WrestleMania Wrestlemania 20,30,40 and so on

Discussion in 'PPV's & Specials' started by HunterHearstJericho, Apr 11, 2014.

  1. At WrestleMania 20 they had a triple threat match for the World Title, similar ending with the top face wining in the match, do you guys think that every 10 years there will be a triple threat main event at WrestleMania? I mean the ending's were kind of similar with a submission victory, similar but not too similar celebration and a big table moment but this one was much more hardcore with the Batista Bomb/RKO in my opinion. One other question why did Triple H use the Crossface? I mean I know HBK and he used it frequently in 2008 but at WrestleMania 30 why do you guys think Hunter used it?
  2. I think it's more that the "-0" Wrestlemanias, in particular, are hallmark Manias. At X, Bret Hart, who was an up-and-comer at that point, won the WWF Title. It was a hallmark moment for the company (Bret not being the prototypical big guy who "looks like a champion" winning the title. At XX, it was Benoit walking away with the big title (arguably, the WHC was, at that point, the biggest title in the company). Again, a hallmark in what was a hugely promising career, not to mention the fact that he, too, was a smaller, less expected guy. At XXX, we've now had DBD walk away with the big title. Again, a hallmark in his young career and, again, he's a smaller, less expected guy.

    I don't think those Manias will ever be about triple threats. I think they're more about doing something new and unexpected.

    • Like Like x 4
  3. This Mania I still believe would have been Batista vs Orton. WWE expected Batista to be over as a face when he returned. WWE then had Punk drop out and Bryan still had such a following so the triple threat match was a quick fix to the Main Event hate / Middle Finger to Punk
  4. Yeah backstage sources said it was a "Fuck you" to CM Punk saying "This could have been you"
  5. As wk said, it's mostly supposed to be a bigger than usual WM moment, not necessarily a triple threat. And HHH used the Crossface because, well, he's used that as a submission move in the past, you know, so why not use it here? And he may have been "stealing" the Yes Lock, one or the other.
  6. Nah dude the announcers said "Crossface" not Yes Lock, + the Yes Lock looks totally different
  7. Well, then Hunter just used it as a rest hold as he has in the past.
  8. He started using it after Benoit's death before his rest hold was a figure four or a Indian Deathlock
  9. Yeah, that's true.
  10. So did HBK
  11. Wrestlemania XX had an amazing ending, its a shame that it'll always be clouded and all that but still one of my favourite WM / PPV endings. I totally agree with @Wacokid27 x0 mania's have always been about "surprises" although DB winning wasn't that surprising to me, Batista tapping out was though.
  12. To us, yes. To the casuals, no.

    To illustrate, my wife watched the DBD matches with great interest (she's a big Bryan fan because she understood why he didn't want anybody pooping on the bus...thank you, Total Divas). And when Trips locked on the Crossface, I immediately recognized it for what it was (Benoit HOLLA!!!). Her response: "He's stealing Bryan's move!". I could have tried to explain the difference, but.....nah, not worth it.

  13. He was using a rest hold that targeted the shoulder. Don't make it something its not.
  14. And people wonder why Bryan is so likable.
    • Like Like x 2
  15. It could be either or although HBK and he used it with it frequently after Benoit's death, and HHH's old rest moves had to do with the legs but alright.
  16. Why would that be? Punk wasn't originally scheduled to wrestle in the triple threat main event (and reports even say that Hunter may have originally been booked to go over him at Mania anyway.) In fact, I conclude that Bryan would have made it into the WWE Championship match even if Punk didn't walk out. The reason he was slotted in there to win the title was to counter the negative crowd reactions that the match would have received if it had just been Orton versus Batista, and considering that same problem would have existed even if Punk had stayed with the company and faced Triple H as planned, Bryan would have found his way into the title match (and become champion) regardless.

    As for the topic, I think it's just a coincidence that the big anniversary Wrestlemania events have always ended with a smaller superstar known more for their wrestling ability than their charisma or larger-than-life personalities winning the championship. The original planned match this year was Randy Orton versus Batista, and if Batista hadn't returned to a huge lukewarm response, that plan would have likely stuck. I wouldn't expect a triple threat match or even a smaller wrestler ('vanilla midget' as some would call them) winning the world title every decade that a Wrestlemania ends in zero.
    • Like Like x 1
  17. As for the Punk thing I remember reading that after the match was accepted at Mania with the stipulation of DB getting a shot if he won the match, than it was said WWE would push him I think Punk was the original one to push and maybe Bryan as well and it would have been a fatal 4 way.
  18. No, just a coincidence. I don't think they have it planned every 10 years to have a triple threat match for the title.
  19. I never read anything like that. If that were the case, then I doubt Punk would have even walked out since a large part of his frustration was that he was being booked in a match against Triple H instead of for the championship in the main event. Punk was led to believe that WMXXX was his big moment to finally main event Wrestlemania (his ultimate dream) and when he realized that wasn't going to happen, he left (at least that's part of the reason why, according to speculation.)
  20. The reason they turned Batista heel (creating the possibility of a triple threat match) is because Vince thought he could persuade Punk to come back at the next week's RAW in Chicago and he had a Mania spot ready for him.
Draft saved Draft deleted