Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 451
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Desperate Housewife
Posted

Fuck - someone even suggested it.

 

HHH vs. Hogan.

 

Or HHH vs. Savage. In a fight for Steph's "Honour" nyuk, nyuk.

 

Ok, now I'm reaching

Posted

Yeah, HHH vs. Savage is reaching, but Shane vs. HHH is just a run in the mill main event.

 

DH, does anyone else but HHH benefit from all these feuds? There has to be someone else built from this. HHH isn't going to be around forever.

 

And you forgot turning Edge face and having him beat by Triple H. Just to help you out.

Guest Desperate Housewife
Posted

Turning Edge face would be FUCKING POINTLESS

Posted

Hey now, just helping you out. You hadn't quite had everyone being beat by Triple H. Hell, you even have a guy who's not in the company being beat by Triple H. Just thought you forgot.

 

OH, and remember Masters and Carlito. We'll just have HHH turn face and beat those two plus Edge. Think long term DH!

Guest Desperate Housewife
Posted

I like Masters and Carlito. Benjamin I'm ambivilent about.

Posted
I like Masters and Carlito. Benjamin I'm ambivilent about.

So Masters and Carlito will be the last guys Triple H gets to crush while Shelton will be first?

 

Honestly, your year long title reign for Triple H plan is terrible. He simply doesn't have enough strong challengers on Raw. The most of the names you mention have already been soundly beaten by Triple H or are well past their prime. You could not fill a year with Triple H main events unless you start re-hasing them over and over. At the point nobody is going to watch because he's already beaten everyone. That's why your idea sucks.

Posted

I like Masters and Carlito. Benjamin I'm ambivilent about.

So Masters and Carlito will be the last guys Triple H gets to crush while Shelton will be first?

 

Honestly, your year long title reign for Triple H plan is terrible. He simply doesn't have enough strong challengers on Raw. The most of the names you mention have already been soundly beaten by Triple H or are well past their prime. You could not fill a year with Triple H main events unless you start re-hasing them over and over. At the point nobody is going to watch because he's already beaten everyone. That's why your idea sucks.

 

Year long title reigns suck, in general. I've never liked the concept of one man being on top for that long, as in holding the title. I've made a few exceptions in the past few years (Kobashi / Joe) - but those are special circumstances. Triple H reigns, even if short, are pointless and dull. He doesn't need to be champion to beat everyone, he does it anyway.

Guest Desperate Housewife
Posted

I like Masters and Carlito. Benjamin I'm ambivilent about.

So Masters and Carlito will be the last guys Triple H gets to crush while Shelton will be first?

 

Honestly, your year long title reign for Triple H plan is terrible. He simply doesn't have enough strong challengers on Raw. The most of the names you mention have already been soundly beaten by Triple H or are well past their prime. You could not fill a year with Triple H main events unless you start re-hasing them over and over. At the point nobody is going to watch because he's already beaten everyone. That's why your idea sucks.

 

You realise he's still over - depsite the constnat feeding him challengers bit. Criticising a year long title reign because you dont like the champion, yet praising Samoa Joe's title reign in ROH is absurd, and hypocritical evidence of an anti-WWE bias

Posted

I like Masters and Carlito. Benjamin I'm ambivilent about.

So Masters and Carlito will be the last guys Triple H gets to crush while Shelton will be first?

 

Honestly, your year long title reign for Triple H plan is terrible. He simply doesn't have enough strong challengers on Raw. The most of the names you mention have already been soundly beaten by Triple H or are well past their prime. You could not fill a year with Triple H main events unless you start re-hasing them over and over. At the point nobody is going to watch because he's already beaten everyone. That's why your idea sucks.

 

You realise he's still over - depsite the constnat feeding him challengers bit. Criticising a year long title reign because you dont like the champion, yet praising Samoa Joe's title reign in ROH is absurd, and hypocritical evidence of an anti-WWE bias

 

 

This sounds like an anti-HHH bias on Si82, not anti-WWE.

 

And where the fuck did Si82 praise a Samoa Joe title reign? What does that have to do with anything? ROH is a glorified Indy promotion. It doesn't sniff WWE's jock in terms of size, why does it even matter?

Guest Desperate Housewife
Posted
I don't think HHH will have another year long reign. After all, how's he gonna break the magic number 16

 

He's only 36.

 

And where the fuck did Si82 praise a Samoa Joe title reign? What does that have to do with anything? ROH is a glorified Indy promotion. It doesn't sniff WWE's jock in terms of size, why does it even matter?

 

It's the principle.

Posted

I don't think HHH will have another year long reign. After all, how's he gonna break the magic number 16

 

He's only 36.

 

And where the fuck did Si82 praise a Samoa Joe title reign? What does that have to do with anything? ROH is a glorified Indy promotion. It doesn't sniff WWE's jock in terms of size, why does it even matter?

 

It's the principle.

 

 

There are no words.

Posted

Comparing Joe's title reign to a HHH title reign is like teaching someone with amnesia what happen in their past, it's completely fucking stupid and pointless.

Posted

I like Masters and Carlito. Benjamin I'm ambivilent about.

So Masters and Carlito will be the last guys Triple H gets to crush while Shelton will be first?

 

Honestly, your year long title reign for Triple H plan is terrible. He simply doesn't have enough strong challengers on Raw. The most of the names you mention have already been soundly beaten by Triple H or are well past their prime. You could not fill a year with Triple H main events unless you start re-hasing them over and over. At the point nobody is going to watch because he's already beaten everyone. That's why your idea sucks.

 

You realise he's still over - depsite the constnat feeding him challengers bit. Criticising a year long title reign because you dont like the champion, yet praising Samoa Joe's title reign in ROH is absurd, and hypocritical evidence of an anti-WWE bias

It doesn't matter how over he is. If the opponents are weak nobody will care because the result is a given. Why would you pay to watch Triple H beat a guy he's already beaten time and time again?

 

I may not like Triple H but a year long reign for anyone would be a bad thing right now. WWE need to build up credible main event guys not have everyone jobbing to Triple H or anybody else.

 

BTW, thanks for making up stuff to try and help your "argument".

Guest Dam(o)nYankees
Posted
Doesn't bore me. And he got a thunderous reaction on Monday Night.

Yes, he's over. We established that. Some of the most over, money making wrestlers in history never fought for the title at six straight Wrestlemanias. Hell, the record for nonconsecutive is 7. There is a reason, whether you want to see it or not, that people who were a shitload more important to this company than Triple H have never done that.

Guest Desperate Housewife
Posted

So he's married to the bosses' daughter. Big whoop.

 

 

You know, back in the 80s, Flair was accused of the exact same political shit, and he did fine, thanks

Guest Dam(o)nYankees
Posted
So he's married to the bosses' daughter. Big whoop.

I wasn't even really referencing that. I was saying that if it was deemed a bad idea for people much more important to the company than Hunter, its probably a bad idea for him.

Posted
So he's married to the bosses' daughter. Big whoop.

 

 

You know, back in the 80s, Flair was accused of the exact same political shit, and he did fine, thanks

Except Flair did a good job of making other guys look good before beating them. And often had to cheat or rely on outside interference to win.

 

HHH does none of the above.

Guest Desperate Housewife
Posted

Wow. Since when is it HHH's job to make sure that someone else "looks good" in the ring. That's why jobbers were invented

Guest Dam(o)nYankees
Posted
Wow. Since when is it HHH's job to make sure that someone else "looks good" in the ring. That's why jobbers were invented

Its not Hunter's job to establish people. But its also his job to not make them look like shit in his matches with them. (For example, making Booker T sell the Pedigree for 27 seconds before pinning him)

Guest Desperate Housewife
Posted

Jesus that was years ago. Get over it.

 

I'm going to watch Smackdown. It entertains me. Something I doubt any of you do.

Guest Dam(o)nYankees
Posted
Jesus that was years ago. Get over it.

Booker never recovered.

Guest Desperate Housewife
Posted

He seems pretty over on Smackdown.

Guest Dam(o)nYankees
Posted
He seems pretty over on Smackdown.

No one is buying him as a serious contender for the World title. Hes feuding with the fucking Boogeyman for Christ sakes.

Posted
Wow. Since when is it HHH's job to make sure that someone else "looks good" in the ring. That's why jobbers were invented

So everyone Triple H faces is a jobber then?

 

If he doesn't help people look good how are WWE supposed to build up credible main eventers?

Posted

Wow. Since when is it HHH's job to make sure that someone else "looks good" in the ring. That's why jobbers were invented

So everyone Triple H faces is a jobber then?

 

:lol:

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...