Who has been the biggest beneficiary of revisionist history?

**Mr. Nerfect** · 05-24-2018, 09:33 AM

The Undertaker and Triple H are both two dudes who, because of their standing with the dominant company that most modern fans are familiar with, get their historical significance emboldened.

Okay, Taker was a big deal when he showed up. He apparently did draw well until they did that Yoko casket angle, and then he fucking stunk up the joint against useless big dudes, then didn't draw as champion. When you get to the Attitude era, he sucks, but Vince is desperate for talent, but he doesn't really work well with Austin or Rock. He gets fat and shit, gets hurt, comes back as the biker, sticks his fist in everyone's business and by that point he has tenure and is really revered by everyone in the business and it kind of confuses me. Also, I hate the streak and I think it is a reasonable hypothesis to suggest that it may have blocked off better routes for business.

Triple H didn't matter until 1999. He only drew with bigger stars and when he came back as a babyface people got sick of him real fast. His charisma is forced, and while he is really good, he's been pushed for so hard and so long for someone that has returned as little as he has.

Oh, and I like to throw out Vince Russo's names in these too. Because so many fans grew up with the Attitude era, and they kind of believe the narrative that Russo was the architect of it as opposed to a passenger on the train they take this apologetic stance and attribute the overall direction to him and it's a bit gross to me, because I really, really hate Russo, and think you can look at basically anything he has done on his own and instantly dispel any suggestion that he is a genius or that he could find his dick if he was strung up being threatened by Yamaguchi san.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

05-24-2018, 09:33 AM	#1
Mr. Nerfect Posts: 61,634	The Undertaker and Triple H are both two dudes who, because of their standing with the dominant company that most modern fans are familiar with, get their historical significance emboldened. Okay, Taker was a big deal when he showed up. He apparently did draw well until they did that Yoko casket angle, and then he fucking stunk up the joint against useless big dudes, then didn't draw as champion. When you get to the Attitude era, he sucks, but Vince is desperate for talent, but he doesn't really work well with Austin or Rock. He gets fat and shit, gets hurt, comes back as the biker, sticks his fist in everyone's business and by that point he has tenure and is really revered by everyone in the business and it kind of confuses me. Also, I hate the streak and I think it is a reasonable hypothesis to suggest that it may have blocked off better routes for business. Triple H didn't matter until 1999. He only drew with bigger stars and when he came back as a babyface people got sick of him real fast. His charisma is forced, and while he is really good, he's been pushed for so hard and so long for someone that has returned as little as he has. Oh, and I like to throw out Vince Russo's names in these too. Because so many fans grew up with the Attitude era, and they kind of believe the narrative that Russo was the architect of it as opposed to a passenger on the train they take this apologetic stance and attribute the overall direction to him and it's a bit gross to me, because I really, really hate Russo, and think you can look at basically anything he has done on his own and instantly dispel any suggestion that he is a genius or that he could find his dick if he was strung up being threatened by Yamaguchi san.