Wrestling Forum banner

Final Battle: WRWD Championship - The Lady Killer vs. Super Delfin

854 views 3 replies 3 participants last post by  The Lady Killer 
#1 ·
Michaels/Taker not main eventing WM25 - good move?

Deadline to hand in your debate will be Sunday May 10th. Failure to show will result in an automatic disqualification. As previously mentioned, your debates are to be posted in this thread only.

You have the option to choose your own side of the topic so you may debate the same side without consequence.

Good luck.
 
#2 · (Edited)
Admittedly, I have not watched Wrestlemania. However, this should not disqualify any opinion on this matter, as the outlook being presented encompasses nothing to do with match quality or the angles built around the contests. It deals merely with the reality (what I believe it to be) of pro wrestling television, pay per view and otherwise. Simply put, it does not particularly matter what match headlined, therefore Undertaker vs. HBK did not need to main event the evening. So it wasn't a good move, it wasn't a bad move, in fact it was basically inconsequential.

Again, since I did not see the majority of the evening’s card myself, what can I do but go off the general consensus? Therefore, I have no problem believing Undertaker vs. HBK was a fantastic bout from all I’ve heard. What some seemed to call an early MOTY candidate. On the other hand, Triple H and Orton at the top of the card was largely said to have bombed according to most viewers. And I think this is where things get a little cloudy.

You see, hindsight being 20/20, yeah you probably want what might be called a Wrestlemania classic at the top of the card. Did WWE go into their biggest show of the year planning on their main event being a let down? They certainly didn’t want to disappoint all the people who shelled out to money to watch. I’m pretty sure they believed they built up that match well, and wanted a title showdown in the main. Well, that and the other title match ahead of Taker/HBK too. And it was a totally understandable move from that perspective. If this isn’t what most people wanted, I don’t think it would be the first time Vince didn’t see that. But life goes on all the same.

Yet, there is more to why it doesn’t matter. Undertaker’s big Wrestlemania streak was on the line…yet again. I’m guessing that was central to the build of the match (again, I really don’t watch all that much now so stick with me). And he didn’t lose at Wrestlemania…yet again. So I’m not seeing why simply being a very good match makes it deserving of being a sure main event instantly. Sure, both men have been there before. Both guys are highly capable. And it clicked that night. It just wasn’t the last match on the show.

But the fans still got to see it. If they were basing their PPV order on that match alone, they still saw it, and it was still apparently very good. Just because the two other title matches weren’t as good, isn’t reason enough to justify this being the Wrestlemania main event over them. And I would have argued the same for the title matches had HBK Undertaker headlined.

In summary, it doesn’t make a difference in my eyes. The fans still saw the matches they paid to see, it was a very good performance by both whether it was the first match on the card or the last, and I think the overall impression of the show as far as it’s legacy remains largely the same. Regardless of what match was at top.
 
#4 · (Edited)
First things first, we should address a few points of interest surrounding the widely-acclaimed match between The Undertaker and "The Heartbreak Kid" Shawn Michaels from Wrestlemania 25. Was it a fantastic match? Certainly. Did it live up to the hype? Yes, and then some. Should it have main-evented the company's biggest event of the year? Definitely not.

This topic is tricky because of the notion of point of view - perception is key in addressing the question of whether or not HBK/Taker should have headlined the 25th anniversary of WWE's biggest annual PPV. From a fan's perspective, be it a casual or internet fan, the best match should close the show. HBK/Taker was without a doubt the match of the night (if not the match of the year), and the crowd in attendance made it obvious. They were at their loudest during that match, and definitely quieted down once it was over. After witnessing what many believe was a near-5 snowflake match, how could anyone possibly have anything left in the tank as far as being emotionally involved in a match? I know when I was watching the event live, everything that happened after HBK/Taker seemed anticlimactic - a bonus that almost detracted from the event because it attempted to follow a professional wrestling masterpiece. How could you possibly top two of the industry's all-time greats giving it 110% on the grandest stage of them all? You can't. In that respect, from a fan's perspective, perhaps that match should've been placed last on the card.

However, there is the other point of view that almost always takes precedent in the world of professional wrestling - the business perspective. Vince has and will always do what's right for business. That being said, why would he place higher emphasis on HBK/Taker than the WWE title match? The WWE title is regarded as the biggest prize in the business, and therefore should be the headlining attraction at the biggest show in the business, regardless of whether it will be the best match of the night. Given the track record of Wrestlemania, a title match nearly always main events the show, yet a match on the undercard may steal the MOTN title. Let's look at Wrestlemania 21 - HBK/Angle is often regarded as MOTN even though it was stuck on the undercard, whereas the two title matches - Cena/JBL and HHH/Batista were borderline dreadful. This just goes to show that WWE places higher value on a superstars' status and how the fans perceive them than on match quality. Everyone could tell that HBK/Taker would be an instant classic. That was a given. But in the bigger picture, more emphasis was placed on the build for HHH/Orton, and the aftermath to a storyline involving Orton was more important than the fallout (or eventual lack thereof) of the HBK/Taker match. The HBK/Taker match was a one-time thing to give the fans a wrestling spectacle at the biggest show of the year. HHH/Orton had been building for years, and the outcome of Orton winning lends itself to a more-future oriented feud rather than a one-off match. The match with future business implications attached to it should main event the show. In this case, HHH/Orton gets the nod.

Fans don't buy Wrestlemania for the order of the card - they buy it for the card itself. That being said, if they paid to see HBK/Taker, they still saw it, regardless of where it appeared on the card. Vince got their money either way, and the fans got a classic undercard match in return.

-----

edit - Thanks for the short extension :eek:

Good luck, Delfin.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top