If they're so great, why haven't they had a good title reign in years?

[Dorkchop]

* Undertaker: If he's soooooooooooooo good, why hasn't he had a good title reign in years? I can't remember his last good title reign. I want to say during his American badass gimmick, but I don't remember him with a decent title reign.

* Shawn Michaels: He came back 3 years ago, won the title, then lost it a month later. It's been 3 years and no title reign. In these past 3 years he's been in some of WWE's best matches. He's been pretty much nothing but incredibly consistent in the ring.

It's just kind of odd because everyone seems to speak so highly of them.

One of my arguments is that the WWE is too set on trying to make another Austin or Rock. Which is stupid because you can't try and create another Austin... They just have to happen. A lot of the time they're not going with what's working. Christian got mad pops, but the WWE didn't go along with the audience.

[The Naitch]

Guys like Taker and HBK are used to put younger guys over mainly

[Innovator]

They don't need the title, they're already over

[What Would Kevin Do?]

They don't need the title, they're already over

Also, they always seem to be in the posistion where someone is trying to beat them to prove something. They are big enough where they are always defending themselves from newcomers trying to prove something. Think about this. If you removed the titles, what would be more impressive, a newcomer beating Batista and John Cena, or a newcomber beating the Undertaker and HBK?

[Funky Fly]

Besides, Taker is not nearly active enough to be a title holder. Frankly, I think he's spending time in cryogenic stasis in between appearances to fight aging and hide from mutant vampires from the planet Romulux.

[JH]

neither one of those guys do not have to be a champion to prove anything they have both already set their legacy and it will not be forgotten just like Flairs legacy
HBK does'nt have to be the champion to still be known as one of the greatest in ring performers of all time
Taker does'nt have to be champion because he's Taker and the fans will never forget what he has done and how damn over he has always been no matter if he was heel or face

[Nowhere Man]

That, and if the old guys are the ones with the belt, the newer guys will never get a chance to shine on top (see: WCW)

[Savio]

Cuz HHH needs to put the title on people.

[Londoner]

If one of those guys have the title for a long period of time, then it would seem as though the current roster isn't that good, and also, they don't really need the title.

[JTB31]

I read somewhere that HBK doesn't want another title reign which could be a reason why they haven't put the title back on him.

[Londoner]

Why doesn't he want another title reign?For the good of the business or he just doesn't want one because of the pressure involved?

[Killjoy3:16]

Let's talk about Angle. Now, there is a guy who needs another title run.:yes:

[UmbrellaCorporation]

Besides, Taker is not nearly active enough to be a title holder. Frankly, I think he's spending time in cryogenic stasis in between appearances to fight aging and hide from mutant vampires from the planet Romulux.


Oh, that's right, you didn't get that surgery, did you? Only one other person has the Easy-Flow Elbow. You might have heard of him. BRUCE WILLIS.

[Chavo Classic]

Let's talk about Angle. Now, there is a guy who needs another title run.:yes:


I don't think he needs the title. He's solidified himself as the top heel in the company and is constatly putting over Cena as a better and better face every time as a result.

Maybe another title run out of respect before his inevitable retirement, but I can imagine neither Angle nor the WWE feel the need to put the strap on him just yet with Cena doing such a good job as champion (and I meant in more general terms - i.e. bringing in the marks and their money, so save your 'Cena can't wrestle' crap for another thread)

[mrslackalack]

You have to make new guys champion. It gets stale when the same guys get the belt over and over. Just as mentioned before WCW. Thats why in 92 Vince wanted to put the belt on new faces like Bret instead of guys like Hogan and Savage.

[Kane Knight]

Taker isn't good and shouldn't be near the belt.

Michaels has proven his worth and doesn't need the belt.

[Favre4Ever]

A heel Shawn Michaels run would be great, and I think it would make for great tv and mabye even give a ratings increase. The answer to the question is obviously that Michaels and the Undertaker have already established a legacy, and are now helping build the legacys of other guys.

I think that Michaels could still hold the ball for the company, but I don't think a face Shawn could do it.

Another thing, Michaels and Angle are on such a different level from almost all of the other talent. If anyone can carry the company, its them. They just need a chance.

[Ben Rodrigues]

Didn't Michaels say on Byte This a while back that he didn't want another run with the World Title because of the schedual and pressure?

[Volare]

[QUOTE=hulkamania320]Another thing, Michaels and Angle are on such a different level from almost all of the other talent. If anyone can carry the company, its them. They just need a chance.[/QUOTE

the only time they might get a chance is if there is a diecent story-line to go with the title victories and the only one who has it is angle (thanks to davari, and by the way i forget did he keep the same theme music?)

[Londoner]

Yes Volare-he did keep the same thing music.

[Volare]

THANK YOU GOD!!!!!! brings back the good ol' days