Originally Posted by DK Wrestling Savior
Nice list. I pretty much agree with it all, with the exception of the John Cena/Miz match being #1 Worst WM Main Event. I don't care about fan reaction because fans are idiots. The build to the match was decent. At the time, WWE lacked top guys...(they still do even though I'm not gonna go there right now)...and it was Miz's turn. He got a decent pop when his music hit and he cashed in. It was one of the better cash ins. The match itself was overshadowed by The Rock, but overall, their match wasn't terrible. I wouldn't even have it on my top ten, certainly not #1. This year's will be #1 if you do this same blog next month.
That is why it is ranked so high. Rock overshadowing the match because no one wanted to see Miz/Cena. They wanted Rock/Cena. The fact Miz won the match with The Rock giving Cena a rock bottom should say enough about my thoughts on it. I was a Miz fan during the period. The fact the build towards it was more back and forth with Rock/Cena during promos with Miz coming out every week telling us not to forget about him. Even Miz dressing up as The Rock 1 night just to get attention. It isn't about just in ring, it is about the buildup also along with the reception from the crowd.
Two that are WAY too high on your list and I question if they belong on this list at all are Triple H vs Jericho (X8) and Randy Orton vs Triple H (25).
The primary reason you cited for both is that you felt the Hogan-Rock and Taker-HBK matches should have gone on last, and with this I'll respectfully disagree. Not because I'm trying to diminish the importance of those matches, but rather because I do not think that the WWE Championship should be diminished in any way, at the biggest show of the year. I'm an "old school" fan - and so I always have felt that the champion should go on last at Wrestlemania, no matter what else is on the card. I think this would retain the importance of the title, and would (hopefully) keep the title off less worthy performers (yes, Miz, I'm talking to you).
I don't agree that either match "failed" as the main event because they didn't belong at the top of the card. In hindsight, its easy to point at both Hogan-Rock or Taker-HBK and say they should have gone on last. But at the time, I think the company was giving the proper recognition to the championship.
Having watched it again recently, I don't feel Jericho-Triple H was a flop by any stretch. The return of Triple H was very well done, as its regularly mentioned as one of the biggest returns in WWE history. Jericho was a top talent at or near the top of his game. The breakup of Triple H and Stephanie was also well done. Her pairing with Jericho was a natural heat magnet. I won't say that they had a 5 star classic, but I thought the match was very good. Triple H hitting the pedigree on Stephanie and winning the title was a nice exclamation point to a good show. I don't recall at all, the crowd being dead or flat for that main event at WMX8. If anything, they were ready for Stephanie to get hers, and they got the payoff.
I felt then (and even more so since) that putting Hogan and Rock in the main event would have been a mistake. That sends a bad message. WWe would basically be telling the egomaniacal Hogan (fresh off the demise of WCW and the Monday Night Wars), that all he had to do was come back and he would always be in the Wrestlemania main event. The match was certainly a top attraction but it shouldn't have been the main event. Hogan needed to see that he was a part of the show, he was no longer THE show. Nostalgia has its place certainly - but in 2002 - it shouldn't have been in the main event of Wrestlemania.
As for WM25 - I was in a unique position, cause I was actually in Reliant Stadium for this show. The Taker-HBK match was obviously an instant classic and certainly among the best Wrestlemania matches of all time. But at that time - going INTO that event - I don't think anyone could have guessed that it would be THAT good.
Still, the Orton-Triple H match had a much, much better build than Taker-HBK. In fact, that was one of the better main event builds I can recall in a long time. The story with Orton and the McMahons was extremely well done and compelling, and it made the story more dramatic, even though we'd seen them face off in the past. What hurt that match was the stupid gimmick of Triple H losing the title if he got DQ'd. This story was so well built, that what the payoff should have been, was a physical match that turned into an all-out brawl between these two. It would have generated the payoff we wanted, which was to see Orton get his ass kicked once and for all. So the creative of that actualy did it no favors, it was poorly constructed. But that entire second half of the show was affected by the brilliance of the Taker-HBK classic.
The crowd was exhausted. It was such an emotional roller coaster and had us all on the edge of our seats. By the time it was over, the crowd was drained. And every match that followed it suffered in comparison. I remember walking out and everyone was still talking about Taker-HBK.That was a unique, once in a lifetime moment that nobody could have predicted. We all expected them to have a great match, but I don't think anyone felt going in, that it would be what it was. Its easy to say that in hindsight now, but not on that day.
Some of your choices are fairly obvious no-brainers, but I don't agree with those 2 matches being amond the "worst" main events of all-time. They were in unique positions for sure, having to follow two extremely popular matches, but they were where the WWE championship should always be - the main event.
© 2011 eWrestlingNews, All Rights Reserved.