Wrestlemania 25 or Wrestlemania 15: Which was better

[jamel21]

My personal opinion Wrestlemania 15 was way better, Wrestlemania 25 was the worst Wrestlemania besides Wrestlemania 9.

The only thing that saved Wrestlemania 25 was Shawn Michaels vs The Undertaker. Smackdown main event was awful. Orton and Triple H was the worst a clusterfuck of a Money in the Banketc.....

Now Wrestlemania 15 started with the first of the three matches with The Rock, Austin trilogy, The HHH heel turn which started his transition as "The Game" as we all know him as now, The Big Bossman hanging from the hell in a cell

Now with all those good examples why does everybody hate on Wrestlmania 15?:

 

[shooter_mcgavin]

Nice comparison ... since both Wrestlemania's were seen as under performers. However between the two I would still say Wrestlemania 25 is the better Wrestlemania.

This is all because of Undertaker vs. Shawn Michales and Ricky Steamboat's comeback. All this made up the bad (Kid Rock, Diva's Battle Royale) and the underwhelming (The Championship Matches, Hardy vs. Hardy, Money in the Bank).

For me Wrestlemania XV probably has its string of bad (Hell in a Cell, Brawl for All, Tori vs. Sable) and underwhelming moments (everything else except X-Pac vs. Shane) as well. Difference is there wasn't a match that had the magnitude of Undertaker vs. Shawn Michaels.

Of course some would say "what about The Rock vs. Austin I?". In the context of now it's easy to assume that this was a big time match. However keep in mind The Rock, at the point, was just borderlining between upper midcarder and main eventer at the time. Think of The Rock = The Miz right now. Imagine the WM main event feel of WMXV being a match between The Miz vs. Hulk Hogan if they ever met in their primes.

The Rock was no serious three to beating Austin, Austin destoyed The Rock in the December PPV a little over a year before and Austin again destroyed The Rock the night after Survivor Series 1998 (only to get DQ'ed). The match was actually overbooked even before the bell rang.

So basically WMXV was just a formality for Austin to regain his title.

 

[dd23beatlesfan1]

I personally think Wrestlemania 15 was a better Wrestlemania than 25, but I could be in the minority on that as Wrestlemania 15 tends to be one of the least favorite Wrestlemanias amongst most wrestling fans.

First off to answer the thread starter's question about why so many people hate on Wrestlemania 15. There's three reasons/possibilities as to why people tend to "shit" on Wrestlemania 15.

1. No real classic matches

The main event between Stone Cold and the Rock is considered a classic by some fans, although truthfully it is easly the least best of their three mania matches (I think most people would agree with that), but it does have some sentimental value as it kickstarted their Wrestlemania series of matches. But in reality it would be lucky to make the top 30 matches in Mania history (it probably wouldn't make my top 30), which to me makes it a good match, but not a classic. But other than Stone Cold and the Rock, pretty much every match on the card is forgotten. It's not known for it's matches. Most Wrestlemanias have at least one classic match, and beings 15 really doesn't it's kind of dismissed by many fans.

2. Attitude Era- hate

The show was much more about the overall storyline of the show rather than the matches. It took place right in the middle of the Attitude Era, and there are some fans who like to criticize the Attitude Era today and talk about it being overrated about how the storylines were terrible and the matches were terrible, etc. People like this are definitely not going to appreciate Wrestlemania 15, because it was a Wrestlemania show definitely of it's time and very much of the Attitude Era

3. It was just a giant episode of Raw

I've heard quite a few fans say that Wrestlemania was basically a mega episode of Raw, and I have to agree with that assessment. It did play out like a mega episode of Raw. Instead of culminating feuds like most Wrestlemania's do, the show was really just a progression of the storylines going on at the time which continued to play out on Raw the following night and the months afterwards. Austin's feud with the Corporation was still ongoing. Triple H's turn continued the evolution of DX and led to his arrival in the Corporation. Undertaker and the Ministry brought more chaos and violence to the WWE thanks to the Hell in a Cell match, which continued to play out on the following Raws. It was a big giant episode of Raw in essence.


Those are the major reasons why people crap on Wrestlemania 15 today.


Now to compare Wrestlemania's 15 and 25. I like Wrestlemania 15 better, and actually think it was a better overall show.

See I was a big fan of the Attitude Era (started watching in 91 though), and even today I still think the storylines, that many fans now consider to be crap to be funny and entertaining. Mark Henry's Sexual Chocolate character. Guess what? That's the most entertaining and interesting he's been in his whole career. The Val Venis/Kaientai feud? I thought it was hilarious. I liked the chaotic outrageous, edgy storylines going on. I'll agree that the matches and talent roster improved hugely in 2000 with the first WCW exodus and Jericho and Big Show arriving a year earlier. But every wrestler on the show back then had a character and storyline and something interesting going on with them.

So, beings Wrestlemania 15 was basically a mega episode of Monday Night Raw circa the Attitude Era at it's popular peak, yeah I'm gonna enjoy it. None of the matches were classics, but as an overall show it was entertaining, fun, exciting, and enjoyable.


Wrestlemania 25? One classic match that easily in the top 10 Wrestlemania matches in history (possibly top 5), a solid Money in the Bank matchup, and what else? Disappointing matches that made for a really boring show. Triple H and Orton is one of the worst main events in Wrestlemania history. It was a terrible match (both have had much matches better before and since). The Hardy's match was underwhelming as well (which was highly disappointing), and the rest of the show was just boring. Yeah the Taker/HBK match was better than anything on Wrestlemania 15, but 15 as an overall show was much more interesting, entertaining, and fun. At least to me.

 

[The Mark of Zur-En-Arrh]

I think that what let WM15 down was the fact that so many of the matches seemed to come from nowhere and were extremely rushed.

For example, a month beforehand, Al Snow and Hardcore Holly had an infamous hardcore match which resulted in them both fighting in the Mississippi River. A month later at WM, Billy Gunn is suddenly the champion from out of nowhere and is defending to against both of them, and loses to Holly. Decent opening bout, get the crowd riled up with some weapon spots, smash a table and the crowd are ready for the real wrestling. But there was literally no build. Ok, the hardcore title never really had any build for anything ever, but you still expect a WM match to have something leading up to the match beforehand right?

Same applies for Road Dogg's IC title defense. He's defending it against Goldust, Shamrock and Val Venis purely for the fact that each of them have been IC champ before, but none of them had a Mania match to wrestle, so rushed 4 Corners match is what they settled for.

Jeff Jarret and Owen HArt defended the tag titles against D'lo Brown and freakin' Test. Two guys nobody cared about at the time, and to make things worse, this was decided on Heat earlier that same night. As i recall, the match didn't last 5 minutes and ended when PMS came out and caused a distraction. Wow, great stuff there.

Nobody cared for Brawl for All, the actual build up and entrances actually took 3x as long as the actual fight, and then when you have Tori vs Sable on the card just to represent the women of wrestling, then your card looks pretty shit.

Kane v HHH wasn't bad. Wasn't awesome, but wasn't bad. Obvious swerve at the end, which was counteracted by a far better swerve later on in the night.

Paul Wight v Mankind, was also not bad. Show's first PPV appearance against a ME'er in Foley, provided some good action but again ended in a lackluster fashion, with seemingly more time being dedicated to Vince being knocked out after the match, than the actual match itself.

Then there was the infamously bad Hell In A Cell match between Taker and Bossman where the only redeeming factor was that it ended.

X-Pac v Shane McMahon was probably one of the best of the whole night in terms of wrestling action and entertainment value, followed by a great swerve heel turn by HHH and Chyna, only to drag it out too long with a Kane run in that amounted to literally nothing.

And then the ME, which is regarded very highly by the majority of fans.

Now on the flipside, what did WM25 have? Taker v HBK and MiTB and a half decent Extreme Rules match that played out like the Hardy Highlight Reel, where there was literally two spots that were unique (the table sandwich and the Chair TWOF).

Every other match was shite in all honesty. The Diva Battle Royal was a complete joke in every aspect. The ring work, the introduction, the commentary, everything about that match was abysmal.

The Tag Title Unification match not even making it to the main card was an insult, made even worse by the 30 second IC title match later in the night.

MiTB featured lots of new faces but instead they decided to have a repeat winner instead of a brand new one, which didn't sit well with some fans (especially me).

JEricho's handicap match was 70% gold and 30% shit. Jericho and Steamboat wowed the millions across the world. Piper and Snuka showed why they should stick to occassional appearances where they talk only, and Mickey Rourke's participation was so pointless.

'I spent months learning to act like a wrestler, but when it comes to the Wrestling show where i get in the ring with a wrestler i'm just going to punch him'? WTF?

And then there were the ME's. I don't need to say anything about Taker/HBK, but the SD Triple Threat wasn't anything to write home about. Solid match but it felt more like a ME for like Unforgiven or The Bash and not WM worthy, and HHH/Orton has to be one of THE worst ME's in the history of the PPV.

If i had to pick, i'd probably say i perferred WM15, despite being at WM25 in person. I got to see the tag match, i was within spitting distance of the ring and had a blast but upon reflection, WM15 was the better PPV.

WM25 had THE best match of the decade on it. But 30 minutes of super amazing wrestling out of a 5 hour show of pure crap, doesn't measure up to 3 hours of decent wrestling even if it was thrown together at the last minute.

With the exception of Brawl for All there wasn't a single time when watching WM15 where i thought 'that segment/match was a complete waste of valuable PPV time' whereas i found myself thinking that repeatedly throughout WM25.

15 minutes of Kid Rock and 10 minutes of Austin doing literally nothing when there were two title matches that EVERYONE wanted to see, reduced to joke or dark matches really really pissed me off in all honesty.

I prefer WM15 because they tried to entertain us with wrestling instead of WM25 where Vince tried yet again to do both at the same time.

 

[emilygoindown]

In my opinion Wrestlemania 25 is one of the most underrated wrestlemania's in history.
When I read these posts it is clear most people here are fans of the attitude era and are clearly not fans of this current era (I refuse to call it the "PG Era")

I personally see upsides to both the manias, however both had problems as well.

Lets start with 15
the good:

Shane VS X pac: One of theonly trully good matches on the show, ad really entertaining (but hardly a classic), but had a great ending with triple h's heal turn

Stone cold vs the rock: I personally loved this match, it was the first in the great austin-rock wrestlemania trilogy, some will say it was the worst, however we need to remember this was when the rock was very much still in progression to a full main eventer, and to be honest, for that reason, the match is even better cause of that.

the bad: pretty much everything else was horrendous: the divas match, brawl for all and of course the HIAC match with undertaker and big boss man, and of course the way it ended was one of the stupidest things i have ever seen.
all the other matches were average at best (triple threat harcore, intercontinental match, show v mankind, kane v triple h)

And now a wrestlemania that is very underrated simply because one match was bad:

the good:
undertaker v michaels: easily one of the greatest matches of all time, arguably the match that 'saved' wrestlemania 25.
MITB: i cant believe people shit on this, I personally loved this match, in my personal opinion it was one of the best ever MITB matches, but no; because a new guy didnt win, every one hates it: allow me to remind u of two things:
one: this is wrestling: sometimes the guy u want to win, will win, but other times he loses.
Say u were watching a football match, would u really be happy if the team u wanted to win, would win EVERY SINGLE TIME. Before u say 'yes', think about it-that would be boring, the joys of competitive sports is that u never no who will win.
Bloody hell, remember people win ad lose matches, sometimes u want him to win, sometimes u dont.

ALSO: cm punk's victory arguably led him to where he is today, and lets not forget the feud we got from that very match (hardy v punk)

Triple threat championshp match:
In my opinion, this match is very underrated and sadly will always be overshadowed by undertaker v michaels.
Now i am not saying that this math was better than that match, however it seams to me, people r shitting all over this match simply because it wasn't as good (and because people just want an excuse to hate cena). Just because the match wasnt as good as the other doesent meen its a bad match. (i bet u if at wrestlemania 26 batista v cena and edge v jericho had come after taker v michaels people would despise those matches, because people have an expectation of every match to follow to get better and u no i am right)

the bad:
Diva's match: yeah it was bad, but get used to it, pretty much every wrestlemania since 19 has only had bad diva's matches.
kid rock concert: yeah, i didnt like this, it went on for too long, and yes, when it replaced the tag match i was pissed: BUT: guess what? THE DVD came out!!!! and guess what! they have the tag match included in it! and....the kid rock concert isnt!
so that means, now when u watch wrestlemania 25, u can see the tag match and not bother with the concert!
let me guess: "oh but on the one day 2 years ago, i didnt get to see it"
I hope u can see why that looks stupid and why thats a bad excuse-but incase u cant-it was 2 years ago, get over it, u can watch the match now as part of the show.

Triple H VS Randy orton: I didnt like this match, I hoped it would be better than that, orton and triple h have had much better matches, i was disappointed yes (though it wasnt anywhere near as bad as people made it out to be)

Everything else:
matt v jeff: i'll admit i was slightly disappointed with this match, however it was still a solid extrem rules match. i liked this match, it wasnt as good as i though it would be, but i still liked it, and most people who simply watch it for what it is, will agree.

handicap match: well the dragon was good, the other...blah.
The mickey rourke thing-just another stupid wrestlemania celebrity moment (wasnt as bad as the butterbean thing thou)

JBL v Mysterio: I never understood why people shit on this all the time: i remember before the show was even advertised NO ONE even cared about that match, the match was being shited all over even before it came on the air, no one wanted to see it, so u should be thankful it was barley even a match! Anyway, say they had gotten 10 minuets-it probably would av been worse
at least we got a hilarious segment, forget about it being a poor end of for JBL, just watch it as a funny segment.

and yeah, so overall i would say 25 is the better show, overall a better selection of matches.
yes, both had their problems, both had crap matches, both had good matches, both had classics
by the way sorry if i offended anyone, we all have a right to our opinions, i was just giving mine.
Thanks

 

[The Jeff]

I too was at WM 25 and was blown away by HBK/Taker. I pick WM 15 as the better of the 2. besides it being the 1st WrestleMania I ever saw (1st WWF PPV too) there was never a dull moment. I sat through the whole event excited and kept watching the tape until I had to return it. WM 25, my 4th live WrestleMania in a row, which I am still attending yearly , was just eh. I feel like the WWE hasn't tried since WM 23. The best match besides the obvious one was MITB. A few high spots and Christian too.

 

[The Crock]

Honestly, Wrestlemania XV wins this, but not by much. Both cards had some nice matches, but the rest were not memorable and not very good. 'Mania XV's highlight was the Rock/Austin match, but 'Taker hanging Bossman, and Shane-O retaining his belt were also quite memorable. On the flipside, 'Mania XXV had a great match between 'Taker and HBK, a nice showing with Jericho and Steamboat, and then obviously a fun Money in the Bank ladder match. That being said, the bad matches on 'Mania XXV truly were BAD. At 'Mania XV, although it had bad matches, they were generally decent... Although the Butterbean/Bart Gunn, Sable/Tori matches were pretty bad, but nowhere near as bad as the Divas Battle Royal and the 21 second IC Title match.

WMXV, just barely.

 

[The Brain]

Both were weak manias. Many times I've said WM15 is the worst of all the manias. I won't get into too much detail as I feel I post my thoughts on this event every couple months. It was just terribly booked and had underwhelming swerves. The main event was nothing but a boring brawl. WM25 wasn't anything great either but Taker vs. HBK on its own is enough to put it ahead of WM15. For as bad as the main event of WM25 was it was still better than the main event of WM15. Neither event was good by mania standards but 25 was the better of the bad.

 

[therockiswwf]

WM 15 sucked.

The hardcore match had no pace/story/crowd and it was just boring.
The tag match, .
Brawl for All - At least Bart got knocked the fuck out.
Big Show/Mankind - It wasn't bad, but it made no sense. Why would Big Show get himself DQ?
IC title - See hardcore.
Kane/HHH - It was decent. I loved the Pete Rose thing.
Sable/Tori- Good lord.
Euro title - Boring. It had a HHH/Chyna turn, but still boring.
HIAC - Boring (see a pattern). Who where you supposed to boo? Both Taker and Bossman were bad guys. WTF with the noose . That was just stupid. But there was a funny part, when Edge was going back up (on the cable thing) he got stuck for a little and just kind of hanged there.
Rock/Austin I - I saw the whole build up for this and not once (even though I already knew who was going to win) did it ever seem like The Rock had any chance at all to win. It was a good match though.

WM 25 had Taker/Shawn which was better than the entire WM 15. WM 25 seemed more like a glorified regular PPV but WM 15 seemed like a glorified Raw. The build up for WM 15 also sucked. The Rock/Austin had the biggest build and it was weak. It was more about Rock/Big Show than Austin/Rock. The second biggest thing that was built up was the guest ref for the main event. Well since Mankind went to the hospital and Big Show got arrested, their match meant nothing. Then Vince can't overrule Shawn to be the ref, so he also wasn't the ref. But the Ref was, yes you guessed it, a regular ref. Out of the two biggest built up matches; one didn't matter and the other was decent but didn't have very good build. WM 25 had a really good build for the upper card but it just couldn't live up to it (except Taker/Shawn).

Oh and the crowd sucked for WM 15.

 

[CelticCorey]

I just needed to see this about WM 15. You guys hated on it; but I thoroughly enjoyed the match between Bossman and Taker. To each their own. I really don't understand the hate that match gets. But definitely was a very good and entertaining match for me. Not to mention, my favorite incarnation of all time of the Undertaker was at WM 15. Him sacrificing Bossman was so cool. Maybe I'll go ahead and watch that match again and see if it's any different.

Never saw WM 15 or WM 25 from start to finish. The first ever WWF event I saw, was, believe it or not, Over the Edge 1999 and I stopped watching from 2007 all the way until the end of 2009 so I missed WM 25 but I heard the latter was poorly received. Although Steamboat and Shawn/Taker was terrific.

 

[The Ace of Knaves]

I just needed to see this about WM 15. You guys hated on it; but I thoroughly enjoyed the match between Bossman and Taker. To each their own. I really don't understand the hate that match gets. But definitely was a very good and entertaining match for me. Not to mention, my favorite incarnation of all time of the Undertaker was at WM 15. Him sacrificing Bossman was so cool. Maybe I'll go ahead and watch that match again and see if it's any different.

Bro, until today it remained the only Undertaker Wrestlemania match to receive 'boring!' chants from the live crowd!!! And even Mark Callaway himself was reportedly upset over the match.

And despite the obvious fact Boss Man was picked over Mankind to go against Taker at WM 15 to nail him on the main event scene and lift him to a legend status, until his death Boss Man was no better than a mid-carder whereas Mick Foley became a legend.

I guess those reasons explain perfectly well why that match is hated to its bone by the fans. Boss Man vs Taker over Mankind vs Taker isn't exactly a good choice.

Never saw WM 15 or WM 25 from start to finish. The first ever WWF event I saw, was, believe it or not, Over the Edge 1999 and I stopped watching from 2007 all the way until the end of 2009 so I missed WM 25 but I heard the latter was poorly received. Although Steamboat and Shawn/Taker was terrific.

Oh, but I hope u watched Taker vs HBK, that match was the best WM match ever.

 

[therockiswwf]

I just needed to see this about WM 15. You guys hated on it; but I thoroughly enjoyed the match between Bossman and Taker. To each their own. I really don't understand the hate that match gets. But definitely was a very good and entertaining match for me. Not to mention, my favorite incarnation of all time of the Undertaker was at WM 15. Him sacrificing Bossman was so cool. Maybe I'll go ahead and watch that match again and see if it's any different.

The match just plained sucked. There were no big moves, weak use of weapons, bad wrestling, crowd was quiet and THEY FUCKING HUNG SOMEONE. I'm guessing the first time you saw this, you were a kid (I was). That is why it may have been cool to you.

 

[CelticCorey]

Actually, the first time I saw this was in the last year or so. Maybe I am the sole person here. Maybe I saw something you guys didn't. Maybe you saw something that I didn't. I have no idea what it is. I will have to go back and watch again. But when I youtubed it about a year ago or so, I really liked it and I don't mind saying that. And I'm not a kid, I'm 19. So....

 

[therockiswwf]

Actually, the first time I saw this was in the last year or so. Maybe I am the sole person here. Maybe I saw something you guys didn't. Maybe you saw something that I didn't. I have no idea what it is. I will have to go back and watch again. But when I youtubed it about a year ago or so, I really liked it and I don't mind saying that. And I'm not a kid, I'm 19. So....

I was only guessing that because it used to be cool to me when I was younger but as I got older I was like wait... they just hung someone, in front of a lot of people, the announcers didn't care that much and where in the hell did he go? I do suspend my belief during wrestling but watching that I just couldn't. It is based on prefernce and stuff so there is nothing wrong with liking it. But I still don't even understand the reason for that match to be in a cell. It was more about Taker/Vince and I don't think Taker/Bossman even had a feud.

 

[The Rob]

WrestleMania XV was a terrible PPV on the whole. The main-event was a complete cluster-fuck from start to finish and the Hell in a Cell match was just laughable in comparison to it's predecessors'. The hanging segment was just creepy and it actually freaked me out at the time. No redeeming qualities all in all.

WrestleMania XXV was probably only just a little bit better than XV, and if it wasn't for Shawn Michaels v.s Undertaker, it would of been worse by a long way. At least the finish was quite cool for XV whilst the main-event at XXV was dull and dreary. For sheer spectacle however, XXV was great. I just find WrestleMania's that are held in 70,000 seaters are just so larger than life whilst a WrestleMania in a 15,000 seat arena is just missing.... something.

 

[RatedRSuperstar1331]

Wrestlemania 25 is better. Undertaker vs. Shawn Michaels is so good, it automatically cancels out anything from Wrestlemania XV. Add to it a perfectly acceptable match in HHH-Orton (though not acceptable enough to be main event), Money in the Bank, and Cena-Edge-Show and you have an event far superior to the mailed-in and, at times nonsensical, Wrestlemania XV.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

I think WrestleMania 25 was better, in just about every way imaginable.

WrestleMania 15 had two matches that went over 10 minutes. Two. The Rock was a big deal, but I still do not buy into him being ready at that point in time. The second best match on that card included X-Pac and Shan'O Mac..that should tell you something.

The set was cheap, and looked like absolute shit. The crowd was small (right around 20,000 I believe) and somewhat smarky (it was in Philly). It didn't feel like WrestleMania, at all. The whole thing completely relied upon Steve Austin, and it wasn't hard to notice.

On the other side of that coin, you have WrestleMania 25. Another Mania that didn't have all that many great matches, but at least a couple (Taker/HBK, MITB). People complain about the HHH/Orton match, but I liked it. It was a bit underwhelming after that top-notch feud, but it was as bad as the A.D.D. cases make it out to be.

Most importantly, it looked and felt like WrestleMania. Mania 15 felt like an off-brand, generic PPV with a totally underwhelming card. Not only that, it didn't surprise. If it would have been better than advertised, I might give it some credit. However, it was about as bad as I thought it would be.

 

[Nadeem Ahmad]

The crowd was ... somewhat smarky (it was in Philly). It didn't feel like WrestleMania, at all.

Is that why the fans possibly could have cared less about Big Boss Man hanging with a noose around his neck from the cell? It looked really believable to me but the way the commentators talked it off let me know he really wasn't suffocating. I did consider that Philadelphia had a fair share of smarter fans that probably saw through the "reality" of the stunt.

Looking overall, Wrestlemania Fifteen had to have been less worse. Despite the poor build, the opening contest for the Hardcore Championship was pretty well fought and it was tricky seeing who would come out with the pinfall as each competitor tried to stop the other person. Plus, Hardcore Holly and Al Snow knew each other well in that environment and Billy Gunn had been brawling and using weapons for more than a year at that point so he was not really a newcomer to the division.

The Roadie defending against Val Venis, Ken Shamrock and Goldust was somewhat underrated as well. All of them were or would become great Intercontinental Champions at some point so if they recently had been involved in the feuds for that division, it was not so unbelievable or out of the question to let that match take place, especially with such discipline in that they adhered to the rules of tagging in and out mostly.

From what I read on various threads, the "Brawl for All" was a shoot anyway so who would not expect Butterbean to knock out Bart Gunn like that?

Mankind and Paul Wight did the best they could do in a match of "wrestling". The outcome nor the importance of the match being irrelevant later did not take anything away from the bout.

Sable and Tori kept things short.

I did have a little problem with Kane versus Triple H but it was for the reason against what most fans loved about the era of Attitude. The fight was too lenient for letting closed fists and other disqualifying aspects being used and cheapened the industry as well as expectations for future shows. Other than those complaints, it was not too far from being decent.

Sean Waltman was extremely underrated and the fact that Shane played to the crowd while not being a full wrestler at least validated the point of letting the championship be determined there but it was not a great match.

The main event to me was like what most people said: it was a cluster, very messy and seemed staged from the start. In essence it felt like a pointless exertion of hormones and wastes of energy aside from some big moves. It was almost worse than the match in the Cell in terms of technical wrestling.

Anyway, three bad matches in the form of the main event, the fight held in the cell and the European Championship did not come close to the disaster of Wrestlemania Twenty-five which maybe inversely could not even showcase three good matchups.