Politicking for good?

Discussion in 'General WWE' started by Stopspot, May 6, 2013.

  1. In wrestling politicking is usually connected to wrestlers using their backstage pull to get themselves ahead of the pack, title shots or high profile matches or perhaps to stop a push of a young talent. So it's looked at with a negative light by most fans. But is there any wrestlers who politic for the overall good of the WWE?

    The one I can think of who doesn't really use politics for personal gain is the Undertaker. Obviously he has politicked at least a bit considering how long his career has been and how long he has been on top. But he hasn't done it to get a bunch of titles around his waist or to be the face of the company seemingly. Out of a 23+ year career Taker has 7 world title reigns in total at a combined total of 445 days. Compare that to another top dog like Triple H who's a 10+ time world champ. Taker is also rumored to have used his backstage pull to have counteracted the Kliq a couple of times backstage and was also seemingly standing guard over Michaels when it was rumored that Michaels didn't want to put Austin over. Taker seems more inclined to use his pull to do what is best for the overall product and roster instead of himself. At least that is what I make out by just looking at things in retrospect.

    Do you have any other examples of guys who politic for the greater good?
  2. H beating BVD and Booker T in 2003 I think it was.
  3. Austin refused to work with Jeff Jarrett and Billy Gunn in 1999, and I don't blame him. Both guys had midcard-for-life written all over them (not a bad thing really, but still.) Refusing to work with the former lead to JJ leaving the company (and when Russo became head writer in WCW, he pushed Jarrett hard as a main eventer because it was his idea to push him in WWF to begin with) and they desperately tried to push Billy Gunn by having him win the KOTR and then working with Austin. When he refused, he worked a feud with The Rock at Summerslam and it proved that he wasn't made to be a top level guy when working with The Rock couldn't even get him any more over than he already was.

    While not a big example, the Undertaker was supposed to lose by a pin fall screw job to Brock Lesnar at Unforgiven 2002 but he had it changed to a draw where they battled down the aisle and Brock got thrown through the Unforgiven logo. I agreed that Taker should have looked like a bad ass until their HIAC match the following month and only taken a pin fall there.

    Triple H's "reign of terror" in 2003 saw quite a bit of politicking but looking back, I don't disagree with most of it. RVD I do, and the way the feud with Booker T. was pushed as an angle, it really should have lead to a Booker T. title win. Saying his 'kind of people' never won the world title had been done before and lead to the black guy winning the world title or getting comeuppance against the guy making these kind of comments (Harley Race making borderline racist comments to Ron Simmons in 1992 WCW comes to mind) but not here. Booker T. was laid out with the pedigree and pinned cleanly. It was BS, especially considering the following two-three months saw a boring Kevin Nash feud. I don't disagree with Kane not getting the title either time. I feel Goldberg should have won the belt at Summerslam though, but HHH supposedly had an injury, hence why he wasn't in the match much. So they had to switch it to Goldberg taking the pin fall and sucking the life from the crowd. Pretty 'convenient' if you ask me.