!!!!!! I've had a lot of fun writing this, and I'm super curious to see what they come up with for 29 and 30, from matches all the way to location--will WMXXX really be in Vancouver???

ALSO, the idea of a one match one on one main event is all but dead...You have the taker match which is almost always, non title, the WWE AND WHC matches (unification theories aside--not happening anytime soon) and some sort of other icon v. icon matches that don't need a title, plus the resurgent IC belt, plus the money in the bank match that they should bring back plus the all important divas title match that will hopefully be Beth Phoenix vs. Kharma someday, so from now on they're pretty much all 'main events' at this point, regardless of where they're at on the card

 

[Headman]

Wrestlemania 8 in my opinion should have ended with Savage and Flair. The ending was awful, and even if it went according to plan it still would have been awful, and nothing compared to the match/ending flair and savage had. That match was also for the title, the only heavyweight title at the time, and so it should have gone on last.

The Warrior return was the "OMG I just spit my soda at the tv" moment of the year. I'm glad the Hogan/Sid match went last just for that moment.

A show that had the wrong main event for me was any show the Undertaker closed with exception to WM 26 because it was HBK's final match. Nothing kills a Wrestlemania ending like an Undertaker win. And don't get me wrong, I love the Undertaker, but the outcomes are predictable and his celebration is a bit of a downer. I also think Tripe H vs Chris Jericho had no business headlining Wrestlemania X8. Same goes for Triple H vs Randy Orton.

 

[Rowdy Robby Piper]

WrestleMania IX: Hogan vs Yokozuna - Too bad that Hogan had to pull his creative card/stroke his ego/whatever and take the title away from Yokozuna. He had no business being there/pulling that, especially given the fact that he pretty much wasn't seen/defended the title until he lost it back to Yokozuna at King Of The Ring.

It's also a shame that WWF didn't pull off Hogan/Flair at WM8 (but that's for another place/another time)...

 

[puppetmaster 316]

Wrestlemania 27 definately.The Miz VS Cena REALLY?????????I mean why.of course the whole wrestlemania sucked but to end it with these two?????Not only the worst main event ever but one of the worst WWE Championship matches in case of being interesting.It was just 15 minutes of crap.The Rock Could do nothing here.just awful.
in the second place,Wrestlemania 2000 which was BS too.No singles match.Ending the night a Fatal 4 Way was worst case scenario.especially TripleH getting the win.I was Huge Rock fan at the time.It was just lame.
Finally,Wrestlemania 8 should have ended with the WWF Championship match.Hogan Vs. Sid sucked.Uncreative and boring.

 

[Rampage Bentley]

I think there is one universal answer to this question

WrestleMania 11

Shawn Michaels vs. Diesel for The WWF Championship was bumped so that we could have the main event of Bam Bam Bigelow vs. Lawrence Taylor

To this day, I have no idea what the logic was behind that move. Not only was LT not a wrestler, but Bam Bam Bigelow was nowhere near a main event level superstar. It'd be the equivelant of having Tom Brady vs. Jack Swagger as the main event of next years 'Mania.

WrestleMania 11, no doubt gave us the wrong main event.

 

[xxxdaniel_ariesxxx]

I Think the obvious, and easiest, answer is WrestleMania XI. The Celebrity match should never rank higher than the Championship Match. end of story...

But...

My Answer is WrestleMania I. I have always said that WrestleMania I should have been headlined my Rowdy Roddy Piper defending the WWF Championship against Hulk Hogan. Piper should have won the championship at The War to Settle the Score due to some underhanded heel tactics, beat up Lauper and T, left everyone laying as he walked out with the title that he had just robbed from Hogan and the first WrestleMania should have been Hogan gaining his revenge and, getting his championship back. Lauper and T could have been in his corner, T could have been the one to stop Cowboy Bob Orton from getting involved and the end of the show could have been Hogan getting back the title that was stolen from him, and Lauper and T getting there revenge on Piper, who since he had just gone through Hogan would have been able to save face while at the same time letting the babyfaces end the show on top... but that's just me.

 

[ProWrestlingFan]

Earlier today someone created a thread about WrestleMania 25. In that thread the OP mentioned that Shawn Michaels vs. Undertaker should have been the main event. That got me to thinking about which manias had the wrong match close the show. Usually the mania main event is obvious but sometimes a case can be made for more than one match that could close the show. Which WrestleMania should have had a different match close the show? For the record I disagree with those who think HBK vs. Taker should have closed WM25. Triple H vs. Randy Orton was clearly built as the main event and was the appropriate choice to close the show. That leads me to my answer in this thread.

I believe the wrong match closed WM26. I have as much respect for Shawn Michaels as anyone but I don’t believe his farewell match should have been the main event of WM26. I never really bought into HBK’s obsession with beating Taker at mania. Why was it so important to him? Just because he was Mr. WrestleMania and he lost at WM25? So what? He didn’t obsess about beating Kurt Angle or John Cena after suffering mania losses to them. I suppose my personal dislike of the storyline isn’t really relevant. Once the match was made the story was career vs. streak and it was obviously a huge story. I just don’t think it was an appropriate main event. At WM24 Shawn Michaels faced Ric Flair in basically the same kind of match. I believe it was the most anticipated match and probably the best match of WM24 but it went on in the middle of the show. Flair still got a nice sendoff and after the match the focus shifted to the superstars who were still going to carry the load. I think HBK vs. Taker at WM26 should have gone on a couple matches before the main event. HBK could have still had the nice sendoff but then the WWE championship should have closed the show.

John Cena vs. Batista is a great mania main event. The story was perfect. Their careers had run parallel since the beginning of 2005. Having the two most consistent main event guys going against each other at mania five years after winning their first world titles was perfect. With all due respect to Michaels and Taker the main event should have focused on the top two current stars. If the title matches were a little weaker like they were at WM27 I would say that HBK vs. Taker should close the show, but with stars like Cena and Batista going against each other I think the WWE title match should have been the main event. Cena vs. Batista had better star power relative to the time, a better storyline, and the WWE title.

I’m sure my opinion won’t be a popular one but HBK vs. Flair did not headline WM24 and Warrior vs. Savage did not headline WM7. Each of those were arguably the best matches on the show and a farewell to a legendary competitor but the title matches were deemed more important on each.

Which mania do you think had the wrong match close the show? When answering this question keep the mindset that the show hadn’t taken place yet. For example, we didn’t know how huge the crowd reaction would be for Hogan vs. Rock at WM18 and how it would kill the crowd for HHH vs. Jericho later. That may still be a reasonable answer but don’t use hindsight to form your opinion.

Completely agreed about Wrestlemania 26 main-event. Every Wrestlemania should end with a Championship match and every Royal Rumble winner should either be in the main-event or in the match before the main-event. Things like this are what makes a World Championship lose its prestige. And weaker stars shouldn't even be in the main-event.

Undertaker's streak is not bigger than winning or defending a World Championship.

 

[thebarber]

I Think the obvious, and easiest, answer is WrestleMania XI. The Celebrity match should never rank higher than the Championship Match. end of story...

But...

My Answer is WrestleMania I. I have always said that WrestleMania I should have been headlined my Rowdy Roddy Piper defending the WWF Championship against Hulk Hogan. Piper should have won the championship at The War to Settle the Score due to some underhanded heel tactics, beat up Lauper and T, left everyone laying as he walked out with the title that he had just robbed from Hogan and the first WrestleMania should have been Hogan gaining his revenge and, getting his championship back. Lauper and T could have been in his corner, T could have been the one to stop Cowboy Bob Orton from getting involved and the end of the show could have been Hogan getting back the title that was stolen from him, and Lauper and T getting there revenge on Piper, who since he had just gone through Hogan would have been able to save face while at the same time letting the babyfaces end the show on top... but that's just me.

The reason that match did not happen was because Piper refused to do the clean job to Hogan on such a massive show, thus why Mr T was brought in and a tag match was made. Hindsight shows this to have been the right move as bringing mainstream celebrities into Mania really got it over in the early years. The first seven Manias got it right, the WWE championship being decided in the main event.
Mania 11 should have ende with Michaels vs Diesel
Mania 13 should have been main evenetd by Hart vs Austin seen as Michaels refused to do the job and lost his smile, he also cost Hitman a main event payday.
Mania 18 obviously should have been Hulk Hogan vs The Rock
Mania 19 I feel Rock vs Austin 3 should have closed the show

 

[The Eighties]

Matches like Hogan vs Sid, Taylor vs Bam Bam and Cena vs Miz were all terrible main events for match quality, but their placement on the card wasn't illogical. Hogan vs Sid had to go last because of the Warrior run-in, Taylor/Bam Bam went last because WWE was counting on the mainstream media attention so it had to be billed as the main attraction, and Miz/Cena had to go on last because Rock was going to close the show to set up the next Mania.

At WrestleMania 18 they tried to go with the WWE title keeping it's prominence and Triple H had decent momentum despite Jericho becoming Steph's sidekick, however it turned out to be a mistake and I think they failed to learn from it and made the same mistake at WrestleMania 25.

The other one I think makes for an interesting debate is WrestleMania 21. Batista vs Triple H had the hotter angle for sure so at the time it felt right as a fan, but WWE knew Cena, not Batista, was going to be their flagship guy coming out of Mania, so maybe his first title win should have went on last.

 

[Headman]

I think there is one universal answer to this question

WrestleMania 11

Shawn Michaels vs. Diesel for The WWF Championship was bumped so that we could have the main event of Bam Bam Bigelow vs. Lawrence Taylor

To this day, I have no idea what the logic was behind that move. Not only was LT not a wrestler, but Bam Bam Bigelow was nowhere near a main event level superstar. It'd be the equivelant of having Tom Brady vs. Jack Swagger as the main event of next years 'Mania.

WrestleMania 11, no doubt gave us the wrong main event.

Oh yeah, I forgot all about that. WM XI going with LT vs Bam Bam totally cast this show in a bad light. HBK vs Diesel was an outstanding match yet it was bumped down the card for a match that belongs in the "Mayweather vs Bigshow" category. Good call.

 

[Aquaman6686]

In recent memory, I would say 23 and 27. Batista/Undertaker should have closed 23, and Edge/Del Rio should have closed 27. I believe that with certain VERY rare exceptions (like HBK's final match), the Royal Rumble winner's match should ALWAYS close WrestleMania.

 

[lil bitch Kid]

First, I think it's a case of which other match on the card would have been a better main event, not re-book it.

Normally, I am a big proponent for the last match should be THE title match. Since now there are 2 THE titles, it becomes a case of which one. Of course, currently, the WWE title is treated more like THE title than the WHT, but I digress. Normally, I think that a WWE title or WHT match should finish the show, with a few exceptions:

- Mania 1, the champ was in the tag match, they were building the main stream exposure that came with Mr. T and it was the first ever Mania.
- HBK vs Taker II at Mania 26: This was the biggest match on the card. HBK put his career on the line and the match started building at the Slammys. 2 Massive stars in the biggest match of the year.
- Rock vs Cena: THEY BUILT THE THING FOR A YEAR. Of course it needed to close the show.

Now, there are cases being made that some matches should have closed the show because THEY ENDED UP BEING BIGGER. The most obvious example was Rock vs Hogan. Going in the build up wasn't great, but the match ended up being huge. In hindsight, fine, the match ended up being massive, but in terms of going in and booking the show, HHH vs Y2J was a good closer. The same situation occured with HBK vs Taker I. The build up to HHH vs Orton was good. Who would have known that the crowd would have been asleep? That match wasn't bad if you watch it again, and it was THE title match. The problem was that the crowd was DEAD.

2 situations where there should have been different main were certainly:

Mania 8: Savage vs Flair should have closed the show. It had the build it would have resulted in a Mania moment and it was THE title match. Had Warrior coming back lead to him staying with the company for years and years and the whole sequence not ended up as a clusterfuck, I think the case is made that it wasn't the worst choice to have Hogan vs Sid finish the show. Again, hindsight plays a huge role, but not bigger than execution. Certainly, nothing that should have been gained was gained by having those 2 matches where they were.

Mania 11: LT vs Bam Bam. Yes, they got main stream exposure, but the match was BAD. At the time, I thought LT did a really good job, watching now, it was bad. And really, what had Bam Bam ever done to deserve a main event on any PPV much les the biggest F'n show of the year? I was a fan, but to take that match over HBK vs Diesel and the history there is a joke. Thank GAWD WWE has learned and we haven't had such show closers as Show vs Money, Show vs Akebono, the 6 person with Snooki and the tag match with Menuduos.

 

[HBKperfect23]

WM11: The title match should always go on last unless theres something unique about the match going on last. LT does not fall in that category. HBK/Desil should have closed the show.

WM18: Hogan/Rock without a doubt should have went on last. It took away from HHH/Jericho which was a solid title match.

Those I disagree with:
WM8: Hogan/Sid with Warriors return was the right call. Warriors return was a shock and would have felt out of place in the middle of the show. This could have taken away from Savage/Flair.

WM13: Bret/Austin should not have went on last. Just because it was the best match doesnt mean it should have went on last. It didnt take away from the main event that year.

WM24: Taker/Edge in a title match was a great closer.

 

[The Perfect Max]

I agree that WrestleMania XXVI had the wrong main event. Like others have said, Ric Flair, one of the very best in the history of professional wrestling, had his "retirement" match half-way through the event. The divas match went on after that I believe, and hell, it was that bad they "accidently" turned the lights off. Joke. But yeah, why should Shawn get the ultimate send-off in Ric Flair didn't. Randy Savage didn't either, but there you go. I would have had Chris Jericho versus Edge for the World Heavyweight Championship finish the show. In my opinion it was one of the best matches that night and had two things backing the idea of it going last:
1) For the World Heavyweight Championship
2) Featured the surprise winner of the Royal Rumble

WrestleMania 23 I still try to make out in my mind which should have gone on last. As much as John Cena versus Shawn Michaels was awesome, I would have cut that by five minutes, given it to Batista versus The Undertaker, and put the World Heavyweight Championship Match last. The Undertaker eliminated Shawn Michaels in the Royal Rumble to win, yet Michaels gets to main event WrestleMania? I won't take away from the match, it was great, but give five minutes of that time to the WHC Match, and I would put that last. The Undertaker hadn't been World Champion for a long time before that, never a World Heavyweight Champion, and was ten years after he won the WWF Championship at WrestleMania 13.

 

[Wald]

Wrestlemania XI - It was the first time they made the WWF title feel second rate and not important at all. I think doing so hampered Diesel's title reign and held back HBK by another 12 months. I would still have gone with the finish with Diesel retaining, but doing so in the main event of Wrestlemania would have been a much bigger deal for both parties involved. I do also think that the title match should close the show at Mania, regardless of whether HBK, Taker, Flair, Austin or whoever is retiring.

If we are allowed change an aspect of a match I always thought Bret vs Austin at Wrestlemania 13 should have been for the title and should have closed the show. The storyline of Austin screwing Bret at Wrestlemania, with HBK giving up the title to make it vacant would have worked perfectly for them to contest the championship at Mania. I would have held the title up as vacant until then and not changed a thing about the match. Bret wins the belt, turns heel and Austin gets to chase him as a face

 

[BigShadThaBoss]

I have to say Wrestlemania 4. That was my favorite WM with that huge WWE World Championship Tournament. I was always a big fan of Randy Savage and Ted Dibiase, however, I think I wouldve gone with a rematch of Savage and Ricky Steamboat. Their match at WM3 was phenomenal. And to see a main event between these two for the World Title at WM4 wouldve been awesome with Savage getting the victory.

Then I have to say WM8. For years everyone wondered who was the best out of Ric Flair and Hulk Hogan. Both the face of their promotions and the one's who held the World Title for the respective companies. So when you get two people like that in the same company at the same time, you have them face of at the grandest stage of'em all. WWE dropped the ball on that one, only for WCW to pick up the slack years later.

 

[neildittmar]

In another thread some time ago, The Brain had a compelling argument against my opinion of Wrestlemania 8 having the "wrong" main event. However, I still stand by my opinion that Flair/Savage should've rightfully closed the show.

Main reason being, Warrior didn't have to run in during the Hogan/Sid match. In fact, it was partially because of Warriors injection into that match that somewhat contribued to the shoddy finish we got.

Papa Shango's garbage timing notwithstanding, this match was indirectly booked as Hogan's retirement match. I remember watching the build-up to this fairly closely, and many allusions were made that this was likely Hogan's "last match" and that Sid presented a challenge that Hogan might not be able to surmount. I'm well aware that Hogan had many opponents where WWF played this card, but Hogan himself was believing it this time. It was indirectly advertised as such. Did Hogan still have it? Was Sid too much? This match needed to have a conclusive finish.

Those watching WM8 simply didn't get that. We got a DQ ending at Wrestlemania, which is a crime in itself. We got a timing issue from Papa Shango, and then we got an Ultimate Warrior who looked very little like the guy who left. It was a bad ending to be sure. I was 15 at the time and a huge Warrior mark and I was left scratching my head a bit. Flair/Savage was for the title, brought all the goods and should've been the main event.

I feel the Warrior run-in could've made sense in the Flair/Savage match as well. Why not after the Savage title win, Flair and some cronies start the beatdown on the new champ? It could've been Shango... it could've been anybody really as Savage would've needed somebody to feud with considering Flair was heading out the door. Then when we think the heels will prevail despite Savage taking the title off Flair, what do we hear but that familiar guitar riff.

It could've worked and quite frankly, would've been more exciting than Warriors save on Hogan in my opinion.

I still subscribe to the theory that Hogan/Sid went on last mainly because Hogan wanted the Wrestlemania spotlight one more time. The DQ victory was so that Sid, then someone who Vince thought was going to be a big deal in WWE, wouldn't lose too much momentum getting the L against Hulk.

 

[sTyLnK]

The WM with the Miz. IMO he's a mid carder for life. Don't get me wrong, I like that the WWE pushes the younger talent, but he failed horribly and should never be pushed to the main event ever again. I didn't even watch the match live because to me he's just not that good. It was only afterward when I watched that I saw how bad it was. JMO and I stand by it.

 

[2Sweet_4Life]

I believe that a title match should end every show but i think HBK vs taker WM26 should OF ended it, it was far better than Cena vs Batista and HBK deserved that send-off. WM27 was the worst WM ive ever watched and ive been watching since WM12. Seriously Cena vs Miz? But i suppose there wasn't 1 match worth ending WM that year. (HHH vs Taker had no meaning to go off last) The only option for me was to have Christian vs Edge but Vince decided to push ADR.

 

[The Ghost of Benoit]

I believe the wrong match closed WM26. I have as much respect for Shawn Michaels as anyone but I don’t believe his farewell match should have been the main event of WM26. I never really bought into HBK’s obsession with beating Taker at mania. Why was it so important to him? Just because he was Mr. WrestleMania and he lost at WM25? So what? He didn’t obsess about beating Kurt Angle or John Cena after suffering mania losses to them. I suppose my personal dislike of the storyline isn’t really relevant. Once the match was made the story was career vs. streak and it was obviously a huge story. I just don’t think it was an appropriate main event. At WM24 Shawn Michaels faced Ric Flair in basically the same kind of match. I believe it was the most anticipated match and probably the best match of WM24 but it went on in the middle of the show. Flair still got a nice sendoff and after the match the focus shifted to the superstars who were still going to carry the load. I think HBK vs. Taker at WM26 should have gone on a couple matches before the main event. HBK could have still had the nice sendoff but then the WWE championship should have closed the show.

John Cena vs. Batista is a great mania main event. The story was perfect. Their careers had run parallel since the beginning of 2005. Having the two most consistent main event guys going against each other at mania five years after winning their first world titles was perfect. With all due respect to Michaels and Taker the main event should have focused on the top two current stars. If the title matches were a little weaker like they were at WM27 I would say that HBK vs. Taker should close the show, but with stars like Cena and Batista going against each other I think the WWE title match should have been the main event. Cena vs. Batista had better star power relative to the time, a better storyline, and the WWE title.

Sorry but youre wrong about WM26. One of the all the all time greats HBK in his last match should be the main event. When Taker decides to retire his last match should be the main event, same goes for the Rock, etc. Some newcomers who cant wrestle like Batista and Cena should not be in the main event over HBK in his last match. Besides how many main events has Cena already been in at Wrestlemania?

 

[EastCoastFan]

Keep in mind: some of these main events were done for a reason. WrestleMania 1 had Mr. T in the main event to help sell tickets, as the WWF was nowhere near a household name then. The other celebrities (Muhammad Ali, Billy Martin, ...) were there to generate buzz and help turn the show into an EVENT that had to be seen. Mr. T may not have been that great a wrestler, but I don't know if they would have been as successful if he hadn't been there.

Bam Bam Bigelow vs. Lawrence Taylor was never supposed to be the main event of WrestleMania 11. It was just supposed to be a wrestler vs. celebrity match, like Big Show vs. Floyd Mayweather, but they got so much mainstream press coverage for having LT on the card that Vince (a man who LOVES cross-promotion and mainstream press coverage) gave them the final slot.

Originally, WrestleMania 8 was supposed to be Hogan vs. Flair, but something happened. I've heard two different things: 1) once they said Hogan vs. Flair would be the main event, it didn't generate as much buzz as they had hoped for, or 2) Hogan told Vince he was retiring after WM 8. Vince didn't want Flair to win the match (it would be admitting that JCP/NWA was better than WWF) and didn't want Hogan to go out as champion.

 

[Pedigree1]

WM18 for me rock v hogan should have closed the show!! What a match that was i enjoyed it and most of us also did too. HHH v Jericho wasnt bad but Rock vs Hogan come on WWE that should have been the closing match IMO! That to me was the wrong main event to close the show.

 

[BK Styles]

18, and it isn't that debatable if you ask me. You have one of the two biggest stars of the present in The Rock, and the icon that paved the way in Hulk Hogan. Without having Austin in there, it doesn't get any bigger than that.

Then, look at the actual main event. Jericho; the Undisputed Champion who, with all due respect, looked weak as fuck during his reign, and by all accounts only held the belt first because HHH wasn't ready at the time. In the other corner, Triple H, who was allegedly meant to be the Undisputed Champion first but wasn't ready, so he won the Rumble and had his shot at Mania.

On one hand, tradition. Should the WWE title go last at Mania? Yes. Almost always. Except when there's another match that transcends it. There are only two types of matches that can achieve this; Taker Streak matches (and even then only one has gone last; Taker/Michaels 2) and Legend vs Legend (i.e. Rock/Hogan, Rock/Cena). All three of these matches, without question, are bigger than the title, and deserve top billing.

On the other hand, practicality. Rock/Hogan, or any icon vs icon match, is a match where the crowd are gonna go fucking crazy. Any match afterwards, even two matches afterwards, is going to suffer because the crowd are gonna be knackered. And that was the case here; the crowd were dead. If Rock/Cena went two matches from the end, the crowd would have been very silent for Punk/Jericho had it gone last on the card.

In my opinion, it was a huge mistake by WWE to not have Hogan/Rock go last. It's one of the single biggest matches of all time. Surely it deserves a place in the main event equal to its importance?