Re: Official DVD/Match/Show Discussion Thread
Which title reign do you guys think was more pointless, Triple H's WWE Championship reign in 2008 or Undertaker's WHC reign in 2009?
I didn't know why either guy won the championship, I know their Veterans but Triple H at the time already won over 10 world championships. He sure as hell didn't need another one. Taker didn't really need the title aswell, He already proclaimed himself as a solidified legend and has an unmatched wining streak at WM which might i add is more valuable than any title. It would have been beneficial if they had allowed a younger talent secure a title reign.
Bonus Question: Which was your favorite Undertaker and Triple H World title reign?
Taker - His 2002 reign as the ABA is my personal favorite. The promos, interviews, feuds and the matches were all awesome and the reign was of decent length too.
Triple H - The WHC reign in 2003 - 2004 was probably his best considering he had Evolution as his stable and was a bonified heel who was booed by all and attracted major heat.