Breh I was thinking the fake win was sooner than it was. From the dates in post 1 to the end of the post, jericho was destroyed.
Even HE says so.
Triple H Presents - How to bury 101
- Thread starter Ed MOTHERFUCKING G
- Start date
Breh I was thinking the fake win was sooner than it was. From the dates in post 1 to the end of the post, jericho was destroyed.
Even HE says so.
This "burial" thing is a bit strong. I mean the Goldberg thing was DEFINITELY a burial. Booker may have been due to the build up. The rest though, seems like a heel going over.
Brehs, Dustin Rhodes, Erik Watts, Jeff Jarrett, Greg Gagne and Brian Lawler were all guys pushed by their fathers, I don't understand why HHH is so different. Is it because it happened in a time where we all know wrestling terminology? Or maybe because the WWE is a much larger scale? Idk but the way I see it is he did what he was told with some input due to his power. Yes his reigns were tedious but let's not act like he did all of this without Vince McMahon knowledge or blessing.
Paul Levesque is really only a cut or two above Miz in terms of actual main event believability but he was a great classic heel so it worked. Maybe we were just mad because he did his job right?
The heel has to be booked strong so when the conquering face goes over he looks like a superhero. Granted he didn't make too many new main event stars in that time but its good he didn't. If he had he would look like Jericho right now where if you beat him it doesn't look like a huge deal. Its all a work... its a fukking work
HHH is nowhere near as good as he thinks he is but in the long run he was a heel we DESPERATELY wanted to see lose. Wether we like it or not, dude was last of a dying breed
Especially the parts in bold.And good point on the Jericho comparison. Jericho gets props as being one of the most unselfish wrestlers on the roster, always willing to put over a new guy or someone that has a spark. But because of that, he can literally go from main eventing one PPV to the second match of the next like it's nothing, because he's never been seen as a consistent main-eventer. You ain't seen HHH wrestling on a PPV during the 8:00 hour in years. Is it cause he's a tyrant out to bury everyone, or cause he's not the type to just lose to anybody they put him in the ring with? Not a knock on Jericho, but when HHH was the top heel, what was the use of being that if EVERYbody could beat him?
Why even watch if you know he's gonna win everytime? It was always counter productive. He's not a draw. He's no "dying breed" on some John Wayne shyt. No..Flair was the scheme artist top heel who had the faction to help him keep the belt and that worked down south in the 80s. Cripple H destroying momentum time and time and time again isn't something to be praised in retrospect. In truth, his failures are the reason why Lesnar/Cena/Batista were pushed to the top to begin with. He wasn't charismatic or good enough for his position.
Reason being, because you don't KNOW he's gonna win every time... you may THINK that'll happen... but there's still that chance that "he MIGHT lose this time" even tho' he always pulls out the win. Eventually people will want to see that heel lose, instead of watching and knowing there's a good chance he will. The real question is, if they book someone to be the top heel like that, why watch if you know he'll lose?
I think it succeeded in leading people to not be sure Benoit was winning at Mania 20. It looked like he COULD, considering the build... but it wasn't a definite until H tapped. There was a lotta doubt that they'd let Benoit go over HHH, since Benoit was the smark favorite and HHH was the smark's most hated by that point. Nobody knew it for sure til it happened, which IMO added to the win.
TrueEpic08
Dum Shiny
This "burial" thing is a bit strong. I mean the Goldberg thing was DEFINITELY a burial. Booker may have been due to the build up. The rest though, seems like a heel going over.
Brehs, Dustin Rhodes, Erik Watts, Jeff Jarrett, Greg Gagne and Brian Lawler were all guys pushed by their fathers, I don't understand why HHH is so different. Is it because it happened in a time where we all know wrestling terminology? Or maybe because the WWE is a much larger scale? Idk but the way I see it is he did what he was told with some input due to his power. Yes his reigns were tedious but let's not act like he did all of this without Vince McMahon knowledge or blessing.
Paul Levesque is really only a cut or two above Miz in terms of actual main event believability but he was a great classic heel so it worked. Maybe we were just mad because he did his job right?
The heel has to be booked strong so when the conquering face goes over he looks like a superhero. Granted he didn't make too many new main event stars in that time but its good he didn't. If he had he would look like Jericho right now where if you beat him it doesn't look like a huge deal. Its all a work... its a fukking work
HHH is nowhere near as good as he thinks he is but in the long run he was a heel we DESPERATELY wanted to see lose. Wether we like it or not, dude was last of a dying breed
Now nominally, I agree with this and understand that Hunter's Evolution run was pretty much about doing this, but here's the problem: Nothing Hunter did really made me (and depending on how you want to read the tea leaves of ratings, others) want to see him. It made me want to go away until he lost. Big difference. Hunter's booking and lack of charisma (not to say that he's not charismatic, but he's certainly no Flair) made him ill suited to play this role.
Jmare007
pico pal q lee
There was no "he might lose" with Hunter, come on now. That's the main difference between him and Flair. Naitch was such a good worker that he made you believe that fukking Samu could win the NWA Title in a random show in Hawaii, HHH...not so much.
The Benoit win did seem bigger thanks to Criple H's reign of terror. But the business was hurt way more before WM XX than what it "won" after Mania 20.
I do give him credit for making Batista a real star though. It's just too bad he had to fukk half the roster over before doing the right thing.
Here are buyrate numbers during that time taken from Jmare's thread2001:
Royal Rumble 2001: 625,000
No Way Out 2001: 590,000
Wrestlemania 17: 1,040,000 (970,000 buys in the US, a record that still stands for Wrestling)
Backlash 2001: 375,000
Judgment Day 2001: 405,000
King of the Ring 2001: 445,000
Invasion: 775,000
Summerslam 2001: 565,000
Unforgiven 2001: 350,000
No Mercy 2001: 325,000
Survivor Series 2001: 450,000 (Invasion ends)
Vengeance 2001: 315,000
2002:
Royal Rumble 2002: 670,000
No Way Out 2002: 575,000 (NWO debuts)
Wrestlemania 18: 840,000 (Rock vs Hogan)
Backlash 2002: 400,000
Judgment Day 2002: 373,000
King of the Ring 2002: 320,000
Vengeance 2002: 375,000
Summerslam 2002: 520,000 (Brock vs Rock & Half Bald Kid returns)
Unforgiven 2002: 300,000
No Mercy 2002: 300,000
Survivor Series 2002: 340,000 (1st Elimination Chamber)
Armageddon 2002: 335,000
2003:
Royal Rumble 2003: 585,000 buys
No Way Out 2003: 450,000 (Austin's back)
Wrestlemania 19: 560,000 ()
Backlash 2003: 345,000 (Goldberg vs. Rock)
Judgment Day 2003: 315,000
Bad Blood 2003: 385,000
Vengeance 2003: 365,000
Summerslam 2003: 465,000
Unforgiven 2003: 360,000
No Mercy 2003: 275,000
Survivor Series 2003: 450,000
Armageddon 2003: 240,000
^^^^ 
$656,120,000 in PPV buys (avg $40 per ppv buy) and that's at the beginning of the downfall.
TrueEpic08
Dum Shiny
Let's be fair to WrestleMania 19: The low buyrate had nothing to do with the build to the matches (including....well, we are in a Hunter thread, right?) and much more to do with the WWE being complete morons in their transition to digital cable.
They might have done upwards of 800,000 or 900,000 if they weren't so fukking stupid.
I crunched some numbers because i'm a numbers guy. Look at this shyt...DURING THE TIME THAT I ILLUSTRATED
.................2002 2003
Royal Rumble 670,000 585,000 -12.69%
No Way Out 575,000 450,000 -21.74%
Wrestlemania 840,000 560,000 -33.33%
Backlash 2001 400,000 345,000 -13.75%
Judgment Day 373,000 315,000 -15.55%
KOTR /Bad blood320,000 385,000 +20.31% (in 03 it was bad blood...DONT EVER ask why KOTR is gone and on raw now)
Invasion or JULY ppv 375,000 365,000 -2.67%
Summerslam 520,000 465,000 -10.58%
Unforgiven 300,000 360,000 -20.00%
THEN HHH LOSES THE BELT:
No Mercy 300,000 275,000 -8.33% <= HHH NOT on card
Survivor Series 340,000 450,000 +32.35% <= Goldberg RETAINS belt against HHH
I can PERSONALLY say that I was buyin PPVs reguarly until Mania XIX, which was the last time I bought the 'maybe hhh will lose' shyt...that dip from x8 to xix is insane money loss. The gate was bigger I think for xix but damn...
Surivor series 02 vs 03 buyrate is literally the difference of HHH going into the ppv with the belt or without it. Both cards are as starstudded...in fact 02 is maybe better, and both of them HHH was in the main event with a belt on the line. In the ladder however, he is facing the champion goldberg...and he was the draw
I'm going to need to see numbers for the following years to see if it was a HHH trend or a "wrestling dying" trend.