Thread: Are they setting up Smackdown vs Raw?
View Single Post
Old 02-02-2005, 09:20 PM   #9
Heyman
Father of Hinduship
 
Heyman's Avatar
 
Posts: 21,083
Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)Heyman makes a lot of good posts (200,000+)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loose Cannon
Yea, I loved it when the Undisputed Champ appeared on both shows. That was gold and I still don't understand why they had to make another Title. Well I do understand why, because HHH wanted to be a champion. I would definately go back to the one champ, one title thing.

I don't understand the WWE's logic in getting rid of that as well.

Back in 2002 (Summerslam) when Lesnar won the title from The Rock.....man oh MAN he would've been way the fuck 'over' IMO.


If Lesnar had stayed heel, and been undisputed champ..........I seriously believe that there would've been another wrestling boom.....and ratings would have shot back up.

Hate Triple H all you want for dominating RAW after that, but it's purely MANAGEMENT's fault (and Snitsky's of course ). Triple H did what almost any one of us would've done in that position.
Heyman is offline   Reply With Quote