Worst booked Wrestlemania card

[Little Jerry Lawler]

Are we talking about the worst booked Wrestlemania in terms of the matches that happened or in terms of where they were placed?

If we're talking about the latter, than I would have to go with WM 19. I barely remember the announcers mentioning the HHH/Booker match up to when they fought. Five big matches in a row will tire out a crowd quickly and they should have done a better job spacing it out. Plus, Hogan vs. McMahon should have been the main event. It was built up the most and the story was already there. Other than Lesnar almost killing himself, can most people remember anything else about the match? It certainly ranks up there as one of the most forgettable main events in Wrestlemania history.

If we're discussing the actual matches themselves, then I'm surprised no one has mentioned WM 21. This had the chance of being the greatest Wrestlemania of all time. Guerrero/Mysterio was decent, Orton/Undertaker was awesome, MITB was spectacular, and a majority loved Angle/HBK even though I think it was overrated. Then, the bottom fell out. JBL/Cena was poorly booked. It should have been an all-out brawl with Cena going through every member of the Cabinet and giving the FU to JBL for the win. I watched the match they had and I said, "That's all?" As far as HHH vs. Batista is concerned, HHH dominated the majority of the match and made Batista look like he didn't belong there at all. They should have had Batista dominate first, HHH try to find a mistake and capitalize on it and get on offense, and have Batista come back at the end. Instead, the match fell flat for me but I'm glad they redeemed themselves at Vengeance.

 

[hellod245]

I think some people took my thread the wrong way. Its not about wrestlemania with bad matches or not right order of matches. It is about wrong matches. Some wrestlemanias like WM 27 wwe did not have any other option with limited star power. Only legitimate stars at that event were Taker, Cena, Rock and HHH. With Rock not wrestling at the event it left only Taker,hhh and Cena and 2 of these 3 facing each others. So Vince did what he could do given his star power of roster. This thread is about those event which had a lot of starpower but still it did not deliver the way it should. I consider WM19 the most star studded WM of all time with stars like Austin,Rock,HHH,Hogan,Taker,Y2j,HBK ,Angle,Nash, Scott Hall,Flair,Vince under same roof. WM19 was good but it could have been The Best with right match ups.

 

[Swarles Barkley]

Kane teamed with Rikishi for some reason to take on Road Dogg, but not Billy Gunn but X-Pac for some reason.

Road Dogg teamed with X-Pac because Billy Gunn was out with an injury. He was hurt against the Dudleyz at No Way Out the month before.

I don't know if I can pick a worst booked Mania. Most of them I liked enough stuff that I wouldn't want to change something I didn't like because that might upset the balance. I won't say dream matches -- like Austin-Hogan or Rock-HBK -- because there are reasons those matches didn't take place and no amount of retroactive booking would change that.

 

[Little Jerry Lawler]

If we're going that route, then I would have to say Wrestlemania 20 for only one reason - HBK. He had no business being in the main event and it pissed me off when he was. It should have been Benoit vs. HHH one-on-one. I don't care what they would have done for HBK. He had two chances to win the title off of HHH and couldn't get the job done. He whined about how he need to finish his business with HHH. What happened when it came to finish that business, Shawn? You lost again. The main event was great but it would have been just as great if it was just HHH and Benoit.

 

[The Brain]

For me the worst booked wrestlemania card was WM20 at MSG. WWE had some great talent like brocklesnar, goldberg, rock, taker, hhh, hbk, mic foley, ric flair on their card but what we got was a lackluster card with only main event saving the grace of that show. Lesnar/Goldberg was a mistake everyone knew they were going out of the company that night so why put those 2 together? It took everyone's interest out of the match and fans were chanting for Austin who was guest referee in the match lol.

By the time the match started everyone knew both Lesnar and Goldberg were leaving the company but nobody knew about Lesnar until that day, or maybe the day before. Lesnar's sudden decision to leave the company caught everybody off guard. Nobody knew Lesnar was leaving when the match was signed. He was probably booked to win until he suddenly decided to leave. They were both big stars who were evenly matched so it was a logical mania match. Austin stunned them both out of the WWF and the crowd made the match memorable. I thought it worked. I would have liked a no contest with Austin just stunning them during the match and flipping them off. They were both leaving so to hell with them. No winner.

Then they put Undertaker's return as deadman on the card and let him squash Kane in only 6 minutes. His entrance was longer than the actual match.

That's because his entrance as the return of the deadman was more important and anticipated than the match itself. Everyone was excited to see the deadman gimmick come back. We had already seen Taker vs. Kane a thousand times but the deadman needed to return against Kane. It wouldn't have made as much sense against anyone else. The match was just a formality. The story was what mattered. In the world of sports entertainment you have to look at the whole picture. Don't just judge things from bell to bell.

The last thing that still puzzles me is putting Rock in a tag team match. I understand they wanted to put evolution over but why not have Rock go one on one with Orton(winning with batista's help) and book a dream match between foley and flair as hardcore match. Their rock n sock vs evolution match was total waste of time. Orton won wwe tittle after a few months of WM so it was sure wwe was considering him splitting from evolution in future so why not book him in one on one match with Rock to give more exposure as singles wrestler.

You're forgetting the months of build between Orton and Foley. I loved that feud. It felt old school with all the time they took building it and it was beautifully done. The feud was Orton vs. Foley all along. Rock was just brought in for a little star power and to get Flair and Batista involved. He only made one television appearance before mania. Orton won the WWE title because of how good he looked against Foley. I think it was their match at Backlash a month later that put Orton in the main event. Orton vs. Rock would have been fine but Orton vs. Foley was one of the best feuds of that time. Foley did a better job of making a star out of Orton than Rock would have.

I thought WM20 was one of the better manias. The only problem I have with it is how long it was. Nearly five hours is just too long. WM20 would have been one of the all time best if they cut out some of the stuff in the middle.

 

[Gavschenko]

Although i think wrestlemania 19 was probably the best there coulda been far better matches i think flair should faced hogan and they coulda point out the fact that it shoulda happened at wrestlemania 8. Another thing that annoyed me is the undertaker was in a crap 2 on 1 handicap match against A-train and Big show surely he coulda been higher up on the card they could have a triple threat for the title since Angle had a bad neck at the time, Taker vs angle vs brock even though the match brock vs angle was good. Aswell Triple h vs booker T, booker should go over instead of getting hit when a pedigree then pinned a minute later which makes him look real week. Could wwe not got Goldberg in sooner to compete at this mania?

The worst wrestlemania was wrestlemania 27 without a doubt Although im a big fan of the miz the main event match was terrible so boring and cena over sold everything seemed as if he was trying to make miz look weak by overselling so bad just my opinion this match was more or less just building up to rock vs cena at the following years mania. Also who can forget Cole vs lawler what a horrible match no need for it to be at wrestlemania and then aswell for it to be on like 3 ppv's later should have at least had Lawler win ano they tried to get cole heat but he already had enough at the time, Sheamus vs daniel bryan didnt even make the show which is laughable as bryan is probably the best in wwe. Poor mania from start to finish

 

[Mitch Henessey]

It wasn't the entire card, but Orton VS Triple H from Mania 25 really bothers me. When you think about Wrestlemania 25, you think about Undertaker VS Michaels, not the main event. Triple H VS Orton is a mere afterthought, nothing more, nothing less.

Such an incredible build, and adding Triple H's real life ties to the McMahon family and his marriage with Stephanie made everything feel more dramatic. Orton and Triple H had unbelievable amounts of animosity towards each other. Orton was bitter about Triple H turning on him after he won the WHC, which lead to his exile from Evolution. And Orton crossed the line, when he attacked Triple H's wife.

EVERYONE wanted to see these two beat the hell out of each other, but they just had to throw in the "if HHH gets disqualified, he loses the WWE Championship" stipulation. I don't hate the HHH VS Orton main event, but it was tamed and underwhelming. This is a big problem for any Wrestlemania main event, especially for a match that featured an intense and heated personal rivalry. A lot of of people were expecting an all out war between these two (similar to their Last Man Standing Match at No Mercy 2007). Instead, we got an average quality match.

 

[HBsam31]

Wanted to make mention of Orton and HHH from Mania 25. The match didn't fit in with the feud and it didn't work at all. Like Mitch said, all the lead up to the feud was so heated so intense, and then the match itself was just kind of blah. It didn't seem to be intense and was just an odd way to end Mania.

My worst booked Mania would have to be 27 though. I hated Edge and Del Rio being first. I think Sheamus and Daniel Bryan should have been on the card instead of preshow. Santino's stable beating The Corre was ridiculous, and I would have much rather seen Morrison vs Ziggler instead of all the Snooki nonsense. The main event was more about The Rock and John Cena than the title so why not let Edge and Del Rio go last especially if they knew Edge was retiring. I don't even want to get into the way Cole and Lawler played out.

 

[Killercam]

Let's look at WrestleMania IV. Most people won't look at this one because it had a somewhat of an original concept and something fresh with the tournament. Plus nobody is upset with the outcome of Macho Man winning the strap, but the tournament had too many matches, very few good ones and just made the event feel too long and clustered. Without changing too much history they could have just had Andre win the belt at the Sat Night Main Event in Feb like they did, then have Dibeosi buy the belt, set up Dibeosi vs Macho for the Title (have macho win a month long tv tourney to become #1 contender if they insisted on a tourney) then have Hulk-Andre part 3 in a retirement match. So
basically the same things get accomplished without having to go through the tournament
format. There was also a chance to get Demolition-British Bulldogs on the card, maybe even bring back Jesse Ventura for one last match against someone. This could have been a great card if the tournament element were taken away.

 

[The Fabulous Rougeau's]

IMO, the worst booked WrestleMania was XI. From the venue, to the stage and everything else, it is the only Mania that didn't feel like a Mania. I have said this on a few other posts, but my WM XI would look like this:

WWE Title Match: Bret Hart (c) v Undertaker
Undertaker was poorly booked when he returned at SummerSlam 94. His story with the Million Dollar Corportation was too long and not prolific enough for where Taker was at that point in time. Bret somehow got stuck with Backlund. We are talking the absolute prime of Bret's career and 5 months of it were wasted on Backlund with another 5 wasted on finishing out the Lawler storyline from 2 years prior. These 2 wrestlers had great matches with one another down the road, but this was the best match and the only match that should have headlined WM XI.

Triple Threat IC Title Match: Razor Ramon (c) v Diesel v Shawn Michaels
This should have been the perfect comprimise to the Clique's backstage politics. This allows them to have a big match where they can make each other look as good as they want without taking the main event. This also could have brought the triple threat match to the WWE sooner than it did. So much potential in a match featuring these three at that time.

Those are the big changes to that card I would have made. From their, I would have had Jarrett go over on 1-2-3 Kid, and the rest of the card could have stayed as is with suitible replacements for guys I took away from their original match.

I also want to defend WM 2000 as I see alot of heat on this card. Alot of you are hating on the main event. The way I see it it is one of the most underrated main events in Mania history. The McMahon's were a huge part of the story and having them all involved in the main event was a nice touch. While I am dissapointed I never got a Rock/HHH solo match at Mania, these two put on a great 20 minute match after the match had already been on for about the same amount of time with Mankind and Show invovled.

You also have two great midcard bouts with Angle/Jericho/Benoit putting on a wrestling clinic and Angle losing both his titles while never getting pinned was great booking. The triangle ladder match between Edge & Christian/Dudley's/Hardy's was a great match and a good look at what was to come with these three in their TLC match.

For me that alone makes WM 2000 a good wrestlemania.

 

[dd23beatlesfan1]

I can't believe that people are picking Wrestlemania XIX as the worst booked Wrestlemania of all-time. You've gotta be kidding me! Was it perfect. No. Could there have been ways to improve the card? Sure. Taker could've been in a much better match (I like the idea of him taking on Benoit). Yes Booker T was pretty hot and probably should've beat Triple H. But the other "classic matches" on the show, which alone makes it arguably the 2nd greatest Wrestlemania of all-time, why in the world would anyone want to change those matches? Why would you change HBK/Jericho, or Lesnar/Angle, or Stone Cold/Rock, or even Hogan/McMahon? Hardy and Mysterio, while too short, was a great opening match to get the crowd going. The women's match was just right. Again the only major change I would've made is either put Taker against Benoit, or against the Big Show in a singles match. Other than that, Wrestlemania XIX was perfect. It's one of the greatest Wrestlemania of all-time. Why drastically change it?


As for the worst booked Wrestlemania's I'm gonna go with the popularly chosen worst Wrestlemanias of all-time, Wrestlemania IX and Wrestlemania XI. There are many reasons why these Wrestlemanias are considered the worst of all-time. And booking is the main reason. Wrestlemania IX was lacking in classic matches along with a couple of duds, while Wrestlemania XI was probably the most lackluster Wrestlemania in history, mainly due to the poor venue, and the poor booking.


Wrestlemania IX should've been headlined with Bret Hart going against one of the top stars of the previous eras, not a new rookie (Yokozuna). It should've been against either Hulk Hogan or Macho Man. Hogan was not too thrilled with working with Bret, so the natural choice would've been Macho Man. One of the biggest mistakes Vince McMahon ever made was relegating Macho Man to being an announcer in 1993-1994. Vince should've used him along with Mr. Perfect, Ted Dibiase, and the remaining stars they had from the previous era to put over the New Generation. Bret should've gotten the rub, and a 6 month feud with Macho Man that would've ended at Summerslam 93, would've done the trick. Macho Man would've been used, Bret would've had a more credible opponent, and thus a much more credible feud which would've made his championship run more credible, and we would've gotten that classic Wrestlemania match that Wrestlemania IX needed.

It already had a solid undercard with Tatanka/HBK, Steiners/Headshrinkers, Crush and Doink was a good undercard feud, and the match had a memorable ending, so I would keep that. I would've changed around Undertaker's opponent to make it be Bam Bam Bigelow which could've played a similar storyline of Taker slaying another giant/heavy wrestler, and also give Bam Bam a big spot on the card which he should've had.

Other wrestlers that were on the original card that I haven't brought up yet include Yokozuna, Razor Ramon, and Bob Backlund,. With Macho being in the championship match against Bret Hart, where does that leave Yokozuna? Obviously with Macho Man in the Championship match, I would've had him win the Rumble instead of Yoko, but still have Yoko dominate the Rumble match, but ultimately lose (like Kane in the 2001 Rumble). Instead, I would've put Yoko up against Hacksaw Jim Duggan. They already had a feud going on Superstars with Yoko putting Hacksaw out of action with his attack and Bonzai drop. They could've had a match at Wrestlemania where Hacksaw tries to get revenge on Yoko, but ultimately lose. Hacksaw was a solid veteran of the past and having Yoko go over on him at Wrestlemania would've make Yoko look great. And it would've continued his push towards eventually winning the title (after Summerslam 93)

As for Razor Ramon. It's pretty bad that he went from headlining Survivor Series 92 (teaming with Ric Flair against Macho Man/Perfect) and Royal Rumble 93 to having a 3 minute squash match with Bob Backlund at Wrestlemania. He deserved a more high profile spot on the card. So I would've switched around the matches of Razor/Backlund and Luger/Perfect. Luger and Perfect was a very intriguing matchup but ultimately it didn't turn out so well. The feud was short-lived and didn't amount to much, thus making it a pretty unmemorable matchup. Whereas Razor Ramon and Mr. Perfect had history both in the company and outside it. Remember Razor and Perfect headlined Survivor Series 92 against each other (along with Savage and Flair in the mix), so it would've made sense for Razor to go after Perfect after Perfect "kicked Ric Flair out of the WWE" to avenge him. That could've been a really good feud, that would've also made sense and culminated at Wrestlemania with Perfect going over (to build towards an epic championship match with Bret at the King of the Ring). Now that kind of does leave Lex Luger in the dust having to face Backlund. But having Lex beat a former world champion (for 6 years I might add) sure wouldn't have hurt his resume. And besides, it would've make much of a difference than what WWE was actually doing with Luger for real anyway (until his face turn).

So my final Wrestlemania IX card would've looked like this....


1. Intercontinental Championship Match

Shawn Michaels (champion) vs. Tatanka (challenger)


2. The Steiner Brothers vs. The Headshrinkers


3. Crush vs. Doink the Clown


4. Bob Backlund vs. Lex Luger


5. Hacksaw Jim Duggan vs. Yokozuna


6. Tag Team Championship Match

Money Inc. (Champions) vs. The Mega-Maniacs (Challengers)


7. Mr. Perfect vs. Razor Ramon


8. The Undertaker vs. Bam Bam Bigelow


9. WWF Championship Match

Bret "the Hitman" Hart (Champion) vs. Macho Man Randy Savage (Challenger)

 

[CrucifiedRaven]

Regarding WM20...

1. Brock Lesnar was leaving the company
2. Goldberg was leaving the company
3. Mick Foley was a part-time wrestler - 1 match pay off
4. The Rock was a part-time wrestle - 1 match pay off
5. Steve Austin couldn't even wrestle, he was a referee

What would you have expected?

WM20 is remembered for 2 reasons, IMO:
1. Benoit making TRIPLE H TAP OUT (you have to remember, at the time, Triple H didn't job to ANYONE... let alone tap out to an Internet darling)
2. Benoit/Guerrero with the belts at the end.

If you ask Kevin Nash, these two moves were bad for business. And maybe he's right. But with the full-time talent they had on the roster, I don't think WM20 was badly booked at all.

Badly booked to me, means:
- Why didn't we have Bret Hart vs Hogan or Randy Savage at WM9 or 10 for the title?
- Why did Bret Hart waste his time with Bob Backlund at WM11? Why was Bam Bam vs LT the main event?
- Why wasn't WM7 booked as Savage vs Warrior for the title? Hogan and Slaughter didn't need the belt
- Why was WM2000 a fatal fourway? Why not Triple H vs. Rock? Why wasn't there even ONE singles match on the card?

Etc etc

 

[rickyc]

Lots of hate for Wrestlemania 2000 on this list, and I need to throw my hat into the ring.

It can be argued that Wrestlemania 2000 happened at the tipping point of the Attitude Era. During Wrestlemania 14 and 15, the Attitude Era was just coming into it's existence, and was still finding itself in terms of the right balance between extreme and awesome, and then during Mania 17 and 18, things were matured and toned down. The WWF had found the right flow and mix, and really began to utilize their superstars, ALL of their superstars in the right kind of way, as Mania 17 will attest too. It was Mania 2000 though that came right smackdab in the middle of this transitional period, and it was this Mania that the WWF could use to make a statement that the last two years were not just a fluke. That their massive ratings up to that point were justified and that they were here to stay. They had just gotten a massive influx of talent from WCW in terms of Beniot, Guerrero, Malenko, and Jericho. They had a rookie sensation in Kurt Angle. The Rock and HHH had turned into MEGASTARS in the wake of Austin taking some much needed time off. Really, the stars were aligned for the WWE to put on a spectacular event. They really failed. Seriously, I understand that you want to put as many superstars on the roster because everyone has worked extremely hard all year, and everyone should enjoy a Wrestlemania payday, but seriously, Wrestlemania should not be a right, it should be a privilege for those who have kicked the most ass in the company that year, and it should be used to put your best foot forward as a company because the world really is watching.

Wow, that was a rant. Okay, getting off my soapbox now, the basic problem with this card was that there were way too many Multiple Participant matches on the card. In all there were: Five Tag Team Matches, a 13 person Battle Royal, a 2 out of 3 falls Triple Threat Match, and of course the main event, a 4 person elimination match. In fact, the ONLY singles match on the entire card was a diva's cat fight that lasted about 2 and a half minutes. That is bad booking in my opinion. Seriously, 5 tag team matches. People get worn out seeing the same thing over and over and over again, and that is all you saw watching Mania 2000. You had all this talent at your disposal, and you wanted to use it, but really? That is the best way you could have come up with to utilize it? Now, I am no booker, but if I was making the card, I would have made something more along the lines of this:

Opening Contest: Hardcore Battle Royal (Original Participants: Hardcore Holly, Crash Holly, Tazz, Viscera, Joey Abs, Rodney, Pete Gas, Taka Michinoku, Funaki, Headbanger Thrasher, Headbanger Mosh, Faarooq and Bradshaw) Take out Faarooq and Bradshaw, and add in Al Snow and Steve Blackman who are more adept at Hardcore, and throw in X-Pac and Road Dogg, X-Pac for his style, and Road Dogg because he was just a Harcore Champion the year prior and it would make sense.

Match Two: Terri Runnels vs The Kat (Was Originally on the card, and I would keep it. Not important enough to be higher up, but it is a good way to calm down the crowd after the craziness they just witnessed)

Match Three: TNA (Test and Albert) vs The APA (Seriously, I have no idea why TNA were wrestling Al Snow and Steve Blackman. Does anyone remember? But, if you are going to put them in a match, and you have to put them in a match simply because of Trish Stratus being their manager at the time (drool......), why not put them in a match against two guys who better match the smash mouth style they possessed?)

Match Four: Kane vs The Big Show (This would come to a head the next year, and for good reason. The dynamic between these two just worked. They were both big men, but they were, and this might be hard to believe for people who only know The Big Show as the hulking giant he is now, but they were both young, athletic big men who could do some great stuff in the ring. I am 99% sure that this match would have gone much better than Kane vs Khali from Mania 23. Yeah....)

Match Five: Triangle Ladder Match (This was THE match of the night and I would absolutely do nothing to change it.)

Match Six: Chris Jericho vs Eddie Guerrero for the European Title (Yes, this might seem like a demotion for Jericho who was just Intercontinental Champion a few months prior, but I really don't see it that way. I see it as him having the third highest title in the company at the time, walking into Mania as a champion, and being able to have a fantastic match against a guy who most of us recognize as being one of the greatest in-ring performers ever. Seriously, this would have been a great match.)

Match Seven: Two out of Three Falls Match for the Intercontinental Title: Chris Benoit vs Kurt Angle (Anyone who has seen these two wrestle each other knows that their chemistry is undeniable. Think about it. We would have gotten this match a year sooner, it would have been two out of three falls, and it would have been for a title that was still pretty prestigious at the time. Yeah, I would have paid to see this match alone.)

Match Eight: WWF Championship: The Rock vs HHH [Mick Foley as Special Referee] (It is nearly universally agreed upon that the main event of Wrestlemania 2000 should have been 1 on 1, The Rock vs The Game. You add in Mick for the intrigue of what he would do. Best Friends with The Rock, had feuded with The Game the last few months. It is just another element, a layer to the story. The essence of the match, the core, would be the same though: The two hottest superstars in the company facing off, mano to mano, for the title. This should have happened.)

Granted my card is probably not perfect, and I would love to hear how you would change it, but seriously, Wrestlemania 2000 could have been so much more than what we got. It was just a damn shame that the WWF was more concerned about shoving as many guys as possible into the card as possible, instead of giving us some great match-ups.

 

[spaldoni]

I thought Mania 2 could of been better. This is how I would of booked it.

Hulk Hogan vs Roddy Piper- World Title Cage Bout. The final blow off to an epic feud.
Randy Savage vs Paul Orndorf- IC title bout
Dream Team vs British Bulldogs- Tag Title Bout
Andre the Giant/Junkyard Dog/Mr.T vs Funk Brothers/Cowboy Orton
Ricky Steamboat vs Magnificent Muraco
Hart Foundation vs Killer Bees
Adrian Adonis vs Tito Santana
Tony Atlas vs Hercules
Jake the Snake vs Hillbilly Jim
Battle Royal

 

[XXJJ]

It might be because its still fresh on my mind, but I have to say Wrestlemania 27 was the worst booked. The WHC for some reason opened the ppv. Not to mention the wrong person won. Del Rio won the Royal Rumble and was going on for months how it was his destiny to win. It killed any momentum he was trying to build

Cena vs Miz was just bad. You had Cena and Rock in a verbal feud with each other and everybody lost interest in Miz. Miz turned into the third wheel for a guy that wasn't even in the match. The ending was very predictable. Crowd was dead and it felt like everybody was just waiting for Rock.

You had an awful announcers match that went on for about 15 minutes, a mixed six person tag match that involved Snooki and a crappy
8 man tag that lasted 1 minute.

The only thing I really liked about that WM was Orton vs Punk.

 

[XXJJ]

It wasn't the entire card, but Orton VS Triple H from Mania 25 really bothers me. When you think about Wrestlemania 25, you think about Undertaker VS Michaels, not the main event. Triple H VS Orton is a mere afterthought, nothing more, nothing less.

Such an incredible build, and adding Triple H's real life ties to the McMahon family and his marriage with Stephanie made everything feel more dramatic. Orton and Triple H had unbelievable amounts of animosity towards each other. Orton was bitter about Triple H turning on him after he won the WHC, which lead to his exile from Evolution. And Orton crossed the line, when he attacked Triple H's wife.

EVERYONE wanted to see these two beat the hell out of each other, but they just had to throw in the "if HHH gets disqualified, he loses the WWE Championship" stipulation. I don't hate the HHH VS Orton main event, but it was tamed and underwhelming. This is a big problem for any Wrestlemania main event, especially for a match that featured an intense and heated personal rivalry. A lot of of people were expecting an all out war between these two (similar to their Last Man Standing Match at No Mercy 2007). Instead, we got an average quality match.

Yeah, their were a few things they did wrong. Orton should of won and became champ. The buildup was awesome, but they wrestled the wrong style of match. It should of been a no holds barred match or HIAC. This needed to be a war. I didn't get the HHH gets dq stipulation either. It made zero sense. I loved their last man standing match in 07. Your right it needed to be something like that instead.

I dont think the match was bad, but you felt really underwhelmed after watching it given how great the feud was. I had a similiar feeling after watching HHHvsLesnar because I had high expectations for that match. The HHH/Orton angle was a hell of a lot better though.

They had a similar screw up with Team Cena vs Nexus. Everybody loved how Nexus debuted and destroyed the Raw set. They never should of had a basic elimination match at Summerslam. It needed to be more, IMO.

 

[wareagle_dakota]

I'd have to go with wrestlemania 27- only HHH/Taker was entertaining and you had perhaps the worst main event ever with Miz being included (i like the Miz but he did not belong there and that match was terrible). While the rest of the card was ok at best it really was a weak wrestlemania top to bottom (lawler/cole anyone)

 

[HBK/RKO]

I have a feeling we might be throwing in Wrestlemania 29 as a poorly booked show. Swagger doesn't belong in the title picture. It should be Sheamus vs Orton for the world title and I'm assuming Jericho is going to get booked wrong when he should have a match against Ziggler. This Wrestlemania has a lot of star power and could be one of the best with those two matches added on top of the Rock vs Cena, HHH vs Lesnar, and Taker vs Punk.

 

[Elchicano15]

I would definitely have to say WM 27 and WM 11. The worst Wrestlemanias in my book. First off WM 27 didn't feel like Wrestlemania at all. It felt like a glorified RAW. Opening with a talking segment with the Rock, then followed by a World Title Match. Yes they did the same thing last year by having the World title match be their curtain jerker and the match only lasted 18 seconds but it was still a good mania compared to 27. At WM 27 They should have opened up with Cody/Rey, the rock can then come out after the match and talk then have the world title match after that. The ending seemed sloppy as well. If Miz was gonna win, he could have won clean. Just to make his title reign relevant. His title reign was nothing spectacular. He didn't defend it at the EC, and spent half of his reign defending it against Jerry Lawler. Of course Jerry should have won his match against COle instead of the cyber GM reversing the decision. It didn't matter what the GM had to say. LOL

Wrestlemania 11 should have had Diesel vs Shawn Michaels closing instead of Bam Bam Bigelow vs L.T.