[Heyman]

Originally Posted by The CyNick Okay, but then Eddie, JBL, Cena and Booker T are all in higher spots because they've been on SD. It has nothing to do with anyone on SD, it just has to do with the fact they recieved bigger pusshes.

Can you really say that though? Eddie Guerrero won the WWE title, but was then made to look like a "fluke" champion. His victories over Lesnar and Angle initially, weren't clean. Guerrero then jobbed the title to JBL. Angle then convincingly defeated Guerrero at Summerslam. Now? Guerrero's been jobbing to Mysterio?

Atleast with a guy like Benoit, he had some clean victories over top quality opponents.

Guerrero's in a higher spot than he used to be, but don't you think he was booked poorly?......to the point where he lost major credibility as champ?


Booker T isn't any better off on Smackdown as he was on RAW. He's still a mid-carder for the most part.

JBL has a new gimmick and has been pushed, but

a) His WWE title win was way out of left field....which made the fans raise their collective eyebrows more than anything.

b) He still has no clean wins over credible opponents.


JBL is "higher up" on SD than he was on RAW, but has he gained much credibility?

Same thing with the guys you mentioned from RAW. The fact that they are in higher positions, has little to do with HHH, it just has to do with the fact that they were pushed.

Maybe. Maybe not. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this. The way I see it however, Batista and Orton benefitted IMMENSELY from their associations with Triple H. Without Evolution (lead by Triple H), I'm not so sure if Orton/Batista would be 'over' as they are now.

And none of those guys do numbers, so obviously getting a "rub" from HHH means nothing.

That's what I strongly disagree with. Back in 96', ratings for the WWE were pitiful. Eventually however - the WWE creative team came up with Austin 3:16.

Austin jobbed to Bret Hart at WM-13, but it still contributed to Austin's growing popularity.

Maybe I'm wrong here, but wouldn't that be like saying, "Bret Hart wasn't bringing in numbers and so a "rub" from Bret means nothing."

Especially when HHH is a terrible draw himself. So there's nothing backing up what you're saying. You just seem to be drinking the HHH kool-aid that he's the "best in the business" and beating him actually means something, when there's no evidence to proves thats the case.

I still think that guys like Benjamin, Benoit, Orton, and Batista would count as evidence (to a certain degree), but oh well. We'll agree to disagree. Either way - I still highly respect your opinions.