Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
...and your NEW WWE Champion....(obviously will contain spoilers)
-
08-10-2007 12:48am#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
Mr.Nice Guy wrote:I spotted the potential for this catastrof*ck the day after Cena's injury...
Surprise, surprise!
I remember prior to WM22 when HHH was interviewed by some radio station the interviewer said something like, "Hey when are we going to see a new WWE belt cos we miss the old one" and HHH replied, "Me too. Hey leave it to me."
It doesn't surprise me ONE IOTA that it will apparently be Triple H who ends up holding the new version of the belt.
He's a f*cking disgrace to professional wrestling and Raw will suck balls with him as the champion. Probably the most selfish piece of crap to ever grace the industry. Let's look at the guys he's destroyed so far since his return...
Booker T, Carlito, Lance Cade, Trevor Murdoch, Paul London, Brian Kendrick, Umaga and now - Randy Orton.
Quite an impressive list for a guy who's been back a couple of weeks and who is supposed to be a babyface and a veteran.
F*cking joke.
Well the only good thing to come out of this will be that HHH will be injured and on the shelf for 6 months+ soon enough
Roll on title number 12 :rolleyes:0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
Vince135792003 wrote:I, like Michelle McCool am loving life.
Just as long as you don't lose THAT much weight and have to be sent in for eating disorder treatment all the time
VR!0 -
-
rossie1977 wrote:happier now that orton has it but still 3 title changes in 2 hours is OVERKILL of the highest order especially with Cena having it for over a year prior.
Making up for lost time
Another thing for all the HHHaters out there.Any of you biased f*cks notice that Kennedy completely no sold Londrick's offence during the six man. I supposed he's not burying them by any chance?
VR!0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Mr.Nice Guy wrote:The crazy f*cker has this idea that he can go down as the greatest wrestler of all time. He won't.
But he will! Much to your dismay. And i'll be thinking of you when he gets entered into the hall of fame ten years from now.
VR!0 -
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
Mr.Nice Guy wrote:Cena isn't shagging the boss' daughter or sitting in on creative meetings but then you know that.
Absolutely. But i don't think shagging the bosses daughter has anything to do with it, seeing as he has been sitting in on creative meetings for about five years before he married her. Another example of sheer bias on your part.Why would that be my booking suggestion? Especially considering you admit my suggestion would have worked better? Strange. I notice a lot of personal comments coming from the HHH supporters. Could it be that they have no adequate defence of their darling? You betcha. At least you admit
I do admit that we could have done without 3 title changes in one night, But i don't think it makes a blind bit of difference as Orton walked with it in the end anyway, but you're heavily fixated on his amount of reigns, that you almost make it your mission to be p*ssed off by HHH every time he has a match! I'm not trying to defend anything, fact of the matter is, HHH is being booked to win, i'm enjoying it, and you're the one doing all the complaining.I wasn't referring to Cena's injury I was referring to how everyone expected the title to be decided in the main event of the show so it would have been very easy to have the last man standing go on at the end without the first match over Orton.
The title match WAS at the end of the show though!Actually it's quite relevant and you acknowledged yourself in another thread that you beleived HHH to want to be beat it also.
Not so much that i believe it, i actually couldn't give a rats ass!Nothing to say about HHH pinning Umaga clean with his finisher having already been in a match? Stop me if these questions are too taxing for you!
Nothing that he didn't do previously at King Of The Ring in 97 long before he was boning the bosses daughter, NEXT!Look in the mirror. You bashed Cena at the beginning of your post and you have referred to Undertaker as "Crippletaker" and much worse.
Yep, and i would do it again as they're just as guilty of doing the same. Only you won't acknowledge it because they're "ya boyz"He certainly will not go down as the greatest of all time.
Wait, watch and learn, is all i'll say.
You do that. Although I don't begrudge him having a place there.I'd like the Triple H defenders to stop knocking me personally and to answer the following points...
I'd actually like to take the time out to apologise for the "remove the head out of your ass comment", but your "remove the blinkers" comment was also unneccessary too. So when it comes to knocking you personally, you might consider practicing what you preach.
1) Do you or do you not agree that part of the reason for last night's events was to move Triple H a step closer to beating Flair's record of 16 world titles? If you disagree, please explain why.
I do disagree here as it really seemed to me that WWE were desperate for filler for that PPV, and that six man tag was enough evidence for me.2) Do you or do you not agree that Umaga has been left looking ridiculously weak from his feud with Triple H? If you disagree please explain why.
No i don't. Did Hogan look weak after losing to Rock at Mania X8? No he didn't. A Pinfall doesn't destroy careers like you're making them out. Plenty of KOTR winners won 3 times in one night, i really don't see your beef with that. I actually believe Umaga was thrown in there to weaken HHH (eventho he got the pinfall eventually) to make it look like Orton got the easy victory in the end. A typical heel title win! That way the feud with Umaga can continue so that they don't drag HHH v Orton from now til Mania!3) Do you or do you not agree that Triple H has been selfish since his return from injury? If you disagree please explain why.
Up until last week no as i really didn't think nailing Londrick, Cade and Murdoch was that big a deal. Umaga certainly didn't deserve last weeks treatment, and i already acknowledged it. Didn't make him weak going into the PPV though, did it?0 -
Lita Forever wrote:Right, and Orton still could have done that if they simply had the one main event match between him and HHH.
Leaving the guts of an hour to kill. I for one didn't want to see any more MVP v Mattitude basketball matches personally.
VR!0 -
validreasoning! wrote:Leaving the guts of an hour to kill. I for one didn't want to see any more MVP v Mattitude basketball matches personally.
VR!
That's a fair point. Okay. What they still could have done then was have HHH and Orton DRAW in the first match, thus setting up the LMS main event. That would have been way more logical. See, there's ways and means and other scenarios that could have unfolded last night. The way things were handled in the build up to the main event last night achieved nothing, and was unnecessary and ridiculous. I don't think anything could convince me otherwise.0 -
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
validreasoning! wrote:I do see your point, but a draw ending on the very first match would have pissed off the crowd.
Okay, it might have. I don't think it would have pissed them off to the same degree that the DQ finish at Unforgiven did. Simply because the ME would have been announced right after the draw, so the crowd would know they were getting another match and a title change. So I don;t think the crowd would be that hostile at all.validreasoning! wrote:Where as Umaga softening HHH up before Ortons rematch makes HHH look like sh*t but capable of getting to the ring, and Orton look like the sneaky heel, taking advantage of the situation.
OR if you look at it another way, it has the opposite effect. It makes Orton look weaker as it looks like he needed HHH to be softened up by another man before he could beat him. You could also say that HHH only lost to Orton having been through two other matches previously..
Wow, I can't believe I'm still posting in this thread. This is way deeper into a HHH debate then I wanted to get. 0 -
validreasoning! wrote:Absolutely. But i don't think shagging the bosses daughter has anything to do with it, seeing as he has been sitting in on creative meetings for about five years before he married her. Another example of sheer bias on your part.
There's no bias on my part. I just wanted you to acknowledge that Cena beat opponents put before him because he was told to do so, whereas Triple H has the power to determine who he'll face and what will happen. At least the story has been set straight.validreasoning! wrote:I do admit that we could have done without 3 title changes in one night, But i don't think it makes a blind bit of difference as Orton walked with it in the end anyway, but you're heavily fixated on his amount of reigns, that you almost make it your mission to be p*ssed off by HHH every time he has a match! I'm not trying to defend anything, fact of the matter is, HHH is being booked to win, i'm enjoying it, and you're the one doing all the complaining.
Few things to say here. If you admit we could have done without 3 title changes why are you being so hostile towards me for having that viewpoint? I'm focusing on the number of reigns because the title reign of Triple H was pretty much pointless unless of course there was a deeper significance to it (which there is - the quest he has to have the most title reigns which you yourself have acknowledged in the past). One last thing, I'm clearly not the one doing "all the complaining" as this thread, the 'All About the Game' thread, the article done on the Wrestling Observer, numerous fan forum comments, numerous podcasts etc. all show that.validreasoning! wrote:The title match WAS at the end of the show though!
Precisely which begs the question why was there a need to have one at the start of the evening in which HHH wins the belt? (11 ahem...)validreasoning! wrote:Not so much that i believe it, i actually couldn't give a rats ass!
You might not care about him beating the number of reigns but you HAVE acknowledged it before.validreasoning! wrote:Nothing that he didn't do previously at King Of The Ring in 97 long before he was boning the bosses daughter, NEXT!
But the reality is he holds substantial political influence now and so I repeat my question - have you nothing to say about him beating the monster heel clean having been through a match already?validreasoning! wrote:Yep, and i would do it again as they're just as guilty of doing the same. Only you won't acknowledge it because they're "ya boyz"
No idea what you're talking about. I just object to you calling me a "biased f*ck" because I have used insulting comemnts towards HHH when you yourself have done the exact same towards Taker and Cena. Less of the hypocrisy please.validreasoning! wrote:Wait, watch and learn, is all i'll say.
Unless he develops in-ring skills to surpass Shawn Michaels at this late stage of his career, it ain't happening.validreasoning! wrote:I'd actually like to take the time out to apologise for the "remove the head out of your ass comment", but your "remove the blinkers" comment was also unneccessary too. So when it comes to knocking you personally, you might consider practicing what you preach.
I appreciate the apology. I don't feel I have knocked you personally though. I wish you'd look at certain points rather than trying to deflect away from them by bringing up Ken Kennedy, KOTR '97, Cena etc.validreasoning! wrote:I do disagree here as it really seemed to me that WWE were desperate for filler for that PPV, and that six man tag was enough evidence for me.
Fair enough if that's your view but it leads me to wonder why you think HHH would be used as filler when he was already scheduled for a match with Umaga? Couldn't they find someone else? Maybe even someone from a different brand like Undertaker which was an idea mooted before? Why was HHH invovled in a WWE TITLE MATCH? (You know what I think )validreasoning! wrote:No i don't. Did Hogan look weak after losing to Rock at Mania X8? No he didn't. A Pinfall doesn't destroy careers like you're making them out.
You've gotta be kidding me? You're comparing HULK HOGAN (one of the most established wrestling stars ever) to Umaga? A guy who is still trying to become an established main event force? Come on, man.validreasoning! wrote:Plenty of KOTR winners won 3 times in one night, i really don't see your beef with that.
I've no problem with guys having 3 matches in one night. I do have a problem with a guy who holds significant political influence being involved in 3 WWE title matches in one night.validreasoning! wrote:I actually believe Umaga was thrown in there to weaken HHH (eventho he got the pinfall eventually) to make it look like Orton got the easy victory in the end. A typical heel title win! That way the feud with Umaga can continue so that they don't drag HHH v Orton from now til Mania!
Orton was hardly made to look like he got an easy win. HHH survived an RKO on a steel chair for crying out loud! Plus HHH almost beat him. And you brought Cena up earlier, when he went through the Elimination Chamber at NYR and then had to face Edge he lasted about 5 minutes and didn't look like winning. Then again he's not the Superman that HHH is!validreasoning! wrote:Up until last week no as i really didn't think nailing Londrick, Cade and Murdoch was that big a deal.
I was under the impression you regarded it as a squash but justified it on the grounds you didn't see them as future main eventers?validreasoning! wrote:Umaga certainly didn't deserve last weeks treatment, and i already acknowledged it. Didn't make him weak going into the PPV though, did it?
Well it did make him look weak as he didn't manage to make Triple H look vulnerable once at all!
To sum up, what i get from your post is the following...
- You think last night was not about adding another WWE title to HHH's record but merely due to the WWE "needing filler" - even though they had plenty of other options they could have gone with. Hmm.
- You don't think the monster heel Umaga has been left looking weak in his feud with HHH despite the fact he backtracked from HHH on Raw (which you acknowledged was a joke) and despite the fact he was pinned clean by the pedigree by HHH on the PPV (who had been in a match already on the show). Hmm.
- You don't think HHH has been selfish since his return despite the fact he's gone though Booker T, Lance Cade, Trevor Murdoch, Carlito, Paul London, Brian Kendrick, Umaga and also Randy Orton (which earned him his 11th WWE title).
I must say I disagree with you wholeheartedly. It's one thing to defend a guy you like (apprently you regard him as the best wrestler ever!) but your defence of him goes against almost all logic. Guess we'll have to agree to differ yet again...0 -
I ain't a trips hater (though he has got much more than he deserved over the years) but i will answer your questions.
1. How come Kennedy's non-selling of Londrick's offense hasn't been brought up yet?
didn't see the match but if he no sold then that lowers my estimation of him. Only the mighty Zeus could pull off the no sell to perfection
2. Will Triple H ever be allowed live without the constant criticism of the smarks out there?
no and rightly so. nobody in this life has the right to be free of criticism0 -
Lita Forever wrote:Okay, it might have. I don't think it would have pissed them off to the same degree that the DQ finish at Unforgiven did.
A decision i'm still annoyed with as i honestly believe that Cena held that belt at least five months too long.OR if you look at it another way, it has the opposite effect. It makes Orton look weaker as it looks like he needed HHH to be softened up by another man before he could beat him. You could also say that HHH only lost to Orton having been through two other matches previously..
Well thats where the sneaky heel comes into play, look at Honky Tonk Man's IC title reign. All the cheap finishes. And the amount of money it drew (Stacks! As people kept going to show after show to see him get his!)Wow, I can't believe I'm still posting in this thread. This is way deeper into a HHH debate then I wanted to get.
Better not listen to the up and coming podcast then, being recorded tonight. More on that later in the podcast thread /shill
VR!0 -
-
-
-
I'm gonna fly through this as theres some serious stuff i wanna clear up before heading out of work.Mr.Nice Guy wrote:One last thing, I'm clearly not the one doing "all the complaining" as this thread, the 'All About the Game' thread, the article done on the Wrestling Observer, numerous fan forum comments, numerous podcasts etc. all show that.
No, but you're the one who is the first to completely lose it here regarding HHH on every RAW and PPV. Check your posts.Precisely which begs the question why was there a need to have one at the start of the evening in which HHH wins the belt? (11 ahem...)
And you still can't let it go. And if i didn't know better, i'd swear you were in it for the windup!You might not care about him beating the number of reigns but you HAVE acknowledged it before.
Still not as often as you!But the reality is he holds substantial political influence now and so I repeat my question - have you nothing to say about him beating the monster heel clean having been through a match already?
Nothing Hogan didn't do countless times over the years, and he's considered a legend. What's so different here?No idea what you're talking about. I just object to you calling me a "biased f*ck" because I have used insulting comemnts towards HHH when you yourself have done the exact same towards Taker and Cena. Less of the hypocrisy please.
That was directed at a number of people here who have constantly bashed the crap out of HHH since his return. Not directly at you, if you took it that way, my apologies, but that most definitely not the case. As for hypocracy, take a look in the mirror regarding your feelings on Taker there. This could go around in circles.I appreciate the apology. I don't feel I have knocked you personally though. I wish you'd look at certain points rather than trying to deflect away from them by bringing up Ken Kennedy, KOTR '97, Cena etc.
I do look at them, and i do take them on board. But replying to you on certain things just goes around in circles. Kennedy and KOTR were valid points, regardless on if you can accept them or not. Personally i'm tired of one set of rules for everyone, and another set for HHH.Couldn't they find someone else? Maybe even someone from a different brand like Undertaker which was an idea mooted before? Why was HHH invovled in a WWE TITLE MATCH? (You know what I think )
I do not know why Taker wasn't thrown in there, unless they plan on giving him the other belt from Batista on SD. Personally i think that Cena being shelved at the 11th hour destroyed all plans for that show and there was a lack of damage control.You've gotta be kidding me? You're comparing HULK HOGAN (one of the most established wrestling stars ever) to Umaga? A guy who is still trying to become an established main event force? Come on, man.
Guess you misread there. I was comparing Hogan to HHH in regards monster killing.I've no problem with guys having 3 matches in one night. I do have a problem with a guy who holds significant political influence being involved in 3 WWE title matches in one night.
Eventhough we don't know that political influence was the basis behind it? For all we know, that was McMahon's bright idea!I must say I disagree with you wholeheartedly. It's one thing to defend a guy you like (apprently you regard him as the best wrestler ever!) but your defence of him goes against almost all logic. Guess we'll have to agree to differ yet again...
I had to skip through a load of this because 1) you probably know what i'm gonna say anyway and 2), i'm meant to be out of here 10 minutes ago!! I've no problem agreeing to differ. I don't regard HHH as the best ever, that accolade goes to Michaels in my eyes (ask Dre as in Dray!). I just appreciate what he's contributed to the business as well as given me the first enjoyable WWE PPV in months!
VR!0 -
Minto wrote:1) Do you or do you not agree that part of the reason for last night's events was to move Triple H a step closer to beating Flair's record of 16 world titles? If you disagree, please explain why.
No, I don't happen to agree, if Orton had simply been given the title, it would have made him seem like a weak champion. IMHO, he had to win it off someone. Believe it or not, he'll get a rub from winning it off Triple H as opposed to someone else. Triple H getting another step closer to Ric's record reigns as champ is pretty irrelevant in the scheme of things as far as I'm concerned. Making Orton seem a stronger champ was more the reasoning for it.
2) Do you or do you not agree that Umaga has been left looking ridiculously weak from his feud with Triple H? If you disagree please explain why.
IMHO, no! I don't think Umaga looks weak from his program with Hunter. I think if Umaga looks weak, it is because he is playing a cliched character that has been seen numerous times before in WWE. His feud with Triple H adds to his experience and its not like he will be champ in the foreseeable future, so having him lose to a man who WILL be champ soon, is just good business.
3) Do you or do you not agree that Triple H has been selfish since his return from injury? If you disagree please explain why.
I think he may be perceived as selfish, but I don't think he is being selfish. Since his injury, he hasn't been putting people over, but tbh, I don't really care.
Thanks for answering my points. What I'm getting from your answers is that...
- You justify Triple H winning the title on the grounds Orton being handed the title would have made him look weak. I'm in agreement that handing Orton the title would have been bad but I believe they should have simply announced HHH vs Orton in the last man standing main event and have HHH put Orton over. Wouldn't that have worked well? I do hate it when world titles are just handed over. I'm sure like me you hated when that happened in 2002 and HHH was made the new World Heavyweight Champion, right?
- You don't believe Umaga has been made to look weak despite never having the opportunity to inflcit damage on Hunter and despite losing clean to a guy who was in his 2nd match of the night. Can't agree at all. As for the feud with HHH "adding experience", what does that mean? The experience of working with a selfish dick?
- You don't think he is being selfish but then don't really care. I think you know full well he is being selfish but don't really care. Wouldn't that be more accurate, Minto?Minto wrote:Now, I have answered the 3 questions asked of me, would some of the HHHaters answer me a question or two?
1. How come Kennedy's non-selling of Londrick's offense hasn't been brought up yet?
2. Will Triple H ever be allowed live without the constant criticism of the smarks out there?
1. One wonders why Kennedy's non-selling of Londrick's offense would be brought up in a discussion about HHH misusing his political influence. As a red herring perhaps?
2. Triple H gets criticism for abusing his power. You don't seem to care about that which is your right but even you acknowledged that "he may be perceived as selfish" which leads me to believe you know he is selfish but since you're a fan of his you aren't bothered by it. Well those of us who aren't fans are bothered. Can you blame us?0 -
Advertisement
Advertisement