Oh the memories of WWE in 2000

[Promoter 0]

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.

[iggymcfly 0]

So basically, you get rid of the twist that made WM 2000 and WM X-7 memorable, and replace them with the cookie-cutter "face chases the heel and wins the belt at WM" that happened every other year. Then you hold off on the Invasion until WM, to the point where it would have no heat at all. Then, finally, instead of freshening up Austin's character, you just have him get crazy, leave, and come back, skipping the whole heel run.

 

Yeah, if you had all the WCW stars signed, it would make for one good "dream PPV", but the rest of the time it would suck, and you'd be taking out all the fresh ideas that actually made the WWE good in 2000 and 2001. I don't like it. I don't like it one bit.

 

If I were going to "fix" anything from that period, what I'd do is make sure that Rock main evented Summerslam 2001 against Austin when he was crazy over, and drawing 6.0 to 7.0 ratings on his own. They could have decided to either keep the belt on Austin or give it to Rocky at that point, but they needed to let that Austin/Rock feud have some closure. As it was, the fans waited and waited for that matchup, getting a tease at Vengeance, and then finally getting at WM XIX at which point, they no longer cared.

[Ultra Violence 0]

Is it me... or is there alot more crowd heat in that video (as with all videos from that era) than with the current product?

[Art Sandusky 0]

The crowds are larger then than the current product.

[Papacita 0]

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.

Nah, by the time the McMahon-Helmsley Era got underway, Trips was over. The two wins over Foley solidified his ME status, so he could've easily drawn against the Rock without Vince's involvement.

 

I never really had that much of a problem with the heel going over, but considering the way they built towards the match, and that they put the title on Rock only a couple of weeks later, they would've been better off allowing Rock to go over at the PPV. I mean, he was the biggest star in the company. Why waste his title win on one of the bullshit PPVs when they could've done it at Mania?

[Promoter 0]

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.

[chaosrage 0]

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.

Nah, by the time the McMahon-Helmsley Era got underway, Trips was over. The two wins over Foley solidified his ME status, so he could've easily drawn against the Rock without Vince's involvement.

 

I never really had that much of a problem with the heel going over, but considering the way they built towards the match, and that they put the title on Rock only a couple of weeks later, they would've been better off allowing Rock to go over at the PPV. I mean, he was the biggest star in the company. Why waste his title win on one of the bullshit PPVs when they could've done it at Mania?

Because if they fight a million times, you have to give Rock one win, or else fans would stop caring. So they let him win a meaningless match and gave him the belt for a month. HHH won the two big matches, WM and ironman. That's the only way it should have gone, since 2000 was the year of HHH and was on such a huge roll. I think the problem is when Rock won it back at KOTR. That's when the ratings started to turn around. HHH's reign was a breath of fresh air for the WWF (When was the last monster heel title run in WWF before that? Yokozuna?), and Rock was completely stale at that point. The belt should have went straight to Angle at Summerslam.

[Papacita 0]

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.

Nah, by the time the McMahon-Helmsley Era got underway, Trips was over. The two wins over Foley solidified his ME status, so he could've easily drawn against the Rock without Vince's involvement.

 

I never really had that much of a problem with the heel going over, but considering the way they built towards the match, and that they put the title on Rock only a couple of weeks later, they would've been better off allowing Rock to go over at the PPV. I mean, he was the biggest star in the company. Why waste his title win on one of the bullshit PPVs when they could've done it at Mania?

Because if they fight a million times, you have to give Rock one win, or else fans would stop caring. So they let him win a meaningless match and gave him the belt for a month. HHH won the two big matches, WM and ironman. That's the only way it should have gone, since 2000 was the year of HHH and was on such a huge roll. I think the problem is when Rock won it back at KOTR. That's when the ratings started to turn around. HHH's reign was a breath of fresh air for the WWF (When was the last monster heel title run in WWF before that? Yokozuna?), and Rock was completely stale at that point. The belt should have went straight to Angle at Summerslam.

I disagree with you. HHH really didn't need the Mania win because, again, he was already established as a main eventer. He'd been in the title picture since August, he'd beaten Austin, Foley, Rock and every other potential challenger for his title, plus with Steph at his side, he was already made. I'd say that the Mania match was a little more important for Rock than it was for HHH, because while he was the bigger star, Mania really marked the first time (at least as a face) that the fed really began to revolve him as a main eventer, and after getting his ass kicked by HHH for the last year, the title match was really his opportunity to establish himself as the man in WWF (which he was in the eyes of the mainstream). And while I can see the logic in having HHH win at Mania (it was unpredictable, and it really kickstarted Rock/HHH on the ME level), it really didn't make sense to do it at all if they were gonna put the belt right on Rock a couple of weeks later. They should've either had HHH win at Mania and hold onto it until KOTR, where he jobs to Rock clean, or just given it to Rock at Mania and let him carry it until the fall...where he'd job to a newly turned Jericho thanks to interference from Steph (that's how it should've gone ). I liked HHH's run in 2000, and I agree that Rock wasn't as entertaining as he'd been in the past, but realistically, he was the biggest star in the company--it really didn't make sense to keep him in the mid-card just so HHH can look good.

[Promoter 0]

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).

[Kizzo 0]

Since the creative director at that time Chris Kreski(late 99 to October 2000)...always planned things well in advance.....I think Vince McMahon and Chris Kreski...had always planned for Triple H to win the match at Wrestlemania 2000....Chris Kreski always wanted to break from the traditional things in WWE(hence the heel winning at Mania) and also move it to more of a reality...you can see what he did to the Undertaker charcter when he was brought back..

 

I will continue to say this....I'm glad Triple H did win at WM 2000..and the swerve with Vince happened...it made for great T.V. and set up for the biggest non 5 star PPV...called Backlash.....

[Prime Time Andrew Doyle 0]

I thinkit was smart to hold off Rocky winning at Backlash and the arrival of Austin, because it was not as if it would have given the WM buyrate a big boost. By hyping Austin at a lesser show, it helped Backlash's buyrate more than it would have for WM, as the WM show would have had no problm raking in a high buyrate.

[deancoles 0]

If they were even smarter they would have did Austin's return at Judgment Day or Fully loaded since Rock going for the Title would still have gotten a good buyrate.

[Promoter 0]

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.

[Kizzo 0]

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.

You can thank Bruce Pritchard for that...

 

I say around late August...when things went downward...and you could tell...that a power conflict was coming along.....the WWE was becoming too hot...great revenue...excellent ratings...and some record breaking buyrates....everything was going so well.....then it crumbled...and that leads us to now...

[chaosrage 0]

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.

He wasn't, but as I said I think it's just because he got stale. Remember, it's not too long after that that he was getting booed and had to turn heel. I think the fact that the fans loved him when he changed his character shows that it wasn't all just because he was making movies. The reason is people were getting sick of him cutting the exact same promos almost word for word since April 99.

 

The fans wanted Rock to carry the company.

 

Fans wanted him to win just like they wanted Foley to win, but when a face chasing after the belt finally catches it, what else is there for them to do? Not a whole lot. If a Rock fan was watching every week to see him beat HHH and become the champ, he'll be happy at first, but after a couple of months of the same thing he's probably stop watching. Because he's already got what he wanted and his favorite guy is at the top. It's like having a movie where the good guy kills the bad guys and saves the day, then it keeps going on for another hour. Austin got around that in 98 by the Austin/McMahon feud and the corporation, usually though the shows are more entertaining and business is better when faces are chasing after the belt. Foley trying and failing to take it didn't hurt the ratings. They were still going up until the KOTR. After Judgment Day, I would have just moved HHH on to Angle and Jericho. Not much would even be different. Jericho/HHH was the focal point going into Fully Loaded, and Angle/HHH was the main thing going into Summerslam.

 

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.

 

Yeah, that sucked, I don't think it makes a whole lot of difference though. For me at least, the shows after KOTR were more boring than the ones with HHH as champ, it didn't have anything to do with Rock pinning Vince. It just wasn't as fun to watch.

 

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.

 

Actually I think a lot of why Rock/Austin 2 was as strong as it is was because he HADN'T won the big one yet. This was going to be it, the match where Rock gets the torch. But no, he went off to make movies, and the passing of the torch match happened the year later. In the same way, that win over Hogan wouldn't have meant nearly as much if he had beaten Austin and HHH at other WMs.

[Jericho2000Mark 0]

Because if they fight a million times, you have to give Rock one win, or else fans would stop caring.   So they let him win a meaningless match and gave him the belt for a month.  HHH won the two big matches, WM and ironman.  That's the only way it should have gone, since 2000 was the year of HHH and was on such a huge roll.  I think the problem is when Rock won it back at KOTR.  That's when the ratings started to turn around.  HHH's reign was a breath of fresh air for the WWF (When was the last monster heel title run in WWF before that?  Yokozuna?), and Rock was completely stale at that point.   The belt should have went straight to Angle at Summerslam.

2000 was not the year of Triple H, it was the year of The Rock...he was the biggest draw and star in the company, by far. Yet, like you said, he lost the two big matches with Triple H and never beat him decisively(heck, Triple H's victory at JD 2000 was cleaner than either of Rock's)...making him look weaker in the eyes of the fans(also since Austin before him, overcame all the odds on his own), which obviously hurt his momentum. When Austin was hot, he ALWAYS came out the winner in his fueds. So why should it have been any different with The Rock in 2000...especially at a time when he was coming close to reaching Austin's 98-99 levels? Triple H was never going to reach that level, and he already had enough cred from retiring Foley and going over most of the roster since summer '99.

 

Personally, I think Rock should have won at Mania, jobbed at BackLash when Austin's interference backfired(slowly building to Rock-Austin at the next year's Mania) and win the IronMan match at Judgment Day...then drop the Title to Jericho at SummerSlam, in a battle between the two most popular faces in the company(at the time).

 

I also agree with whoever said they missed the boat with a second Rock-Austin rematch. When The Rock returned in summer '01, everyone wanted to see him finally get his big win over Austin, and the ratings were excellent in the weeks after his return up until his fued with Booker began...when the fans realized there wasn't going to be another Rock-Austin match. I think that also hurt his momentum a bit.

[chaosrage 0]

2000 was not the year of Triple H, it was the year of The Rock...he was the biggest draw and star in the company, by far.

No, 1999 was the year of the Rock, 2000 was the HHH show. Hell, even when Rock had the belt, the main storylines still revoved around HHH. Biggest draw? He obviously wasn't the biggest draw because the ratings and buyrates went down as soon as Triple H lost the title.

 

Yet, like you said, he lost the two big matches with Triple H and never beat him decisively(heck, Triple H's victory at JD 2000 was cleaner than either of Rock's)...making him look weaker in the eyes of the fans

 

HHH won by DQ at JD. Before that, they were tied. Triple H never got a decisive victory over him either. So how does he look weaker?

[Jericho2000Mark 0]

2000 was not the year of Triple H, it was the year of The Rock...he was the biggest draw and star in the company, by far.

No, 1999 was the year of the Rock, 2000 was the HHH show. Hell, even when Rock had the belt, the main storylines still revoved around HHH. Biggest draw? He obviously wasn't the biggest draw because the ratings and buyrates went down as soon as Triple H lost the title.

 

Yet, like you said, he lost the two big matches with Triple H and never beat him decisively(heck, Triple H's victory at JD 2000 was cleaner than either of Rock's)...making him look weaker in the eyes of the fans

 

HHH won by DQ at JD. Before that, they were tied. Triple H never got a decisive victory over him either. So how does he look weaker?

Triple H won the two big matches, and beat The Rock in their final singles match during the fued...he got the best of him.

 

Fully Loaded 2000, when Rock was Champ, drew bigger buys than KOTR a month earlier when Triple H was holding the Title. Every PPV during Rock's second reign in 2000 drew great buys, it wasn't until Survivor Series 00(headlined by Triple H-Austin, BTW) that the buyrates started going down. The ratings didn't start going down until they moved to TNN and the show revolved around Austin again.

 

1999 was the year of Austin... Rock didn't even become the top star until the fall.

[chaosrage 0]

Triple H won the two big matches, and beat The Rock in their final singles match during the fued...he got the best of him.

 

Fully Loaded 2000, when Rock was Champ, drew bigger buys than KOTR a month earlier when Triple H was holding the Title. Every PPV during Rock's second reign in 2000 drew great buys, it wasn't until Survivor Series 00(headlined by Triple H-Austin, BTW) that the buyrates started going down. The ratings didn't start going down until they moved to TNN and the show revolved around Austin again.

 

1999 was the year of Austin... Rock didn't even become the top star until the fall.

Rock ended up with the title and he won their last match at Summerslam. Not clean, but none of them were clean.

 

King of the Ring got a 1.19. Fully Loaded got a 1.04. http://www.steveswrestling.com/info/wwebuyrates.html As for the ratings, they went from 6s and 7s when HHH was champ to 4s and 5s in August and September. Pretty big difference. The last 6 Raw ever did was the first week of August 00.

 

Then maybe the Rock never had a year. Just a couple of months.

[Guest Ray]

The Rock was STALE.....IN THE MIDDLE OF 2000?

 

Well that's officially one of the dumbest statements ever.

[chaosrage 0]

Were you watching in 2000?

[Guest Ray]

Were you?

 

The Rock was by far the most over wrestler in the promotion and clearly the top man.

[Adam 0]

Well in retrospect, if Foley knew he was in the WM Main, there would have been no Hell in a Cell match. Then we would have had that 8 Man Tag that they were talking about doing with the Radicals vs. DX with perhaps a replacement, and Foley vs. Rock vs. Show for the no 1 contendership. They could have gone with Rock-Show and Foley-HHH at WrestleMania instead of the four way, and had Rock and HHH go over in both matches, with niether losing credibility, Foley retiring, and Show being, well, Show.

[Papacita 0]

As for the ratings, they went from 6s and 7s when HHH was champ to 4s and 5s in August and September. Pretty big difference. The last 6 Raw ever did was the first week of August 00.

Well, looking at a Raw ratings history, there were only 3 shows that cracked 7 that year, and two of those were post-PPV shows (following Backlash and Judgment Day, the other came in the week going into Backlash). In June, Raw drew two 5's (both during HHH's 4th title reign), then pretty much stayed in the 6's until August 21 with Rock as champion (the only exceptions were July 3rd, which drew a 5.3--you could probably attribute to the upcoming holiday-- and August 14, which happened at the height of the HHH/Angle program, a period where Rock didn't even have a real program, so the show basically revolved around HHH). They scored back to back 4's to close out August (late night shows due to the US Open), and two high 5's to start off September (judging from the list, the post-Open numbers tend to be a bit lower than normal historically) before the switch to TNN on the 25th, which is when the ratings really began to taper off.

 

Jericho/HHH was the focal point going into Fully Loaded

Not really. Rock/Benoit got a bit more attention going into that show.

 

Fans wanted him to win just like they wanted Foley to win, but when a face chasing after the belt finally catches it, what else is there for them to do?

He could defend the title. If a face has strong opposition, it's just as interesting watching him try to hold onto the title as it is watching him try to attain it. If the chase is more interesting in WWE, it's only because they tend not to have an abundance of strong heels.

[Promoter 0]

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.

[Vanhalen 0]

I really liked Armageddon 2000, it was sold only on the main event, and that delivered

[Guest Staravenger]

2000 was Triple H's year without a DOUBT. When Rock was champion, Triple H was feuding with Kurt Angle & Chris Benoit while Rock was doing pretty much nothing. A 4-Way at Unforgiven is lazy booking, and he jobbed the title to Angle, then went into a mini-feud with RIKISHI while HHH was with Austin.

 

During HHH's title reign(s), he feuded with Mick Foley in main events, and of course The Rock.

 

The Rock was feuding with the Big Slow.

 

Benoit/Rock and HHH/Jericho is a push at FLoaded, but HHH/Jericho was MUCH mored interesting. Benoit/Rock seemed like a "flavor of the month" feud for Rock.

 

Triple H was also having good mid-card matches on SD & RAW, including a shockingly entertaining match vs. Rikishi and a ***+ effort vs. TAKA Michinoku....a L-HW.

[Promoter 0]

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.

[Kizzo 0]

Armageddon '00

1.15

 

Survivor Series '00

1.0

 

No Mercy '00

1.35

 

Unforgiven '00

1.5

 

Summer Slam '00

1.4

 

Fully Loaded '00

1.04

 

King Of The Ring '00

1.19

 

Judgment Day '00

1.05

 

Backlash '00

1.65

 

WrestleMania XVI

2.35

 

No Way Out '00

1.2

 

Royal Rumble '00

1.6

 

That's called a standout year....during that year not one buyrate went below the 1.0 mark.....when that happens...you are creating some exciting T.V. and you really have the fans hooked to a particular storyline....and they want to see the PPV....

[Promoter 0]

Well, when they're hot they're hot, but the trick that the "genius" Mcmahon hasn't figured out yet is to stabilize things not to have the highs and lows in such a discrepancy over the years. I think 1999 was an even better year financially. What were the numbers a year or two later? I also think it's more than just storyline, but the wrestler's character's fleshing out to mature that year. It's kind of a climax from the build up from late 1997 with the roster being added with the influx of the wcw guys like the Radicalz, Big Show, Jericho etc. jumping.