Bret Hart had some pretty interesting words about Triple H, saying he's "never had a great match." So, let's put it to you, the commentariat:
1. How much credence do you give these statements by Hart, given he's on record as having a specific taste in what wrestling matches should be worked?
2. Buy or sell: Triple H has never had a great match.
3. If you were going to dispute the comments, which match or matches would you point to as evidence that Trips had at least one great match?
4. Buy or sell 2: Perceived politics are at the root of most of Triple H's criticisms in the ring, and thus unfairly cloud his match quality.
5. If you were Triple H, would these comments by Hart preclude you from working with him again?
1. How much credence do you give these statements by Hart, given he's on record as having a specific taste in what wrestling matches should be worked?
2. Buy or sell: Triple H has never had a great match.
3. If you were going to dispute the comments, which match or matches would you point to as evidence that Trips had at least one great match?
4. Buy or sell 2: Perceived politics are at the root of most of Triple H's criticisms in the ring, and thus unfairly cloud his match quality.
5. If you were Triple H, would these comments by Hart preclude you from working with him again?
1. I give them a fair amount of credence, because I agree with them (or some of them, at least.) He's "good enough" packaged as "great."
ReplyDelete2. Sell. Yeah, that's probably unfair.
3. Let me get back to you on that one. (I've never seen Trips/Taker from last year, and it's been a long time since I've seen a match during his prime.)
4. Cautionary sell. I'd be more inclined to believe that people don't like his matches because the E kept ramming him down our throats.
5. If Bret can get over Montreal and Owen enough to work with Vince, then Triple H can get over this.
1. While he is considered a technical genius, preferences in wrestling vary over different people, hench why people like hoss fights while other don't, personally I cannot stand ROH. I understand where he is coming from and I do say Triple H in ring is just a typical wrestler, but not everyone can be bret hart... you need the Triple H of the world to balance it out
ReplyDelete2. Of course he has had good matches
3. Any with Shawn Micheals, Undertaker twice, Jeff hardy, John Cena and his ladder match with the rock
4. Wasn't it Trips that thought of the idea to screw bret?
5. Money builds any bridge. but hart isn't worth a lot now. so yes.
1. I give his thoughts on wrestling and the business a lot of credence, but his personal preferences don't mean as much.
ReplyDelete2. Sell. That's ridiculous.
3. The first ones I thought of were pretty much his entire series with Foley (street fight, HIAC). Then there's that amazing Taka match, the Jericho screw job, HHH/Austin vs. The Chrises, a shockingly great chain match with Kane from that era, the WrestleMania three way with Michaels & Benoit, the SummerSlam street fight with Michaels, the Iron Man match with The Rock, the 3 Stages of Hell match with Austin...these are literally just off the top of my head. Ridiculous statement by Hart (which isn't so that that there isn't a whole lot of bad and overwrought crap on HHH's resume at the same time...).
4. Buy. He was great in his prime as a top heel. He has gotten worse with each injury and his prolonged presence at the top of the card when he stopped maturing as a character made him tired and cliched, but there were a couple of years there where he was incredible.
5. Not if there was money to be made working with Hart.
1. Bret Hart has a point when he says that Triple H is not an innovator. HHH is a power gamer that takes the best of what is available and throws it into the show.
ReplyDelete2. Sell.
3. I'd say Trips vs The Rock at Summerslam 1998 or Trips vs The Undertaker 2011.
4. They are not only perceived politics but obvious real politics that have given Triple H more than he would have got if he were not the son in law. But there are also other points that have to be criticised and that are the reason why Triple HHH is not among the greatest of all time. Lack of innovation is one point, boring and too long promos, lack of subtlety and lack of charisma are others.
5. If I were Triple H no, but I am not Triple H!
1. his comments are fair.
ReplyDelete2. hesitantly, buy. hhh has had a good number of good to very good matches, but nothing i'd really consider a classic, or that warrants re-watching.
4. sell. i given't the slightest whiff of shit about backstage nonsense. if i did, i wouldn't be as big a fan of punk as i am.
5. nope. there's nothing unfair or outright offensive about what he said. he went out of his way to stay respectful.
1.Not much. He didn't watch WWE when Triple H was at his very best during the McMahon-Helmsley era.
ReplyDelete2. Sell, sell, sell.
3. Triple H vs. Mick Foley, Triple H vs. Taka, Triple H vs. Undertaker 2 (not 1), Triple H vs. Shawn Michaels vs. Family Destroyer, Triple H vs. Austin 3 Levels of Hell, many more.
4. Sell.
5. Yes. Why would I want to employ someone who bad mouths me when the company already got every last penny out of him possible?
1. I think he has a point and I give him a fair amount of credence. But lets not act like Bret Hart is above being vindictive and petty. I think his comments would have at least been more circumspect if HHH wasn't the man who once said "we'll do business for him". And while we've all seen and heard about the reconciliation with Shawn and Vince over the last few years, I've heard very little about his relationship with HHH, the third in the Montreal conspiracy.
ReplyDelete2. I will buy this with a few caveats that I'll mention in the next question.
3. I think the Foley series is the obvious argument against this, but I think those matches are too much about Foley to give HHH much credit for them. The Austin/HHH vs Benoit/Jericho tag from Raw is another I'm tempted to throw in the great category, but again, its hard to judge how much credit to give HHH on that one. I'd also say that just generally, HHH's time as the super undisputed top guy was one I was not around too much for. So there could easily be some match I'm not aware of.
4. I think this has to be a buy to a certain extent. Its always been clear that HHH is a purebred locker room politicker and there's plenty of people that downgrade him just for that. But I think most of the criticism thrown at him seperates that aspect and looks at the on-screen product. Like Hart, I've always found HHH to be kind of blandly good in-ring. As a character and on the mic he's grated on my nerves for a long time because he is just the best and smartest and strongest at everything all the time or he's a juvenille goofball. Both of those get stale very quickly.
5. I don't feel like this story will get enough legs to make money off of it in any way, and I honestly can't see them working together on any other angles just because there's no crossover in their roles. HHH and Bret are both guys you wheel out once in a while for old guy prestige factor - little reason to use them together on something. As far as in-ring, Bret is hardline retired so thats a non-starter.
I don't think HHH will actually blacklist Hart or anything. Somehow I doubt it bothers him much and Hart is already in a pretty minimal role.
I'm pretty sure I could name a thousand wrestlers better than HHH without picking a single person who I considered a controversial pick.
ReplyDelete