Jump to content
TSM Forums
Sign in to follow this  
UZI Suicide

HBK is a little unhappy

Recommended Posts

Giving HBK, at this point in his career, a mega push, and having him go over the guy you're building the future of your company around is nothing short of stupid. He still has worth to the company to work with and get younger workers over and work occasional "dream" matches with fellow "legends". A mega-push and title win are, or at least should be, out of the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah because putting the title on Shawn and pushing him has always led to SOOO much money being drawn.

 

I can tell you exactly what the finish needs to be here: Masters gets the masterlock, Shawn goes into the ropes, flips back on him, 1-2-3. Masters keeps it on after the bell and a slew of officials and jobbers has to break him off. Shawn gets the win, Masters keeps his finisher intact.

 

How hard is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JMA
If they told Shawn that he was going to beat Hogan clean at Summerslam and then beat John Cena for the WWE title at Unforgiven, I'm sure he wouldn't have had any problem staying a heel.

 

Why would WWE *ever* do something as stupid as this? I mean obviously they are stupid, but this is beyond even the stupidest humans.

Agreed. Shawn winning the WWE Championship at this point in his career would be a huge step back for WWE. Shawn should be making stars at this point, as should other WWE veterans who shall remain nameless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Giving HBK, at this point in his career, a mega push, and having him go over the guy you're building the future of your company around is nothing short of stupid.  He still has worth to the company to work with and get younger workers over and work occasional "dream" matches with fellow "legends".  A mega-push and title win are, or at least should be, out of the question.

 

Wow. What point in his career? You're talking like he's as old as Hogan or Flair. When Flair was as old as Shawn, it was 1989. I wouldn't be surprised if Shawn had another 10 years left and was still having good matches when he's 50. Hell, Batista is only a few months younger than Shawn and he's just getting into the title picture. What exactly, other than a bias against Shawn, makes you think he's almost finished and should never go near the title again?

 

Shawn, as a heel this past month, was by far the most entertaining character on Raw. That alone should have been more than enough reason for him to get a title run. Nevermind that at 40 he's also arguably still the best wrestler on Raw, easily better than Cena could ever hope to be. But.. THEN there's the fact that if he's seen as someone at the top level, someone that could beat Hogan, someone that could win a world title instead of a has-been, he'd be in a better position to put over other wrestlers. It's kinda hard to make new stars when you're known as the guy that gets beat by everybody, just look at Foley or Flair. Or when you're the guy that gets his ass handed to him by a 52 year old with an artificial hip. If there's anything Raw needs, it desperately needs someone that can make new stars. Someone that can make main eventers. Right now, HHH is the only one that can do it. Shawn can't. If Masters completely dominates Michaels and pins him clean, he won't be a main eventer. Not even close to one. A win over Hogan and a world title run could have maybe changed that and kept his heel character alive, continuing to make Raw exciting for months. But I guess Cena doing nothing with the title and turning Shawn face and wasting him on Masters is smarter than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If they told Shawn that he was going to beat Hogan clean at Summerslam and then beat John Cena for the WWE title at Unforgiven, I'm sure he wouldn't have had any problem staying a heel.

 

Why would WWE *ever* do something as stupid as this? I mean obviously they are stupid, but this is beyond even the stupidest humans.

Agreed. Shawn winning the WWE Championship at this point in his career would be a huge step back for WWE. Shawn should be making stars at this point, as should other WWE veterans who shall remain nameless.

 

Why would it be a step back? If heel HBK wins the title, we have the best in-ring performer, and the best mic worker in the WWE as champion. As it is, they're continuing to push a stale worker who's terrible in the ring, and is poor enough on the mic that a heel Jericho got cheered over him at Summerslam.

 

If you want HBK to make new stars, then give him a seven month title reign and let RVD beat him clean at Wrestlemania. All that a loss to Hogan does is kill the hottest act in the WWE dead, and make the discerning fan turn off the product altogether.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest *KNK*

A lost to Hulk Hogan did Shawn Michaels no damage, what damaged Shawn was his refusal to change his character. Leaving him with the only options left on the table, Chris Masters and Carlito.

 

A seven month reign from Shawn would basically cripple the business for good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah because putting the title on Shawn and pushing him has always led to SOOO much money being drawn.

 

I can tell you exactly what the finish needs to be here:  Masters gets the masterlock, Shawn goes into the ropes, flips back on him, 1-2-3.  Masters keeps it on after the bell and a slew of officials and jobbers has to break him off.  Shawn gets the win, Masters keeps his finisher intact.

 

How hard is that?

 

Well. That just settled that. I dunno if they could pull it off physically, but shit, that's definitely the finish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A lost to Hulk Hogan did Shawn Michaels no damage, what damaged Shawn was his refusal to change his character. Leaving him with the only options left on the table, Chris Masters and Carlito.

 

A seven month reign from Shawn would basically cripple the business for good.

 

Oh, bullshit. There's no way you can make the "cocky heel that thinks he's the biggest icon in the history of the business" character work if he loses his first big PPV match to a 52 year old retired wrestler. The loss is what took HBK off the table as a viable opponent for Cena at Unforgiven.

 

The fact is that HBK was incredibly fresh, and the character change had everyone forgetting all the jobs that HBK's done over the last two or three years, and instantly buying him as an absolute top-level main eventer. The loss to Hogan just killed all that momentum dead, and basically forced Shawn to abandon the character and go back to being a face.

 

As for a seven month reign for HBK crippling the business for good, that doesn't even make sense. If anything's going to cripple business, it's going to be continuing Cena's boring reign. Back when Vince was actually on the pulse of the fans, he'd anticipate an act getting cold, and move the belt to the fresh act before the fans had even fully made up their minds. However, right now we have Cena getting booed on PPV with the fans slowly but surely turning on him, and what does Vince do? He takes the only heel act with enough momentum to actually carry the belt and he kills it dead.

 

Pushing HBK to the moon would have been the best thing Vince could have done. With the move to USA looming, he could have brought Raw back to the land of consistent 4.0+ ratings, but I can't really see anyone jumping on the bandwagon with Cena as champ. Honestly, I can't even watch Raw in front of my friends with that stupid fag as a face champ.

 

To put it in the words of an intelligent person who hasn't watched wrestling in a couple years, (in this case, Bill Simmons from ESPN.com):

 

Battling for the WWE title: Chris Jericho and champ John Cena, known for his mediocre rapping, a truly mediocre catch phrase ("Come get some!") and a finishing move called "The F.U." He's like a younger, watered-down version of Stone Cold Steve Austin, with a little Vanilla Ice thrown in. Needless to say, the crowd seems a little lukewarm on him. And I'm downright lukecold.

 

That right there is the exact feeling of anyone over the age of 14 who might be mildly interested in wrestling if it weren't so damn boring right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JoeJoe

^ Yo, they're in desperate need of spam in New Orleans, don't waste it here on us.

 

Honestly, Shawn Michales can make a great heel champion. And he can make careers if he wants to. I think he'd actaully do a much better job in Huntre's spot than Hunter does. I'd like to see him turn back, carry the title, and finally redeem himself by putting some young buck over at a major PPV. He has never actually 'made" anyone, this can be his time do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest fanofcoils
A lost to Hulk Hogan did Shawn Michaels no damage, what damaged Shawn was his refusal to change his character. Leaving him with the only options left on the table, Chris Masters and Carlito.

 

A seven month reign from Shawn would basically cripple the business for good.

 

Oh, bullshit. There's no way you can make the "cocky heel that thinks he's the biggest icon in the history of the business" character work if he loses his first big PPV match to a 52 year old retired wrestler. The loss is what took HBK off the table as a viable opponent for Cena at Unforgiven.

 

The fact is that HBK was incredibly fresh, and the character change had everyone forgetting all the jobs that HBK's done over the last two or three years, and instantly buying him as an absolute top-level main eventer. The loss to Hogan just killed all that momentum dead, and basically forced Shawn to abandon the character and go back to being a face.

 

HBK losing to Hogan does NOT hurt him because it was a nostalgia match not a 40 year old vs a 52 year old match. HBK losing to Hogan showed the fans that HBK is worse career wise than Hogan. HBK lost no momentum losing to Hogan, he could have stayed heel and feuded with Cena for instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JMA
A lost to Hulk Hogan did Shawn Michaels no damage, what damaged Shawn was his refusal to change his character. Leaving him with the only options left on the table, Chris Masters and Carlito.

 

A seven month reign from Shawn would basically cripple the business for good.

Indeed. If Shawn had stayed heel, he'd have much more options available to him. As a face, he's stale in the creative department.

 

I still don't think he refused to turn heel for religious reasons. As it's been stated, other religious wrestlers have no problem playing heels. Michaels just wants to be cheered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with Masters keeping his Masterlock on Shawn through the pin means that, although he keeps his finisher intact, he's too dumb to realise he's about to lose a wrestling match. If you honestly want to keep the WRESTLER reasonably protected (as opposed to just his finisher), I'd advise against that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest *KNK*
The problem with Masters keeping his Masterlock on Shawn through the pin means that, although he keeps his finisher intact, he's too dumb to realise he's about to lose a wrestling match. If you honestly want to keep the WRESTLER reasonably protected (as opposed to just his finisher), I'd advise against that.

 

That finish has been done many times to established wrestlers like Steve Austin and Roddy Piper.

 

It won't damage Chris Masters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A lost to Hulk Hogan did Shawn Michaels no damage, what damaged Shawn was his refusal to change his character. Leaving him with the only options left on the table, Chris Masters and Carlito.

 

A seven month reign from Shawn would basically cripple the business for good.

Indeed. If Shawn had stayed heel, he'd have much more options available to him. As a face, he's stale in the creative department.

 

I still don't think he refused to turn heel for religious reasons. As it's been stated, other religious wrestlers have no problem playing heels. Michaels just wants to be cheered.

 

No, the loss to Hogan as has been pointed out killed his heel character. There's no way he could keep up his arrogant "I know I'm better than everyone" character up if he just got beat by a 52 year old man with an artificial hip, even if he wanted to. (I had this same argument with HTQ before the match happened, and won it btw) His heel character isn't the same one he was in 97. He wasn't a cowardly heel this time. This character claims he's the best, knows he's the best, and backs it up. Yet he couldn't back it up, against the man that's basically opposite everything Shawn is. He showed that he was the one that was all talk, which goes against his character. The ending made all of his shooting as pointless as a Hogan promo.

 

Depending on how the match went, it could have either been the start of something great or the death of heel Shawn and back to old boring Shawn. If he would have beaten Hogan, or at least if it had a DQ ending, I don't have any doubt that he would've stayed heel. Think about it. If he just wanted to be cheered and he's face now, he's getting what he wanted, so why would he be unhappy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JoeJoe

Yeah. Even Austin. "40....one yr old, already balded, retired, wife beating, broken-red neck".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because there's a big difference between 40 and 52. Someone that wrestles a regular schedule and someone retired (with an artificial hip and knee) who just comes in once or twice a year. His back seems to be fine now. Was Flair described as a 40 year old, old guy that should never get close to the title again in 89? Will people say that about Batista when he turns 40 in a few months?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely irrelevant.

 

Hogan has never gotten over on work. He's gotten over on the big boot, leg drop, and posing. That's what he got over with 20 years ago, that's what he got over with at Summerslam. The case being made isn't that Shawn lost to "a guy who can't work", it's that he lost to a "52 year old" with a "artificial hip". Looking at things like that, then Shawn is a "40 year old" with a "fused spine". And if you want to look at it more objectively, and at least Hogan was _big_. Shawn is one of the smallest guys on the roster. Why should Cena, a ripped guy in his 20's, lose to some -a lanky, balding, guy in his 40's- one like THAT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because there's a big difference between 40 and 52. Someone that wrestles a regular schedule and someone retired (with an artificial hip and knee) who just comes in once or twice a year. His back seems to be fine now. Was Flair described as a 40 year old, old guy that should never get close to the title again in 89? Will people say that about Batista when he turns 40 in a few months?

 

There's also a big difference between 28 and 40. The 1980's were a different time where image wasn't as important as it is today, and Batista doesn't look like he's 40. HBK looks like he's 40, and it's 2005.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest JoeJoe

-Flair was ALL about image in the 80's.

 

-Hogan sold on charisma, his big size and mobility. He's lost all of that except charisma.

 

-Its sad to see a really immobile, plastic, old fart beat the best wrestler on the card, with a weak looking leg drop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anticrombie
-Flair was partly about image in the 80's.

 

-Hogan sold on charisma and his big size. He's lost all of that except charisma.

 

-An immobile, plastic, old fart beat a bible-thumping, overrated egomaniac with a weak looking leg drop.

 

Voila!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How come when Hogan is spoke-of, he's described as a "50 year old, bald, retired, old guy with a broken hip" but Michaels isn't described as a "40 year old, balding, once-retired, lanky, old guy with a broken back"??

 

Hogan was a 40-year old balding once-retired guy in 1993. He still had some mileage left then to be a top-level wrestler. 12 years later, when he can hardly walk, wrestles three to four times a year, and does a reality show where he's portrayed as a crazy old man, he no longer has that mileage.

 

The fact is that if you job to Hogan at this stage of his career, it means you're a joke. If the best worker/most entertaining character on the show is made to look like a joke, it hurts the product. Simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was my question so hard? Or was it so on-point that the HBK fans have to ignore it?

 

Shawn Michaels, objectively and physically, isn't much better in relation to guys like Cena as Hogan is to him. Those who complain about Hogan beating Michaels, in theory, should react the same way to Michaels beating Cena. However, the problem is, those that *do* complain about Hogan beating Michaels are most-likely HBK-marks, and of course won't apply the same reasoning and standards. So, either the reasoning is flawed, or the person doing the reasoning is.

 

The fact of the matter is this:

 

- Michaels is old. He looks old.

- Michaels is lanky, especially in relation to 99% of the roster.

- Michaels offense is lacking, at best.

- Michaels is in the last legs of his career, his prime having passed him a decade ago.

 

Apparently, the only thing that differs between he and Hogan are 12 years and that Michaels moves faster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your argument is flawed. If you look at professional athletes from almost any major sport, their competitive age is from about 18-20 lasting to about 40-45. However, after the age of 45, their skill level drops off dramatically, and they are no longer able to compete at the top level in their sport.

 

Take Roger Clemens for instance. He is the best pitcher in all of baseball right now, and he's 43 years old. He's older than HBK, still able to pitch at the absolute top of his sport. However, if you look at how many 52 year olds there are on major league rosters, the answer is zero. In fact, if you look at how many 52 year olds, there have been on major league rosters in the past 50 years, it's still zero.

 

HBK beating Cena isn't any less believable than Roger Clemens striking out Jason Bay. However, the idea that a 52 year old man who can barely walk is able to outfight any top-level wrestler is insulting both to the character and the viewer, and really damages the product.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×