TPWW Forums - View Single Post

**tucsonspeed6** · 02-27-2006, 05:21 PM

Despite the bad beginning of this thread, it could be a good one. Without creating a completely new thread, I'd like to address a new question in this one: In one of the headlines, Kurt Angle noted that he would have rather have had a one on one with Rey Mysterio instead of a triple threat match. It seems that Kurt feels that a 1 on 1 makes for a more memorable and epic-like match that seems more suitable for Wrestlemania. It raises two questions: 1) Can a gimmick match (and I think that a triple threat is hardly gimmicky compared to some of the stuff we see these days...) headline Wrestlemania and still be memorable, and 2) Is the main event of Wreslemania so sacred that a mildly gimmicky match could ruin the entire show?

The answer to 1 is undoubtedly yes. No offence to either Angle or Rey, but I've been there, seen that. No matter how they book it, the night before WM, I'll pull out Summerslam '04 (or was it '03?) and watch the match, then sit back, satisfied that I didn't waste my $35 on something I already saw. Besides, as history has shown, Just two years ago we saw WM headlined by a triple threat that I think may not have been the greatest match of all time by any measure, but was a strong candidate for match of the year, and for WM to be headlined by a MOTY candidate is kinda the point, is it not?

Which brings me to my second question: At what point did the main event of WM become untouchable. Sure, you could argue that Angle doesn't want to share the spotlight, or that he just wants to be remembered as the greatest, and a good reference he or his fans could use is a WM main event, but a match like a triple threat has its own strengths and weaknesses. It's my belief that a 3 way may not get the wrestlers over the way a well built feud might, but it does get the title over, and I think it does so better than a two man feud does. Besides, basing a storyline around a triple threat centers the story around the title (or at least it should by default). WWE hasn't been the best lately at building 2 man feuds. Sure, the ME of the most recent PPV isn't about running over Steph's poor puppy, but using cheap heat like Eddie G's name to build a hatred isn't exactly the right path either. Centering it around the title is a better way to build up the WM main event.

So in this case, I disagree with Kurt Angle. How about you guys?

02-27-2006, 05:21 PM	#7
tucsonspeed6 Banned WWE on 1/1/07 Posts: 2,141	Despite the bad beginning of this thread, it could be a good one. Without creating a completely new thread, I'd like to address a new question in this one: In one of the headlines, Kurt Angle noted that he would have rather have had a one on one with Rey Mysterio instead of a triple threat match. It seems that Kurt feels that a 1 on 1 makes for a more memorable and epic-like match that seems more suitable for Wrestlemania. It raises two questions: 1) Can a gimmick match (and I think that a triple threat is hardly gimmicky compared to some of the stuff we see these days...) headline Wrestlemania and still be memorable, and 2) Is the main event of Wreslemania so sacred that a mildly gimmicky match could ruin the entire show? The answer to 1 is undoubtedly yes. No offence to either Angle or Rey, but I've been there, seen that. No matter how they book it, the night before WM, I'll pull out Summerslam '04 (or was it '03?) and watch the match, then sit back, satisfied that I didn't waste my $35 on something I already saw. Besides, as history has shown, Just two years ago we saw WM headlined by a triple threat that I think may not have been the greatest match of all time by any measure, but was a strong candidate for match of the year, and for WM to be headlined by a MOTY candidate is kinda the point, is it not? Which brings me to my second question: At what point did the main event of WM become untouchable. Sure, you could argue that Angle doesn't want to share the spotlight, or that he just wants to be remembered as the greatest, and a good reference he or his fans could use is a WM main event, but a match like a triple threat has its own strengths and weaknesses. It's my belief that a 3 way may not get the wrestlers over the way a well built feud might, but it does get the title over, and I think it does so better than a two man feud does. Besides, basing a storyline around a triple threat centers the story around the title (or at least it should by default). WWE hasn't been the best lately at building 2 man feuds. Sure, the ME of the most recent PPV isn't about running over Steph's poor puppy, but using cheap heat like Eddie G's name to build a hatred isn't exactly the right path either. Centering it around the title is a better way to build up the WM main event. So in this case, I disagree with Kurt Angle. How about you guys?