*ruins the main event of WrestleMania 2000 in you're path*

*ruins the main event of WrestleMania 2000 in you're path*

Attached: 259-2590378_image-id-big-show-2000-hd-png-download.png (860x966, 873.56K)

nah you did

>obese smelly smarks still failing to recognize even after 22 years that their bitching and moaning about Foley not winning the title from Triple H was what ruined it
Truly a special bunch of retards

smarks who try to re-book wm2000 and the surrounding events are so dumb. i guarantee most of them didnt even watch it at the time. foley was retiring first of all and triple h was the hot new main eventer so him losing the belt to foley would have been stupid. secondly (and most importantly), triple h losing the belt at wm2000 would have killed his heat and killed the mcmahon helmsley faction, meaning there would be no need for austin to help the rock at backlash. no triple h vs rock with austin helping means no huge backlash buyrate, and it also completely erases from history the legendary moment where austin helps the rock. everything worked out great, it was massively successful, so why on fucking earth do smarks try to re-book it 20 years later? anything you can come up with is worse than what actually happened

No one is crying about Foley. Everyone knows the match should’ve been Rock vs Gaytch with Rock going over.

should have been Rock vs Triple H with Rock going over clean. WrestleMania 15 should have been a triple threat with Mankind vs. Stone Cold vs. The Rock (c) with Austin winning by pinning Rock after the Stunner.

>no triple h vs rock with austin helping means no huge backlash buyrate
>Backlash buyrate is more important than WrestleMania buyrate

>popping one huge buyrate and killing the other because the chase is over is better when you could pop two huge buyrates because muh wrestlemania prestige
Smarks everyone.

>WrestleMania 2000: The Road to Backlash 2000

Yeah. I was just a kid in 2000 but I was watching and my neighbor who was my Dad's friend was a huge WWF mark and we wwere talking about the main event and he said he thought Big Show must have gotten hurt early on and they must have had to change the whole match and that's why it was so bad. That was his theory at the time at least

>I'm such a pathetic shill who's incapable of any of my own thoughts, and have to project and defend every decision daddy Vince makes. If you're not also like this then you're a smark
Delusional mentally ill, submissive cultists everyone.

our reaction at the time was that this is what happens when you don't have Undertaker and Austin and made us think WWF was doomed without those two. also Triple H retaining left such a bad taste with everyone i knew. we all agreed it was just like something WCW would do. and in 2000, comparing something to WCW was as bad as it got.

>signs of VDS starts showing
kek like clockwork

This is some serious retardation. Did Austin going over Rock the previous year kill The Rock or the corporation's heat? No. Were they still able to continue a story between the two the following month despite Austin going over him at WrestleMania? Of course. You're just making retarded excuses to justify a dumb decision motivated by politics and for HHH to score a "Win" at WrestleMania in the main event. It's also funny how you're calling anyone a smark when you use wrestling terminology like "heat" in your lexicon like you're one one of the boys in the back. Gain some self-awareness because you look like a complete retard.

Attached: Rock and Austin twice in a row.png (1460x448, 1.04M)

agreed but to be fair, in 1999 they had Russo creating all those great storylines keeping everything fresh and interesting. in 2000, they had no such luck. they were spinning their wheels. Russo also wouldn't have tanked the Angle-Steph-Hunter triangle story. they made so many poor writing mistakes that year and it was a sign of things to come

Now compare backlash 99 buyrates to backlash 2000 buyrates. Case closed. Smarks like you will forever be delusionally retarded even when the obvious logic is staring at you right in front of your face and you still fail to recognise it. Obese smelly smarks are seriously room temperature IQ mongoloids and thats why nobody ever takes any of your talking points or fantasy bookings seriously

>Calling anyone a smark when he cosplays as a WWE employee defending and doing his duty for his boss who sends him his invisible paycheck in the mail for his hard work

Attached: 4ki23k.jpg (798x770, 195.18K)

Not really his fault though. The main event should always be a one-on-one match. Multi-man matches generally suck as a rule. There are very few exceptions in WWE: Benoit v HBK v HHH (WMXX), the rematch at Backlash, the Austin v Bret v Taker v Vader (Final Four 97), and Taker v Rock v Angle (Vengeance 02). Can't think of any others that even bothered to try to tell a compelling story. Maybe I forgot one or two but it's very rare. Most of them are garbage spot fears with no story.

i still think that aside from maybe KOTR, WM was the worst WWF PPV of 2000.

>Wanted a WWF Title match at a WrestleMania in his contract
>Not his fault

>displaying crippling VDS is his form of comeback
HOLY FUCKING KWAB

>Cosplaying as a WWE employee
KWAB

The other user literally deconstructed your previous post about heat carrying over. You should stop embarrassing yourself user

>as long as I agree with my own headcanon therefore I'm right
HOLY FUCKING KWAB

so did Triple H. the previous year. that's how we ended up in this mess.

no, a correction actually: triple h wanted to win the wwf title in his contract in 1999. all big show asked for was a wwf title match at wrestlemania. that's not as demanding and seems reasonable for a former wcw world champion