Want more wrestling news, rumors, and results? Be sure to visit PWInsider.com and PWInsiderXtra.com.
The Cynical View
Triple H vs. Cena 2.………
Is this crap really going to headline Wrestlemania?
By Michael Campbell
Cena vs. Helmsley. “The Game†vs. err… “the Thugâ€ÂÂ. “The King of Kings vs. “The Chain Gang Soldierâ€ÂÂ. Triple H versus John Cena…. Part II.
Is this what you want to see at Wrestlemania? Is this the rematch of the year? Is this a bout so unmiss-able, so appealing, that it deserves to take place at Wrestlemania?
I think not.
Welcome back to the Cynical View, and following a well-earned holiday, I’m as troubled as ever. See, prior to the Royal Rumble, I was pretty damn optimistic, looking forward to the events of the immediate future. The main source of this optimism was of course, Wrestlemania 24, which at this tender young stage, already had me salivating. Prior to the annual battle royal, the future couldn’t have been brighter. Jeff Hardy, the fastest rising, most popular young star within the company, was challenging for the WWE title. Although unlikely he would win, it was at least not a certainty, an at best, a platform to catapult him into the main event spot of Wrestlemania, in a rematch. The Rumble seemed, to some, extremely open, with several candidates emerging… Undertaker, Triple H, Shawn Michaels, Batista, Big Show, Mr Kennedy, and as real outside shots, CM Punk, or Shelton Benjamin. Of course, anyone who was backing Shelton or Punk was deluding themselves, and The Big Show was more likely, if he returned, to be an obstacle set up for the eventual winner. Michaels seems likely to be heading for a showdown with Ric Flair at Mania, which ruled him out, while Kennedy is perhaps not someone in serious consideration for a Mania top spot this year. Cynics saw it as boiling down to either The Undertaker or Triple H. I felt these two, and Batista were the only true possibilities, with Dave winning, being a precursor to him jumping to Raw to take down Orton. But something happened. Vince McMahon’s predictable, robotic, enormous company served us, all of us, with the unthinkable surprise of John Cena.
Thus, Number Thirty to enter into the match, was the former WWE Champion, who entered and clashed in an “epic†finale with Triple H, the only other possible winner left, and actually beat him. This caused a rupture in the series of events everyone predicted, and has perhaps caused irreparable damage. While the kids cheered, it’s a piece of booking that has infuriated many, and worse, left an unfeasibly dull outlook as we peer towards Mania.
Yes, the arena came unstuck for Mr Cena’s surprise entry, and just as much for the face-off between him and Mr Connecticut. However, the element of surprise itself cannot be underestimated when considering that pop that he received. Additionally, lest not forget that he was also booed increasingly as the action transpired. What was gained from this? Not much, considering those fans who hated Cena six months ago still hate him, a situation that could have been avoided had the WWE waited a more appropriate time before re-introducing him. So Cena returned, and was immediately placed into a main-event scenario. This served to only increase hatred for the Boston native, from those sectors who already disliked the guy, as he’d literally just waltzed back into the main event scene. In kayfabe terms, he also looked weak as hell. The last guy to enter? Come on.. Whilst being the last person should ensure you an important role in the finish of the Rumble, it’s not the most heroic of victories for someone who wobbles along the line of popularity the way Cena does.
Rubbishing the Royal Rumble concept, the WWE then booked John Cena vs. Randy Orton for No Way Out, not Wrestlemania, which for most people, is a set-up to have Triple H take Orton’s spot in the Mania title picture.
Of course, none of this is certain. It is possible that we will still see Jeff Hardy (who I strongly believe should headline the Raw main event, against Orton, even if it is a gimmick match). But I doubt it. What’s more likely a scenario, is the thought of Trips, Orton, and Cena locking up in a triple threat. That’s not terrible, but not an ideal situation.
Wrestlemania used to be about a bitter war between two foes with a common goal. It encapsulated the entire, basic concept of pro-wrestling within one unmisseable match. Ignoring the first couple of Mania’s, which revolved around the novel scale of the product, and were sold for the overall value, this format can be traced back to the third annual supershow, and Andre/Hogan. This was a stonking show, and while the featured bout was little more than window-dressing, with the likes of Steamboat/Savage/The Bulldogs/Hart Foundation providing the actual substance, there’s no doubt about who brought the huge purse in here. Mania 4 was less successful, and there may be some merit to Hulk Hogan’s theory that the reason for this was the deriving from the formula, in favor of a vague, exhausting tournament concept. Hence, Macho Man’s title win in the tourney, only pulled about two-thirds of the audience who tuned in the previous year. However, the sheer scale of Mania three’s success is ridiculous, and as all following shows dropped waaay, waaay from the numbers that one achieved, it should be taken with a pinch of salt. Luckily for Savage, who wasn’t at fault, he had another opportunity, twelve months later, to prove his worth, which he did, in a fantastic encounter with foe Hogan. Not drawing as big again, this one, is nonetheless regarded as a total success, and a key landmark in terms of modern pro-wrestling storytelling. The two clashed following a superb, pitch-perfect rivalry, that is a template now for Partners splitting.
The Sixth Wrestlemania wisely stuck to the standard of having your two biggest stars in the top slot, this time being Warrior and Hogan, while the next two stumbled somewhat economically and artistically, thanks largely to Hogan’s staleness, and indecisiveness over who fitted in where. Many, myself included, feel the big match at 8 clearly should have been Ric Flair vs. Hulk Hogan. The next two Mania’s then dropped off further, but were part of an overall slump in business. 1995,96, and 97 saw Mania pull it’s three worst buy-rates in history, though it should be noticed that the worst was the latter, headlined by Undertaker/Sid. This is noteworthy because whereas the other two where in slump periods generally, they still pulled over twice as much as most of their other shows through each year. Taker/Sid didn’t, drawing about 300,000 buys, a horrible number for a Wrestle mania (compare this to last year- No Mercy for example pulled 270,00, while Mania pulled a massive 1.2 million). For me, a large part of this had to be the feeling of unimportance surrounding the main attraction, a thrown together title match that was clearly a vehicle to get the World title on the Undertaker. In other words, a means to an end… something Wrestlemania should never be treated as.
Since then, the WWE has been largely successful (sometimes enormously so… last year’s being the prime example), and more to the point, has done extremely well in promoting the title matches. 1998 saw the rise of Steve Austin. The following year, he reclaimed his crown, in a rare case where a baby face was hot enough to maintain almost exactly the same spot in two successive Mania’s, in the post-Hogan era. At the time, there was supposed controversy, as certain backstage figures were pulling for a triple threat, which Shawn Michaels rightly surmised as slighting tarnishing the significance of the main event. Ironic, isn’t it? 2000 cheated fans out of such a result, and diluted it’s impact, by featuring a convoluted four-way match. For this discussion, what’s notable, is that the catalyst for almost all the storylines in the main event was Triple H (current champion, took the title from the Big Show, retired Mick Foley, was married to Vince’s daughter, was feuding in a white-hot rivalry with The Rock), and they managed a bigger buy-rate than any Pay Per View headlined by Stone Cold. So while it isn’t remembered fondly in terms of content, it did appeal enough to folks heading in, largely due to the Rock/HHH feud.
WWE again went back to basics the following year, though in general, numbers had started to fall. They stuck with this in 2002, except they showcased the wrong match in the top spot, Triple H versus Chris Jericho. In this case, Triple H, the babyface, was probably lucky to have Rock against Hulk Hogan underneath him, to support what emerged as an average financial success. But would his title challenge have encouraged as substantial buyrate alone?
Trips again had a premium spot the following year, though he used it to butcher Booker T’s WWE career. It wasn’t however, a featured headliner, on a card that confused some with it’s array of great encounters on paper, topped by a horribly unappealing clash between Hulk Hogan and Vince McMahon. The card bombed in Wrestlemania terms. However, artistically, it was a wonderful Pay per view.
Wrestlemania XX did considerably better, but featured what felt like a team-effort, rather than a single, unmisseable epic, and still didn’t drive numbers back up to the level of 2001. The WWE did achieve this however, with Wrestlemania 21, headlined by Triple H against Batista, in a show that drew enormously well, and actually topped the following year, with Cena versus HHH as the main. Yep, Cena/HHH. Meanwhile, last years show, broke records, but did so mainly thanks to the mainstream buzz generated media-wise, for the Donald Trump, Vince McMahon storyline. Cena was again in the main event, though he has certainly the rich tycoons to thank for a substantial (if not the majority) of the draw.
Looking back at these, one guy has been a recurring presence over the past 8 years- Triple H. But how successful were his Mania contributions?
In his first top spot, Hunter outdrew Steve Austin, but he did so, with the premise being that he would lose the title, probably to the Rock, the new number one star. This is not a knock on HHH though- he was the perfect villain to enter into this, but his role was to attract people to seeing him defeated. Quality wise, the match was largely average, and overlong, but it did feature a stunningly shocking ending, which if nothing else, was at least memorable.
In 2001, Hunter was positioned against The Undertaker, in a much better encounter, as part of a show, where the top match was the clear draw, although the under card did exceed all expectations, and is now regarded as one of the finest WWE shows in history.
2002 is a blot on Triple H’s CV, as he takes a large part of the blame for his damp squib of a feud with Chris Jericho. While the WWE never promoted Y2J as a strong enough champ to be in this position, he did much better prior to the conflict with Triple H. The Game jettisoned some of the aspects of their story that could have made it more attractive, siding with Stephanie McMahon in favoring the crap Soap opera antics that turned off viewers. The PPV fared disappointedly, but was part of a downward trend in the business. However, its buyrate has got to be attributed to the first ever encounter between the Rock and Hulk Hogan. The Game and Jericho’s’ match may have had value, but that was erased once it went on after Hogan/Rock- the real main event, and in any case, wasn’t what was selling the tickets. The silence that Triple H was greeted with throughout his (very good) bout, was proof enough of this. The Positioning of the card by the way, was entirely Hunter’s fault, as he talked Vince into placing this title match last.
In 2003, Hunter dominated Raw, and looked set to drop the belt to on-fire Booker T. It was a match that viewers looked forward to, as many tired of Hunter’s run on top. Alas it wasn’t to be, and HHH’s reputation took a serious hit amongst critics and observers. Luckily for him, although the show was a financial failure, and his match outraged many, the show wasn’t built around it, which protected HHH for future Mania main events. The show was instead built around Vince McMahon, versus Hulk Hogan, a rivalry that resulted in a fine piece of entertainment, but perhaps the sight of two dinosaurs convinced casual fans to reconsider.
Wrestlemania XX saw slight improvement, again offering a mixture of different top-liners (Goldberg/Lesnar, Eddie Guerrero/Angle. HHH/HBK/Benoit), in favor of one standout, epic draw. Hunter’s position as Raw champion may have actually hurt the buyrate, as although most were overjoyed by Benoit’s astounding victory (in a thrilling main event), heading into the match, many fans felt that the inclusion of Shawn Michaels in the bout, making it a three-way, either cheapened the importance of the title chase, or offered an out from Hunter having to do the job (Benoit pinning Shawn Michaels was the smart option), or both. But to HHH’s credit, he did a wonderful job of putting the tragic Canadian over, both here, and over the following months.
Hunter’s biggest Mania success must surely be his mega-draw with Batista in 2005. Yes, John Cena made his first headliner stamp, in the Smackdown title match with JBL. But it clearly was not the “real†main course, and was neither booked, or promoted as such. I would argue that the overall card, as has become increasingly noticeable in recent years, drew the bulk of the money, but there’s no disputing that the expertly promoted Batista/Hunter top-liner, was an essential component of this. But as with his other financial success at the years’ biggest show, WM 16, HHH was again in the role of the defending champion, and fans were paying to see him lose. Complicating this, is the fact that at WM 22, Hunter faced Cena, as a heel challenger who was actually cheered by the majority of the audience. But this effort didn’t quite have the interest of the year previous, or the year that followed. It was also undermined, in the build-up, when HHH claimed because Cena was an average wrestler (which Cena admitted to… duh!), that it would be a walk in the park for him! What a way to promote a fight, eh?
Last year has to be considered as something of an anomaly though, based on the unprecedented media coverage that is uncharacteristic of even Wrestlemania. Interestingly, the biggest PPV in absolutely years, achieved such success, despite not featuring Triple H, in any capacity whatsoever. 21 is a different matter. It showcased Hunter in a role in which he excelled, as a dominant, manipulative, long-term heel champion, that people were dying to see defeated. He cannot take that role this year. In order to be in the main event, if he is, against Cena, he could either turn heel prior to then, and literally repeat the tired formula from two years ago, or he could work a baby face versus baby face effort. For me, this is an unfortunate, boring, and most worryingly, unappealing prospect.
Hunter just doesn’t draw the causal fans interest as a baby face. He is unsympathetic, and like the Undertaker, is overly familiar. He’s been around for so long, at the top of the card, that it’s hard to utilize him to wind in new, viewers. This awkwardness is compounded by just how unlikable John Cena is. Intriguingly, Hunter has rarely, If ever headlined a Pay Per View, as a baby face. In fact, in his entire career, including the nine years he has been in and around the main event, he has only done so Seven times.
The first of these, was a Rumble match, in 2002, which enjoyed enormous success, and can be attributed directly to Helmsley. While the Rumble always pops an increase audience, this one did so more than usual, and was built almost entirely around HHH’s return to action after 8 months out injured. We've already mentioned the disappointment of WM 18, and have to discount the impressive No Mercy 2007 figures, as the HHH matches were not advertised ahead of time. That leaves Vengeance 2007, which did well because Hunter was involved in a gimmicky Degeneration X reunion with Shawn Michaels, though not as well as the previous year, Backlash 2006, in which HHH was in the midst of a baby face turn, and was the clear focal point of the top bout. The show pulled a horrible buyrate, that is atypical of the event, which often capitalizes on following Mania.
The last two are Hunter’s 2002 bouts with Undertaker (at King of the Ring), and Hogan (a first-time, “dream†match, at Backlash). They were the two lowest rated pay-per-views of the first half of the year, and only Unforgiven, and No Mercy did worse. Worse, Backlash was then, the lowest rated in the event’s history, and King of the Ring, the least successful since 1997. Ironically, two years prior, both shows drew their biggest ever buy-rates, with Hunter on top -as a heel. Even more ironically, Vengeance, which followed king of the ring, saw Hunter, the baby face, unable to wrestle, and the buy rate was higher, as it also was for Judgment Day, which Helmsley also didn’t headline. Interesting stats, that generally indicate that while Hunter doesn’t bomb as a good guy- he doesn’t pull in anyone new either.
Now, I don’t especially wish to bash Cena. He’s a fine performer, in my opinion, and has improved immeasurably in many aspects of his work. Despite this, his characters is still phony, unbelievable, and unsympathetic. Placing him against Hunter works against him, because Hunter is almost certain to be cheered, even though Cena is the long term star, who will be expected to remain on top for years to come. However, even though HHH would be the sentimental favorite in person, it still doesn’t mean a damn, when it comes to whether or not the WWE will be able to pull those extra Mania figures, on the back of whether he will win the strap.
I’ve tried to defend Cena in recent times, and I still feel that he deserves better than the stick he gets from a lot of fans. However, following the Royal Rumble, I talked with several people in work about the event.
Every single one of them was disgusted by the outcome.
One, is a long-term, reasonably smart fan, who turned off during Cena’s run on top, and hasn’t tuned back in. The Cena Rumble win pretty much guaranteed that status quo will be maintained.
Another has watched it without fail for years, but dislikes Cena, and still enjoys the work of Austin, DX, Rock, Foley, etc…
Similarly, another guy, who watches it, pretty much regardless, doesn’t like Cena at all, but does like the typical casual fan favorites- Austin, Rock, Taker, Foley, DX, and to a lesser extent, Chris Jericho.
Everyone else, said pretty much the same thing. Not one had anything positive to offer about Cena’s return.
Now, obviously, I’m not suggesting this is proof of anything, or an accurate assessment of all fans, but it is worrying. Your talking about a bunch of guys that love the WWE, but don’t find it’s main, big star, appealing . A large portion of Cena’s defense is that he appeals to casual fans. But clearly, in my opinion- he doesn’t. Instead, he appeals to kids. And that is the difference between Cena and all those attitude era stars, and it looks likely to stay that way, unless changes are made. Stone Cold was loved by everyone, The Rock was a massive crossover star, Foley was loved and respected by older fans, but was goofy enough that young ‘uns backed him. Kids loved DX and Taker, and smart fans have generally always rolled with either, providing they’re booked interestingly and originally enough.
For the record, all of my serious, wrestling loving buddies were even more pissed off than I was, at the thought of Cena headlining Mania. Therefore, who’s left to cheer him- just the kids? Well, there goes the casual attitude era fans. And that for me, is a problem, because those fans don’t want to back Trips either, because he’s stale the moment the belt is strapped around his waist.
And really, in the era of the overall product, the entire card being more of a draw than ever, when Hunter/Cena was a lesser success the first time around, than other options, even with this aid- is there really scope for a rematch worthy of being the top match in the biggest show of the year?
It used to be an epic conclusion to the year, and a starting point for the one ahead. But Hunter versus Cena is not an piece to achieve either of those.
That’s it for now. Thanks for reading this nonsense. I hope it was at least as entertaining as a Mark Henry match, and more through-provoking than a Honky Tonk shoot. If you have any comments/questions/queries/or anything to say, get in touch at bazilalfonso@hotmail.com, whether you agree/disagree/hate me, or whatever if may be, I welcome all correspondence. Thanks again
