Quote:
Originally Posted by The CyNick
Someone said Trips put off losing to Goldberg at the big show (Summerslam), in favor of another show. My response was they did that with Rocky in 2000 and it didn't impact his success one bit. My point is if Goldberg was going to be able to hold an audience, him winning the belt 4 weeks later would not have made a difference. Goldberg fizzled out just like he did in WCW because his act is a short term act. There's no sustainability to his gimmick.
Regarding the losing. My point with Rollins was he can't just dominate every babyface within the first 6 months of his reign. This was in n reference to losing matches primarily to Cena. Hunter was in a different position. In his first year after winning the belt, he not only lost matches, but he lost the belt to unworthy opponents. In the end, he got over, because he's talented. In the 03-05 timeframe he's a different type of champion, but even still, he was booked similarly to Rollins in that he defended the title against the B players (Kane, Ambrose, Booker, RVD) but lost to the A players (Goldberg, Batista, etc and then in Rollins case it would have been losing to Reigns).
I get it, HHH is the devil in these parts. You need someone to point to and blame the shortcomings of your favourites on.
|
Christ. You said, above, Hunter lost the key matches. And you're wrong. He lost secondary matches after winning the big match hyped at the headline events. Stop beating around the bush. Everyone can see you wrote "key matches" and everyone knows the key matches happened at Summer Slam and Mania, not b shows.
You also pointed out that Hunter, supposedly, didn't go around dominating in his initial reign, which you were wrong about again. Hunter constantly got dq'd and was rarely pinned in his initial run, and two of those pins saw him being shafted and were far from clean.
You keep trying to change the subject but it's clear that because you're too lazy to fact check you're instead trying to pull info out of your ass and making false statements, only to back track and try and change direction of conversation.
Case in point, please point out something I've said blaming Hunter for beating a wrestler I like. Can you cite it? Or is it another one of your SpiNick tactics to distract others from calling you out on your forever changing stance.