Shawn Michaels as World Champion

[Aero 0]

In the spirit of getting some DISCUSSION~! back in the WWE folder...

 

I just realized that the last time HBK held a World Title was 2002, and even that was hardly of any significance since he held it less than a month before losing it back to HHH. Outside of his defense against RVD on Raw, I don't recall anything of note happening in that month. It's been more than 5 years now. Would anyone else actually like to see HBK as a World Champion?

 

I can't remember for sure, but I think I remember reading that one of the big reasons for the company not really getting behind him was that he doesn't work the full schedule with all the house shows. I'm sure someone else can clarify that, but in regards to the topic, just forget about this. Would there really be any backlash if they let HBK get a decent title reign anytime soon?

 

Looking at the two rosters (ECW doesn't count because it's ECW), Raw's main event scene has Orton, Cena, and HHH with Jericho, Kennedy, Umaga, and JBL to mix in and out, and Smackdown has Edge, Taker, Big Show, and Batista with Kane, Finlay, Khali, and the ECW guys on the sides. Considering Kennedy and Umaga aren't exactly World Title material at the moment, and Jericho will apparently be at the top of the mid-card for the time being, I can't say I'd want HBK to stay on Raw for a title reign. I'd welcome matches against Cena, JBL, or Jericho, but he needs to stay far away from HHH. Smackdown, on the other hand, opens up some fresh matches with Taker, Batista, and Show. I know I'm not the only one, but I'm dying to get a real Taker-HBK match again. It's wishful thinking, but maybe after the Taker-Edge feud, assuming it continues after WM, HBK can be brought to Smackdown to get something interesting going. It's not like he has much left to do on Raw once Flair is gone.

 

What are everyone else's thoughts? It's not like WWE has a huge amount of younger talent that are ready to take over the main event scene anyway.

[Dandy 0]

Yes, I think they missed the boat on putting the title on him on at least one occasion in the past 5 years. I was an advocate before of turning him heel and giving him a run with the belt. It appears he has no intentions of playing a heel for more than one match (and leading up to said match) at a time, though. So now, I think he should be built up to winning the title, and have a monster heel decimate him for the title. Shawn can really take an ass-beating, and it seems to always have drama when he is laid out and put on the shelf. This would be a good way to usher in a new era for a strong heel.

[HollywoodSpikeJenkins 0]

Not really. HBK is past his prime and has never really been a draw. According to the observer notes, both Rey and Cenas DVDs out sold his. He can still bring it on the microphone, but only when he is motivated. His natural charisma and legend status should keep him in the upper midcard and have a one-two month title contender against a heel champion, but shouldnt get another run.

[Aero 0]

Of course he's past his prime, but I still find him to be more entertaining than most of the guys on the roster. Of course, HBK is among the group of wrestlers that usually get the TV time to have good matches.

 

It's a shame that he apparently doesn't want to play heel any time in the future. He's so much more entertaining. I was begging for it last year before WM against Cena. And sure, it was done in 1997, but I'd love a heel HBK vs. champion Undertaker feud.

[foleyfanforever88 0]

Before Cena came back, I would have definitely been for putting the WWE title on Shawn, but now I can't see him holding it over Cena, HHH, and Orton. On Smackdown, however, I think he would make a great World Champion. There are no main event faces over there except for Batista, who has already faced Edge too many times, and the Undertaker. I think HBK could have great feuds with Edge and MVP, and I too would love to see another HBK-Taker main event match. (Wrestlemania 25?)

[Just call me Dan 0]

Theyd have to move the tapings date from Tuesday to live on Thurs or Friday with the network switch, and he might. He can't miss his weekly bible study.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

So now, I think he should be built up to winning the title, and have a monster heel decimate him for the title. Shawn can really take an ass-beating, and it seems to always have drama when he is laid out and put on the shelf. This would be a good way to usher in a new era for a strong heel.

As long as it's a transitional reign that ends like this, I wouldn't mind too much. And I'd rather not see another Shawn vs. Hunter match ever again, which is a risk you run with Shawn holding the WWE title.

[Guest IronManLUNG]

According to the observer notes, both Rey and Cenas DVDs out sold his.

Not Rey's...

 

Numbers: Cena 211,000; HBK 188,000; Rey 143,000.

 

Theyd have to move the tapings date from Tuesday to live on Thurs or Friday with the network switch, and he might. He can't miss his weekly bible study.

 

Maybe he just doesn't want to be on the B-Show?

[The Truthiness 0]

Nah, I think his bible study classes are a pretty big deal in San Antonio. He has the biggest class in John Hagee's Cornerstone Church, which in the christian world is pretty huge. I can see him not working Smackdown because of that.

[Hawk 34 0]

Is that because of his name or is he a genuinely well-regarded teacher?

[The Truthiness 0]

He's a genuienly good teacher Hawk, he really knows the bible and is really big in the community because of it. I'm sure his name attracted a lot of people, but he doesn't use it as a crutch. I've attended a few revivals at Cornerstone, and there is more than a few stories about Shawn helping a family when some one lost a job, died, or was just a victim of bad circumstances. They told one of the stories on his dvd, but there are a few more stories like that about Shawn in San Antonio.

[Thanks for the Fish 0]

There is basically three feuds I want to see from HBK before he retires - MVP, Finlay (sans Hornswoggle) and CM Punk. I don't think he'll ever sniff the World Title anymore probably because he doesn't want it.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

Given my lifelong hatred for HBK, I'm not sure how fairly I can answer this.

 

But no. I know he can still work and all that, but any title he gets, it could be argued, would be a nostalgia run. They don't work.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

The only way I'd want to see it is if he was going to be used to transition the belt to someone new. That way they could have the new person get the belt from a "name" without having to use anyone that would be worthy of a longer feud over the title where they could believably lose (HHH, Cena, Taker, Edge, Orton)

 

So...if they want to make someone like MVP champion and have him beat HBK...fine by me.

 

...

 

They really need to stop pretending there's a brand extension too.

[Jaxxson Mayhem 0]

Hell yes I'd love to see another title run for HBK. That's probably one of the only ways to get me to watch RAW every week again. That or give CM Punk the title. Those are the only two I really have an interest in seeing have the title.

[David Blazenwing 0]

I think if you look at a list of the ten biggest matches of the last five years, HBK's name would likely be attached to a good 4-5 of them at least. That being said, I do think any more titles for him would be purely nostalgia at this point, but is it any different than Taker getting the belt again? I'd love to see at least one more HBK world title run, personally, as long as he doesn't let any backstage shit ruin it (such as the rumors about the Iraq show and HBK berating Umaga for making his tights the same colors as Triple H's or something like that - I forget the full details, but it just came off as very un-christian behavior to me).

[luke-o 0]

Correct me if I'm wrong. But remember when Kurt Angle was the suprise entrant in the Smackdown Battle Royal to determine a new HWC, wasn't that supposed to be Shawn? But he said he didn't want to be on the B-show?

[Epic Reine 0]

I can't really think of a scenario where Shawn would be anything more than a transitional champion which is the last thing the belt needs at this point.

[bob_barron 0]

Correct me if I'm wrong. But remember when Kurt Angle was the suprise entrant in the Smackdown Battle Royal to determine a new HWC, wasn't that supposed to be Shawn? But he said he didn't want to be on the B-show?

 

He doesn't want to go to Smackdown! because it would mess with his Wednesday bible study

[Black Lushus 0]

I can't really think of a scenario where Shawn would be anything more than a transitional champion which is the last thing the belt needs at this point.

 

the use of a transitional reign would have been the way to go to give the belt to Jeff Hardy if not for, you know...

 

Triple H wins at WM and transitions to Jeff Hardy, for example. You could probably have a similar program with HBK and someone else.

 

Why do you feel someone getting a transitional reign would be the last thing the belt needs at this point? What the belt needs is someone new, and a transitional reign is the best way to get that belt to someone new.

[Epic Reine 0]

If I want to have HBK win the world title, I would want him to get a lenthy reign with it and not job out the title 4 weeks later like his cup of coffee reign in 2002. They were building up a nice program between him and Cena last year before he got hurt, that would have been a great time to put it on him and build up Cena retaining it for months. Now though? can't see any way for Shawn to get a decent reign out of it.

[HollywoodSpikeJenkins 0]

According to the observer notes, both Rey and Cenas DVDs out sold his.

Not Rey's...

 

Numbers: Cena 211,000; HBK 188,000; Rey 143,000.

 

In the observer notes thread, it says HBK sold 118k.

[Dandy 0]

I think a problem with some of what we are saying is personal definitions of "transitional champion." I don't see it defined by length, personally, but I think some of you clearly do. A transitional champion does not have to drop the title the next night (i.e. Kane, Foley), nor do they have to drop the title the next month (i.e. Shawn 2002). If the belt is on A, and you want the belt on C, you might need to put it on B. This is usually because of the face/heel dynamics, but it could be a myriad of reasons.

 

For a number of years, it was perceived that there was an annual ritual of crowning a transitional champion late in the year to carry over until WM plans could be finalized. Some of those reigns lasted 4 months or so. They were still transitional champs. Unless there is a long-term plan to keep the belt on someone, they are a transitional champ. There would be nothing wrong with HBK holding the belt for 2-4 months, provided he had a couple of successful defenses. I think some people read "transitional champ" and think it is going to be a quick nostalgic run a la Hogan in 2002, and they dismiss it quickly.

[Jericholic82 0]

so we're using dvd sales to determine if someone should hold a world title? Of course Cena sold so many dvds, the kids were probably on their parents cases to buy it.

 

but topic-wise, I don't see it happening. Sure he could be used well to transition the title to someone new, but I doubt He'd actually do it, or WWE would ever consider him as champ again.

[Just call me Dan 0]

I'm on the Shawn/Cena kick again. I want to see them "finish" that feud the way it was intended to finish. Even if Shawn never beats him for the belt, that feud was money as ar as in-ring competition was concerned. Shawn's reaction to the finish of the 4-way at Backlash was awesome.

[MarvinisaLunatic 0]

HBK could easily be the champ on smackdown for an extended period of time if he'd go there but he won't. Smackdown has 2 legit ME faces in Batista and HBK..

 

 

 

 

[USC Wuz Robbed! 0]

I think a problem with some of what we are saying is personal definitions of "transitional champion." I don't see it defined by length, personally, but I think some of you clearly do. A transitional champion does not have to drop the title the next night (i.e. Kane, Foley), nor do they have to drop the title the next month (i.e. Shawn 2002). If the belt is on A, and you want the belt on C, you might need to put it on B. This is usually because of the face/heel dynamics, but it could be a myriad of reasons.

 

For a number of years, it was perceived that there was an annual ritual of crowning a transitional champion late in the year to carry over until WM plans could be finalized. Some of those reigns lasted 4 months or so. They were still transitional champs. Unless there is a long-term plan to keep the belt on someone, they are a transitional champ. There would be nothing wrong with HBK holding the belt for 2-4 months, provided he had a couple of successful defenses. I think some people read "transitional champ" and think it is going to be a quick nostalgic run a la Hogan in 2002, and they dismiss it quickly.

 

Makes me wonder whether we should consider Orton's reign transitional as the end result was probably always to have it be put on Triple H at Mania, yet he held it for almost six months, if not actually six.

[Ginger Snaps 0]

I don't want to see this.

 

I really, really don't.

 

See also: HHH, Undertaker.

[Dandy 0]

I think a problem with some of what we are saying is personal definitions of "transitional champion." I don't see it defined by length, personally, but I think some of you clearly do. A transitional champion does not have to drop the title the next night (i.e. Kane, Foley), nor do they have to drop the title the next month (i.e. Shawn 2002). If the belt is on A, and you want the belt on C, you might need to put it on B. This is usually because of the face/heel dynamics, but it could be a myriad of reasons.

 

For a number of years, it was perceived that there was an annual ritual of crowning a transitional champion late in the year to carry over until WM plans could be finalized. Some of those reigns lasted 4 months or so. They were still transitional champs. Unless there is a long-term plan to keep the belt on someone, they are a transitional champ. There would be nothing wrong with HBK holding the belt for 2-4 months, provided he had a couple of successful defenses. I think some people read "transitional champ" and think it is going to be a quick nostalgic run a la Hogan in 2002, and they dismiss it quickly.

 

Makes me wonder whether we should consider Orton's reign transitional as the end result was probably always to have it be put on Triple H at Mania, yet he held it for almost six months, if not actually six.

I actually had Orton's current reign in mind when posting. I haved mixed thoughts on it. On one hand, I think he was meant to transition it to either Triple H, or a returning Cena (depending on whether or not they wanted him to keep it until Cena got healthy). On the other hand, I think they wanted to give him a lengthy reign to establish him as a competent champ.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

I think Orton's length of reign is entirely tied to Cena being injured.

 

It's hard to come up with a new plan when you only have the same 3 people that your willing to put the title on (HHH, Orton and Cena) and one of them is hurt.

 

And hey...they're all in the Main Event of Mania.

 

Woopie.