I know everyone loves to hate on the guy, but I thought this was a very well-done interview. He really went into some detail on certain aspects of THIS BUSINESS that we don't hear enough about.
I won't repost my giant summary like I did in the BoD thread, but I will give HHH praise for his *hellacious* work ethic. It's small wonder Vince gave his blessing on marrying his daughter considering how driven HHH is. Awesome interview and a great insight into HHH (and actually Vince to a small degree as well).
I REALLY enjoyed that interview; HHH is one of those guys who hasn't done a lot of interviews other than fluff pieces here and there so it's refreshing to get some of the insight from, arguably, the most powerful person in wrestling next to Vince.
Yeah, I laughed at him totally exposing the pipe bomb as a complete work. And I know we all 'knew' it was, but Punk has always strongly maintained that there was a semblance of reality to it.
'So now you can train guys from day one instead of recruiting all your guys from other companies.
You have to give talent the tools to succeed. First of all you have to find the right people, the right athletes. Sometimes for guys who have been in the indies for five or six years, it's harder to break them of bad habits than it is to start them fresh. Some guys won't have it. You say, "I know you worked someplace else, but that's just not how it really works. It might've worked there, but let me show you how it works in the real world."
ok, i honestly did enjoy the interview and i do think overall that hhh showed he cares about things and is a student of the game (hey, thatd be a good nickname), but this bit above is pretty "head up ones own ass' material'
those 'bad habits' have led to some of your bigger recent stars (punk not taking shit from people, dbry being the energizer bunny, all systems go and claw and scratch'
and for him to say wwe is 'the real world' really is indicative of unwilling they are to see the value in other styles and places
For the smark audience it was ok, maybe a B-/C+, but a much better interview for the casual fan. Certainly Masked Man wasn't going to ask pointed questions about the Reign of Terror.
Are you sure that's what he means by 'bad habits' and not all the "highspot-highspot-highspot" matches you generally see throughout the indies? I mean, Punk and Bryan aren't exactly your common, everyday indy worker; they're outliers.
As far as the "real world", WWE *is* North American wrestling for better or worse. You say people watch more than just WWE, but not really. Not a lot of people, anyway. There are niche markets for every form of entertainment and that's all ROH, TNA, and the rest are. And since WWE won the war twice (first against territories, then vs. old school Southern wrestling) and TNA and ROH have never been more than gnats, I'd say the fans themselves have been unwilling to see value in other styles and places.
I appreciate you hate the guy, and obviously politicking was a major factor but if you don't think hard work plays a *major* role in almost anyone's success at that level...
Despite what the WWE Hype machine would have you think, having a great match at Wrestlemania isn't the be all, end all ya know. Lots of guys have had great careers without ever having a great match at Wrestlemania, or even being on a Wrestlemania.
Politicking may have helped get him his 'spot', but once he had it he picked up the ball and ran with it, and had a series of great matches.
Is he still an A-hole? Probably. But he is an A-hole who when healthy and motivated could go in the ring with the best of them.
Well yeah. Punk was speaking from the heart so in that sense it was a 'shoot', but obviously WWE allowed him to speak and didn't shut of fhis mic, so in that sense it was a 'work'.
I'm a little surprised that people ever thought it wasn't at least partially a work - even if in just the sense that Vince said - 'go ahead and say what you what. Feel free to take shots at us' or something similar. If WWE had no idea what was going on they would have turned off the mic.
Hogan, savage, Bret, Shawn, Nash, Hall, rock, Austin, Foley, angle, edge, Jeff hardy, cena, Batista, punk, rey mysterio, undertaker, and even sting are all contemporaries of this guy who were better than him overall and connected more with the fans. Good for him booking himself to win the belt 100 times, and getting to the arena 3 hours early. How about he uses that time to learn how to cut a different promo than the same one he always does.
Bingo. I'm thinking more of guys like Teddy Hart - who seemed to have all the tools but pissed off people everywhere he went because he refused to work well with others.
Yeah...I mean...if they didn't like Punk and Bryan's "bad habits" then why would WWE be pushing them while Punk and Bryan are displaying these "bad habits".
They're probably talking about unnecessary, dangerous and stupid spots.
vs. Owen, Wrestlemania 14 vs. Jericho, Wrestlemania 18
And you can't really blame him for having poor matches with Warrior, Goldust, Kane, BikerTaker, or that overbooked clusterfuck of a 4-way with Rock, Mick, Show, and all the McMahons.
Outside of the Booker match, none of them can really be blamed on HHH for being subpar.
Reading this I was wondering if HHH was working the guy a little? Look at the subtle (and not so subtle) shots at Bret Hart, Mick Foley, and Steve Austin. There were some parts that were interesting to me because it seemed to illuminate a lot of the way the WWE does business.
Good read. I've generally found HHH as an in-ring performer to be an average worker who has detracted from the in-ring product at times, but he's always seemed to have a really good mind for the business.
6 of those names are in the upper echelon of wrestling history (Hogan, Savage, Shawn, Bret, Austin, and Rock). And depending on the next few years, you could easily add Cena and/or Punk to that list. Most guys fail in comparison to them. After those 6 (or 8), the rest are pretty much all lumped together. They all have immense positives and critical negatives. Though there's no way in hell I put Hardy, Batista, Taker, or Sting ahead of HHH.
The Jericho match wasnt good. I think Scott gave it 3 stsrs and tthat's way too generous IMO. Its all leg kicks and then hhh goes over. For mid card fodder that's good, for the 20 minute wm main event its not
Yeah, the Austin one, if it was a shot, was perhaps the most subtle shot ever. Plus I think Jericho said pretty much the same thing in one of his books about how protective he was of his character's image/booking.
I've heard Austin make similar statements on his own podcast. He freely admits he'd tell creative if something sucked. I mean, the guy walked out because they wanted him to do something stupid and he disagreed (though he says in hindsight it was extremely short-sighted on his part and only came back because JR played mediator).
I love this guy. Love him, love him, love him, love him. Him and his little "Who, me?" act; him and his little gym rat work ethic line; him and his shrugging "I was just in the right place at the right time for everything" act. LOVE IT!
Yeah, no bad guy strong arm tactics. That wasn't you with the "if he doesn't want to play ball then screw him!" egging on of Shawn. You didn't have any say in making Booker look like a man with no pride; you had to pedigree Kendrick and London; it just made good sense to insert you and Nash into the Summer of Punk; If Evolution weren't such a good idea, it would have been voted down by the writers, because we don't understand the creative process.
In all seriousness, I do like a lot of what HHH has done with development, and I do like the talent he's brought in. I'm more of a fan of HHH the exec than I am of HHH the wrestler, and I think he has a great appreciation for doing things the old school way. I love that NXT is basically structured like a territory, and that's no accident. But man that is some first class, revisionist history bullshit that he spins. Sprinkle in some straw, misrepresent people's gripes, etc, etc, and then shrug your shoulders and say "Who? Me?"
I felt like those were shots at Kaval/Low Ki, London and possibly Hero given the heat he has with the office for not getting into better shape. Punk and Bryan got over not just because they could have good matches but because they could do WWE entertainment. Bryan is in the spot he's in right now because he turned a first class shit sandwich ('Kane and Daniel Bryan go to anger management' should have been the wrestlecrappiest of wrestlecrap) into the best part of WWE TV for a few months. Punk is in the spot he's in not because of **** matches but because he actually connected with the audience both as a heel and a face.
You read a lot of the indie guys who think they should just do their same act just on a bigger stage and that's not what's going to get over in WWE.
"But man that is some first class, revisionist history bullshit that he spins."
And pray tell where your info comes from?
I'd rather hear Triple H's side of the story than anybody else's because, ya know, he's ACTUALLY THERE. That holds more water for me, to tell you the truth.
And, yeah, what fans saw in Punk and Bryan in ROH were traits they could see as potential main eventers among the ranks of Austin, HHH, Rock, Foley, Shawn, Undertaker etc. Nobody with anything more than an ostrich-brain said, "WHY DON'T THEY SIGN AMAZING RED!! THEY'RE ASSHOLES!!"
I get a big kick out of some peoples' responses. The guy gets interviewed and clearly answers all of the questions as honestly as possible, and people can't rid themselves of the notion that he's hiding something dreadfully insidious and sinister. For some reason, *he* is the biggest threat to others' success, despite that clearly being a sticking point that would jeopardize WWE's and Vince's ideals.
Funnier yet, people choose to disregard questionable victories of others while meticulously analyzing the devious reasons behind Triple H going over. Think about it. If you ask me, John Cena and Orton have had far more unjustified victories than Triple H and have left greater wakes of destruction than he. Even when you go back and wonder "why Triple H went over so-and-so", there are always reasons that revealed themselves in time or simple logic can deduce that "the top heel can't lose a hat trick of PPVs in a row, dummy."
I don't care if people don't like the wrestler or the character. Have at it. But it's awfully questionable when they'll laud other wrestlers and judge them on an unimpressive rubric, whereas with HHH they say, "well, compared to the greatest of all time, he ain't that great." It comes off as a *liiiiittle* petty.
The thing I liked the most in that interview is how HHH mentioned how he's letting a lot of the new guys come up with their own gimmicks like the old days, such as Damien Sandow and Bray Wyatt.
That match was really HHH vs. Stephanie... Jericho was an afterthought and it showed... furthermore everyone at home and at the arena was emotionally spent from Hogan/Rock.
For me, the Bret Hart one was warranted (he was asked directly about it) and HHH was actually pretty diplomatic about it. The one at Austin wasn't that he would tell the bookers that something was crap (because honestly that seems par for the course with a lot of top guys) but that Austin wouldn't participate in fixing it. The really egregious shots were at Foley, IMO. Implying that Foley was just a garbage worker and was the wrestling equivalent of torture porn.
It struck me as egregious because the question was about ECW and there are a LOT of garbage-y brawls from that company featuring totally crap workers (:cough:NewJack:cough:)
You're right. I should take, at face value, the word of someone that is known for having a very, very healthy self interest streak. I should just disregard what I'be seen over the years, and what I know about people and swallow whole. Ok.
The funny thing is, I actually enjoyed the piece quite a bit. It didn't have the self pitying tone of Nash's piece. And like I said in my original post, he's doing a hell of a job with development. It is possible to like someone, appreciate their insight, and still think they're full of shit.
There are lots of small changes in terms of bringing guys to the main roster. There are weeks of promos and vignettes before the guy is debuting. In the 2000s, it is not really like that. Basically this mentality comes from the 80s and stuff.
I actually don't mind HHH being a politician behind the scene in terms of his in ring character. That stuff is common through out wrestling history. In the end, it's Vince McMahon's call to make.
Its sad how many hhh apologists this blog has. You can tell lots of people here became fans after 2005. Trust me. If youlived through 1999-2004 you know this guy sucks. Oh he has some good matches? So didn't Tito Santana...what's your point?
The genius of Edge as a heel was that he won the title by cashing in the MITB at the most opportune time, which was original at the time. Less than a month later, Cena won the belt back in a ten minute match. Cena actually killed Edge's heat.
Cena didn't make Orton. I don't even...
RVD is a guy who is perennially over. He won the belt from Cena because the ECW Revival thing was huge at the time. Cena didn't even job cleanly or anything.
Cena jobbed to Miz to fuel his own feud with The Rock.
Punk and Daniel Bryan made themselves. What did Cena do, not get in the way? The company line would not have allowed him to.
Triple H didn't undercut Orton at all. Orton was a part of a prestigious stable: Evolution. If not for that honour which he didn't deserve in the first place, he wouldn't have the same career today. The plan, clearly, was for Orton to win the belt, be dethroned, and it would lead to him winning it back at WM21. However, the ratings dropped once he won it and nobody had interest in him as a face. If people think Orton stinks now, he was a lot worse in 2004-'05. The entire plan was for Triple H to put him over like he did Batista.
He didn't undercut Benoit, either. Benoit was THE MAN early in 2004 until the company decided his 'thank you' reign was over and they changed direction and Benoit jobbed to Orton. That was it.
Triple H put over Jeff Hardy like nobody else has. Maybe he didn't become "it" by beating Triple H, but he was treated like an equal to a multi-time world champ.
The Booker T deal, which admittedly stunk because the storyline called for Booker going over at WM19, was fucked because he was contemplating retirement at the time and they figured they'd keep the heat on Triple H as World Champion because they knew he'd eventually be defending against Goldberg. If Booker won, he'd have lost it a month or so anyway out of pure necessity. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
I started rooting for Triple H in late 98/early 99. I liked Austin and Foley well enough, loved to hate heel Rock, but for whatever reason, I liked his DX stuff, liked his badass attitude when he went heel, or just wanted to be different I decided that's my guy and I am loyal if nothing else. And here is the thing about being a fan of someone; YOU DON'T CARE if he is burying people or winning to much, you WANT THEM TO WIN! So I don't apologize for anything HHH has done. Like I said he's my guy.
Cena worked a looong and amazing feud with edge after that where he did plenty of jobs and got edge over as a superstar. And cena laid down for Orton a bunch to get him over (which hhh wouldn't do) Rvd was the victim of hhh politics and cena did the job that huntor wouldn't. He made the miz way before that wrestlemania match by letting mix absolutely kill him on the mic which is 100% how miz got over as a heel in the first place. Cena absolutely made punk. He put him over at 2 straight shows in the summer of punk and made him a mega star, and he just did the same thing with db. Did you watch wwe in 2004, because hhh was still main eventing shows and Benoit was treated as an afterthought as champ. He worked mid card matches while huntor fouggt Hbk. Maybe he made Hardy "look" good but he wouldn't do a job for a guy who was the most over wtrstker on the planet at that point.
I like the majority of your posts on here, man. In fact, I've noticed that repeatedly you'll post shit I mostly agree with, EXCEPT when it comes to your bias against Triple H. It's the one thing we'd disagree on.
It's funny, because you think this blog has a lot of Triple H apologists yet I've seen people get 10+ upvotes because all they've posted is "Triple H sucks! HYUCK HYUCK HYUCK!!".
I don't want to fight over petty bullshit. We can have our disagreements. I just don't want to paint everyone who's a fan of "X" as idiotic because some guys see things in others that I don't see in them, and vice versa. For instance, Fuj sees something in Orton and thinks Foley's a hack, and I see the complete opposite yet we can see each other's points and go, "well, to each his own."
No fight. I'm a big Satan fan. just can't stand huntor. Some of its the politics. Some of its because I think he fucked over rvd and Benoit, some of it's for how bad the DX reunion was. I dunno, I think he's the worst
Everyone knows the B+ story, right? It's from a Meltzer review years ago of one of HHH's matches. He said it on his podcast on Monday night, claiming that "someone has a long memory," referring to Triple H.
With Benoit, who was always one of my favourites, I believe they never really embraced him as a star and were waiting to have him drop the belt after Backlash. They treated Triple H like they do Cena now: "Someone else is the champ, but Cena's the main character of WWE, let's not kid ourselves."
With RVD, who is really underrated by WWE, I think was hurt most by his work ethic and politics. According to him (I heard from his interview on Jay Mohr's podcast) he had big heat with Vince because he didn't want to do the Tribute To The Troops tour and was tired from the schedule he had to work. That's probably what hurt him the most.
The DX reunion I didn't care for either, it was very childish, but by that point it had become the John Cena Show and I had to tap out anyway. I really haven't paid much attention since 2007 or so.
From paying attention, noticing trends, etc. I mean, its hard to ignore stuff when it keeps happening. Can I prove any of it? No, nor do I believe some of the more outrageous rumors. But you seem to want me to ignore what crowd he ran with, who he learned from, and all the times that he went over when the story called for a loss. The white guy telling the black guy to carry his bags should not win. If HHH really was just a hard worker who did his job, and what was best for business, he would have eaten that pin. Anybody else would have. You dont get that sort of protection without working overtime in the self interest dept.
I realize that I am bias because you are always going to be bias for the guys you like but the first time I saw the match was on You Tube so I didn't have the Shawn/Undertaker match fresh in my head, and yes I had been enjoying some cocktails but I honestly liked it. Not an all time classic mind you, and given the hatred it should have been no DQ, but it wasn't nearly as terrible as everyone makes it out to be.
Vince himself hasn't always made decisions that he could benefit from. Clearly, he's made a lot of mistakes.
I've said it before in another post, but I'll repeat it: storyline-wise, Booker should have gone over at WrestleMania XIX. In reality, he was contemplating retirement at the time and hindsight dictates that they were clearly protecting HHH so that he'd have heat for the feud with Goldberg. If Booker had won, he'd have lost it shortly after anyway; they really had no stock in him at all.
"If HHH really was just a hard worker who did his job", he'd do what Vince ultimately decided on is what.
If I've noticed anything from watching this ill-begotten show, it's that wins and losses are dictated by a slow, amorphous show of faith in certain guys. When John Cena was on his way to becoming the champ for the first time, he was an unstoppable freight train. Likewise, the top heel cannot simply job to every Tom, Dick and Harry on consecutive PPVs.
If there's any proof to how WWE operates, it's that they operate quite pragmatically and the proof lies in Cena. They job him cleanly a handful of times IN HIS ENTIRE CAREER only when it really, REALLY matters. Punk, Bryan, Rock... uh, who else?
Now, how many people are going to bitch that Cena isn't "doing what's right for business" when it's clear that he's one of the most reliable company guys in history?
"I got the NWA title that Harley Race wore, and Harley was in my office one day and I showed it to him. Harley had tears in his eyes, and he says, "See that dent right there? I smashed my head on it in St. Louis.""
Does Meltzer have any proof at all that HHH actually read that review? Cause to me this whole "B+" story makes DM look like a sad, inconsequential loser trying to gain relevance by creating a (pretend) connection to the hottest angle in wrestling today.
How many years ago was this review? 10? 15? Why did HHH (or Steph) wait so long to mention it?
You didn't think he was the MAN in 2000? To me that's one of the ultimate years for 1 wrestler ever, when you factor in matches, angles, crowd heat, etc.
I think it's more likely that people in wrestling use letter grades to critique others from time to time, and Steph was using B+ cause it's a universal symbol of being very good but just short of exceptional, which was the point she was making about Bryan. I think that's more likely than it being a shot at DAVE MELTZER from something he wrote (1 time?) 10-15 years ago.
Don't you think B+ is very specific? And you know people have long memories in wrestling, especially anyone involved with Vince. (Hello, Randy Savage, Lex Luger, etc.)
Hate to burst your bubble, but outside of the past few WrestleManias, HHH was generally a bigger draw than 'Taker over the years. As far as overall money drawn is concerned, HHH is still probably ahead of 'Taker.
Bret, Shawn, Nash, Hall, Angle, Edge, Hardy, Punk, Mysterio and outside of the past few WrestleManias 'Taker as well. That's more than half of the eighteen guys you listed. Hell, I'm not sure Savage was a bigger draw than HHH either.
1. B+ *is* specific, although I don't read the Observer so I have no idea if Dave commonly uses letters to grade matches/wrestlers
2. HHH does strike me as the type of guy, ala Michael Jordan, to catalogue slights and insults, particularly from his early years
My reasons for not believing Meltzer:
1. I've watched enough wrestling-related programming (mostly shoot interviews) to know that people in the business occasionally use letter grades to describe other wrestlers
2. It happened so long ago, so why wait until NOW to say something? That's an expression that could have been used in countless other promos over the years.
3. HHH didn't say it, and he wasn't in the ring when it was said
Ultimately for me the 2nd list far outweighs the 1st one. I can believe that *Meltzer* believes it was related to his original comment, but I think his mind is clouded by his desire to create a connection between himself and this promo.
Plus the B+ rather than A thing is the type of thing condescending managers/higher-ups (e.g. Stephanie and HHH in this storyline) do say to their employees. It was very believable and fit perfectly into Steph's heelish promo.
He jobbed to Hardy twice from 2007-2008. He did, however, "get his wins back" for those who note these things. Still, the HHH/Hardy had more good than bad for Jeff.
Just a small point, but the Kendrick/London thing is so overblown. Yes, he didn't need to do it and it probably didn't make them look too good, but it isn't nearly as bad as say, Stone Cold Stunning an entire ring full of wrestlers singlehandedly. Hardly the political travesty I've heard people treat it as over the years.
Jobber I have been reading a bunch of your posts today, (it's Friday and my production at work is dwindling as the day goes on,) and can I just ask you one thing? Why do you spend so much time and energy disliking HHH? It's freaken pro wrestling. It's supposed to be fun. Be upset about things that matter.
I think it's cool to hate a guy for whatever reason you want, but what kills me is his blatant misrepresentation of reality. Like, just say "I fucking hate HHH cause he's boring as shit and drove me away from wrestling for years, and he always beat the guys I thought were more talented".
Don't add all the stuff that just isn't true, most notably that he isn't a "draw". As if the monster ratings of 2000 while he was champ didn't happen. As if WM21, at the time the most purchased ppv ever, and headlined by his match, didn't happen.
Or saying that the fans don't like the guy, ignoring the huge pops he's been coming out to since 2006. Or claiming that the lack of sympathy he got after SSlam last year was indicative that he isn't over, when the exact same thing happened to Chris Jericho the next night but apparently that's different.
Jabber, maybe I just don't get it. Like I said I watch wrestling and to this blog for fun. There are very few people, if any, in pro wrestling that I hate. I have hated CHARACTERS, (corporate Rock, Paul Heyman for example) but never the person themselves. If Jobber, (and many like him that post here) want to hate someone from a staged sport that's their business but I am just sort of curious as to why.
I'm the same way as you... now. But I used to be different, I used to hate people I had never met or who had never done anything to me other than maybe some mild annoyance on my part. I wasn't like that with wrestlers really, mostly pro athletes. But I remember that so I can't begrudge anyone for doing the same.
Smark-dom is weird. We hear all this backstage stuff, very rarely is it 100% accurate (like most office gossip), but we couple that with our preconceived notions of who these guys are (usually derived from their personas on tv), and we start feeling like we truly know them. We feel a real connection to these guys cause they're actually playing real people... sort of. So HHH isn't Tony Soprano, he's HHH the real guy who screwed over RVD, who totally didn't deserve it. And we know all this from third-hand gossip and complaints from bitter ex-employees who totally did nothing wrong.
I don't agree with it, I think people don't apply the same scrutiny to everyone and are often blinded by fandom to basic facts staring them in the face. But I understand where it comes from.
Right, there's always a reason to keep HHH strong. And my point is that he shrugs his shoulders and acts like he has no control over that.
You know what its like? It's like Palpable Johns having no problem giving away a million free pizzas, but then screaming bloody murder about providing healthcare to employees. Now, I'm not trying to make this political, its his business, whatever. But he has no problem justifying and finding a way to cover a million free pizzas. And just like HHH getting the W, there's a reason for the free pizzas; to drum up publicity and business. But there's also a perfectly good reason to provide healthcare for basically the same costs; healthy employees won't make other employees and customers sick. And yet, when it comes down to it, the Pappa always ends up justifying free pizza.
So, yeah, there's always a reason that HHH goes over, but there's also a reason that Jericho (health insurance for employees) could have gone over, and somehow, in all these years HHH and the booking team couldn't rub enough brain cells together to justify a Jericho victory? And that shit just happened? I don't buy it. Like, its amazing how a business owner is so brilliant at coming up with ways to pay for a free pizza giveaway (and I'm not saying that free pizza is a bad idea) but those same genius business owners suddenly become stumped by how to do anything for the people making them money. Again, not by accident.
But then again, I kind of made peace with my HHHate long ago. It's just something he does, just like my favorite musician, David Byrne, is a dick to his former bandmates. I just kind of roll my eyes shake my head. And hey if HHH being a dickis what gets us NXT, then so be it.
May be, but we as fans are not really in a position to *know* what actually happened so without others involved giving their accounts, it's unfair to say he's full of shit, whether or not it's true. If it came out that Vince was to blame for all these decisions, would it really be a shock? His fairly smart, loyal, muscle-bound son-in-law?
I don't doubt that Jesse hates John Cena but I am guessing that most of us think that his over the top schtick is just that...schtick. If not...well then he needs to get some help.
I say this on another response, but that sort of attitude involves ignoring a lot of things. Like I'm supposed to ignore HHH's little digs like "you can't work, just like Jericho," and then also that Jericho loses anytime the faced off? Or I'm supposed to ignore an interview HHH gave on a late night show (think it was leno) where, instead of putting over his match with Jericho, he just kind of said, "he's not really there." It was such a bizarre answer because it sounded like a boss giving a performance review. This was right before jericho ate another loss too.
Look when you make the moves that HHH has made, its going to attract scrutiny.
I just think we jump to conclusions far too often. Vince makes lots of decisions for his own personal enjoyment and will often shy away from a great idea simply because it wasn't his or he doesn't 'get it'. Didn't Vince tell Jericho to his face that he was the worst undisputed champion? If Vince wanted Jericho or Booker or RVD to go over, they would've gone over. But like the mythical John Cena heel turn, Vince wants what he wants and damn if anything is going to change his mind.
I just don't think Vince wants HHH to lose that often. HHH is everything Vince has ever wanted: muscular, smart, loyal, hard-working, charismatic, and he has a great look. He and Cena go over because they're right up Vince's alley. Guys like Punk and Bryan have to work their asses off to get to that same level because they don't have all the qualities Vince looks for.
He's an overrated jerk off who used his backstage stroke to fuck up something I like. I fail to see how Scotts blog isn't an appropriate venue for my disgust of hhh.
I didn't get him calling Foley a garbage worker. I got more "you shouldn't necessarily do everything the crowd wants you to do". Which kinda fits the whole point of the interview.
I don't know if you meant to reply to the other guy, but I never said you can't talk about your disgust with HHH. I said it's cool, but don't be spouting off shit that is obviously false (he's not a draw, he's not over, etc.).
I'm not saying that HHH sits on a throne with a magic veto, but I do notice that he does very few favors, and sometimes just does things because he can. This is also a guy who tried to say that nobody laid down for him, and he probably would have continued saying that if everyone hadn't called bull on him.
I understand your point about not jumping to conclusions, but. I do know a thing or two about how people maneuver, shift blame, and take credit for things, Ames the things I've heard out of HHHs mouth throw up quite few flags.
I've never understood the whole "HHH buried Jericho" thing. I mean, I can believe that behind the scenes HHH had Jericho pushed down the card and stuff like that, but as far as on-screen interaction goes, HHH never really made Jericho look bad. Hell, I'd argue their on-and-off 2000 feud was the best thing to happen to Jericho's career until his feud with Rocky at the end of 2001. Their Last Man Standing match is a textbook example of making a guy (in this case Jericho) look great in defeat.
Their 2002 feud is a different case, but even then I doubt HHH came up with the "Jericho ran over Lucy" angle. I remember he gave an interview promoting WrestleMania 18 where he talked about how he was pretty disappointed and underwhelmed by the build-up.
It's not that I think Jericho was buried or pushed down the card. It's more likely that someone who had Vince's ear used a line like "He's not ready...yet"
Again, it's not like HHH was waiting to crap on any talent that crossed his path, but there's a way to paint people as not championship material, or simply not ready for the winner's circle. It's much more mundane than people think it is, and that's why I don't have any problem connecting the dots from HHH on screen behavior to his backstage behavior.
Worst. Analogy. Ever. Don't fight it. It's terrible.
Hey, did it ever occur to you that they didn't have complete faith in Jericho because he also had a strong interest in Fozzy? He's not the wiser investment.
Exactly. It might not be fair, but stardom often beats titles. HHH himself as a world champion often took a backseat to Rocky, just because he was the lesser star.
Yep, like I said, I can believe that HHH did some politicking against Y2J backstage, but that never really carried over to their interactions with each other on-screen.
You gave another token excuse for why HHH is the smarter choice, but that's all it is. That's the whole point of backstage power, your token excuse tops someone else's legit reason.
Fozzy? Really? A guy who had wrestled in Japan and gotten himself over despite no support in Japan isn't going to be motivated? That's your reason to never give Jericho the rub? That's worse than any pizza analogy I could come up with, and I'm full of pizza analogies. The Fozzy thing never became a real distraction until the continued to screw with him. He was plenty focused early on and people were clamoring for him.
I didn't prove your point at all. I understand that as a consumer, "token excuses" that may prevent you from seeing more of your favourite performer are annoying and there's no justification for it from an onscreen perspective (I love Jericho too, and there was no reason he couldn't have been world champion multiple times between 2002 until his first departure).
However it's a factor that must be taken into account. They made the mistake of sacrificing everything for Brock, and he left them high and dry. Of course Jericho has always been a model worker, but it's not like he's the only great talent that got stuck in the midcard for years on end.
Come to think of it, your only point is that you like Chris Jericho and he should have been champion, and not just Triple H. Because you like him more. That's the argument that everyone has had. "I don't like Triple H, so it's bullshit that he's constantly on top!" Not everyone can be Steve Austin, and the show can't always be good. When a company's on cruise control, they're just going to stick the proven draw in there in the prime slot and that's about it.
I...don't like Jericho. I don't have any real loyalty to him, and I like Paul London way more than him so by your simplistic logic I should be much more upset that HHH pedigreed London and Kendrick.
Look, HHH was an asshole. I'm not saying he was a bad worker or a terrible human being. He was an asshole who did some pretty underhanded things. I read the interview. I enjoyed the interview. I called bullshit on the things I found to be bullshit, and then you appointed yourself the representative of the HHH Image Rehabilitation Army, and started chafing. We get it, your guy gets too much bullshit on line. It's not fair, and the whole "burial" thing is overblown. That doesn't change the fact that this is a guy who talks a lot about business, and who did not always do what was best for business.
- Lack of cohesive and focused points - Subjectivity employed in areas where objectivity is required - Too much misrepresentation of hearsay as facts - Wholly unoriginal take on an oft-discussed subject
Overall, I'd give it a D+.
We get it, there's something about Triple H that makes you think he's a hypocritical asshole. Get in a time machine, set it to 2003 and join a wrestling bulletin board.
The one thing to take away from that interview.
ReplyDeleteWWE is producing Leprechaun 7.
With Hornswoggle.
WHAT???
I won't repost my giant summary like I did in the BoD thread, but I will give HHH praise for his *hellacious* work ethic. It's small wonder Vince gave his blessing on marrying his daughter considering how driven HHH is. Awesome interview and a great insight into HHH (and actually Vince to a small degree as well).
ReplyDeleteI REALLY enjoyed that interview; HHH is one of those guys who hasn't done a lot of interviews other than fluff pieces here and there so it's refreshing to get some of the insight from, arguably, the most powerful person in wrestling next to Vince.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who says the "pipe bomb" was a shoot needs to read this.
ReplyDeleteI like the part where he's talking about Taker and then goes "it's a massive undertaking".
ReplyDeleteI thought it was a shit interview. I could have guessed any of those answers. Yawn...he works hard...I dont give fuck.
ReplyDeleteWhy should I care about some steroid freak who only acheived success by politicking... oh yeah I don't.
Oh and maybe that unforgiven 06 hitc match wouldnt have sucked so bad if he and Shane had fallen through a few tables
Yeah, I laughed at him totally exposing the pipe bomb as a complete work. And I know we all 'knew' it was, but Punk has always strongly maintained that there was a semblance of reality to it.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who says punk yelling at that fan was a shoot should too
ReplyDelete'Starting a year after I got to the WWF, Vince would say, "Hey, you have
ReplyDeletean opinion on this, what's your opinion?" And I'd give Vince my
opinions.'
iow, 'HEYSTEVE, i mean, hey vince, i think you should screw bret'
'I dont give fuck.'
ReplyDeletei heard you give great fuck
'i'm not trying to put myself over'
ReplyDeletea la "to make a long story short': TOO LATE!!!
The semblance of reality was that he truly believed what he was saying
ReplyDeleteBingo. It's a worked shoot. I doubt they were keeping him cold as Mason Ryan's manager to set up this angle out of the blue.
ReplyDeleteTo Trips, since it's not his experience, it's solely a work.
'We don't tell the fans who's going to be over.'
ReplyDeleteBWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
But where does this interview rank in the 1,000 interviews of all time?
ReplyDeleteIf Vince could've created a son in a lab, HHH would be it.
ReplyDelete'So now you can train guys from day one instead of recruiting all your guys from other companies.
ReplyDeleteYou have to give talent the tools to succeed. First of all you have to find the right people, the right athletes. Sometimes for guys who have been in the indies for five or six years, it's harder to break them of bad habits than it is to start them fresh. Some guys won't have it. You say, "I know you worked someplace else, but that's just not how it really works. It might've worked there, but let me show you how it works
in the real world."
ok, i honestly did enjoy the interview and i do think overall that hhh showed he cares about things and is a student of the game (hey, thatd be a good nickname), but this bit above is pretty "head up ones own ass' material'
those 'bad habits' have led to some of your bigger recent stars (punk not taking shit from people, dbry being the energizer bunny, all systems go and claw and scratch'
and for him to say wwe is 'the real world' really is indicative of unwilling they are to see the value in other styles and places
'It's small wonder Vince gave his blessing on marrying his daughter considering how driven HHH is.'
ReplyDeleteexactly. steph was his little girl, and he knew how much hhh would be driving her HIYOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
For the smark audience it was ok, maybe a B-/C+, but a much better interview for the casual fan. Certainly Masked Man wasn't going to ask pointed questions about the Reign of Terror.
ReplyDeleteI don't often resort to the "H" word, but a talking Andre the Giant hologram would be hella cool.
ReplyDeleteI don't often resort to the "H" word, but a talking Andre the Giant hologram would be hella cool.
ReplyDeleteForgive him, he's taken a few too many shots to the head over the years. He's referring to Daniel Bryan challenging Orton at Night of Champions.
ReplyDeleteWhat makes you think the examples you gave of Punk and Bryan fall under the "bad habits" category he mentioned?
ReplyDeleteAre you sure that's what he means by 'bad habits' and not all the "highspot-highspot-highspot" matches you generally see throughout the indies? I mean, Punk and Bryan aren't exactly your common, everyday indy worker; they're outliers.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the "real world", WWE *is* North American wrestling for better or worse. You say people watch more than just WWE, but not really. Not a lot of people, anyway. There are niche markets for every form of entertainment and that's all ROH, TNA, and the rest are. And since WWE won the war twice (first against territories, then vs. old school Southern wrestling) and TNA and ROH have never been more than gnats, I'd say the fans themselves have been unwilling to see value in other styles and places.
I appreciate you hate the guy, and obviously politicking was a major factor but if you don't think hard work plays a *major* role in almost anyone's success at that level...
ReplyDeleteHow do you know he didn't?
ReplyDeleteAll the hard work in the world and he still didn't have a good match at wrestlemania until he stood in the middle of hbk/Benoit match
ReplyDeleteIt's aliiiiiiive!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteDespite what the WWE Hype machine would have you think, having a great match at Wrestlemania isn't the be all, end all ya know. Lots of guys have had great careers without ever having a great match at Wrestlemania, or even being on a Wrestlemania.
ReplyDeletePoliticking may have helped get him his 'spot', but once he had it he picked up the ball and ran with it, and had a series of great matches.
Is he still an A-hole? Probably. But he is an A-hole who when healthy and motivated could go in the ring with the best of them.
Well yeah. Punk was speaking from the heart so in that sense it was a 'shoot', but obviously WWE allowed him to speak and didn't shut of fhis mic, so in that sense it was a 'work'.
ReplyDeleteI'm a little surprised that people ever thought it wasn't at least partially a work - even if in just the sense that Vince said - 'go ahead and say what you what. Feel free to take shots at us' or something similar. If WWE had no idea what was going on they would have turned off the mic.
Hogan, savage, Bret, Shawn, Nash, Hall, rock, Austin, Foley, angle, edge, Jeff hardy, cena, Batista, punk, rey mysterio, undertaker, and even sting are all contemporaries of this guy who were better than him overall and connected more with the fans. Good for him booking himself to win the belt 100 times, and getting to the arena 3 hours early. How about he uses that time to learn how to cut a different promo than the same one he always does.
ReplyDeleteBingo. I'm thinking more of guys like Teddy Hart - who seemed to have all the tools but pissed off people everywhere he went because he refused to work well with others.
ReplyDeleteSeriously dude, did HHH run over your dog or something?
ReplyDeleteRuined pro wrestling for me in many ways.
ReplyDeleteLast thing I want to say re:huntor the barbarian, "what big stars ever laid down for me"=not a student of wrestling history.
ReplyDeleteThere is nobody I would want to see working with up and coming acts less than him. All he knows how to do is get himself over at everyones expense.
Yeah...I mean...if they didn't like Punk and Bryan's "bad habits" then why would WWE be pushing them while Punk and Bryan are displaying these "bad habits".
ReplyDeleteThey're probably talking about unnecessary, dangerous and stupid spots.
You don't think it'd be Cena?
ReplyDeleteI gave it a 4/10.
ReplyDeleteNot unless Masked Man was going in there with a set narrative that he wanted to push forward, facts be damned.
ReplyDeletevs. Owen, Wrestlemania 14
ReplyDeletevs. Jericho, Wrestlemania 18
And you can't really blame him for having poor matches with Warrior, Goldust, Kane, BikerTaker, or that overbooked clusterfuck of a 4-way with Rock, Mick, Show, and all the McMahons.
Outside of the Booker match, none of them can really be blamed on HHH for being subpar.
Reading this I was wondering if HHH was working the guy a little? Look at the subtle (and not so subtle) shots at Bret Hart, Mick Foley, and Steve Austin. There were some parts that were interesting to me because it seemed to illuminate a lot of the way the WWE does business.
ReplyDeleteI thought the Bikertaker match was good. The Jericho match... Not so much.
ReplyDeleteGood read. I've generally found HHH as an in-ring performer to be an average worker who has detracted from the in-ring product at times, but he's always seemed to have a really good mind for the business.
ReplyDelete6 of those names are in the upper echelon of wrestling history (Hogan, Savage, Shawn, Bret, Austin, and Rock). And depending on the next few years, you could easily add Cena and/or Punk to that list. Most guys fail in comparison to them. After those 6 (or 8), the rest are pretty much all lumped together. They all have immense positives and critical negatives. Though there's no way in hell I put Hardy, Batista, Taker, or Sting ahead of HHH.
ReplyDeleteNo way. Vince is all about ambition and business. Cena has some of those traits, but he's no HHH.
ReplyDeleteThe Jericho match wasnt good. I think Scott gave it 3 stsrs and tthat's way too generous IMO. Its all leg kicks and then hhh goes over. For mid card fodder that's good, for the 20 minute wm main event its not
ReplyDeleteCena is Vince's perfect wrestler, but Trips is Vince's son.
ReplyDeleteHonestly...I can't really disagree with any of the shots Triple H takes at those guys.
ReplyDeleteFunny how HHH is a bigger draw than at least half of those guys despite connecting less with the fans.
ReplyDeleteYeah, the Austin one, if it was a shot, was perhaps the most subtle shot ever. Plus I think Jericho said pretty much the same thing in one of his books about how protective he was of his character's image/booking.
ReplyDeleteI've heard Austin make similar statements on his own podcast. He freely admits he'd tell creative if something sucked. I mean, the guy walked out because they wanted him to do something stupid and he disagreed (though he says in hindsight it was extremely short-sighted on his part and only came back because JR played mediator).
ReplyDeleteI mean, I guess the content of it is a shoot, but WWE gave him the OK to speak from the heart.
ReplyDeleteI love this guy. Love him, love him, love him, love him. Him and his little "Who, me?" act; him and his little gym rat work ethic line; him and his shrugging "I was just in the right place at the right time for everything" act. LOVE IT!
ReplyDeleteYeah, no bad guy strong arm tactics. That wasn't you with the "if he doesn't want to play ball then screw him!" egging on of Shawn. You didn't have any say in making Booker look like a man with no pride; you had to pedigree Kendrick and London; it just made good sense to insert you and Nash into the Summer of Punk; If Evolution weren't such a good idea, it would have been voted down by the writers, because we don't understand the creative process.
In all seriousness, I do like a lot of what HHH has done with development, and I do like the talent he's brought in. I'm more of a fan of HHH the exec than I am of HHH the wrestler, and I think he has a great appreciation for doing things the old school way. I love that NXT is basically structured like a territory, and that's no accident. But man that is some first class, revisionist history bullshit that he spins. Sprinkle in some straw, misrepresent people's gripes, etc, etc, and then shrug your shoulders and say "Who? Me?"
I understand where Austin is coming from, but I also understand why Vince would choose Triple H over him.
ReplyDeleteI felt like those were shots at Kaval/Low Ki, London and possibly Hero given the heat he has with the office for not getting into better shape. Punk and Bryan got over not just because they could have good matches but because they could do WWE entertainment. Bryan is in the spot he's in right now because he turned a first class shit sandwich ('Kane and Daniel Bryan go to anger management' should have been the wrestlecrappiest of wrestlecrap) into the best part of WWE TV for a few months. Punk is in the spot he's in not because of **** matches but because he actually connected with the audience both as a heel and a face.
ReplyDeleteYou read a lot of the indie guys who think they should just do their same act just on a bigger stage and that's not what's going to get over in WWE.
Mate, I've had a few arguments with friends about this because they don't understand how I feel this why.
ReplyDeleteI feel the same way.
No, he paid Rikishi to do it.
ReplyDelete"But man that is some first class, revisionist history bullshit that he spins."
ReplyDeleteAnd pray tell where your info comes from?
I'd rather hear Triple H's side of the story than anybody else's because, ya know, he's ACTUALLY THERE. That holds more water for me, to tell you the truth.
TGGI.
ReplyDeleteAnd, yeah, what fans saw in Punk and Bryan in ROH were traits they could see as potential main eventers among the ranks of Austin, HHH, Rock, Foley, Shawn, Undertaker etc. Nobody with anything more than an ostrich-brain said, "WHY DON'T THEY SIGN AMAZING RED!! THEY'RE ASSHOLES!!"
I get a big kick out of some peoples' responses. The guy gets interviewed and clearly answers all of the questions as honestly as possible, and people can't rid themselves of the notion that he's hiding something dreadfully insidious and sinister. For some reason, *he* is the biggest threat to others' success, despite that clearly being a sticking point that would jeopardize WWE's and Vince's ideals.
ReplyDeleteFunnier yet, people choose to disregard questionable victories of others while meticulously analyzing the devious reasons behind Triple H going over. Think about it. If you ask me, John Cena and Orton have had far more unjustified victories than Triple H and have left greater wakes of destruction than he. Even when you go back and wonder "why Triple H went over so-and-so", there are always reasons that revealed themselves in time or simple logic can deduce that "the top heel can't lose a hat trick of PPVs in a row, dummy."
I don't care if people don't like the wrestler or the character. Have at it. But it's awfully questionable when they'll laud other wrestlers and judge them on an unimpressive rubric, whereas with HHH they say, "well, compared to the greatest of all time, he ain't that great." It comes off as a *liiiiittle* petty.
Right, cause it's not like winners get to re-write history or anything.
ReplyDeleteIt's called a Rashomon situation.
Assuming you too watched WWE between '99 and '04, you can have your opinion on Triple H.
ReplyDeleteBetter than us, Triple H has a far greater insight than any of us to the reality of what happened behind the scenes.
However, you're basically calling him a liar for recalling events a certain way. Everybody remembers things differently than others.
Who's full of bullshit?
I took that as bad habits, as in playing to just one camera and things like that. More production based.
ReplyDeleteOne, two, and HE'S ALIVE, HE'S ALIVE! No he isn't, just two!
ReplyDeleteThe thing I liked the most in that interview is how HHH mentioned how he's letting a lot of the new guys come up with their own gimmicks like the old days, such as Damien Sandow and Bray Wyatt.
ReplyDeleteSex. You are talking about how often they have sex. I get it!
ReplyDeleteThat match was really HHH vs. Stephanie... Jericho was an afterthought and it showed... furthermore everyone at home and at the arena was emotionally spent from Hogan/Rock.
ReplyDeleteTGDGI :(
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't even rank on the top 1,000 interviews.
ReplyDeleteBut that's how Bret rated HHH's match with Taker.
ReplyDeleteAh. Then IDGI :(
ReplyDeleteThe world needs B+'s also
ReplyDeleteThe shot was not that Austin would tell them that it sucked, but that he wouldn't work on coming up with something better.
ReplyDeleteFor me, the Bret Hart one was warranted (he was asked directly about it) and HHH was actually pretty diplomatic about it. The one at Austin wasn't that he would tell the bookers that something was crap (because honestly that seems par for the course with a lot of top guys) but that Austin wouldn't participate in fixing it. The really egregious shots were at Foley, IMO. Implying that Foley was just a garbage worker and was the wrestling equivalent of torture porn.
ReplyDeleteIt struck me as egregious because the question was about ECW and there are a LOT of garbage-y brawls from that company featuring totally crap workers (:cough:NewJack:cough:)
You catch on really quickly, I've noticed.
ReplyDeleteI shall now refer to you as 'The Dream Catcher, Parallax' until sobriety has taken over.
"I shall now refer to you as 'The Dream Catcher, Parallax' until sobriety has taken over."
ReplyDeleteSo I am looking at a Punk like reign as 'The Dream Catcher, Parallax' then?
He did it for the Rock.
ReplyDeleteYou're right. I should take, at face value, the word of someone that is known for having a very, very healthy self interest streak. I should just disregard what I'be seen over the years, and what I know about people and swallow whole. Ok.
ReplyDeleteThe funny thing is, I actually enjoyed the piece quite a bit. It didn't have the self pitying tone of Nash's piece. And like I said in my original post, he's doing a hell of a job with development. It is possible to like someone, appreciate their insight, and still think they're full of shit.
Poor Shane.
ReplyDeleteI actually had sex for the first time last night. It was magical!
ReplyDeleteThere are lots of small changes in terms of bringing guys to the main roster. There are weeks of promos and vignettes before the guy is debuting. In the 2000s, it is not really like that. Basically this mentality comes from the 80s and stuff.
ReplyDeleteCena has made edge, Orton, rvd, miz, punk, and Daniel Bryan.
ReplyDeleteHhh made one dude, Batista. He undercut Orton and Benoit. He coukd have made Jeff Hardy by doing a job and wouldn't, same with booker t.
Exactly!
ReplyDelete434 days as 'The Dream Catcher'. That's what you're looking at.
ReplyDeleteNo he isn't
ReplyDelete"I should take, at face value, the word of someone that is known for having a very, very healthy self interest streak."
ReplyDelete...Known from where? That's my point.
Congratulations! How long did you last?
ReplyDeleteROFLOL...yeah hhh is a bigger draw than the undertaker
ReplyDeleteThat might be the craziest thing I've seen written on this blog
I actually don't mind HHH being a politician behind the scene in terms of his in ring character. That stuff is common through out wrestling history. In the end, it's Vince McMahon's call to make.
ReplyDeleteNot to mention the return of splitscreen/picture-in-picture promos.
ReplyDeleteIts sad how many hhh apologists this blog has. You can tell lots of people here became fans after 2005. Trust me. If youlived through 1999-2004 you know this guy sucks. Oh he has some good matches? So didn't Tito Santana...what's your point?
ReplyDeleteThe genius of Edge as a heel was that he won the title by cashing in the MITB at the most opportune time, which was original at the time. Less than a month later, Cena won the belt back in a ten minute match. Cena actually killed Edge's heat.
ReplyDeleteCena didn't make Orton. I don't even...
RVD is a guy who is perennially over. He won the belt from Cena because the ECW Revival thing was huge at the time. Cena didn't even job cleanly or anything.
Cena jobbed to Miz to fuel his own feud with The Rock.
Punk and Daniel Bryan made themselves. What did Cena do, not get in the way? The company line would not have allowed him to.
Triple H didn't undercut Orton at all. Orton was a part of a prestigious stable: Evolution. If not for that honour which he didn't deserve in the first place, he wouldn't have the same career today. The plan, clearly, was for Orton to win the belt, be dethroned, and it would lead to him winning it back at WM21. However, the ratings dropped once he won it and nobody had interest in him as a face. If people think Orton stinks now, he was a lot worse in 2004-'05. The entire plan was for Triple H to put him over like he did Batista.
He didn't undercut Benoit, either. Benoit was THE MAN early in 2004 until the company decided his 'thank you' reign was over and they changed direction and Benoit jobbed to Orton. That was it.
Triple H put over Jeff Hardy like nobody else has. Maybe he didn't become "it" by beating Triple H, but he was treated like an equal to a multi-time world champ.
The Booker T deal, which admittedly stunk because the storyline called for Booker going over at WM19, was fucked because he was contemplating retirement at the time and they figured they'd keep the heat on Triple H as World Champion because they knew he'd eventually be defending against Goldberg. If Booker won, he'd have lost it a month or so anyway out of pure necessity. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
If you include the twenty minutes of crying afterwards, 22 minutes.
ReplyDeleteI thought that happened almost verbatim?
ReplyDeleteI started rooting for Triple H in late 98/early 99. I liked Austin and Foley well enough, loved to hate heel Rock, but for whatever reason, I liked his DX stuff, liked his badass attitude when he went heel, or just wanted to be different I decided that's my guy and I am loyal if nothing else. And here is the thing about being a fan of someone; YOU DON'T CARE if he is burying people or winning to much, you WANT THEM TO WIN! So I don't apologize for anything HHH has done. Like I said he's my guy.
ReplyDeleteCena worked a looong and amazing feud with edge after that where he did plenty of jobs and got edge over as a superstar. And cena laid down for Orton a bunch to get him over (which hhh wouldn't do)
ReplyDeleteRvd was the victim of hhh politics and cena did the job that huntor wouldn't. He made the miz way before that wrestlemania match by letting mix absolutely kill him on the mic which is 100% how miz got over as a heel in the first place. Cena absolutely made punk. He put him over at 2 straight shows in the summer of punk and made him a mega star, and he just did the same thing with db.
Did you watch wwe in 2004, because hhh was still main eventing shows and Benoit was treated as an afterthought as champ. He worked mid card matches while huntor fouggt Hbk. Maybe he made Hardy "look" good but he wouldn't do a job for a guy who was the most over wtrstker on the planet at that point.
Allow me to break some bread.
ReplyDeleteI like the majority of your posts on here, man. In fact, I've noticed that repeatedly you'll post shit I mostly agree with, EXCEPT when it comes to your bias against Triple H. It's the one thing we'd disagree on.
It's funny, because you think this blog has a lot of Triple H apologists yet I've seen people get 10+ upvotes because all they've posted is "Triple H sucks! HYUCK HYUCK HYUCK!!".
I don't want to fight over petty bullshit. We can have our disagreements. I just don't want to paint everyone who's a fan of "X" as idiotic because some guys see things in others that I don't see in them, and vice versa. For instance, Fuj sees something in Orton and thinks Foley's a hack, and I see the complete opposite yet we can see each other's points and go, "well, to each his own."
As long as you blew a load, it's all worth it. Wasting sperm (potential humans) is the greatest.
ReplyDeleteNo fight. I'm a big Satan fan. just can't stand huntor. Some of its the politics. Some of its because I think he fucked over rvd and Benoit, some of it's for how bad the DX reunion was. I dunno, I think he's the worst
ReplyDeleteAt what point did "overall wrestler" become "biggest draw"?
ReplyDeleteI'd feel better if youd at least apologize for his match against orton at wm25
ReplyDeleteEveryone knows the B+ story, right? It's from a Meltzer review years ago of one of HHH's matches. He said it on his podcast on Monday night, claiming that "someone has a long memory," referring to Triple H.
ReplyDeleteOK cool.
ReplyDeleteWith Benoit, who was always one of my favourites, I believe they never really embraced him as a star and were waiting to have him drop the belt after Backlash. They treated Triple H like they do Cena now: "Someone else is the champ, but Cena's the main character of WWE, let's not kid ourselves."
With RVD, who is really underrated by WWE, I think was hurt most by his work ethic and politics. According to him (I heard from his interview on Jay Mohr's podcast) he had big heat with Vince because he didn't want to do the Tribute To The Troops tour and was tired from the schedule he had to work. That's probably what hurt him the most.
The DX reunion I didn't care for either, it was very childish, but by that point it had become the John Cena Show and I had to tap out anyway. I really haven't paid much attention since 2007 or so.
From paying attention, noticing trends, etc. I mean, its hard to ignore stuff when it keeps happening. Can I prove any of it? No, nor do I believe some of the more outrageous rumors. But you seem to want me to ignore what crowd he ran with, who he learned from, and all the times that he went over when the story called for a loss. The white guy telling the black guy to carry his bags should not win. If HHH really was just a hard worker who did his job, and what was best for business, he would have eaten that pin. Anybody else would have. You dont get that sort of protection without working overtime in the self interest dept.
ReplyDeleteI realize that I am bias because you are always going to be bias for the guys you like but the first time I saw the match was on You Tube so I didn't have the Shawn/Undertaker match fresh in my head, and yes I had been enjoying some cocktails but I honestly liked it. Not an all time classic mind you, and given the hatred it should have been no DQ, but it wasn't nearly as terrible as everyone makes it out to be.
ReplyDeleteVince himself hasn't always made decisions that he could benefit from. Clearly, he's made a lot of mistakes.
ReplyDeleteI've said it before in another post, but I'll repeat it: storyline-wise, Booker should have gone over at WrestleMania XIX. In reality, he was contemplating retirement at the time and hindsight dictates that they were clearly protecting HHH so that he'd have heat for the feud with Goldberg. If Booker had won, he'd have lost it shortly after anyway; they really had no stock in him at all.
"If HHH really was just a hard worker who did his job", he'd do what Vince ultimately decided on is what.
If I've noticed anything from watching this ill-begotten show, it's that wins and losses are dictated by a slow, amorphous show of faith in certain guys. When John Cena was on his way to becoming the champ for the first time, he was an unstoppable freight train. Likewise, the top heel cannot simply job to every Tom, Dick and Harry on consecutive PPVs.
If there's any proof to how WWE operates, it's that they operate quite pragmatically and the proof lies in Cena. They job him cleanly a handful of times IN HIS ENTIRE CAREER only when it really, REALLY matters. Punk, Bryan, Rock... uh, who else?
Now, how many people are going to bitch that Cena isn't "doing what's right for business" when it's clear that he's one of the most reliable company guys in history?
106 comments and NO ONE mentions this?:
ReplyDelete"I got the NWA title that Harley Race wore, and Harley was in my office one day and I showed it to him. Harley had tears in his eyes, and he says, "See that dent right there? I smashed my head on it in St. Louis.""
For shame, BOD. For shame...
Does Meltzer have any proof at all that HHH actually read that review? Cause to me this whole "B+" story makes DM look like a sad, inconsequential loser trying to gain relevance by creating a (pretend) connection to the hottest angle in wrestling today.
ReplyDeleteHow many years ago was this review? 10? 15? Why did HHH (or Steph) wait so long to mention it?
It's not all about you, Dave.
I'm sure he knows who subscribes to his newsletter.
ReplyDeleteYou didn't think he was the MAN in 2000? To me that's one of the ultimate years for 1 wrestler ever, when you factor in matches, angles, crowd heat, etc.
ReplyDeleteI think it's more likely that people in wrestling use letter grades to critique others from time to time, and Steph was using B+ cause it's a universal symbol of being very good but just short of exceptional, which was the point she was making about Bryan. I think that's more likely than it being a shot at DAVE MELTZER from something he wrote (1 time?) 10-15 years ago.
ReplyDeleteDon't you think B+ is very specific? And you know people have long memories in wrestling, especially anyone involved with Vince. (Hello, Randy Savage, Lex Luger, etc.)
ReplyDeleteHate to burst your bubble, but outside of the past few WrestleManias, HHH was generally a bigger draw than 'Taker over the years. As far as overall money drawn is concerned, HHH is still probably ahead of 'Taker.
ReplyDeleteBret, Shawn, Nash, Hall, Angle, Edge, Hardy, Punk, Mysterio and outside of the past few WrestleManias 'Taker as well. That's more than half of the eighteen guys you listed. Hell, I'm not sure Savage was a bigger draw than HHH either.
ReplyDeleteMy reasons for believing that Meltzer is right:
ReplyDelete1. B+ *is* specific, although I don't read the Observer so I have no idea if Dave commonly uses letters to grade matches/wrestlers
2. HHH does strike me as the type of guy, ala Michael Jordan, to catalogue slights and insults, particularly from his early years
My reasons for not believing Meltzer:
1. I've watched enough wrestling-related programming (mostly shoot interviews) to know that people in the business occasionally use letter grades to describe other wrestlers
2. It happened so long ago, so why wait until NOW to say something? That's an expression that could have been used in countless other promos over the years.
3. HHH didn't say it, and he wasn't in the ring when it was said
Ultimately for me the 2nd list far outweighs the 1st one. I can believe that *Meltzer* believes it was related to his original comment, but I think his mind is clouded by his desire to create a connection between himself and this promo.
Seems reasonable.
ReplyDeletePlus the B+ rather than A thing is the type of thing condescending managers/higher-ups (e.g. Stephanie and HHH in this storyline) do say to their employees. It was very believable and fit perfectly into Steph's heelish promo.
ReplyDeleteHe jobbed to Hardy twice from 2007-2008. He did, however, "get his wins back" for those who note these things. Still, the HHH/Hardy had more good than bad for Jeff.
ReplyDeleteJust a small point, but the Kendrick/London thing is so overblown. Yes, he didn't need to do it and it probably didn't make them look too good, but it isn't nearly as bad as say, Stone Cold Stunning an entire ring full of wrestlers singlehandedly. Hardly the political travesty I've heard people treat it as over the years.
ReplyDeleteJobber I have been reading a bunch of your posts today, (it's Friday and my production at work is dwindling as the day goes on,) and can I just ask you one thing? Why do you spend so much time and energy disliking HHH? It's freaken pro wrestling. It's supposed to be fun. Be upset about things that matter.
ReplyDeleteI think it's cool to hate a guy for whatever reason you want, but what kills me is his blatant misrepresentation of reality. Like, just say "I fucking hate HHH cause he's boring as shit and drove me away from wrestling for years, and he always beat the guys I thought were more talented".
ReplyDeleteDon't add all the stuff that just isn't true, most notably that he isn't a "draw". As if the monster ratings of 2000 while he was champ didn't happen. As if WM21, at the time the most purchased ppv ever, and headlined by his match, didn't happen.
Or saying that the fans don't like the guy, ignoring the huge pops he's been coming out to since 2006. Or claiming that the lack of sympathy he got after SSlam last year was indicative that he isn't over, when the exact same thing happened to Chris Jericho the next night but apparently that's different.
Jabber, maybe I just don't get it. Like I said I watch wrestling and to this blog for fun. There are very few people, if any, in pro wrestling that I hate. I have hated CHARACTERS, (corporate Rock, Paul Heyman for example) but never the person themselves. If Jobber, (and many like him that post here) want to hate someone from a staged sport that's their business but I am just sort of curious as to why.
ReplyDeleteI'm the same way as you... now. But I used to be different, I used to hate people I had never met or who had never done anything to me other than maybe some mild annoyance on my part. I wasn't like that with wrestlers really, mostly pro athletes. But I remember that so I can't begrudge anyone for doing the same.
ReplyDeleteSmark-dom is weird. We hear all this backstage stuff, very rarely is it 100% accurate (like most office gossip), but we couple that with our preconceived notions of who these guys are (usually derived from their personas on tv), and we start feeling like we truly know them. We feel a real connection to these guys cause they're actually playing real people... sort of. So HHH isn't Tony Soprano, he's HHH the real guy who screwed over RVD, who totally didn't deserve it. And we know all this from third-hand gossip and complaints from bitter ex-employees who totally did nothing wrong.
I don't agree with it, I think people don't apply the same scrutiny to everyone and are often blinded by fandom to basic facts staring them in the face. But I understand where it comes from.
Amen. This just comes across as irrational. Has Jesse hacked your account?
ReplyDeleteHey, that's not fair.
ReplyDeleteWhat about Eddie, Jericho, Benoit, and Flair?
I think Steph is foreshadowing the return of "Above Average" Mike Sanders to feud with Bryan.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the hologram would ignore people that came up to talk to it. Maybe make it a sitting at a bar and drinking Andre the Giant hologram.
ReplyDeleteRight, there's always a reason to keep HHH strong. And my point is that he shrugs his shoulders and acts like he has no control over that.
ReplyDeleteYou know what its like? It's like Palpable Johns having no problem giving away a million free pizzas, but then screaming bloody murder about providing healthcare to employees. Now, I'm not trying to make this political, its his business, whatever. But he has no problem justifying and finding a way to cover a million free pizzas. And just like HHH getting the W, there's a reason for the free pizzas; to drum up publicity and business. But there's also a perfectly good reason to provide healthcare for basically the same costs; healthy employees won't make other employees and customers sick. And yet, when it comes down to it, the Pappa always ends up justifying free pizza.
So, yeah, there's always a reason that HHH goes over, but there's also a reason that Jericho (health insurance for employees) could have gone over, and somehow, in all these years HHH and the booking team couldn't rub enough brain cells together to justify a Jericho victory? And that shit just happened? I don't buy it. Like, its amazing how a business owner is so brilliant at coming up with ways to pay for a free pizza giveaway (and I'm not saying that free pizza is a bad idea) but those same genius business owners suddenly become stumped by how to do anything for the people making them money. Again, not by accident.
But then again, I kind of made peace with my HHHate long ago. It's just something he does, just like my favorite musician, David Byrne, is a dick to his former bandmates. I just kind of roll my eyes shake my head. And hey if HHH being a dickis what gets us NXT, then so be it.
May be, but we as fans are not really in a position to *know* what actually happened so without others involved giving their accounts, it's unfair to say he's full of shit, whether or not it's true. If it came out that Vince was to blame for all these decisions, would it really be a shock? His fairly smart, loyal, muscle-bound son-in-law?
ReplyDeleteHogan, Taker, Shawn, Rock, and Cena have all main-evented above the world champ as well over the years. That's not unique.
ReplyDeleteI don't doubt that Jesse hates John Cena but I am guessing that most of us think that his over the top schtick is just that...schtick. If not...well then he needs to get some help.
ReplyDeleteI say this on another response, but that sort of attitude involves ignoring a lot of things. Like I'm supposed to ignore HHH's little digs like "you can't work, just like Jericho," and then also that Jericho loses anytime the faced off? Or I'm supposed to ignore an interview HHH gave on a late night show (think it was leno) where, instead of putting over his match with Jericho, he just kind of said, "he's not really there." It was such a bizarre answer because it sounded like a boss giving a performance review. This was right before jericho ate another loss too.
ReplyDeleteLook when you make the moves that HHH has made, its going to attract scrutiny.
I just think we jump to conclusions far too often. Vince makes lots of decisions for his own personal enjoyment and will often shy away from a great idea simply because it wasn't his or he doesn't 'get it'. Didn't Vince tell Jericho to his face that he was the worst undisputed champion? If Vince wanted Jericho or Booker or RVD to go over, they would've gone over. But like the mythical John Cena heel turn, Vince wants what he wants and damn if anything is going to change his mind.
ReplyDeleteI just don't think Vince wants HHH to lose that often. HHH is everything Vince has ever wanted: muscular, smart, loyal, hard-working, charismatic, and he has a great look. He and Cena go over because they're right up Vince's alley. Guys like Punk and Bryan have to work their asses off to get to that same level because they don't have all the qualities Vince looks for.
He's an overrated jerk off who used his backstage stroke to fuck up something I like. I fail to see how Scotts blog isn't an appropriate venue for my disgust of hhh.
ReplyDeleteYeah he had a good year... 13 years ago
ReplyDeleteI didn't get him calling Foley a garbage worker. I got more "you shouldn't necessarily do everything the crowd wants you to do". Which kinda fits the whole point of the interview.
ReplyDeleteDidn't WrestleMania 26 not do that well despite being a Taker and Shawn headlined show?
ReplyDeleteI don't know if you meant to reply to the other guy, but I never said you can't talk about your disgust with HHH. I said it's cool, but don't be spouting off shit that is obviously false (he's not a draw, he's not over, etc.).
ReplyDeleteI'm not saying that HHH sits on a throne with a magic veto, but I do notice that he does very few favors, and sometimes just does things because he can. This is also a guy who tried to say that nobody laid down for him, and he probably would have continued saying that if everyone hadn't called bull on him.
ReplyDeleteI understand your point about not jumping to conclusions, but. I do know a thing or two about how people maneuver, shift blame, and take credit for things, Ames the things I've heard out of HHHs mouth throw up quite few flags.
I've never understood the whole "HHH buried Jericho" thing. I mean, I can believe that behind the scenes HHH had Jericho pushed down the card and stuff like that, but as far as on-screen interaction goes, HHH never really made Jericho look bad. Hell, I'd argue their on-and-off 2000 feud was the best thing to happen to Jericho's career until his feud with Rocky at the end of 2001. Their Last Man Standing match is a textbook example of making a guy (in this case Jericho) look great in defeat.
ReplyDeleteTheir 2002 feud is a different case, but even then I doubt HHH came up with the "Jericho ran over Lucy" angle. I remember he gave an interview promoting WrestleMania 18 where he talked about how he was pretty disappointed and underwhelmed by the build-up.
It's not that I think Jericho was buried or pushed down the card. It's more likely that someone who had Vince's ear used a line like "He's not ready...yet"
ReplyDeleteAgain, it's not like HHH was waiting to crap on any talent that crossed his path, but there's a way to paint people as not championship material, or simply not ready for the winner's circle. It's much more mundane than people think it is, and that's why I don't have any problem connecting the dots from HHH on screen behavior to his backstage behavior.
Worst. Analogy. Ever. Don't fight it. It's terrible.
ReplyDeleteHey, did it ever occur to you that they didn't have complete faith in Jericho because he also had a strong interest in Fozzy? He's not the wiser investment.
Exactly. It might not be fair, but stardom often beats titles. HHH himself as a world champion often took a backseat to Rocky, just because he was the lesser star.
ReplyDeleteYep, like I said, I can believe that HHH did some politicking against Y2J backstage, but that never really carried over to their interactions with each other on-screen.
ReplyDeleteYou kind of just proved my point.
ReplyDeleteYou gave another token excuse for why HHH is the smarter choice, but that's all it is. That's the whole point of backstage power, your token excuse tops someone else's legit reason.
Fozzy? Really? A guy who had wrestled in Japan and gotten himself over despite no support in Japan isn't going to be motivated? That's your reason to never give Jericho the rub? That's worse than any pizza analogy I could come up with, and I'm full of pizza analogies. The Fozzy thing never became a real distraction until the continued to screw with him. He was plenty focused early on and people were clamoring for him.
I didn't prove your point at all. I understand that as a consumer, "token excuses" that may prevent you from seeing more of your favourite performer are annoying and there's no justification for it from an onscreen perspective (I love Jericho too, and there was no reason he couldn't have been world champion multiple times between 2002 until his first departure).
ReplyDeleteHowever it's a factor that must be taken into account. They made the mistake of sacrificing everything for Brock, and he left them high and dry. Of course Jericho has always been a model worker, but it's not like he's the only great talent that got stuck in the midcard for years on end.
Come to think of it, your only point is that you like Chris Jericho and he should have been champion, and not just Triple H. Because you like him more. That's the argument that everyone has had. "I don't like Triple H, so it's bullshit that he's constantly on top!" Not everyone can be Steve Austin, and the show can't always be good. When a company's on cruise control, they're just going to stick the proven draw in there in the prime slot and that's about it.
I...don't like Jericho. I don't have any real loyalty to him, and I like Paul London way more than him so by your simplistic logic I should be much more upset that HHH pedigreed London and Kendrick.
ReplyDeleteLook, HHH was an asshole. I'm not saying he was a bad worker or a terrible human being. He was an asshole who did some pretty underhanded things. I read the interview. I enjoyed the interview. I called bullshit on the things I found to be bullshit, and then you appointed yourself the representative of the HHH Image Rehabilitation Army, and started chafing. We get it, your guy gets too much bullshit on line. It's not fair, and the whole "burial" thing is overblown. That doesn't change the fact that this is a guy who talks a lot about business, and who did not always do what was best for business.
I'm done.
Oh, you're done now? I'll give you a rating:
ReplyDelete- Lack of cohesive and focused points
- Subjectivity employed in areas where objectivity is required
- Too much misrepresentation of hearsay as facts
- Wholly unoriginal take on an oft-discussed subject
Overall, I'd give it a D+.
We get it, there's something about Triple H that makes you think he's a hypocritical asshole. Get in a time machine, set it to 2003 and join a wrestling bulletin board.