Kizzo 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 Just 4 years ago....the creative team could come up with some hilarious ideas......why can't we not have this creative team back with the old Vince McMahon ENJOY Backlash 2000 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Promoter 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 Backlash 2000 was perhaps the best non big four ppv of all-time. That should have been WM 2000 imo. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SamoaRowe 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 I forgot how terribly amusing that is! I agree with the comment about Backlash 00 being one of the best ever. Just awesome card with awesome wrestling and brings back some very fond memories now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Art Sandusky 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 Austin doing a run-in at Wrestlemania to help Rock win the title would have been big too, you can't get buys from a surprise at the show itself. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Australian Pride 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 But even back then WWF had it's faults - Backlash 2000 featured possibly the best Light Heavyweight title match ever (Scotty vs Dean Malenko), which the crowd was completely in to, and yet the title was downgraded and wasnt seen on PPV again for months (maybe over a year). Thrown in the non-elavation of Chris Jericho, who was also on fire but constantly losing to HHH and Benoit, and there were some serious problems. Still, wrestling wise they were untouchable, as almsot every PPV that year was good value. (Armageddon being an exception) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kizzo 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 Everything worked at this PPV.... The storylines that lead to the PPV were very good.....good matches.....a very good ending to the PPV with the Austin run in......as the Promoter stated...this should have been the Wrestlemania PPV... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UseTheSledgehammerUh 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 KOTR 2000 was awful. Unforgiven 2000 was awful. No Mercy 2000 was awful, save for the main event. Survivor Series 2000 was awful. Armageddon 2000 was awful. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UseTheSledgehammerUh 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 It shouldn't have been WrestleMania. From an intelligent standpoint. Vince already had his WM buys based on the "WrestleMania" name and "All Day Long!" show alone. Backlash, a traditionally bad and/or poorly purchased PPV, was hyped by Austin's return and finally, the 1-on-1 Rock/HHH bout for the World Title. Further reason why wrestling's a business, not a legitimate sport. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Art Sandusky 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 KOTR 2000 was awful. Unforgiven 2000 was awful. No Mercy 2000 was awful, save for the main event. Survivor Series 2000 was awful. Armageddon 2000 was awful. The key difference between these "awful" PPVs and recent "awful" PPVs is that those in 2000 were still very watchable and didn't feel like wastes of money afterward. The first PPV I felt like I wasted money on was Backlash 2001. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Promoter 0 Report post Posted July 5, 2004 I think the wwe started to go to hell right after Judgement Day personally. The wwe from Rumble to Backlash was well thought out. I don't know what the hell they were doing after Judgement Day though. I won't go into that now though and I agree the stuff was still very watchable. Here are some reasons why I believe Backlash 2000 should have been the WM 16 ppv, but I do understand why they went that route though. Wasn't Backlash in the same month of Mania? Anyways, with hindsight I believe it for these reasons which do have to deal with business aspects. 1. It was WrestleMania and the big blow-off event. The fatal four-way was a weak main event and was done because the wwe felt Triple H wasn't strong enough as a draw imo. The wwe had posters of Rock/Triple H for WM 16 at the time. The wwe used WrestleMania to get Triple H over plain and simple as there is nothing wrong with that, but he in turn weakened Big Show and Foley who really had no business in there. I even marked out for it to be honest since a heel never really won those WM main events before. The event should have been Triple H defending against Rock. Triple H was basically the world champ since around SummerSlam. The Rock was gaining a lot of steam in 1999 with the wwe having polls asking fans who was more popular, he or Austin. The Rock lost his title and his chase for the title was de-valued due to the mix up in the chase by Foley and Big Show. It came off disjointed. The wwe also gave away the triple threat WM main event on free tv without getting a big rating. They could have did the twists and turns and still lead to Rock/Triple H at WrestleMania. 2. The Rock's character was kind of damaged by choking. I know what the arguments will be against this philosophy, but can anyone say Rock's popularity was ever as hot again after that month of March? It would be like jobbing Hogan to Andre at WM III or having Austin drop the match to HBK at WM 14(which was rumoured if HBK wasn't hurt). Besides the WM main event there was just too many damn multiple match ups on the card. You don't do that to your big show because it kills the heat for matches. Backlash had a hotter crowd for a reason. 3. Again, the build up made more sense for Austin appearing at WM in the corner of the Rock. The wwe could have manipulated the situation from Survivor Series and add heat about Rock trusting Austin who was the man who won the title from him the year prior at WM 15. Doing the program that they did at WM would not have people on a downer. The wwe had just ran the Day Long special as you said. It was not too bright to show all the great finishes of years past and then deliberately piss of the paying customers by having the heel go over. They need to keep goodwill with fans after doing that. All they created was people comparing that ending to past Mania shows and having dis-satisfaction of "not feeling like WrestleMania". The buy-rates in general have never been the same since. 4. If they wanted to increase the surprise factor for their minor ppv shows it would have been better to have Rock job the title quickly at Backlash(that is another topic completely and won't get into yet). If fans were satisfied with the WM ppv there wouldn't be a baklash for backlash. It could be argued the happy ending and feel good atmosphere might be more appealing for casual fans coming back for the minor ppv show and have Triple H regain the title there. 5. Rock's winning the title on a minor ppv killed his reign. He didn't win when it counted. I am glad the wwe was smart enough not to do this with Chris Benoit this year. They learned their lesson. (as a sidenote I believe the chinks in the armour of the 2000 booking began after Judgment Day and if they did a few things differently that year the outlook would be different completely 2-3 years laters). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest BurnToShine Report post Posted July 6, 2004 KOTR 2000 was awful. Unforgiven 2000 was awful. No Mercy 2000 was awful, save for the main event. Survivor Series 2000 was awful. Armageddon 2000 was awful. No Mercy 2000's Benoit v. HHH match was "awful?" Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted July 6, 2004 I personally think Judgment Day was a better in match quality than Backlash 2000, but that's my opinion. Both shows had it's strong points. King of the Ring wasn't that bad IMO, but it was booked horribly, especially the tournament. (Everyone and their dead grandmother knew Angle would win, but feeding him CRASH & RIKISHI as the last two? Please...) Unforgiven wasn't too bad either, but it was forgetable. Ditto No Mercy. Survivor Series: Yeah, horrible. Can't even remember half the card. Armageddon same as UForgiven & NM. Decent card, but nothing memorable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ISportsFan 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 Armageddon same as UForgiven & NM. Decent card, but nothing memorable. I disagree. Armageddon was built on the 6-way HIAC. There was nothing else of any prominence on the show, and it was the pure definition of a one-match show. The card was anything but decent. From prowrestlinghistory.com: Dean Malenko, Perry Saturn, & Eddie Guerrero beat Lita, Matt & Jeff Hardy (8:06, elimination match) WWF European Champ William Regal pinned Hardcore Holly (4:59) Val Venis pinned Chyna (5:02) Chris Jericho beat Kane (17:16) in a "last man standing" match Edge & Christian beat The Dudley Boys, Road Dogg & K-Kwik, and The Goodfather & Bull Buchanan (9:42) in a "fatal four way" match to win the WWF Tag Title when Christian pinned Buh Buh Chris Benoit beat Billy Gunn (10:03) via submission to win the WWF I-C Title WWF Women's Champ Ivory beat Trish Stratus and Molly Holly (2:12) in a "triangle" match when she pinned Stratus WWF World Champ Kurt Angle beat The Rock, Steve Austin, Rikishi, Triple H, and The Undertaker (32:14) in a "hell in a cell" match when he pinned The Rock. Does that look appealing in any way? Not other than the main event. Jason Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest TheZsaszHorsemen Report post Posted July 6, 2004 KOTR 2000 was awful. Unforgiven 2000 was awful. No Mercy 2000 was awful, save for the main event. Survivor Series 2000 was awful. Armageddon 2000 was awful. HHH/Benoit at NM 2000 was very good. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted July 6, 2004 Does that look appealing in any way? Not other than the main event. I was skimming through it the other day and found it to be enjoyable. In retrospect, I probably wouldn't have gotten it if not for the HIAC match, but it wasn't as bad as some of the PPV's in 2002-2003. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Promoter 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 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. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Buzz 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 In comparison...no WWE ppv will ever be as bad as the Legends of Wrestling ppv. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SamoaRowe 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 In comparison...no WWE ppv will ever be as bad as the Legends of Wrestling ppv. You mean Heroes of Wrestling? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eclipse 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 Ah yes, the beauty known as Backlash 2000. That was one of the best WWF PPVS ever, and to THIS DAY, I haven't marked out as much when Austin returned and cost HHH the title, after UNSTOPPABLE CHEATING since 1999 from HHH. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Papacita 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 I get angry whenever I think about Backlash 2000. Not because of the matches or anything, but that was the first WWF PPV I had missed in well over a year... ...and they stripped Chyna! The one time I actually miss a show, and they strip Chyna! I'm getting heated right now just thinking about it. As for when WWF started slipping up...I'd actually say it started with WM2000. Wasn't a bad show, but selling the ME with the McMahon in every corner stipulation was when they really started working my nerves, not to mention the stupid swerve with Vince at the end (if they wanted to put HHH over, why not allow him to win clean? Or at least let him do his own cheating). From there they had the Fact-gime, and they had that little period where they'd end every show with lumberjack matches or handicap matches and what not, and things just got boring and predictable for me. Things picked up a bit after KOTR with the Angle/Steph storyline, Rock/Benoit and HHH/Y2J, but after SummerSlam everything just seemed to fall apart. For me anyway. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted July 6, 2004 ...and they stripped Chyna! The one time I actually miss a show, and they strip Chyna! I'm getting heated right now just thinking about it. You should be thanking god then... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Papacita 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 ...and they stripped Chyna! The one time I actually miss a show, and they strip Chyna! I'm getting heated right now just thinking about it. You should be thanking god then... Ah, you must be new around here. <---TSM's resident Chyna mark. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest Staravenger Report post Posted July 6, 2004 ..... Have you been in jail or something? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Promoter 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 As for when WWF started slipping up...I'd actually say it started with WM2000. Wasn't a bad show, but selling the ME with the McMahon in every corner stipulation was when they really started working my nerves, not to mention the stupid swerve with Vince at the end (if they wanted to put HHH over, why not allow him to win clean? Or at least let him do his own cheating). From there they had the Fact-gime, and they had that little period where they'd end every show with lumberjack matches or handicap matches and what not, and things just got boring and predictable for me. Things picked up a bit after KOTR with the Angle/Steph storyline, Rock/Benoit and HHH/Y2J, but after SummerSlam everything just seemed to fall apart. For me anyway. 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. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
UseTheSledgehammerUh 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 I stand corrected and totally forgot about Benoit/HHH, which was good, but still..."strange"...seeing Hunter put over as a face. I'll never, ever forget Benoit HEADBUTTING STEPHANIE MCMAHON on a Raw before the PPV, during the storyline buildup. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Silence 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 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. I remember back in October or November 2000 at high school in my freshman year when a Mexican boy at lunch said he didn't watch wrestling anymore because he thought it was "ghetto", and earlier in the semester, he talked like he watched WWE, but apparently he just stopped months later. The strange thing about it is that he was still on the wrestling team at my high school, but that's obviously different than WWE. You're right about the McMahons. They were just ALL OVER WWE TV back in 2000, and it continued into 2001, 2002, and 2003 with Vince and Stephanie, with Shane and Linda making rare appearances. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Eclipse 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 McMahon was the word that year, especially from late 1999 into 2000. In fall 1999, that's when the whole Test/HHH/Steph feud happened. I remember British Bulldog getting pissed off at Test, then throwing a garbage can at Test which hit Steph. She had temporary amnesia. Oh, and quite possibly the longest running HEEL run ever with HHH marrying a drunk Steph, and then a huge swerve with her ACTUALLY accepting it, by attacking Vince at Armageddon that year. That was ONE HELL OF A HEEL RUN. The McMahon/Helmsley era began, with Steph and HHH taking out Vince, then, the reforming of DX, and the constant cheating from HHH to keep retaining that title. AND FINALLY at Backlash, he loses, and that was one hell of a way to end the feud. BUT, McMahonomia was running wild. That's mostly what we saw in between. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kizzo 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 Complain all you want about the McMahons on T.V. too much in 2000....but they had very good buyrates on every PPV...ratings stayed high...things started to fall down...around October of 2000.... So the fans liked having the McMahon's on T.V......but the McMahon's didn't know how to leave...when it was there time to go... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest bigdiswrestling Report post Posted July 6, 2004 The BEST Possible way they could've done it to please everyone would've been to do this: Wrestlemania 16 (2000) Rock over HHH for the WWF Title thanks to Stone Cold (same finish as Backlash) Backlash 2000 Rock over HHH for the WWF Title with Stone Cold as the ref. Stone Cold can tease a stunner on The Rock after the match, but doesn't... until he returns. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
iggymcfly 0 Report post Posted July 6, 2004 There's no way in hell that The Rock should have won at WM in 2000. It was the first time a heel had won at Wrestlemania in 16 chances, and you're saying that he shouldn't have? How predictable do you want the WWE to be? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
