bradhindsight Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Will is joined by Scott from the Place to Be podcast and Dylan from the Wrestling Culture podcast to debate one of the most powerful figures in wrestling. Triple H! We'll discuss his early Blue Blood gimmick, being a member of the Kliq and DX, his run as a World Champion, his role as a power player behind the scenes and his treatment of other wrestlers. If you hate HHH, you will enjoy this show. If you like HHH, you will enjoy this show. Time to play the game! http://placetobenation.com/wrestling-with-...eat-hhh-debate/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradhindsight Posted January 29, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Will: it was the apostrophe in "We'll" that was the culprit Also - if you downloaded it yesterday through iTunes, please re-download as the correct length is 2:58. Thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 OK thanks for posting Brad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjh Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Cool show, as always Will. One point I would add about the Curtain Call is that an added benefit to Triple H was that it allowed him to prove to Vince that he was the ultimate team player. He took all the shit and didn't complain about it whatsoever. You could make the argument that he wouldn't have been so trusted in later years if he hadn't done that. Dylan loses marks for not sarcastically mentioning Chris Benoit as a person Triple H carried though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 I need to rewatch Hogan vs HHH, Hogan vs Taker, HHH vs Taker from 02. An example Will didn't mention along the lines of the Masters one. I'm also with Will that the Angle feud is heinous enough that it really needs to be mentioned at the top of the litany Dylan starts with. It's probably something people could hack away at but to me, the end of the boom is Summerslam 00 where they went exactly the wrong way with a storyline that a lot of casuals were really into, for all the wrong reasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Alright, I've made it through. First off, you guys did a great job going through the career and sort of giving it all a definitive chronological look. I think that's important and this will be a good historical relic. Scott did a pretty good job explaining his fandom and obviously Dylan's job was a lot easier. I think everyone involved was fair in listening to the other person's opinion and it was a highly civil affair. It was probably the podcast that it was supposed to be and that it should have been. That said, I was really disappointed that there wasn't more breaking down of his ringwork. There was a bit about what he did well or what he did poorly, but it was really minimal. Extremely so. I think that was the crux of Dylan's initial argument years ago and while there were mentions tossed out here and there, there really wasn't much in depth discussion of these matches and what made them work or didn't. There were a few specifics (disingenuous showing of ass, etc), but even those really needed to be broken down into specifics of how and why he does or doesn't do this. Basically, while I think it was a good review and overview, it didn't cover much new ground in a back and forth setting when it very much could have and frankly, I came in expecting it to given the argument leading up to it and the argument from years ago. I think, ultimately, it will be a worthwhile historical record, but in the grand scheme of the argument, it feels a bit like wasted motion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soup23 Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Up to 2000 and enjoyed the overview so far. I feel like a good middle ground candidate between Scott and Dylan in regards to the HHH debate and really only despised him once he got past the Batista feud. One match I would say where HHH carried a lower level opponent was the Kane match at Judgement Day 2001. I also thought HHH was pretty amazing working the leg vs. Shawn on Taboo Tuesday 2004. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bradhindsight Posted January 30, 2014 Author Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 I'd like to read more around who the better worker was in their 2000 matches - HHH or The Rock. Scott argued for HHH while Dylan was on the side that the Rock was better in those matches. Where does everyone else stand? I need to re-watch them but I didn't think Rock was at HHH's level workrate wise until later in the summer of 2000. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DR Ackermann Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Good podcast. Scott raised a great point about why HHH beating Booker might have been the right move, but I don't think it justifies the way it was done. Dylan brings up how people usually come out of a HHH feud worse off than they were going in. That alludes to a great point I think someone (Loss?) made in the Flair/Funk/Lawler Wrestling Culture podcast about people trying to live out their own Ric Flair fantasy, but completely missing the aspects that made Flair great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoo Enthusiast Posted January 30, 2014 Report Share Posted January 30, 2014 Can there be a "Scott gets destroyed defending Edge" show, too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cross Face Chicken Wing Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 That said, I was really disappointed that there wasn't more breaking down of his ringwork. What is there to breakdown? Breaking down HHH's ringwork is like breaking down a Nickelback record. Sure, you could try it, but... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigelow34 Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Will's "Greek philosopher with young boy" comment was fantastic. Can there be a "Scott gets destroyed defending Edge" show, too? I think "destroyed" is a bit much. It isn't easy to go into a forum like this with a clearly unpopular/underneath stance and then articulately present your side of the case and stand by it like Scott does. He clearly was in position to have to present more evidence as the defendant and did a nice job, even if his stance is probably wrong for the most part. Plus it came across to me as more of a discussion than an actual debate anyway. Will and Dylan were great too. An Edge one would be pretty interesting too. Nice job fellas, as always. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 That said, I was really disappointed that there wasn't more breaking down of his ringwork. What is there to breakdown? Breaking down HHH's ringwork is like breaking down a Nickelback record. Sure, you could try it, but... I have full faith that Dylan and Will could do it. I've seen them both do it before in a myriad of ways for both the best and the worst wrestlers in the world. I don't know Scott really (at least I think I don't. Does he post here? If he doesn't, he should), but he obviously has some vivid memories of these matches and strong feelings about them, so I think he could likely pull together patterns as well. It was interesting to hear someone defend Triple H as a character/presence/etc. since that argument is so often one sided, but a lot of it is also common sense and a lot of the positive raised were really personal things. I just thought that using this format to really dissect the work of a wrestler who's been in as many "big matches" as just about anyone in the last twenty years would be a bit more novel and interesting than the chronological view, especially since, as I said before, that was the brunt of the initial argument of people having better years than Trips. I guess I kind of wanted an argument about the hundred guys who were better and how and why instead of just a chronological view and poking at some of the usual talking points. That said, they covered almost three hours with what they had, which might have been necessary for a starting point of this argument and it probably worked better for a broader audience. I just don't think the initial issue that spurred on this podcast in the first place was really touched on, let alone resolved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott6173 Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I appreciate everyone's opinion and Dylan was a solid debate opponent. Will was great in laying out the ground rules and throwing out the parameters. Considering he's not a big fan of "The H" it didn't bleed over to it feeling like a handicap match. I stand by my opinions and I'm sure Dylan does too. There will be Triple H haters who think I'm an idiot, and they are entitled to that. I knew going in I was on the side of unpopular, and that's why I took time to sculpt my reasonings and defenses without sounding too much like a fan. It was fun, and I have no problem debating Edge's career also. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstar Sleeze Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Up to 2000 in this podcast and wanted to note something that Dylan said that HHH was the last heel standing thus he had to get the title and thus he backed into good fortune. Dylan makes the argument that all the bells and whistles for HHH was to get him over because the company was so insecure about his standing, but I disagree. The WWF was a babyface promotion with a red hot babyface that could have easily transitioned from Austin in the form of The Rock. We all know the history outside of Billy Graham and Yokozuna to that point the WWF was dominated by babyface champions. Vince had no problem in recent history from going from one face to the next in rapid succession (Bret->Diesel->Bret->Shawn). There had to be a reason why they pushed HHH harder when The Rock was right there. I would agree with Dylan if HHH was really they only player left standing, but he wasnt The Rock was right there. I think WWF had tremendous faith in HHH to pull this off and put him in opportunities to succeed because they wanted to try something different. They could leverage the McMahon status, Foley jobbing and Rocky high profile to cement Rocky and HHH at the same time and actually to leads instead of the usual Hogan vs. World or Austin vs. World they usually run. Dylan's point of creating stars together is so fuckin spot on. I do want to go back and watch 2000 WWF because it does get raved about and I have a spotty memory (I was only 10 after all) of it all. HHH post-2001 quad injury is pretty insufferable, but I actually think he was pretty deserving of his spot up until that point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstar Sleeze Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I am listening to the HHH promo that is spliced into podcast and I think one of the more egregious ball-cutting feuds was the Cena feud in 2006, which I am pretty sure cemented the special reaction forever because HHH basically called Cena out as a bad wrestler when he was not and that validated all those morons' opinions. We all agree that smart marks are easily worked into believing Shawn Michaels and HHH are great machines because they are presented as such so having HHH shit on Cena's wrestling ability (calling him uncoordinated and kids only like him). Of course, Cena blows on the mic so bad that he could present himself as a working man that "Hey maybe I don't look pretty in the ring, but I get the job done because I am a fighter." He basically works a modern version of the Dusty gimmick that what I lack in wrestling ability I make up in heart. I think that is what he goes for sometime but he is so fucking bad at conveying that message. A more recent example was when Daniel Bryan called him out before Summerslam and Bryan said he was a Wrestler (Ooooooooh he used the "W" word) and that Cena was just an entertainer. I was like Cena tell this fuckin clown "You might be a wrestler, but Im a fighter" and then punch him in his pompous mouth. Of course, fuckin Cena caved and once again looked like a shit head. Yes, HHH should have played his role as a heel and not tried to indulge a certain part of the audience in order to stroke his own ego, but some of the onus has to be Cena to overcome it and get himself over and connect with everyone. I know I just debated myself on that and hell I don't even if it gets brought up in the podcast. But I just wanted to bring it up and see what people thought about the HHH/Cena interactions. Just to be clear Cena in the ring is awesome he totally gets it. Cena on the mic is just atrocious. He is so, so bad. EDIT: I just realized that promo was from 2008ish, but Cena didn't do a bad job standing up for himself here, but sometimes he just looks a fool with his dick in his hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigelow34 Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 On the topic of "Guys that Hunter carried to a very good/great that you wouldn't expect" Does Rikishi fit the bill? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I think most people here would put Rikishi as being better than HHH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigelow34 Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 I think most people here would put Rikishi as being better than HHH. Fair enough. I was debating it as I was listening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goodhelmet Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 To Matt, this wasn't the place to dissect a bunch of matches. Plus, I don't have a photographic memory. I can't recall specific moments from matches I watched over a decade ago over the course of an entire podcast. I also didn't want to watch a bunch of HHH matches. I have no problem talking about the matches but this was more about the reasons why someone would like or dislike HHH. If you like him, I think Scott gave plenty of reasons why he is a fan. Dylan gave plenty of arguments why the guy is a douche. We touched on the 100 years thing but that wasn't what the podcast was going to be. It only inspired the podcast in that I wanted Dylan to be the voice of the anti-Trips corps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt D Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 To Matt, this wasn't the place to dissect a bunch of matches. Plus, I don't have a photographic memory. I can't recall specific moments from matches I watched over a decade ago over the course of an entire podcast. I also didn't want to watch a bunch of HHH matches. I have no problem talking about the matches but this was more about the reasons why someone would like or dislike HHH. If you like him, I think Scott gave plenty of reasons why he is a fan. Dylan gave plenty of arguments why the guy is a douche. We touched on the 100 years thing but that wasn't what the podcast was going to be. It only inspired the podcast in that I wanted Dylan to be the voice of the anti-Trips corps. I get it, and you guys did a good job at what you set out to do, absolutely. I just came in expecting something else and was a little disappointed accordingly. It fit the Wrestling With the Past format that you guys used for the Bret and IC/TV title shows much better than what I have wanted would have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Ridge Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Listening to that awful HHH promo about Cena that was on show had me wondering what are the best HHH promos? Not those DX skits but actual memorable promos. Year 2000 was one of my favorite years for WWF. Easily the best year for Hunter. But by the end of the year I was starting to slowly turn on the guy by then. He kept beating up Angle (my guy) and them making him the person behind running over Austin was too much. He was already pushed so strongly as a heel the past year and they add the Austin scalp to him too? But he was still doing enough in the ring. But 2002 into 2003 was where he became unwatchable for me. Ugh, that HHH versus Undertaker match from King of the Ring 2002 is the worst. Hated the three stages of hell match with Michaels and then the Steiner matches. Credit for Scott to sticking by his guy HHH and participating in the show. HHH is a tough one to go to bat for. In the end, I agree mostly with Dylan's view point but I would consider Stephanie equally to Vince as far as who helped get HHH over more. Vince was the evil boss but Stephanie was managing Triple H and married to him during that whole storyline. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoo Enthusiast Posted January 31, 2014 Report Share Posted January 31, 2014 Will's "Greek philosopher with young boy" comment was fantastic. Can there be a "Scott gets destroyed defending Edge" show, too? I think "destroyed" is a bit much. It isn't easy to go into a forum like this with a clearly unpopular/underneath stance and then articulately present your side of the case and stand by it like Scott does. He clearly was in position to have to present more evidence as the defendant and did a nice job, even if his stance is probably wrong for the most part. Plus it came across to me as more of a discussion than an actual debate anyway. Will and Dylan were great too. An Edge one would be pretty interesting too. Nice job fellas, as always. True. I was mostly kidding, though "I like Evolution because I like Evolution" wasn't the strongest of evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted February 2, 2014 Report Share Posted February 2, 2014 Only about an hour in, but I love how it was brought up that besides the "burying" talk that always goes along with HHH, he really hasn't elevated too many people. The Rock was elevated alongside him and then later on he basically dragged Orton and Batista up to the main event, but otherwise he's left a trail of "they don't have IT" behind him. That's why I have no qualms about Punk quitting. He had a feud with HHH back in 2011 and HHH thought the best storyline would be him beating Punk. I'm sure that's not the only reason Punk left so close to Wrestlemania, but even it was it's understandable. I haven't kept up with this board's opinion on the Bryan/Rumble incident, but I'm not getting the "See, it's a long-term storyline building up Bryan as an underdog". There is literally none (or very little) evidence of long-term planning like that being done on purpose by Vince and HHH. HHH is gonna have to show something different on either side of the ring for me to give him the benefit of the doubt on things like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zoo Enthusiast Posted March 1, 2014 Report Share Posted March 1, 2014 Any more of these individual wrestler episodes in the pipeline soon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.