Promoter

Yeah, that's down to booking, but Rock was at his peak popularity in 2000 and the company felt he would always be that way which is why they booked him the way they did. Why wasn't Austin booked that way at his peak years or even Hulk Hogan? 1-2 years later the fans slowly started to turn on him. Guess who fans backed when it came to the dream matches between the icons? The men who always came out on top when it counted Hogan and Austin. I truly believe Rock deserved better and he still is the most selfish in the three. I'm not taking anything away from Triple H's fantastic year, but he did have a lot better booking backing him from having the Mcmahons as a foil in the background and stabilizing the wwe title from the hot potato days of 1999. The wwe was determined to make him a star and the man took the ball for a touchdown admittedly when Austin was gone. Do people remember the rumours that WM 16 was actually going to be the rematch between Rock and Austin if Austin wasn't injured? The wwe had planned for Rock to be crowned and passed the torch in 2000, but felt Triple H could get the rub since Rock was so over. It goes back to the face chasing heel champ scenario. The Rock did not have any strong heels to play off of if they gave him a strong reign starting at Mania. Benoit and Jericho were still being built up and that's why they faced off later in the year against Rock.

I really don't understand why they don't incorporate at least portions of the house shows into storylines. It can be done because they use to do it very well pre-1989. With the knowledge of fans today with access to results from the website I think it's a great tool they could use. I think it has to do with Vince more wrapped up in being a tv show instead of a touring pro wrestling unit. The belief of "if it didn't happen on tv it didn't happen at all" is wrong imo.

I agree about the idea of strong heels against a strong face champion makes it just as interesting as the chase. I don't know where this myth came from that it is only exciting when the face chases for the belt. That is a booking problem more than anything. HHH held the world heavyweight title for a long time basically in 2002 and 2003, yet it was boring because he didn't have too many strong faces. It's the strength of the roster in terms of faces and heels. I mean Triple H wan't hot in 2000 all by himself now was he? The Rock was not stale in the middle of 2000. The Rock got somewhat stale(more like stagnate from how he was positioned) in the fall with the stupid Rikishi angle and not being in the wwf title mix. Nice-guy Adam has a nice alternate that keeps everyone's heat equal. Trips still comes out as the first heel to walk out as champ at a Mania to cement him as a legendary heel and Rock keeps his heat by going over Big Show. The wwe would still have the big Trips/Rock match to promote. That could have gone down at SummerSlam. Radicalz vs. DX sounds much better than what they actually did as well. Didn't that multi-man tag match have the highest rating for a match in the era in February or something? It is true that when the wwe started to focus the show back on Austin from Rock things started to slide. 1999 was Austin's year, but it's clear that in the fall of '99 The Rock was on heels for the top face spot. I also liked Jericho2000mark's alternate of Austin costing Rock the title which would help build to their match at WM 17 if need be. This is what I intended with my alternate storylines. To create discussion on how things could be altered because business did start to slide in the fall of 2000. I also agree about fans getting teased with Rock/Austin at SummerSlam 2001 and the wwe not delivering. That might have been the best time in actuality, but the damn convoluted invasion messed things up. They probably felt they could save it. As a side note when WM 18 was announced in Toronto it had seem to imply that Rock vs. Austin in a champ vs. champ scenario would happen. They had pictures taken with the Mayor in a stand off. I won't even get into how they really screwed up 2002. I mean REALLY. I think that was the final straw for the masses and they haven't recovered since really.

Lump me in with the people who want NO GM. Isn't there going to be a new president later this year anyways?

I do admit Kreski was excellent in the position. I also liked the people who did the stuff in 1985-1987. That was kind of reality in some ways. It was after Hogan dropped the belt in 1988(tremondously I might add) when things started to get Walt Disney. I still stand by that post Judgement Day the wwe started to crumble.

I don't think ratings turning after KOR really had anything to do with Rock per se. I think Rock's stock had dropped because of the big loss at Mania and then subsequently jobbing the title right back to Trips so quick. The Rock didn't even get the win over Triple H, but Vince Mcmahon of all people for that other reign. I say that year the wwe killed the Rock's momentumn more than anything else. Tell me guys if Rock was ever at the peak of his popularity again after heading into WM 16 since because I doubt it very much. The fans wanted Rock to carry the company. The Rock was bested by Austin the year before and now Triple H when in actuality he was quickly becoming the biggest star in the company, but he wasn't booked that way because they probably believed that he was so over that it didn't matter. Well, a year to two later he was not drawing anywhere close to what he was in 2000. Don't forget Foley was at an all-time high in popularity due to his retirement in the near future. It wasn't only because Trips was on a such a huge roll, but because the wwe was also riding off the peak popularities of Foley and Rock. Once they killed that by KOR fans stopped caring as much. Rock was champ, but he never really went over the guy who had been the top heel. Not a great way to start his second reign in that year. It can also be argued that Rock needed Austin to win at Backlash(in a mark's eye) and you see where Rock's stock could drop. Papacita might have the right idea in that if Trips had to retain at Mania he should have gone straight to KOR or SummerSlam as champ and drop the belt to Rock. All the belt passing and cheap victories killed a lot of momentumn. I believe Rock/Austin 2 at WM 17 would have been much stronger if Rock didn't seem like a damn choke artist against Austin or Triple H(the wrestlers instead of movie star) which is why I think they did this. Maybe they felt Rock wouldn't be around after his movie gigs took off, but this has only really been the case in the last two years where Rock could easily give the rub back before bolting to hollywood(he did to Lesnar).

I'll give you a clue who said this. He works with Scott Kieth The real problem I have with house shows is that the wwe doesn't make them feel important like the 80's. I remember seeing house show matches being shown from my hometown on the lesser shows such as the modern day Heat or Velocity. I mean it can't hurt. I do think they can improve on it with having results mean something such as using their website for rankings and such, but maybe that's too much work for this "creative team" to bother with.

I think 3 ways are gimmicked as well. There is a reason why they put a third wheel into the match to add something to it. I don't understand the love for Angle/Eddie from WM XX though. That was an underwhelming match imo with the Savage/Hart rip-off ending from snme. If we are talking in extremes of greatness of a wwe/f title match I think Angle/Benoit eats the other matches of the recent era. The ending of Michaels/Benoit with Trips' big nose takes away some of the oomph. Hogan/Savage at WM V and Bret/Davey from the other era are good choices. One hidden gem though is Bret Hart against Undertaker at One Night Only. On a side note I think we are overlooking JBL against Spike Dudley from last week (not like I even watched last week's show, but how could those two not put on a classic)

If true,who thinks Eddie would go over Bradshaw twice on tv? He's jobbing next week as I suspected.

Benoit/Angle I would suppose, but it is a big list.

I was thinking the same thing about HHH turning face, but I suppose if Flair turns with him it may work well. The thing is can Orton play a better face than Triple H can play one?

iggymcfly and papcita, thanks for the feedback. I actually LIKED Triple H going over at the time because it was funny as hell to see everybody get their predictions wrong. I liked how they tried to get the Montreal heel heat finish. However, I think it started a bad trend where fans started to distrust getting a satisfying ending. They did the same thing again at WM 17. They were nice twists, but I believe it did damage the company. Austin has admitted that turning heel was a mistake at WM 17. I believe the timing was wrong because no one was really believable to go over Austin besides Triple H and Rock and they screwed up Triple H the night after Mania. The fans wanted it and they screwed it. Things financially started to drop and even the wwe admitted in conference calls that there was too much creative confusion post WM 17 which started the box office to bomb. I don't think Rock going after Triple H with all those twists and turns on the road to Mania made it cookie-cutter. Remember Rock won the Rumble, but he had the dispute with Big Show. He put the Mania title shot on the line at No Way Out and still lost. This is not cookie cutter. The wwe even gave away the announced Mania triple threat on television. At the time this was not cookie cutter. You also leave out the possibility of Austin turning on Rock in the story. The Rock went through hell to get to the WM main event if you remember. I do agree with you about Rock/Austin was spoiled in 2001. There had to be some closure, but I guess they tried their best with the WM 19 match-up. Rock finanly got his WM win over Austin. I suppose Trips was over, but something tells me Vince thought he needed the boss to really cement him as the top heel with star power. As for WM 17 being cookie cutter it wouldn't be. Triple H had already defeated Steve Austin before and would be on a monster reign from Slam 2000. The match would have heat especially in Texas. Anyways, as I said before the wwe was really great overall until post Judgement Day/KOR 2000.

The wwe sometimes throws that theory out the window though. Remember, the smackdown before Eddie won the title he had gone over Brock Lesnar in the tag team match-up. The wwe has smartened up with giving away things in this fashion. It's not a guarantee which is good.

I think we should still wait with this Eugene/Triple H stuff. I hope I don't give the wwe too much credit, but this storyline has a lot of possibilites. I still believe there is a swerve here. Eugene says Trips is his favourite wrestler. Trips has taken him into Evolution, while Orton seems the most upset about the move. Eugene befriends Benoit. Eugene befriends The Rock who had words exchanged with Randy Orton. The Rock is a major rival of Triple H. Don't some think Eugene is a tool used by Dinsmore and Triple H to fool everyone for Triple H to get his belt back? It's just not too obvious which is good. Don't you think Triple H saying he knows what he's doing with Eugene is a plan to get back his belt? The signs are there. All the other scenarios are predictable and short-sighted imo. The little problems within Evolution also point to this. Orton can be pissed that the cerebral assassin didn't let him in on the plan.

As I stated before, I really believe the only reason Triple H went over at WM 16 was that he was not over enough as a main event star and the wwe had to use the event to get him over with Vince Mcmahon. I think it had a lot to do with Steve Austin not putting over Triple H at SummerSlam '99 in a one on one encounter. The wwe had planned for Trips to be the next big thing and in some ways the push from hell wasn't catching on with the masses. I think if Austin had done the job Triple H might have been taken more serious instead of winning the title through Mankind. Sometimes predictable isn't really bad if the predictable outcome is desired by the majority as satisfying. In retrospect, Trips shouldn't have gone over because the only thing left memorable about that event is Trips being the first man to walk out as a heel champion heading into the event. The finish of the Backlash main event was more of a WrestleMania ending. I understand where the predictable debate comes from, but that is simply from booking. Look how Rock/HHH could have been much less predictable with certain changes in the booking. In retrospect, I would have Triple H win the title to end SummerSlam and perhaps even attack Jesse "The Body" Ventura. Bingo, Triple H gets mainstream attention and he goes over the massively over Steve Austin who was hurting at the time. You have Rock who was coming up in popularity, so you build to have Rock and Austin in some kind of chase with Triple H. Triple H main events the ppv cards in September/October against Mankind. Then you still run the triple threat match at Surivor Series with Austin getting hit by the car. Triple H goes over Rock in cahoots with Vince Mcmahon. Basically, the finish of WM 2000 at the Survivor Series to run the tradition of screwing people that was getting established with the 97 and 99 events. The Mcmahon/Helmsley Era begins a year after Rock was thought of being the corporate champ by Vince Mcmahon. Vince would now have a relative who would do his company proud as champion. Mcmahon and Triple H brag about finally getting rid of the pest Steve Austin from the wwf. Now, you set up Rock as the true babyface who the fans rally behind to dethrone Triple H, but he goes through obstacles. He wins the Royal Rumble in the same fashion I suppose. There is no problem with how the twists and turns happened on television at the time. What I would have done is have the triple threat match in Chicago on raw be about Rock getting the one on one encounter for WM 16. Then from there, I would still have Linda Mcmahon bring in Steve Austin as special enforcer for The Rock. However, another twist would be Austin and Rock's past. I would give some doubt of Austin's trustworthiness. Austin from the Survivor Series could still have bad vibes about both Rock and Triple H taking him out to be on top of the wwe. This way the ending of the match is in somewhat doubt. It will be about Rock trying to regain the title, but also about Austin might wanting to get revenge on both HHH and Rock. That sets up the situation that happened at Backlash and the ending of WM 16 having a truly classic ending to remember for the ages. This would be the only time in history Rock actually wins the title at a WrestleMania as we know for the time being anyways. So, this sets up Backlash with Rock heading into the event as the WWF Champion against Triple H in a quick rematch. I would have Rock go over again and then move onto other challengers for the spring and summer. What I would then do is have the big blow-off between Rock and Triple H in the ironman match at SummerSlam 2000 and have Triple H take the strap there. Then set up the love triangle for the fall season with Kurt Angle getting with Stephanie Mcmahon. You build things to Austin/Triple H for WM 17 as Heyman and Triple H wanted it and have Austin stay face by regaining the title. The reason I would keep the title on Triple H is that Triple H/Austin would be a rematch over 2 years in the making and it could be built up as Triple H reaching the top of the wwe by taking out Austin in '99 when he won the title and a few months later wiping him out in the drive by. Austin/Triple H(champ) at WM 17. I would do Rock/Undertaker at WM 17 in a face vs. face encounter. I know what many are saying and that is they loved the Rock/Austin encounter, but wait and see. Rock/Austin had the problem of Rock leaving to do his movie and making things a bit predictable. Austin would be the face champ with the Invasion angle in waiting. I would build to Rock/Austin at SummerSlam 2001 where Rock regains the title with Vince Mcmahon being a face who now pushes him as the new superstar face of the wwf. Austin goes missing in action and gets "crazy" just like he was in 2001 storylines. He becomes paranoid about his position in the wwf. The Rock continues to be a successful champion. You keep The Rock as champion since his movie would be a buzz and help give wwe some publicity. You run him in title defenses against Jericho, Angle, and Benoit to help give them a rub. Now, we are at the Royal Rumble and we get the Invasion angle. Booker T shows up and attacks The Rock as being The Book wannabe. Flair returns and cuts a wicked promo on Vince Mcmahon. You then have others start to jump in and we got the friggin nWo in there for NWO that has the champ vs. champ match of Booker T vs. The Rock. The Rock goes over. Remember Austin is still missing in action. Here is what happens... for WM 18. WWF Title Match The Rock vs. Hulk Hogan Remember Hogan was the real last champion with the whole Russo mess. Keep continuity. Invasion Best of 7 Series wwf vs. ecw/wcw/nwo The winner gets the Thursday Timeslot for their "brand" Vince Mcmahon vs. "The Nature Boy" Ric Flair Steve Austin returns against Bill Goldberg in the dream match-up Triple H vs. Scott Hall with Kevin Nash Booker T vs. Edge Jericho turned to wcw/nwo vs. Kurt Angle Tables Match Palumbo/O'Haire vs. Dudleys Hardcore Match Kane vs. Rob Van Damn That's it for now since this is probably too long as it is.

Well, the net honeymoon love of Triple H is soon to be over. Wait until Benoit drops the title back to Triple H to see it grow back to its legendary status.

AndrewTS, I didn't know Trips was facing Benoit either. I didn't even know the ppv was on sunday.

I have to admit I got no clue, but it seems to me that Triple H will win the title either at Vengence or SummerSlam for sure where things will be built up with Edge. You guys have a point about the Benoit DVD which I overlooked because last night imo Edge/HHH was being planted for SummerSlam. Edge doesn't have to lose his title shot this sunday. He can easily win by countout or disqualification because of Triple H to build to HHH/Edge in Toronto. I'm suspicious of Benoit leaving with the title this sunday. I think if the stuff with JBL didn't happen I would be more sure. I guess that is good since it's not so predictable. What would they do with Benoit? Pit him against Eugene for SummerSlam. I also heard it's Taker/JBL(I'm from Toronto) which does disgust me. It could go like this..... World Heavyweight Title Match Triple H(champion) vs. Edge WWE Title Match JBL(champ) vs. Undertaker Intercontinental Title Match Orton vs. Rock planted couple of weeks back U.S. Title Triple Threat Match Angle vs. Eddie vs. Cena To not put too much stress on Angle Benoit vs. Eugene(who costs Benoit the title this sunday) ??????????????who knows what else.

I'm still of the opinion that Eugene is going to turn on the fans and be in Evolution. I don't know maybe some of Russo's brain is stuck in the inner ear of my head. This Eugene/HHH stuff isn't that bad right now, but I fear the overexposure will make me sick in short time. It can reach levels of being too contrived.

Don't forget he has a grandchild on the way. He has to see him at his birth. You know he could come back re-incarnated as a doctor who delivers babies. It would be a contrast to being a funeral director. Smell the ratings. Delivering a baby in the middle of the ring in the build up for WrestleMania 21. You know, the wwe is about entertainment. It's the Mcmahons ever growing desire to be "producers" in entertainment instead of promoters in pro wrestling. The eternal tug of war

I call Bearer returns with Mordecai down the line against Taker even as maybe Percy Pringle. Damn, just thinking about this stupidness is grating me.

Actually, I think the favouritism thing has to do with whatever show a Mcmahon is on. I think Vince favoured smackdown when he was "co-owner". Look, how the "brand" was stacked in the early days of the split. Vince wanted to look superior to Ric Flair as "co-owner" and it showed. Then it changed to Eric Bischoff and Stephanie Mcmahon. Smackdown was still better for the most part. All of last year smackdown was better for the most part with Stephanie Mcmahon as general manager. Stephanie Mcmahon loses her GM position and the show starts to slowly crumble although Heyman was a good GM. Vince all of a sudden disappears from the show. Benoit jumps, Lesnar leaves, Heyman quits, Booker downplays it as minor leagues, etc. etc. Now, the only show with a Mcmahon on it is Triple H and bingo he happens to be on the more entertaining show for the most part. That is the "favouritism" theory down to a tee.

I think I have to agree with you here. I know a lot of people who started to get pissed off with wrestling around WM 2000(not net/smark fans either). The backlash ppv show just kind of delayed the long term anger. I agree things just started to fall apart after SummerSlam. I think it can be argued the Mcmahons started to piss away fans when they started to centre the show around themselves in 2000 and 2001.

Damn wwe gets 500 K for each show every week? You guys are sure? That's pretty steep. I also do notice that the station doesn't pimp the wwe anywhere close to what they were upon arrival.

Yeah, I thought the Judgement Day main event was better than the Backlash main event, but the booking after this show had me puzzled to say the least. I wouldn't actually call any of the ppv cards in 2000 awful. We have witnessed the crap of brand only ppv shows this year. Not including the wcw crap-a-thons.