If Stephanie married a non-wrestler...

[Xero]

Let's say Stephanie got married to a movie executive (just an example, replace it whatever you want, as long as they aren't connected to wrestling). How different would things be today?

This is assuming that Stephanie and Hunter NEVER had a relationship off-air.

Would the booking be any different?

Would Hunter's career have been affected?

Would the "pecking order" in terms of stroke be different?

Would she have been as involved with the company as she has been?

Any other quandaries that could possibly come out of this hypothetical?

Discuss.

[Next Big Thing]

The biggest factor dictating Hunter's career path wasn't marrying Steph, it was Shawn being hurt and taking four years off. Otherwise I think he would always be HBK's shadow. For all you Hunter haters, I concede that he may get some company perks for being married to Steph, but that doesn't take away from how much better he is on the mic than 95% of the roster. It doesn't affect his ability to be a legitimate heel for one program (not this tweener bullshit) and then have the fans eating out of his hands as a face the next. The pop he got in MSG when he came back from his first quad injury wasn't because he was breaking Steph's back. He's good and the fact that he's married to Steph probably hurts his legacy because everyone discounts his achievements attributing it all to his marriage rather than his ability.

As far as Steph goes, I think that as soon as she became a tv character she was being groomed for some position in the family business, but I think being married to HHH gives her a little more incentive to be involved.

As far as booking, I don't think HHH would have held as many heavyweight titles, but he'd still be a top guy.

As an aside, wasn't the MSG return when he came back freakishly roided, or was he jacked before that?

[BigCrippyZ]

I think Hunter's performance from late 1999 through late 2000, early 2001, speaks for itself. The majority of which was prior to his off-screen relationship with Stephanie, if I'm not mistaken. He was an incredible heel throughout that time period and I think that proves the main event push he received during that time period was clearly earned, not to mention effective and a great decision overall.

I think his main event/world title run would have been just as deserved and still would've happened, however, his title runs may not have been as long or as frequent had he not been involved with Stephanie. I also think he wouldn't have had as much say in terms of who he works with and/or who should be getting pushes (Orton, Sheamus, etc) had he not been involved with Stephanie.

I still think that Stephanie would be involved in the business had she not been involved with HHH, but it may have been more limited, especially when it comes to writing/creative. I have a feeling she wouldn't have been nearly as involved with creative and would never have been made SVP of Creative had she not been involved with HHH or a main event wrestler.

[VSG]

Let's say Stephanie got married to a movie executive (just an example, replace it whatever you want, as long as they aren't connected to wrestling). How different would things be today?

WWE Films presents Legends of the Hidden Temple: NXT Style

[erickman]

he would be in the band right now with hall nash and pac doing last call vids

[DAMN iNATOR]

The one thing that can safely be said here is that without Hunter marrying Steph, he probably wouldn't have come anywhere near 13 World titles. But he'd definitely still be a part of the main-event scene.

[The Jayman]

The one thing that can safely be said here is that without Hunter marrying Steph, he probably wouldn't have come anywhere near 13 World titles. But he'd definitely still be a part of the main-event scene.

:y:

[CSL]

Triple H gets a load of shit for being married to a McMahon but the fact is, he's more dedicated, works harder and is more of a mark for the business than just about anybody. I doubt there'd have been much difference at all. Except maybe RVD and Booker T might have 1 or 2 more title reigns.

[Nark Order]

Triple H gets a load of shit for being married to a McMahon but the fact is, he's more dedicated, works harder and is more of a mark for the business than just about anybody. I doubt there'd have been much difference at all. Except maybe RVD and Booker T might have 1 or 2 more title reigns.

It's no so much that he just gets shit for talking to Steph, he gets shit for finding a way to be a huge kissass whenever possible. Before Steph, he positioned himself with the most powerful people in the company to make sure he had the best chance to get ahead. After The Kliq and Shawn were gone, he was in a great position with Vince to get the recognition he needed. Vince also trusted him enough to date his daughter, which Trips did. Whether he did it to get ahead is debatable but the results aren't really that debatable.

Even if you put those things aside though, after he was in a position of power he treated people like absolute shit until he got to the point where his spot was secured. He played backstage politics to get his way and to make sure he always looked good no matter who he had to face. Obviously after he was sure that his spot wasn't in jeopardy, he started complying and did pretty much anything that creative wanted him to do. He sure stepped on alot of faces on the way up though.

That's why people hate Triple H. It's not so much 1 event, it's ridiculous and devious behavior spanning across his entire career. I'm sure apart of it is jealousy because he played the perfect game he had to play to get to the top, but alot of it is disdain for how he accomplished it. And I'm sure being affiliated with Shawn back when Shawn was the bastard of the locker room doesn't help either.

[St. Jimmy]

Michael Bay.

[RiX1024]

it wont affect HHH's career much because he has paid his dues, done time and he'd be still in the main event scene but somebody else might take his place, plus he wont be winning multiple titles like he did, maybe Cena, Batista nor Orton won't be top stars.

In Stephanie's terms, she'll be phased out a tad depends on who she married. if it was someone who's involved with the business she'll have the same stroke as she has now. if it was someone outside the business idk what will happen.

[CSL]

It's no so much that he just gets shit for talking to Steph, he gets shit for finding a way to be a huge kissass whenever possible. Before Steph, he positioned himself with the most powerful people in the company to make sure he had the best chance to get ahead. After The Kliq and Shawn were gone, he was in a great position with Vince to get the recognition he needed. Vince also trusted him enough to date his daughter, which Trips did. Whether he did it to get ahead is debatable but the results aren't really that debatable.

Even if you put those things aside though, after he was in a position of power he treated people like absolute shit until he got to the point where his spot was secured. He played backstage politics to get his way and to make sure he always looked good no matter who he had to face. Obviously after he was sure that his spot wasn't in jeopardy, he started complying and did pretty much anything that creative wanted him to do. He sure stepped on alot of faces on the way up though.

That's why people hate Triple H. It's not so much 1 event, it's ridiculous and devious behavior spanning across his entire career. I'm sure apart of it is jealousy because he played the perfect game he had to play to get to the top, but alot of it is disdain for how he accomplished it. And I'm sure being affiliated with Shawn back when Shawn was the bastard of the locker room doesn't help either.


More power to him. He played the game and won. Sure, everybody would like there to be no 'politics' in wrestling but there always will be, whether its Triple H taking advantage of them, Hulk Hogan, Bruno Sammartino or Lou Thesz.

I've never understood why people who's only connection to the wrestling business is through their TV and computers have taken it so personally in the past. I doubt Booker T was complaining when his WrestleMania XIX cheque showed up (The only people worse than these folk are the guys actually in the wrestling industry that take it personally. It's the nature of the beast and they should know it, it runs through wrestling from the highest to the lowest points)

It's the very definition of 'It's not what you know, it's who you know'. Trips looked out for himself, put himself in a position to make the most amount of money for the longest amount of time. Kevin Nash is one of the worst politicians around yet people slurp on his balls because he cracks jokes and entertains in interviews.

I don't think he's going anywhere for at least the next 10 years and as monotonous as it might be at times, fair play to him. I doubt the 98% of WWE's fan base that wet themselves everytime he shows up and line Vince's pocket with that cash money are going to mind.

[Nark Order]

I'll agree there's a double standard as far as backstage politicians go. Undertaker and Nash are never really targeted by the IWC and they were horrible backstage politicians at one time.

And of course Triple H works his ass off but so do tons of guys that are never afforded the opportunities Trips was. Alls I'm saying is that he put himself in line for such opportunities by stepping on peoples faces. His work ethic is incredible and it seems that almost nobody loves the business more than this guy, but nobody likes "that guy" at work no matter what you do tbh. With that being said, "that guy" is usually the one that gets ahead. All depends on how you look at it I guess.

[Nicky Fives]

I think his career only would have slightly changed..... piss and moan all you want, but this guy lives wrestling..... his passion would have risen him to the top without Steph's help.....

[The Franchise]

No doubt that marrying Steph has helped HHH's career but his work in 2000 was some of the best in WWE history and he would have been the #1 heel regardless.

[The Show Off]

I've never understood why people who's only connection to the wrestling business is through their TV and computers have taken it so personally in the past. I doubt Booker T was complaining when his WrestleMania XIX cheque showed up (The only people worse than these folk are the guys actually in the wrestling industry that take it personally. It's the nature of the beast and they should know it, it runs through wrestling from the highest to the lowest points)


So I shouldn't care if a movie is dog shit as long as the actors get paid well?

[CSL]

An over-reaction and a retarded analogy at the same time. Outstanding work.

[Emperor Smeat]

It probably would have meant that Triple H couldn't just half-ass it as a wrestler, such as the early Brand Split era where RAW was horrible in terms of feuds and interest when he held a stranglehold on the main-event heel spot. Probably would have meant other heel wrestlers would have been pushed so less main event and title reign numbers.

Most of the "hate" towards him comes the vast amount of feuds and wrestlers he's had a hand in "squashing" in terms of important matches or personal backstage feelings. For example, when Jericho was coming back to the WWE supposedly Triple H joked about him not being able to be the savior or "save" anything.

Best case scenario would be something similar to Undertaker where he would provide the veteran leadership and huge respect in the locker room. Undertaker usually only gets pushed into the main-event when the WWE needs him to be champion against a rising heel star or to help boost interest in a feud.

[The Show Off]

An over-reaction and a retarded analogy at the same time. Outstanding work.

It's neither.

If you're not interested in my comment or you're not smart enough to reply to it then either say one of those two things or ignore me, don't be a snarky douchebag because I question one little comment of yours.

[CSL]

You can question me all you want, that's kind of the point of a forum. It doesn't make your analogy any smarter. How can you compare the career of a wrestler to a film and it's actors? You're trying to make an analysis by comparing an individual piece (the 'dog shit film') to a near-complete volume of work (Triple H's career) Which part is the dog shit film? The whole career? A certain angle? The WrestleMania XIX part that you quoted? A match? A certain period of time? An era? Your post was really nothing more than a shot at Triple H that you didn't put much thought into.

Even so it doesn't really matter since I'm pretty sure none of it can be described as 'dog shit', no matter how much you may dislike him. Hence 'overreaction'. Hence 'retarded analogy'.

[The Show Off]

You can question me all you want, that's kind of the point of a forum. It doesn't make your analogy any smarter. How can you compare the career of a wrestler to a film and it's actors? You're trying to make an analysis by comparing an individual piece (the 'dog shit film') to a near-complete volume of work (Triple H's career) Which part is the dog shit film? The whole career? A certain angle? The WrestleMania XIX part that you quoted? A match? A certain period of time? An era? Your post was really nothing more than a shot at Triple H that you didn't put much thought into.

Even so it doesn't really matter since I'm pretty sure none of it can be described as 'dog shit', no matter how much you may dislike him. Hence 'overreaction'. Hence 'retarded analogy'.

What I was refering to is the problem people have with Booker T losing the match to Triple H at Wrestlemania XIX. Most people believe that having Booker T lose that match was a terrible injustice to his career and to him as a wrestler (not in my opinion, but that opinion is certianly out there).

So what I meant was my analogy was...

Booker T being booked to lose the XIX match is like a dog shit film

People bitching about Booker T losing said match is like people complaining about a dog shit film.

You saying that since Booker T didn't complain about the money he recieved people shouldn't complain about the outcome of the match. This is like you saying that if an actor doesn't complain about his pay check on a bad movie people shouldn't complain that the movie is bad.

Perhaps the term "dog shit" was too strong, but my analogy is hardly "retarded."

Thank you though, I do appreciate that you took the time to explain yourself and that's not being sarcastic. I'm just trying to have a conversation not an argument.