Quote:
Originally Posted by Noid
Sigh, one last time:
* It shouldn't have been used for that reason. Triple H was the heel; Sting was the face. The WWE vs. WCW thing doesn't make sense. If you defend what happens without acknowledging what shouldn't have happened, then you're not seeing as big a picture as you think you are, chum.
* Triple H is forever strong. He's not losing to JTG on Superstars.
* The fans do see Sting on that level -- your own argument works against you. That's why people care so much that the WWE fucked it up.
* If your modern 8-year old WWE fan doesn't? You MAKE them. It's fucking storytelling.
|
So does that mean a heel can never beat a babyface in a big match?
Why would you invest an HHH loss for Sting, who at best would work 3-5 more matches in his career that are going to be throwaway matches. On the other hand you can use Sting, who has a name, create a special moment (Sting's Mania debut and the NWO v DX thing), sell the Monday Night Wars show on the Network, and keep HHH strong to eventually mean more when Rollins beats him?
It baffles me why people can't see the larger picture. I mean I know the reason. It's HHH, so you people think you have to hate anytime he goes over. It gets tiresome, but it is what it is