HHH is in the WON HOF

[Guest Brian]

I want to see the decline in North American numbers, personally. If you couldn't draw a 1000 in Canada...

[Guest Y2DAYDAY]

Actually, if everyone wants to get technical, the decline started with the Austin heel turn and the rest of 2001 being based around heel Austin. BTW, HHH was not around the second half of that year.

 

In reality, Austin was on top when business fell, not HHH.

 

HHH came back, and they did the biggest Rumble buyrate ever based on his return.

 

After Mania in 2002, both Austin and Rock left and they did the split. That only sped up the decline. So you lose 2 of the top 3 guys during the boom and business isn't going to drop? Come on!!! HHH's face run died and was totally undercut by HulK Hogan(and Hogan wonders why HHH hates him).

 

Fast forward to the hard split start with HHH and Brock as champs. BTW, at this point, they had no Hogan, Austin, or Rock, leaving the only top face from previous years being HHH, and he was a heel.

 

Even at this, things didn't really drop until they went to split PPV in June 2003. The June and July 2003 shows did well and then things fell later in the year.

 

BTW, Mania 19 with Austin, Rock, Hogan, Vince, Angle, and Lesnar on top BOMBED with HHH and HBK in midcard spots. WM's 20 and 21 with HHH and HBK in the main events did big business.

 

I'm sure there are counterpoints to all of the points I just made. However, the simple fact is that if HHH wasn't around, things would have only fallen more. In reality, he is the biggest money drawing heel by far in the history of the business and usually, even recently, his PPV main events do good business.

 

Him vs Batista at Mania was the absolute draw for that show. They don't do 700,000 buys without that match.

 

HHH is an easy first ballot HOF'er and should have been in last year.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

If you lose stars, then you should have guys ready to take their spots on the roster (aka new stars), they didn't. That was in large part due to HHH. It became the HHH show for well over 3 years, and during that time business has dropped dramatically and only survives due to international touring. He is a central, active, figure in the WWE's decline, along with Vince and Steph.

 

And how do you know if HHH wasn't around things would have declined more? If he wasn't around, they would have been forced to create new stars and elevate fresh talent.

 

In terms of his drawing record, as I said before, on its own it gets him into the HOF automatically. But there needs to be context, the wrestling business is much different now than it was 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago. *I* could draw more than 80% of North American wrestlers if the WWE had me on TV. That's just the way the business is. Put me in the Main Event at Wrestlemania, I could draw millions of people off the name of the event alone. That would *kill* the draws of yesteryear. IT'S DIFFERENT. What's more impressive: 10,000 fans and 2 million people watching RAW automatically every week no matter who's on, or 2000 people coming JUST to see you? On paper, the first one wins easy. But does that accurately reflect a *true* draw? Is that the same thing guys back decades ago had to their advantage?

[World's Worst Man 0]

Lets also not forget that Triple H, based on his wrestling ability alone, is in no way, shape or form, a hall of famer. That means his drawing power and positive impact on the business must be great enough to overcome those "shortcomings". I think one would have a tough time arguing that his drawing power was at such a level as to overshadow his merely above-average wrestling ability. Not to mention his negative impact on the business.

[stahl 0]

I think most people do consider triple H to be more then just average in the ring. Sure his injuries have hampered him but he works extremely hard and generally puts on quality main events.

[Perfxion 0]

If people want to call HHH a draw by only using WM PPVs needs to look down the line of other PPVs. How come the only PPV he can draw on is WM? Rumble 2002 did well, but business was better in 02. And Summerslam 2002 did well, but again, business was better. Now look at the worst drawing PPV of all time for this era and who was in the main event.

 

The last 8 WMs have all drawn on the name. The lowest the PPV will do is like 500K buys. So anything above that is a plus. WM is a bad PPV to use because of its name value, what would make me shocked is if a GAB or a Unforgiven gets a buy over 400K.

 

 

He does NOT belong in the hall. he isn't a major draw but is offset by a near doubling of prices for everything.

[Guest Brian]

I think most people do consider triple H to be more then just average in the ring.  Sure his injuries have hampered him but he works extremely hard and generally puts on quality main events.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Actually, he was a smarter worker after his injury, but he didn't have the great bumping that covered up many of his weaknesses.

[Guest Ken_Anderson]

Even though the WON HOF is infamously stringent about who's allowed in, even at this point in his career, Triple H has got to be considered a shoe-in. 150%. From every single angle, there's no way you can exclude this guy. I've seen people in this thread say that, from a workrate standpoint, he doesn't belong. If HHH doesn't belong from that standpoint, VERY few people do. The H-Man has had legitimate ****1/2 - ***** matches with Steve Austin, Mick Foley, the Rock, Chris Benoit, Chris Jericho (Last Man Standing) and Shawn Michaels in the last several years. He's had standout, memorable matches with Ric Flair, Kurt Angle, Batista (HIAC), the Undertaker (WMX7), and even TAKA. Sure, he's lost a half-step since the injury, but you can't let personal bias blind you to the fact that the man has more than held his end in some absolute CLASSICS.

 

From a character standpoint, even though he's gotten a bit stale, you also can't deny that for a solid two years, he was the absolute BEST heel in all of wrestling. Starting around the time of the Test wedding, Triple H was just off the charts as a heel. Again, I know it's easy to hate on the guy, but you can't deny the fact that 15,000 people wanted to crucify him on a weekly basis. He was a LEGITIMATE top-draw much longer than Foley ever was, and all other comparisons aside, he's put more asses in seats than Bret Hart EVER has. Not saying he's a better worker, but compares Triple H's gates to Bret Hart's, and you'll see there's no comparison. I'll never forget that Dallas RAW 10-Man match where a mere tag-in of Triple H would have the entire building shaking with "asshole" chants.

 

Triple H is as close to an "automatic" as I've ever seen in the WON HOF. He carried the promotion to some of it's greatest heights on his BACK, without Steve Austin, and often without the Rock. I do agree that it's too early for guys like HHH (and Angle) to be voted in, but if the Observer voters don't put in the H-Man in the HOF, they'll expose themselves as nothing but a bunch of jaded, out-of-touch-with reality, dirt sheet/internet marks.

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

The WWF's greatest heights financially were 2000, and unless you were watching a different 2000 to the rest of us, Rock was there too, and he and Hunter were against each other for a lot of it. Austin came back in September of that year, so you can't say Austin wasn't a part of that success either.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

The problem here is that HHH was given everything. In 1999 Vince McMahon was determined to get him over as a top heel and pushed him relentlessly for better part of the year doing that. HHH has been afforded every single fucking luxury the WWE could give him. The best heel in wrestling? That's pretty easy, when all the heels under him can't use the same "tricks" that he does and can't be elevated to his position. When Eugene was at his hottest, who was there to take the heat from him? Who gets the ring time, the blood, the gimmicks, the weapons? Who gets all the tv time he wants? Where is the accomplishment in ANYTHING HHH has done in the past 5 years?

[Guest drdrainoscott]

Ok, this argument is really beginning to iritate me, if only for the fact that I feel that those who are arguing against HHH are only doing so to "prove" that they aren't marks. For those that feel this way, what is your criteria for the HOF?

 

In my opinion, if you don't consider Triple H a hall of famer, then Undertaker and Mick Foley definitly don't belong in either. Would you agree?

[Hunter's Torn Quad 0]

Ok, this argument is really beginning to iritate me, if only for the fact that I feel that those who are arguing against HHH are only doing so to "prove" that they aren't marks. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Or it could be that they really don't feel Hunter is HoF material, and it has nothing to do with them wanting to 'prove' they aren't marks.

[CanadianGuitarist 0]

Yes.

 

He got hot as the WWF was at the highest point ever, 1999-2001.

 

King of the Ring

IC Champ

European Champ

 

And that's without his Stepanie-bonking.

 

I hate to say it, but yes, HOF.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

I haven't said definitively that HHH isn't a HOFer. I just don't think he's a "Slam Dunk" like Meltzer says he is. The guy has been on top of the top organization in professional wrestling history for 5 years and he has drawn more than 99.9% of wrestlers in wrestling history which -on paper- is a huge accomplishment and deserves HOF recognition, _however_ unlike Hogan, Austin, Rock -the big stars in HHH's era-, HHH didn't really *do* anything to warrant it. HHH was along for the ride for the most part, and when he *was* on his own he failed to deliver, especially considering the amout of TV time he was given. It's a case of not living up to your contemporaries, and like I said before, this should be relative. The environment is different now, it's on national television and a PPV audience, where drawing 10,000 fans to an arena and millions on TV is expected.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

In my opinion, if you don't consider Triple H a hall of famer, then Undertaker and Mick Foley definitly don't belong in either. Would you agree?

 

First of all, those are different situations. Mick Foley deserves consideration for his influence in professional wrestling, as his book was a major success and spawned a trend that is still seen today. Taker deserves consideration for his longevity and staying power in an organization that simply doesn't allow that. Secondly, I wouldn't say that either guy were shoe-ins for the HOF, which is being said of HHH.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Rudo, we haven't derailed a WWE folder thread in ages.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Those were crazy times, back then. Wild times. Livin every day like it was your last... chance at making smart ass comments and creating absurd stories.

[The Czech Republic 0]

Yuuuuuup. I'm messing with that Christian thread right now by quoting 90s power-pop band lyrics. It's my warmup lap for future hijinks.

[World's Worst Man 0]

Ok, this argument is really beginning to iritate me, if only for the fact that I feel that those who are arguing against HHH are only doing so to "prove" that they aren't marks.  For those that feel this way, what is your criteria for the HOF? 

 

In my opinion, if you don't consider Triple H a hall of famer, then Undertaker and Mick Foley definitly don't belong in either.  Would you agree?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

We're all marks if you want to be technical. I think the word you were looking for is "fanboy" and I very much doubt that the "no to Trips" people are WWE fanboys. Just a hunch..

 

As for criteria, well, I would say the only reasonable criteria is wrestling ability, drawing power/popularity, longevity and influence on the business. Under these criteria, Triple H stands no chance, due to not having exceptional wrestling ability or exceptional drawing power, to go along with his mostly negative impact on the business. Likewise, I'm not so sure UT is a HoFer either. His wrestling ability probably earns him negatives, and his drawing power while good, isn't fantastic. What he has going for him is longevity at the top as well as being over with the fans for so many years. Mick Foley on the other hand, has his rather large impact on the business going for him, even though he was lacking in wrestling ability and drawing power. I'd certainly say that in the present, Foley and UT would make better candidates for the HoF.

[Guest]

HHH isn't a HOFer. He isn't an innovator, and damn sure hasn't opened doors to get people to watch. UT and Foley are much, much more better candidates than him.

[Guest *KNK*]

This has to be the most pretentious debate I have ever seen here. We are arguing over the qualifications of a fictional Hall of Fame created by a newsletter and is ultimately the decision of Dave Meltzer, his followers and un-named former wrestlers.

 

In professional wrestling, it isnt set up like other sports where you generally rely on statistics and give small leeway to aspects like character and "impact" (always a questionable topic).

 

How legitimate is this Hall of Fame when Kurt Angle was inducted into it, just after a couple years of being in the business, i seriously doubt the voters, whomever they are was also taking his amatuer career in consideration?

 

It's a fictional Hall of Fame in the same vein as WWE's version. It's controlled by political webs (i.e shawn not getting in for years and kurt getting in automatically). It's just as irrlevant as the PWI 500 and the DVDR ratings. It's all pointless arguements that is allowing you to find a new avenue to display your hatred of Triple H.

 

Why isn't anyone questioning the induction of The Freebirds? At least Triple H has a history of main eventing, drawing and having some sort of an impact on the business...The Freebirds were just another entertaining heel tag team in the 80's.

 

It's nothing to get so up in arms about, but it appears alot of people are emotionally upset about this situation.

 

It's a fictional character being inducted into a fictional HOF.

[RavishingRickRudo 0]

Rationalizing things on a Wrestling Discussion Board doesn't fly, not now, not ever.

[Slickster 0]

I agree with every thing RRR has said. HHH has accomplished so much in his career not because of determination or working his way to the top of the card, but because it's been pretty much handed to him.

 

However, based on the criteria of the Hall of Fame, he is indeed a worthy candidate and should be inducted.

 

(Also, Foley and Taker are first-ballot, no doubt about it.)

[Slickster 0]

With that said, it's Gordy List time.

 

1. Was he ever regarded as the best draw in the world? Was he ever regarded

as the best draw in his country or his promotion?

No; in WWE from late 2002-early 2003, I believe.

 

2. Was he an international draw, national draw and/or regional draw?

 

Yes, he was.

 

3. How many years did he have as a top draw?

 

From roughly late 1999-early 2001 and 2002-present, so roughly 6 years.

 

4. Was he ever regarded as the best worker in the world? Was he ever

regarded as the best worker in his country or in his promotion?

 

Never; he was considered one of WWE's best in 2000 (probably peaking with his Benoit match in late 2000).

 

5. Was he ever the best worker in his class (sex or weight)? Was he ever one

of the top workers in his class?

 

No; I would say yes from 2000-early 01.

 

6. How many years did he have as a top worker?

 

 

 

7. Was he a good worker before his prime? Was he a good worker after his

prime?

 

From 1995-1998, he was an OK midcard wrestler. I'm not quite sure when his 'prime' ended, so I'll skip this,

 

8. Did he have a large body of excellent matches? Did he have a excellent

matches against a variety of opponents?

 

He has had good, memorable matches with a variety of opponents, including Austin, Taker, Rock, Kane, Jericho, Benoit, Guererro, and Taka Michinoku, to name a few.

 

9. Did he ever anchor his promotion(s)?

 

He has been permanently anchored to the main event scene since late 1999.

 

10. Was he effective when pushed at the top of cards?

 

Yes and no. His drawing power is best when supplemented by other top draws; on his own he wasn't/has not been all that impressive without a strong supporting cast.

 

11. Was he valuable to his promotion before his prime? Was he still valuable

to his promotion after his prime?

 

Well, since he will probably be running the place in the future, I'd say so.

 

12. Did he have an impact on a number of strong promotional runs?

 

He was involved in almost all major storylines from late 1999 to the present.

 

13. Was he involved in a number of memorable rivalries, feuds or storylines?

 

Too many to list, really.

 

14. Was he effective working on the mic, working storylines or working

angles?

 

Yes, HHH does work hard to put angles over (though his mic work is repetitive).

 

15. Did he play his role(s) effectively during his career?

 

Yes, whatever the gimmick HHH played it to the fullest.

 

16. What titles and tournaments did he win? What was the importance of the

reigns?

 

Rumle winner, King of the Ring, 11-time world champion; however, I don't think that many of these honors are held in high regard or make people respect him more.

 

17. Did he win many honors and awards?

 

Too many to list.

 

18. Did he get mainstream exposure due to his wrestling fame? Did he get a

heavily featured by the wrestling media?

 

Not really (unless 'Blade:Trinity' counts); most of the IWC is abuzz about his every move.

 

19. Was he a top tag team wrestler?

 

Never.

 

20. Was he innovative?

 

I don't believe so. The sledgehammer and the Pedigree are his main contributions to the sport, wrestling-wise.

 

21. Was he influential?

 

*snickers* Yes, and we see his influence on every minute of WWE programming.

 

22. Did he make the people and workers around him better?

 

I don't believe so, no.

 

23. Did he do what was best for the promotion? Did he show a commitment to

wrestling?

 

No, since he quashed many pushes (see Booker T, RVD); Yes, above all else.

 

24. Is there any reason to believe that he was better or worse than he

appeared?

 

Well, his backstage power quashed many a push and directly shaped his own career, so a lot of this accomplishments were artificially generated.

[Dangerous A 0]

At least HHH wasn't a first ballot HOF'er. He didn't get in last year, but what helped him get in this year was the field was very weak. Even though he has and is given every chance to get over and hold others back, I think eventually he would get in. Maybe not this soon. The only first ballot HOF'er I can see on the horizon anytime soon is Rock. Rey Mysterio may get in first ballot if the field is weak the first year he is eligible.

 

Eddie may take awhile and it may take him some more time on or near working up top for him to make it, cause this year he was middle of the pack. Jericho will see even more difficulty getting in because he'll get support from current wrestlers, but not much from historians, perhaps a little from reporters. I think Arn Anderson will probrably never make it, same with Owen Hart.

[SuperJerk 0]

My only reaction to this story was surprise that WON has a Hall of Fame.

[Guest Andrew J.]

I just want to ask one question to all the people that say HHH undercut RVD's push in 2002:

 

Do you REALLY think WWE would have given RVD the title, with or without HHH?

[Guest *KNK*]

I just want to ask one question to all the people that say HHH undercut RVD's push in 2002:

 

Do you REALLY think WWE would have given RVD the title, with or without HHH?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes. In 2001 when he was the hottest man in the company and in 2002 when he was still godly over.

 

Good business is putting the focus of the company behind the top star in the eyes of the fans, which from 2001-2002 was Rob Van Dam.

 

I don't want this to turn into another idiotic RVD praise/bash vehicle but the fact remains, RVD was the people's choice and Triple H did everything he could to derail RVD's momentum and succeded.

[UseTheSledgehammerUh 0]

When did Triple H have a "good, memorable" match with Eddie Guerrero?

 

Surely you couldn't mean the "Draft Lottery" match.

[Lord of The Curry 0]

I'm not a huge RVD fan by any means but he only needs two thumbs to generate the type of heat HHH would need a 20 minute promo for. At the very least putting the title on him would've meant fresh feuds.