Quote:
Originally Posted by The CyNick
That may be how you see it, but if you actually watched how WWE built up the match leading up to Mania, there was a tie in with the Monday Night Wars and how Sting was the last hold out from WCW.
No doubt he picked the fight because of the abuse of power, but in the WWE Universe, Sting was there to v settle an old WCW vs WWE score. Hence why nWo were willing to put their differences aside to help Sting.
Within the realm of that storyline, HHH had to go over. And it's not even debatable in my mind.
|
Sting actually said "This isn't about WCW". Nice try.
Also, that storyline is dumb. Triple H vs. Sting does not need to about WWE vs. WCW in the first place. You don't bring in Sting to be WCW. You bring in Sting to be Sting.
And -- even if this was WWE vs. WCW -- the idea that you
always need to put over WWE is also incorrect. You don't
need to do that. Sometimes it actually helps to give he rub to the "invaders" or the new guys. The home team going over is one of those myths that a lot of people keep alive -- like long title reigns are automatically better than short title reigns.
I was listening to Kevin Sullivan talking about the WCW/New Japan program on his podcast, and the co-host, MSL, said "Obviously WCW had to go over, but..." and Sullivan actually revealed that he was more entertained by the idea of New Japan going over, because you could have build up a major Japanese star, kept the relationship with them strong, and at that point they were paying WCW $1,000,000 a year. Plus, it'd present WCW as
underdogs. That's a good way to get the people behind you.
WWE
own WCW. So there's not even proper logic behind protecting your own investments anymore. By dragging up WCW from the dead and kicking it back down, you are just shitting on your own intellectual property.